sct or reflector???

[boborange]

i thought i had kinda decided on a celestron omni 150 (chosen over the explorer 150 purely on a superficial basis: i like the celestron looks) and was going to take the plunge but just been looking at the celestron omni 127 sct. Its another £100 but the benefits are that its much smaller, more portable (I live in london so will be transporting it to dark sites fairly regulary) and i imagine much easier to live with and i believe it does not need to cool down as much as the reflector, all of which mean i will use it more.

Most viewing will be done in light polluted london but with regular trips out to darker skies in oxfordshire.

Everyone says aperture is king so wondering if the 127 sct is inferior to the 150 due to the smaller aperture?

thankyou......

[nightfisher]

the 127 might be better for you regarding transporting, but as it a mak it will take longer to cool properly compared to a reflector,

what do you plan on viewing, planets or dso

[riklaunim]

SCTs are smaller than Maks - shorter OTAs and less weight. Due to obstruction and size limits small maks and SCT aren't that effiecient as those bigger. 6-8" SCT is very good, exp. the 8".

[E621Keith]

Depends how much you value portability.

In theory a reflector of larger aperture will perform better on DSO. Large aperture is not as important on planets and the SCT with longer focal length may make it easier to get reach higher magnification.

I switched my main scope from a 120mm refractor to a 80mm one, one of the reason was because the 80mm is lighter and easier to carry. The best telescope is the one you use most often.

[boborange]

thanks for your replies. Im just getting started in this so really looking to focus on planets initially. i can get to dark sky sites roughly once a month but the scope would be set up in london at all other times.

so the optical difference between the two would only really be noticable on dso?

[CGolder]

you will gain more by being at at dark site than you will lose by having 1 inch less.

[sixela]

so the optical difference between the two would only really be noticable on dso?

Not really. For planets as well, more aperture means more details. The good thing about SCTs and Maks is that the long focal length means you can use longer focal length eyepieces for planetary observation, and cheap eyepieces are more comfortable when they're long.

[brantuk]

For dso hunting you need dark sites and large aperture - and if imaging then a short focal ratio.

For planets Maks and Sct's give sharper crisper views and images due to the long focal length.

It's only critical for imaging really - all types will let you view planets and dso's to a lesser or greater degree. The aperture size will just limit how many you can pick out