My five year plan

[Ags]

I was looking at a SkyWatcher Mak 180 in a shop recently, and I think it is a bit big for me. I'm guestimating that a C8 is probably about the same size (but lighter) so now I am looking for something smaller. My main goals are planetary sketching and city stargazing - clusters and doubles.

I think around the beginning of next year I will get a Skymax 150 on a EQ5 Pro. It's that bit smaller (volume-wise), a bit less expensive and is a nice rugged Mak. It seems widely praised. I don't think it takes 2" EPs, so that saves me a bit of money too. The max FOV would be 0.9 degrees. I'm hoping I won't lose that much in planetary resolution using a Mak 150 instead of a 200mm SCT.

Another thing putting me off an 8" scope is that the sky goes grey at an exit pupil of 2mm from my back yard, so as aperture gets higher I need crazy magnification to get a pleasing view.

The alternative (also on EQ5) would be an Explorer 150PL - in theory it should be an even better planet scope given its smaller central obstruction. But I value viewing comfort, and also that long tube must stress the mount and vibrate badly. And it is certainly not fitting the "small is better" mantra I am now spouting.

Well with a Mak as my main scope I will obviously need to invest in a wide-field scope too... ;-) My current fave for this would be the Revelation 90mm/f500 APO. That would give a 3 degree FOV, again without needing to invest in 2" EPs.

The next thought with an APO would be some imaging. I know an F5.6 doublet semi-apo is not good for RGB imaging, but from my light-polluted location I would only be doing narrowband. I also know that an EQ5 is not the best basis for imaging, but the scope's FL is only 500mm, and it is very fast (F5.6) so that would reduce the accuracy demands on the mount. And with bad light pollution the exposures would be quite short.

There you are - five years worth of salivation and window-shopping!

[Parus major]

I've got to say, I've lived with my 150PL for a year and I have been known to give her a cuddle in the passing, that's how pleased I am with it. In practical terms it's not much bother on an EQ3-2 where the only stability problems are to do with the aluminium legs which are a bit pants. The length might cause this but I can't tell. On an EQ5 this might not be an issue at all.

I'll tell you where I'm at, I'm keeping the scope but getting a new mount. After talking to the kids on here and reading what they say to others the common consensus is that HEQ5 is a minimum for imaging with my or really any scope but to be completely future proof I'm two weeks off having the cash for a EQ6 syntrek so that's what I'm after. That gives me options of pretty much all manageable scopes in the future.

Basically, if you do want to do AP then the HEQ5 and the EQ6 are where you want to start looking.

[John]

I've not looked through a Skywatcher 150mm mak but I was very impressed with the views of Saturn through the 127mm version at the SGL6 star party

And that was on a simple AZ-3 mount - it's that light !.

[Ags]

parus I agree that an EQ5 might be too lightweight but I also want to avoid collossal equipment. My ten year plan has an EQ6 head on a pier!

By the way you make the 150PL sound very tempting!

[Earl]

Humm

5 year plan.

a) Own a house outside of Ledbury not renting, with much better LP (its not that bad here tbh)

a nice big RoR Observatory with large warm room.

c) an Imaging rig, which I can just turn on boot up and go. (as for exactly which gear... no idea)

d) remote this from inside the house.

[Ags]

Jahmanson, having looked through a 127mm mak, would you say maks live up to their rep for giving 'apo-like' views? My impression of my 100mm mak is that it is optically superb. The only drawbacks are the narrow FOV and fiddly focusing.

[Ags]

I just noticed on the FLO site that the skymax 150 comes with a 2" diagonal and a 28mm 2" EP... I wonder why, given that vignetting would occur?