Would this make a good first scope for DSOs?

[Aussie]

The whole scope including mount, telescope & counter weights is 9-10kg I'd guess, its not that heavy at all.

Dimensions:

Telescope is 85cm long, and 28 cm wide at the eye piece bit.

And the mount is about 110cm long, by about 30cm at the widest bit. The counter weight bar can be unscrewed is required to make the mount even smaller.

Generally its not that big, and I would be surprised if it could not fit into the back of a very small car. Of course that Telescope is the non parabolic one I just described. The 130p would be even smaller so those measurements are something you can work with.

heres a picture of the scope:

Click it to enlarge.

please note the telescope brackets on the mount are for a different scope, the ones you get for the reflector are about double that size, but I couldn't be bothered changing them for the pic. And thats a tape measure set to 1m on the wall so you can see what I mean.

[Paul Riley]

The whole scope including mount, telescope & counter weights is 9-10kg I'd guess, its not that heavy at all.

Dimensions:

Telescope is 85cm long, and 28 cm wide at the eye piece bit.

And the mount is about 110cm long, by about 30cm at the widest bit. The counter weight bar can be unscrewed is required to make the mount even smaller.

Generally its not that big, and I would be surprised if it could not fit into the back of a very small car. Of course that Telescope is the non parabolic one I just described. The 130p would be even smaller so those measurements are something you can work with.

heres a picture of the scope:

Click it to enlarge.

please note the telescope brackets on the mount are for a different scope, the ones you get for the reflector are about double that size, but I couldn't be bothered changing them for the pic. And thats a tape measure set to 1m on the wall so you can see what I mean.

Cheers for that

[sengoksa]

I think this has been mentioned before but the sky watcher

130m dosnt have a parabolic mirror sadly I belive they

discontinued the 130 pm ... its jsut the 130p now Im not

saying ther 130m is a bad scope far from it ,its jsut good to have

a parabolic mirror:D

[Capricorn]

The 130 is a decent start, however you say "for DSO's" and for DSO's you want aperture. The 130 is about as small as a reflector gets these days.

If the mirror is spherical then that is a bit of a problem. Simply the image will not be as good.

I would avoid the 130 with a parabolic mirror. They are f/5 and you may have to buy a good eyepiece to use the magnification it would be capable of. A good 5mm eyepiece for a 130P would be about 70-80 so half the cost of the unit.

Also f/5 reflectors need collimating more precisely, no cost but you would need to do it regularily.

The 150PL seems a better option, but the cost is about twice as much, although the mount is better. Eyepieces for it are easier, a decent plossl will be adaquate. The mirror is parabolic and as is obvious it's bigger.

A set of motors is very useful, it is not convenient to try and use the manual twiddlers while you are observing. Motors are about £80 if not already fitted.

Whatever you get it is the start of an expensive slope, the 10mm eyepiece and barlow supplied are generally poor so almost immediatly you will want to get better, also add in the cost of a collimator.

Although say twice the cost, the 150PL would I say last you a lot longer before you wanted/needed to upgrade.

[sengoksa]

So let me get this staight your advising against the superior 130p

thats the same same price as the 130m wow that genius

[Aussie]

So let me get this staight your advising against the superior 130p

thats the same same price as the 130m wow that genius

nah capricorn was advising the 150pl.

[Capricorn]

The 130P is f/5, to get 130x magnification you need a 5mm eyepiece. To get more you need even smaller. To get a good image on an f/5 scope with a 5mm eyepiece you will need a good eyepiece.

TV plossl's are good, £80.

But don't go down to 5mm, so no use. The next TV eyepiece that does go to 5mm is about £180, after that they get more expensive.

So if the scope and mount costs £150 and to get decent magnification you could need an eyepiece costing £180.

Just got a nice Antares SW eyepiece of 4.9mm, they are £160, for an f/5 scope I have.

The idea being an inexpensive scope as the 130P (f/5) soon becomes expensive.

Short focal length eyepieces will have small eye relief also, so again the cost goes up for the LER type eyepieces so that you don't have to have the eyepiece in contact with your eye.

F/5 scopes are nice and short, but bits for them cost more. F/5 is really relevant to large apertures.

If you want to view DSO's the saying is "aperture counts", the 150 is bigger then the 130. You get 33% more light collected = more DSO's.

My point is simply that I will guess that within 8 weeks you will want more aperture. The 150PL on the EQ3 has greater potential.

It depends whether or not you intend to go on to something bigger or if this is a tester for astronomy. If just to find out if you are interested then the 130P will do that.