papa Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Hi guys,Im new to this forum which I must say has some excellent information for a beginner like myself. Im looking to purchase my first scope and have narrowed it down to these two.The main thing that I currently require is portability, so that I can move it from my house at home to my house at uni and therefore this rules out a lot of options. Id also like to be able to carry it easily to darker sites etc. In the future should my interest in Astronomy continue then I would probably look to add an 8" dob, its just not practical for me right now.So my question is which of the two would be better for a beginner like me? I understand the 80mm will be better for wide views but the mak should be better for planets? If I buy the mak, will I miss out on a lot more of the sky? Is there anything else I should be considering?Thanks for your help.Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianb Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 What do you want to look at?The Startravel is lousy on planets because of the chromatic aberration - and the Skymax has a very small field of view because of the long focal length.Have you considered a small Dob - like the Skywatcher 130P Heritage Flextube (around £130) - which will do either planets or rich fields better than either of the scopes you mention & still be pretty portable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papa Posted March 10, 2011 Author Share Posted March 10, 2011 Thanks for the quick reply!I realise neither scope will be Superb as they are both small. Ive heard that the symax is good for planets which I would really like a good view of, but I'd also like to be able to see some other sky objects aswell. How big would the 130 be? Would this be better than the mak on planets? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianb Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 How big would the 130 be? Would this be better than the mak on planets? Not huge ... see hereYes, you would get significantly more detail on planets, the extra aperture (130mm vs 90mm) is always a bonus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papa Posted March 10, 2011 Author Share Posted March 10, 2011 Thanks.With regards to transporting it, Id need to be able to travel with the scope, plus all my uni stuff, so suitcase, rucksack, bags etc. So transporting the scope/mount may be an issue. I was also looking at the 130P (on the EQ1 mount I think). Essentially Id need to do alot of travelling with it so thats why I was looking at the smaller scopes. Itd be nice to take it on holiday for instance.Do you think Id be disapointed with the skymax? I think id be far more likely to use a smaller scope due to ease of use, transportation etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russ Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Thanks for the quick reply!I realise neither scope will be Superb as they are both small. Ive heard that the symax is good for planets which I would really like a good view of, but I'd also like to be able to see some other sky objects aswell. How big would the 130 be? Would this be better than the mak on planets?The 130 is the better allrounder, as Brian says, good for widefield and planets. And should give a marginal increase in detail over the Skymax 90 when viewing the planets. But the 130, having a focal ratio of F5, will be need to be collimated to within an inch of its life to beat the Skymax 90. Maksutovs are renowned for holding their collimation incredibly well. F5 newtonian's have the opposite reputation.The 130 will cool quicker, easy to setup but demand better eyepieces too. The 90 is only a small Mak and cools relatively quickly itself providing it's stored somewhere cool. And also easy to setup and use. The 90 is also incredibly easy going even on the cheapest eyepieces. Has massive focus travel, so no worries of not be able to bring an eyepiece or accessory to focus.All swings and roundabouts. Nothing is ever clear cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russ Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Thanks.With regards to transporting it, Id need to be able to travel with the scope, plus all my uni stuff, so suitcase, rucksack, bags etc. So transporting the scope/mount may be an issue. I was also looking at the 130P (on the EQ1 mount I think). Essentially Id need to do alot of travelling with it so thats why I was looking at the smaller scopes. Itd be nice to take it on holiday for instance.Do you think Id be disapointed with the skymax? I think id be far more likely to use a smaller scope due to ease of use, transportation etc.If you are travelling with the scope a lot, to uni and back. Or holidays etc. I would think about a more robust type scope. I don't the 130 dob is that scope. Just my own personal view, i know Brian will disagree. You say the planets are what holds the most interest. I think the Skymax 90 suits your needs better. It can be used with a good camera tripod at lower power. Perfect for holidays. And that collimation will hold.I've owned the Skymax 80, 90, 102 and 127, plus the ETX 90. They are a cracking optical configuration that provide razor sharp lunar and planetary views. It's just those widefield views are non existent and impossible to achieve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianb Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Don't forget that you WILL need a stand / mount / tripod of some sort & for a small scope with an eyepiece at the bottom end of the tube (refractor or catadioptric) the tripod is going to be a lot bigger than the scope. A small dob is a fairly compact & self-contained unit ... I would think the 130P Flextube would fit very nicely into a medium sized rucksack, perhaps the "photo" type with foam inserts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papa Posted March 10, 2011 Author Share Posted March 10, 2011 Cheers guys, your advice is appreciated. My concern with the skymax is that you say widefield views will be impossible to achieve. What does this mean exactly? Id love to look at planets, the moon etc, but will I also be able to view stars, doubles etc? What about things like M1, M45, M13 etc. As id like to see these aswell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papa Posted March 10, 2011 Author Share Posted March 10, 2011 My budget is around £200, so with the Skymax, plus a maplin case to carry it in and a 32mm eyepiece and moonfilter is about that.The first scope I was looking at was the 150p on the Eq3-2 mount. Im assuming this would be too large to fit in the standard maplin aluminium case? Also would I require any extra lenses filters with it, as its more expensive at £239? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin66 Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Does the Skymax90 come with a mounting???You'll definately need something more substantial than a camera tripod! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papa Posted March 10, 2011 Author Share Posted March 10, 2011 It comes with the Eq-1 mount, from FLO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papa Posted March 10, 2011 Author Share Posted March 10, 2011 How much better would the heritage 130p be than the skymax 90? How much more could I see, and how much better would those images be?Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.