Jump to content




Just how good is the skywatcher 127 Mak ???

Recommended Posts

What more can one say re. the MAK127. On a budget, it gives a real taste of "proper" telescope? ;)

Maybe I can compare TWO of the others? Lengths of string (and prejudices) aside, I genuinely believe my new MAK150 e.g. produces significantly brighter images than my MAK127. The larger aperture is useful for DSOs - Notably my favourite open (and globular) clusters which are, under local conditions, on the "cusp" of showing much detail with the MAK127. I haven't had a good look at planets with the 150, but it's "fairly astonishing" re. the Moon! Visually, you can play the same "trick" with 2" diagonals, to deliver expected increased true field with the 150 as well. The 150 is of course heavier and, for the first time, I see a cool-down time, that exceeds my setup time. As a "Pro" version 150, I also saw a bit of the much-vaunted "image shift" - In my case, this seemed substantially improved by running the focus back and forth a few times between the stops. But I am considering motorised (Crayford?) focus, if funds permit...

In conclusion, I see no *major* disadvantage in going for the MAK150 over the MAK127. In any real aspect, the MAK150 is simply a "big" MAK127 - with the advantages expected... :D

I suspect(!) that the MAK180 is a significantly different beast? Heavier. At f=2700, getting a bit "extreme" for general use - Even for the most optimistic! LOL. But, if I had the dosh, I'd be seriously interested in an Intes 180. At F10, I could "tolerate" the anticipated (scaled) traites of some 7" MAKs? I think they have TRUE 2" capability - which must be useful? MAK Love is never of the "first sight" variety... Cat (Feline) love is ever circumspect? ;)

But who knows? Price (collimation) aside, I was very tempted by a Celestron C8... Opinion varies: Some believe in the useful "DSO threshold" being 6" for Cats, some suggest 7"? I did note that the C8 is actually a tad lighter than a MAK150... :)

Edited by Macavity
Link to comment
Share on other sites

mmm, I think you might have to change the focuser on the 150 & 180, as they do suffer from image shift from what I hear.... The MAK127 is a decent scope for Lunar & planetary imaging, I done this shot of Corpernicus in Dec 08, unfortantly it is the only image shown on the SkyWatcher Website for the Skymax 127, not that I am complaining.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheers guys, I think I've asked this before a while ago but can't recall- does anyone know what the weights are of the 150 & 180, I can't find them anywhere:icon_scratch:

PS what are the chances of an Alter 603/615 coming up on AB&S :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a 180 Pro which so far hasnt even left its box :) I'd love to give it a go but I just so seldom have the ime for its cool down.

I am thinking of flogging it and getting a TAL 200K (maybe, possibly, might etc)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheers Nadeem,

5.6kg & 7.8kg respectively

PS had a bit of a scare tho, one of those malware scans started up as I went on the site :)

Agh I see Cornelius beat me to it ;)

Edited by beamish
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, let's get this straight - they're all fantastic scopes! If people let their 180s sit around in boxes going mouldy from not being used, then that's a crying shame! (Sorry AB!) I have the 127 and the 180, and the 180 only has very minor image shift, considering the focal length and magnifications that it supports. Of the two, the 127 is certainly easier to set up and use, but the 180 gives such a stonking view it's one of the wonders of the world (maybe)!

FWIW I got my 180 2nd hand, moderately used, in good condition for £300, and once I sold the included eyepieces and finder that came down to about £220. Has anyone found a bigger bargain?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I own the 180mm and keep it in a shed so the cool down isn't a factor. As mentioned the mirror shift is very minor, even for lunar/ planetary imaging purposes, I have dual speed Crayford for the scope but is very much a luxury item for the scope rather than a necessity.

Edited by GazOC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.