Jump to content

 

1825338873_SNRPN2021banner.jpg.68bf12c7791f26559c66cf7bce79fe3d.jpg

 

Switch - ED100R for a Bresser Messier 127 or 152. Yes or no ??


Telescope40
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi all.

Pondering more aperture as usual. This has been going on a while. Earlier posts will confirm. Currently have a ED 100R and am wanting more details on planets. Seen many ads for the Bresser Messier OTA's - 127 and 152's. My ED is an Apo ?? The Bressers are achro's ??

Would anyone agree this may be a way forward or would I best be served in putting funds into better quality EP's as the ED100 would benefit from such a move? You can see my current kit via my signature info.

Also another point would be - will my cement mixer - sorry LXD55 mount, cope with the weights of the Bresser OTA's? Seen the 152 weighing in at 10 KG, the 127 about 7 Kg ( approx ). Info from Meade sites seem to say yes it will.

Any insights and forthright views most welcome.

John

Edited by Telescope40
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 34
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Sometimes when you have the bigger scope craving there's only one way to cure it. :D We've all been there, got the bigger scope, realised it perhaps wasn't all that and then wished we stuck with the smaller better quality, better balanced (size/weight/performance) scope.

I personally wouldn't swap an ED100 for either one of those. Owned 3 ED100's and they were excellent on the sun/moon/planets/doubles. Super sharp, snapped into focus, no visible CA and excellent contrast. Cooled quite quickly and not too heavy (a breeze for an EQ5 class mount).

Had one Skywatcher 150 f8 Achro,which was too heavy for my EQ5 at the time, so so on the planets (more CA than i like) and i didn't use it too often. Preferred to use my ED80.

But i think you'll doubt whatever anyone says until you experience it. It could be the extra weight/size and the CA won't be bothersome to you. You could go the cheaper Explorer 150PL route to experience more aperture on the planets with no CA and super sharp optics. And the LXD55 won't complain about the 150PL.

Edited by russ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not much help but I have a Bresser R152s but have never used it, as I have no mount.

All I can say it's really heavy and I was told that it is a petzval design in that it has a lens front and rear. If this is correct then it might do better on CA then a non one, but being F5 there will be a fair amount of colour I would imagine.

As I said I don't know for sure so better check this out.

Edited by Doc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've owned an ED100, a Bresser Messier 127L and a couple of 6" F/8 achros. The 127L was a nice scope but a big OTA - it would be OK on the LXD55 if you have the steel tube tripod legs. The 6" F/8's are fun but are even bigger. The ED100 is a really light package for the performance it delivers and therefore easy (and cheap !) to mount.

Don't underestimate that extent to which the ED100's almost colour-free images equalise the gap between it and the larger aperture achros. When I managed to remove most of the CA from one of the 6" F/8's using a chromacor corrector I was startled at how much detail and contrast the CA in the native optics had been masking , and how much extra magnification the corrected optics could handle.

I really do understand the lure of the large refractor though - I've another chromacor corrected 6" in my sights now :D

Edited by John
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say stick with the ED100 as you want it for planetary observing. Good optics and not too heavy.

While the bigger achros are good for low power widefield use their biggest weakness is higher power planetary use. It's not that they can't be used for planetary observing, but the CA will rob you of some detail. And then again mounting the heavier OTA can bring more problems.

Now if only you could come across a second hand ED120 at the right price. :) The ED120 isn't that much bigger or heavier than the ED100.

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi All. Really appreciated the viewpoints. Think the ED100 will be staying put.

John- You mention the ED 120 - is there a link to this scope so I have an idea of the correct one, to keep my peepers open for.

Is it the Skywatcher model ( blue tube) or Celestron. I get confused easily of late. Ha ha

Thx John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I meant the SkyWatcher ED120 gold tube. There's a pic and some info on this webpage. They usually go for a reasonable price.

http://www.astropixels.co.uk/Equipment.htm#ED120

The latest ED120 PRO Black Diamond has the same optics but looks a bi fancier and comes with a dual speed crayford and diagonal.

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/proddetail.php?prod=pro120ed2ota

Yes the Equinox 120 is nicer mechanically but not better optically.

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are considering an ED120, why not include the Meade 127 Triplet in the hunt? A good secondhand one in mint condition shouldn't cost more than around £800-£900 and I hear they are superb optically - and fully apochromatic. PhilJ on this site has one and loves it to bits. And he reckons the extra 7mm makes a difference.

I had both a 100EDR and a Meade/Bresser 127L 5" achro - the same one Jahmanson had. Although the Bresser was very noticeably brighter than the 100EDR, (and so better if fainter objects are your target), on planets I didn't see much more detail due to the CA. However, a fringe killer does largely remove that false colour (which isn't all that bad to begin with), so it really is a matter of personal preference.

I'd say that if absolute image quality is key, go for the 100ED (or a bigger 120/127) apo. If light gathering at a budget is more important, a good 6" achro F8 will show much more fainter objects, and a fringe killer will improve the planetary views no end.

If none of that works, get a good Russian Mak...Lomo or Intes with astro sital glass (fast cooldown)...they're brilliant!

Hope this helps.

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It can be found here

I had no idea Bresser offered a MakNewt but that looks nice. Is that a carbon tube as well? I suppose the one obvious downside is the price, which is close to the Skywatcher MN190 but 40mm down on aperture.

Edited by russ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had no idea Bresser offered a MakNewt but that looks nice. Is that a carbon tube as well? I suppose the one obvious downside is the price, which is close to the Skywatcher MN190 but 40mm down on aperture.

The Bresser is also much heavier (16 kg vs 10 kg :)). I would say the Skywatcher MN190 is the better option then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bresser is also much heavier (16 kg vs 10 kg :D). I would say the Skywatcher MN190 is the better option then.

Blimey that is heavy for a 6" MakNewt. Even the old Intes MN scopes were not that heavy ;) Something of a deal breaker :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16KG! My 6" Intes Micro weighs around 10kg and its a much longer tube! The mirror must be highly polished granite to weigh that much.

Back to the OP, i think the 100ED is a great scope. I went from mine to a 120 Evostar and back to the 100ED again. Optics are great and the tube is nice weight for a mid sized mount. The jump in size to the larger options is very noticable i think. Also at F9 the 100Ed is a great all rounder.

Stephen

Edited by step_hen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Russ - interesting scope.

I guess these are being aimed at imagers ? - the secondary obstruction seems quite a bit larger than the miniscule ones on the Intes and Intes Micro mak-newts. As a visual astronomer this sort of undermines the point of a mak-newt for me but I guess the low levels of coma appeal to imagers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at the price of the 190Mak-Newt on that site- about £1500

I've noticed with all the German sites (TS included) that the GSO, Bresser etc prices are good. But all the Skywatcher prices are stupidly high. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Russ - interesting scope.

I guess these are being aimed at imagers ? - the secondary obstruction seems quite a bit larger than the miniscule ones on the Intes and Intes Micro mak-newts. As a visual astronomer this sort of undermines the point of a mak-newt for me but I guess the low levels of coma appeal to imagers.

I think you're right John. 32% CO is definitely an imagers scope, not one for the discerning planetary observer.

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
 Share

  • 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.