Question on Aperture

[Dencappo]

Hi all

I am comparing the Celestron 4SE with a SkyMax 127 as possible first scopes.

My question is does a larger aperture always equate to a 'better' image?

A total noob question, I'm sure, but I'm wondering how much the quality of the optics comes into play.

Thanks for your valuable advice folks!

[pvaz]

Thing of it as a bucket in the rain. The wider the bucket the more water you collect.

It's the same with a telescope, it collects light and focuses it in a point, making faint objects visible. With more aperture the image becomes brighter as it collects more light.

[richbyers]

Obviously the quality of the optics makes a difference, though the main factor is the aperture

rich

[kniclander]

tbh, it depends what you are looking at. a cheap 8inch newt will give you better views of faint dso's than a top quality 4 inch refractor costing well over 10 times as much. However, the refractor will (i would hope...) give you "sharper" views of planet, moon and stars where light grasp is less of an issue. As always, the answer to any equipment related dilemna is, of course, "buy both"....

[Dencappo]

Thanks for the replies chaps.

I expect my interest will primarily be the planets, moons and stars; and of course DSO's but to a lesser extent (I think... it's certainly hard to know for sure when I have ZERO experience). Does anyone know which scope I can expect to see the best images through: The Celestron 4SE or the Skymax 127?

[John]

I agree with the other responses on the general issue of aperture v's optical quality. With regard to the 2 specific scopes you mention, they are of more or less equal optical quality and are the same optical design (maksutov-cassegrain) so the larger aperture will out perform the smaller one.

[Earl]

I can vouch for the 4SE been a great little scope, but be aware that apature fever once it setsin in 4inch wont be enough, I am already tempted to sell mine as i have picked up a 6inch SCT

[Dencappo]

Thanks again!

It's looking increasingly like its going to be the Skymax 127 for me.

Now I just have to settle on whether I should opt for a GoTo or EQ3-2 mount as they cost the same.

[MikeOram]

Hi Matty,

I've just started and got the Skymax 127. I reckon its a great scope. Its easily portable and can also be used for terrestrial viewing (seals on a sand bank ~1 mile upstream from my garden are great fun to watch).

Although the long focal length makes it ideal for planets, for splitting stars (and watching seals), the deep sky objects (DSOs) such as clusters and galaxies also look good to me. Of course, if I win the lottery, I'd get a "light bucket", but until then I can honestly say that the Skymax 127 is a great little scope. I would guess that the smaller Celestron 4SE would also be good, but a little less bright (64% of the light), making the DSO's that much harder to see.

Which ever you go for, ENJOY

[Dencappo]

Thanks Mike, SkyMax it is.

[Doc]

They are both good scopes. If I had to make the choice I would go for the 4SE and take it to darker skies.

[MikeOram]

Hi Doc,

Can I ask why you'd go with the 4SE rather than the 127? Is the mount noticably better or something?

[Doc]

I was getting confused I for some reason thought the celestron was a newt similar to the SLT series and being F5 was better then the F11.81 mak on DSO's.

But since I've re-read it and they are both Maks I say that their will be little difference so go for the bigger aperture.

[Pete Presland]

bigger is always better !!!

[Dencappo]

bigger is always better !!!

Well, that's what I thought.

I did become confused, though, when I noticed that pricing/value does not always appear to be linked to aperture.

[John]

Well, that's what I thought.

I did become confused, though, when I noticed that pricing/value does not always appear linked to aperture.

With GOTO scopes a good proportion (at least 50%) of your money is going on the mount rather than the optical tube.

With a dobsonian mounted scope I reckon 90% of the cost relates to the optical tube so, in terms of performance, you get much more "bang for your buck" so to speak.