£400 to spend, thoughts on these choices

[Questions]

...and my budget (which is slowly going out of the window).

..And so it begins.

Im at the same stage, ive been torturing myself for months, Ive come to the conclusion that whatever I will buy, I will have minimum regrets, but maximum enjoyment

tesco 0% creditcard and regular payments are pushing me to the cpc, but the skywatcher 200p eq5 goto seems the more sensible option.

[TPC5]

Can I ask for a quick clarification on this, is viewing via an 8" Dob going to give the same viewing results as the 8" Celestron CPC option? I know there are clear cost implications but just on the viewing front - are they equal?

Thanks again to those reading and contributing to this thread.

Tim

[Moonshane]

Assuming the optics are of comparable quality (which they may well be although I don't know a lot about this specific model) the main difference (apart from the GOTO/tracking etc of the CPC) will be focal length; this affects the focal ratio (f10 in the CPC and f5 or f6 in the dob).

this has two effects:

1) the field of view with the CPC will be much less with the same eyepiece.

2) the CPC can use cheaper eyepieces successfully than the dob.

Assuming you can fit the object in the field of view and both are collimated accurately, then the views should be very similar.

[thesatanbug]

You could always buy a decent scope on an equatorial mount for a bit under your budget (say a Skywatcher Explorer 200P on EQ5) to start, and add GOTO later. I don't know if it's just me, but I found goto more use when I knew what it was I wanted to view, rather than aimlessly sending the scope one way then the other on a whim.

[TPC5]

Yes, the combined wisdom is to leave the GOTO functionality for a while. The problem is I work away a lot and when at home I have to balance time between urgent work issues, football matches, my motorbike and, of course, the wife. The GOTO seemed a good way to get the most out of an investment, especially if I want the other half to be actively involved not just getting cold watching me mess about looking for things. Hmmmm.

Tim

[maej]

The best scope to get is the one you will get the most use and enjoyment from.

If you get a huge dob then never use it for the time and hassle of dragging it outside and frustration of finding anything then it is a wasted investment. Conversely if you get a smaller goto mak you might find the views you actually see are not as good as expected and lose interest.

No scope is perfect at everything so you need to think realistically in terms of what is convenient and what you can live without, then you can get the best of what you really need without wasting money on what you don't.

[maej]

This is my amateur observation from posts I have read over the last year or so. I may have misunderstood things here but this is how I have come to understand it.

There is no cheap good allrounder unfortunately. The maks have less aperture but higher focal ratios for the money which makes them better for small bright objects like planets and the moon and cheaper magnification since they can use the cheaper eyepieces, and smaller so more portable. The newts have larger apertures but lower focal ratios which makes them suited toward dimmer larger objects like galaxies and nebulae since they have more light collection ability through aperture and a wider field of view, but bigger and likely harder to transport. So maks for planets and the moon, newts for galaxies and nebulae etc.

That said they are still both capable of viewing anything, it's just the design limitations make them more specialised one way or the other. Of course this is a generalisation and there are always exceptions and crossovers, and I have not even mentioned resolution, or refractors.

As for goto, if the frustration of searching the sky for things to see manually is going to stop you getting out there looking at the sky so much, then goto would be a wise investment for you, but if you would enjoy the challenge of hunting objects yourself then goto will just be a waste of money that could be saved or spent on better optics.

There, a years worth of amateur forum perusal condensed and summarised into one post. I hope I haven't got things terribly wrong, I'm sure someone will be along shortly to put me right.

[maej]

I myself had a budget of around £300-£350. My shortlist became

skywatcher skymax 127 (mak with goto)

skywatcher explorer 200p (8" newt on an EQ mount)

With the celestron 127 mak now available I think I personally would put that high on my list as well since it seems the same as the skymaz except for a red dot finder which many people prefer and apparently better goto software.

In the end I spent so long choosing which scope to get that the money I had saved got spent on other things so I ended up scopeless, but as the nights draw in I am again on the lookout for a suitable scope for me. I am currently leaning toward the Celestron 127 mak for me.

[thesatanbug]

If you are determined to get goto then consider pushing your budget to a Skywatcher 150P on EQ-3.

It'll see you comfortably through starter and intermediate level stargazing.

[Stahlblue]

Hello - another new member here! Sorry if it seems like I'm hijacking the thread.

I'm currently stuck between the Skywatcher Explorer 200P (w/Equatorial mount) & the Orion Skyquest XT8 (w/ Dobsonian mount). Both have the same aperture at 8".

The Equatorial mount seems the logical choice for me, as it tracks objects through the sky (I'm willing to spend the extra effort setting it up). Portability shouldn't be an issue either because I intend to use it mainly from my back garden.

The XT8 has a go-to feature which I'm not too fussed about, I'd prefer to find things the old fashioned way.

The XT8 is also around £100 cheaper at £300.

What would be the advantage of a Dobsonian mount?

As I live in an area with some light pollution, can I expect to be able to see DSOs? I know that light pollution filters are sometimes available.

Thanks in advance for the advice.