Thinking about a small grab-and-go Mak

[jonathan]

When I attended a local astronomy club meeting there was someone there with a very tiny looking Maksutov, black, mounted on a (proper dual) fork which I think they said had a basic Goto system too.

I don't want the Goto, but tracking would be nice. Just something that will give me the equivalent of 15x70 bins or better but in a telescope, that I can set up perhaps on a garden table and not have to worry about cooling down or dew so much.

I think this guy's Mak was either a Skywatcher or Meade, can't remember.

I see on FLO they have several small Skywatcher Maks, such as the Maksutov - Skywatcher Skymax 102 (EQ2), but could I (or should I) fit a tracking motor to that kind of mount? What wide-field eyepiece could I use on such a telescope that would give me good views?

I've been through three 15x70 bins and frustratingly just can't get on with them at all, leaving my 8x42 bins being the only grab-and-go kit I have.

[wpitcairn]

Hi I recently bought the Skymax 127 on the Supatrak mount, (no goto). But this is seems to be easy to use. Just Level and Alight on North and you are setup for simple tracking. I think this could be upgraded to a goto simply by upgrading the handset. But the manufacturer seems to keep the price for the handset very high.

[Astro_Baby]

WHat is it about a mak thats particularly appealing ? Is it size or weight ?

The reason I ask is Maks can be dew magnets. My 4" never had an issue with just a dewshield but I have known folks who say evena 4" was a non starter without dew control.

On a table wont help either unless its a very stable table and even then the hight may not be right and will result in it being uncomfortable to use.

You could look at big binos on a mount which may be more portable or even a small refractor may be more portable and more dew resistant (at least without resorting to heated dew bands).

Finally you could always use a small Reflector as a grab and go. The Orion (US Orion not Orion Optics) so some very neat small reflectors in their Starblast range.

Dont get hung up on a Mak is all. Consider weight as well. Maks can be small but they arent always light, especially when you budget in the mount.

[JamesF]

I'm struggling to see why a Mak should be any more of a dew magnet than any other scope of a similar size.

Perhaps having the corrector means that moisture in the air is more liable to settle on the optics rather than, say, on the inside of the tube where it might not get noticed as might happen with a Newt. And of course there could well be more owners of 5" or 6" Maks than of 5" or 6" refractors, so you might well not hear of so many problems with refractors.

Surely as many people with SCTs of a similar size would complain about dew problems though?

(Not noticed any problems with mine as yet, but I've only really used it once, by bodging it onto the EQ1. I've just today made up a bracket to fit it to the EQ3-2, so if the skies remain clear I'll have a look at Saturn later.)

James

[jonathan]

WHat is it about a mak thats particularly appealing ? Is it size or weight ?

Yes and yes. A pair of 15x70 plus the heavy tripod is a two-handed effort for me, I really can't imagine a Mak on a mount being any heavier or bulkier. That is about the size I'm looking for.

I've read up heavily on dew and it appears to be mainly a problem for SCT and Maks over 6", but if it came to it then I would just buy or make a small dew shield, no sweat.

You could look at big binos on a mount

As I said, can't get on with big binos. I'm looking for a replacement to binos in the form of a telescope.

Finally you could always use a small Reflector as a grab and go.

Too big, space is very limited. I've seen a small Mak up close and personal and it was just right, weighs almost nothing compared to my 8SE; I'm just trying to find out what people think is the best small one to go for.

[Astro_Baby]

Well fracs almost never get over 5" and are almost always well equipped with adequate dew shields. Reflectors have relatively small glass elements at the front of the scope (but still require at least a dew shield most of the time). Both my Maks (4" and 8") show(ed) a great attactionfor dew. The 4" was ok so long as it had a decent dewshield but even that could not keep dew off on a few nights of use. The 8" is a complet non starter without dew heaters. I have never seen a scope dew up as bad.

A small Mak might actually be as heavy as 15x70 binos. The tropid/mount may not be very light. The Nexstars was light compared to say an HEQ5 but still relatively heavy and bulky. Lighter weight=wobbly telescopes.

Even a 4" Mak seemed quite heavy to me - at least a lot heavier than 10x50 binos.

Thats why I suggested other alternatives.

[jonathan]

Thats why I suggested other alternatives.

I know, and your advice is very much appreciated. I learned a lot about this when I researched my first telescope, the 8SE, so I guess a much smaller telescope on an EQ mount will be a whole new experience for me again, should be fun!

I'm not too worried about wobble with such a small telescope, almost anything should be better than what I get from the Celestron Nexstar mount! Or even when I try holding my bins up.

[AndyH]

Small maks are wonderful scopes. I've had a few beauties through the years. Lomo 70mm, Ylena 85mm and I-M 125mm. All were Russian mind you. I've never tried a chinese made one but they will I'm sure be vg quality. As you say, make yourself a long dewshield or small ones can be bought for 5 or 6 quid from Warehouse Express.

Their small size makes mounting very easy.

I say, go for it.

Cheers,

Andy.

[AndyH]

If your budget could be stretched, try to get a 5"/125mm one. Could give you many years of joy.

Andy.

[jonathan]

If your budget could be stretched, try to get a 5"/125mm one. Could give you many years of joy.

Andy.

I already have an 8" so I'm not really looking for something to see lots with, just for quick fun sessions really. I'm probably going to replace the Nexstar Goto mount with an EQ6 Syntrek when funds allow, that will be my long-term investment for more serious viewing.

[Specman]

Hi,

I purchased a NexStar 4SE from Flo last year and its been great. They were giving Astro Zapp dew shields as free gifts with them and I can honestly saw I have never had a dew problem and I live near the sea in the far North of Scotland.

I don't use dew heaters with it, never needed one. Its a great grab and go set up.

The secret to the dew shield seems to be the flock neoprene internal, it catches all the water vapour. They are also nice and long and I think that helps. It certainly cuts out stray light!

Cheers

Mark

[Specman]

I think this guy's Mak was either a Skywatcher or Meade, can't remember.

Sound like the Meade 90mm MAK that comes in its own little travel rucksack.

I myself fancied a Meade but was advised by a knowledgable source that I, quote "should steer clear of them at the moment as they are in trouble, lost their way a-bit, quality is a bit hit and miss. Seems in the recession the opted to save money and have apparently scimped on the scope quality. Replaced brass gears for nastly plastic ones. Getting a good Meade right now is a bit hit or miss". un-quote.

FYI The NexStar 4SE uses the same mount as the 5SE so its over mounted. But the skywatchers look much the same. I think that the GOTO package is probably the cheapest way to get tracking on a small scope. Skywatcher MAKS seem much the same as the Celestron. The are probably all made at the same factory in China anyway, just painted a different colour! They certainly look pretty much identical.

Cheers

Mark

[jonathan]

Thanks Specman, useful info there.

I'm thinking about this one: Maksutov - Skywatcher Skymax 90 (EQ1)

It's very affordable and if the mount proves too feeble (can't imagine it will be) I could always upgrade later. As far as a replacement for big bins goes it should be ideal, my camera tripod doesn't have motor drive as it is anyway so I shouldn't be missing out on anything.

If the need arises I could upgrade to a single-axis motorised mount, has anyone got any experience with this: Skywatcher - RA Economy Motor Drive for EQ1

I'm not expecting to do any photography with it, just keep some stars in the eyepiece for long enough to do a sketch or have a good look.

[ronin]

Sounds like the Meade ETX 90.

Know someone that has one and they like it for it's relatively small size.

Meade also made a 105.

Possibly worth looking out for one in the used sections as Meade no longer make at least one of them, suspect it is the 105 they stopped.

[Specman]

You know...I like the Skywatcher MAK 90 scope but that EQ1 mount just doesn't cut it!

Its a shame about the issue's with Meade as I always fancied one of those ETX80's myself. Also the Nexstar 4SE is probably more than you need for a lite portable set up, though the tripod and mount is really nice, solid!

My thoughts are that if you are thinking even now that you will upgrade the tripod then I wouldn't waste your money.

Had a look around for you and I think I have found a little beauty

SkyProdigy 90 Computerized Telescope (item #22091) / SkyProdigy Series Computerized Telescopes / Telescopes / Products / Celestron.com

A new little Celestron 90 MAK! but costly!

or

Celestron NexStar 90 SLT Mak Telescope: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics

But after all my searching I couldn't find anything as good as this Meade for the price. It just looks right!

Meade ETX80 AT Telescope

So after all that, my advice would be go find yourself a decent Meade ETX80, they will be guaranteed if you buy new for a year. Try and get to see it try it out before you buy, check out the build quality. Even with the hit and miss quality issues its the best little MAK for your money I think.

Clear Skies

Mark

[jonathan]

From the picture that Meade ETX80 looks very much like the one I saw at the meeting.

Can't say that the Prodigy does anything for me, don't want that kind of mount (although it's about time someone made a star recognition auto-setup thing!), same goes for the Nexstar 90 I'm afraid.

At £259 the ETX80 is a little more expensive than I had fancied, but for a tiny bit more I could have a SkyMax 90 on an EQ2 with RA motor drive... or for just under £200 I could have the same on a manual set up; options, options, options!

I do have to wonder why the Meade with Goto is cheaper than SkyMax 90 with EQ2 and RA motor drive only - is the Meade really of that much lower quality? Where is the actual cost saving going on with the Meade, or are the SkyMax 90 / EQ2 are overpriced?

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Regarding dew, my 8" SCT has been free of dew since I got the dew shield (no heater!), even in a night that a lot of stuff iced up. The scope was outside for 4-5 hours, and the outside and top end of the dew shield were covered in frost, but no frost on the thin corrector plate. A 4" mak used for quick session should only need a dew shield.

[Specman]

From the picture that Meade ETX80 looks very much like the one I saw at the meeting.

At £259 the ETX80 is a little more expensive than I had fancied, but for a tiny bit more I could have a SkyMax 90 on an EQ2 with RA motor drive... or for just under £200 I could have the same on a manual set up; options, options, options!

Your guilty of the same mistake nearly all of us do. You say you want grab and go then start pushing the aperture and set up size up!

The Meade ETX80 is perfect, even comes with its own rucksack that it all fits into. Perfect grab and go!

Just make sure you get a good one! I wouldn't faff about with those cheap EQ mounts and £60 extra is hardly a bank breaker, just save up a couple of more weeks.

Apparently you can also get these in RA without the GOTO. Sold as a backpack Observatory. They are sure to be cheaper than the GOTO's.

Meade ETX 80 AT Backpack Package GOTO Telescope | Telescopes | Rother Valley Optics

Clear Skies!

Mark

[Cunhaval]

Ditto - big dew problems on my 127 Mak for the first two nights, when new. Then did a bit of work with a camping mat - not a trace of dew since, even when everything else was running with it!

My d-i-y bodge is about twice as long as the objective is wide, and I didn't bother with the traditional velcro. Just cut mat to fit circumference of the front of the tube, and then gaffer-taped the inside and outside of the mat seam. Now a really snug fit - no chance of it blowing off. Seems to work for me

[jonathan]

Thing is that I want to steer clear of Goto, and I'm not really pushing for aperture either, just something quick to replace my big bins.

Surely an EQ2 with RA drive will be more than adequate for a Mak 90?

[AndyH]

Yup.

Go for it.

Andy.

[jonathan]

Hmm, this one seems to be running away with me... I think I have to curtail it before I go and spend close to £1,000 on something!

Started out as a Mak 90, drifted towards a Meade ETX 80, then it became a Startravel 80, but after reading some words about that telescope regarding the nature of achromatic refractors I just don't think I would enjoy using it; to have a refractor that I would enjoy using I'd probably have to spend about £600 on a good 80 APO, and although this was originally (and still is) in my grand plan of things to buy, it's not what I'm shopping for at the moment.

Back to the Mak 90 I think:

Skywatcher EQ2

Skywatcher Skymax 90 OTA

Astrozap dewshield to fit ETX-90 / C-90

Don't think I'll bother with RA motor drive to start off with, just see how I get on.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Sounds like a good set-up. Regarding good 80 mm APOs, the TS/APM 80mm F/6 costs 648 euro, and I can really recommend it as a grab and go scope.

[ollypenrice]

One thing I think is that small scopes don't do high magnification well, but what they do do well is widefield. So I would incline towards something like the second hand TV Pronto that I bought for 200 pounds. It can show the whole Veil complex or the whole Rosette in a wide EP and that is something you cannot see in a bigger scope. Also, if not on a tracking mount, there is a lot to be said for low power.

I think the dew magnetism of Maks arises from the 'thicker than SCT' corrector plate and this also affects cooldown time.

Enjoy your choice, anyway! So many good scopes out there.

Olly

[jonathan]

I do have a 2" 32mm Panaview, but I would need to fit the 2" diagonal (which I have, obviously) so that could make the small telescope very back-end heavy; could be interesting, and if it works it should be very nice.