Which one of these should I get?

[Gerrypfc]

Afternoon folks. Complete novice here and looking to buy one of these 2 scopes to get myself into astronomy. 

Both are preowned, as just wanted something cheap incase it doesn't ignite my interest as much as I hope (isn't likely not too, but you get where I'm coming from lol) 

 

Skywatcher 114/500 az goto, comes with red dot finder, 25mm, 10mm, 6mm plossl, 4mm plossl.... £120 - £140 depending if I can haggle them down

 

Skywatcher explorer 130p az goto, comes with everything you get as stock by the looks of it....£165

 

Would like them to observe planets / dso and relatively short exposure astrophotography with a attached dslr camera. (I understand eq tracked mount is best for this) 

Is there much difference in what I can view and the level of detail I hope to achieve? 

 

[Cumbrianwolf]

I would opt for the slightly larger aperture of the 130p which should do you well for planetary and some bright DSO, dependent upon the darkness of your skies, most DSO do not show up to be much more than a monochrome fuzzy blob even in larger apertures as the limiting factor is our own eyes of which are not optimised for darkness rather than the instrument being at fault and details do not show until you are into the very large apertures, but do not let that stop you as once bitten it becomes hard to not keep going.  

 

This may burst your bubble, but I do not think a mount like will hold up to the weight of a DSLR, on the other hand a mobile phone on a mount viewing through an eyepiece may just be doable for planetary and some DSO otherwise you will overload it and all manner of tracking issues to occur. Be aware that an AZ mount will induce rotation of the image as it tracks, as they do not take the courses of an object exactly as that of an equatorial mount. 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 21, 2022 by Cumbrianwolf

[Nightspore]

2 hours ago, Gerrypfc said:

Afternoon folks. Complete novice here and looking to buy one of these 2 scopes to get myself into astronomy. 

Both are preowned, as just wanted something cheap incase it doesn't ignite my interest as much as I hope (isn't likely not too, but you get where I'm coming from lol) 

 

Skywatcher 114/500 az goto, comes with red dot finder, 25mm, 10mm, 6mm plossl, 4mm plossl.... £120 - £140 depending if I can haggle them down

 

Skywatcher explorer 130p az goto, comes with everything you get as stock by the looks of it....£165

 

Would like them to observe planets / dso and relatively short exposure astrophotography with a attached dslr camera. (I understand eq tracked mount is best for this) 

Is there much difference in what I can view and the level of detail I hope to achieve? 

 

 

I think the Skyhawk is a Bird-Jones type. The 130P is f/5 so good for DSO but probably not so hot for planetary.

[Gerrypfc]

Thanks for the replies. 

I was leaning more towards the 130p tbh. 

I was slightly concerned about the weight of the camera with the mount, but wasn't sure if this would be so much of an issue on shorter exposures shots and over a shorter overall time? 

Ideally I would like a stronger equitorial mount with tracking capabilities, but my budget isn't there atm and I'd like to see if I get hooked on it first, before shelling out alot of money 

[Cumbrianwolf]

7 minutes ago, Gerrypfc said:

Thanks for the replies. 

I was leaning more towards the 130p tbh. 

I was slightly concerned about the weight of the camera with the mount, but wasn't sure if this would be so much of an issue on shorter exposures shots and over a shorter overall time? 

Ideally I would like a stronger equitorial mount with tracking capabilities, but my budget isn't there atm and I'd like to see if I get hooked on it first, before shelling out alot of money 

Most DSLR are far too heavy for the mount, and it would most likely grind to a halt or stutter really badly causing potential damage, but do consider trying eyepiece projection as I said in the original post, as that should not cost you the earth if you already have a phone with a camera as the mounts are cheap. Find your footing first and if you enjoy it then work on moving upwards at a later date as it is more of a marathon than a sprint and what you learn now will carry on with you.

[Gerrypfc]

Thanks for the heads up. 

I do have a cheap phone mount off amazon, so maybe I'll try that first. 

Not sure if longer exposure shots are something I can do with a phone? Admittedly, they aren't going to be no where near as good as a proper camera... But I'd like to be able to collect as much detail as possible. 

[Cumbrianwolf]

12 minutes ago, Gerrypfc said:

Thanks for the heads up. 

I do have a cheap phone mount off amazon, so maybe I'll try that first. 

Not sure if longer exposure shots are something I can do with a phone? Admittedly, they aren't going to be no where near as good as a proper camera... But I'd like to be able to collect as much detail as possible. 

The mount won't allow long exposures because of its limited design, it is just there to point and go. You make get up to five or so seconds on a 32 mm eyepiece, that is for you to experiment with. I know that is sounding defeatist, but it is better you know the truth before you fall down the rabbit warren that so many of us have been before you. If you really want to image then you need to reconsider the funds as otherwise it gets very frustrating and imaging is just one of many steps as there is so much more such as the processing of the images, believe me as I have had my eyes opened up to what is needed regarding the digital side as prior for me was a 35 mm camera, hence why I am on here asking as this side of it is new to me, and we are all learning.  

[Gerrypfc]

I'll do some more research and go from there I think.

I'd love to just be able to put down a wedge of money on some top kit... But until I get into it properly.... 165 quid isn't too much to risk. 

Seen some pretty good results online using 15-20 second exposures, stacked and tweaked with software. 

[paul]

Of the two the 130p is a better solution - it will give you a better experience with all objects you look at. With a 2x barlow you will see plenty of detail on Jupiter and the rings of Saturn will be very obvious. Being the same F-ratio as the 114 scope means you will see objects <> 20% bigger for the same brightness as the 114 scope.

[Cumbrianwolf]

59 minutes ago, Gerrypfc said:

I'll do some more research and go from there I think.

I'd love to just be able to put down a wedge of money on some top kit... But until I get into it properly.... 165 quid isn't too much to risk. 

Seen some pretty good results online using 15-20 second exposures, stacked and tweaked with software. 

Well then I stand corrected, and I say go for it as you said it is not a great investment, but it could be the one that cements you to the hobby.

[Gerrypfc]

Yeah true. It is all a big learning curve. Just don't want to invest too heavy at first. 

Think you're probably right about the dslr on this mount though... Maybe I'll get away with some short shots. 

Believe me... I would like too. Have already show the missus quite a few scopes, mounts, camera etc.... All with a pretty hefty price tag 😂. 

If I get something like the 130p az, just to help me get to know the sky and take some basic photos with a bit of detail. Then hoping it'll inspire me to get into it more and know what exactly I'm gonna need, when it comes to the point of investing more heavily £££ 😁

[Gerrypfc]

This is what I have atm... Picked it up for 30 quid. 

Is nice for looking at the moon, but stand is far too wobbly to try track further objects..... Doesn't help being a complete novice and not knowing how to use the eq mount properly yet 😂

As well as struggling to find where stuff is located in the sky lol

[Cumbrianwolf]

5 minutes ago, Gerrypfc said:

This is what I have atm... Picked it up for 30 quid. 

Is nice for looking at the moon, but stand is far too wobbly to try track further objects..... Doesn't help being a complete novice and not knowing how to use the eq mount properly yet 😂

As well as struggling to find where stuff is located in the sky lol

The manual mounts on such scopes are not ideal but at least it got you started, you will find the Go-To option is a real bonus as you learn the sky much quicker that way, and being able to track is also one of those things that once you have it you will never look back. 

[Gerrypfc]

Yeah for sure. Certainly not a cheap hobby, but I'm sure it'll be an enjoyable one. 

Just need to buy a house outside the city now for less light pollution 🤣

[Cumbrianwolf]

5 minutes ago, Gerrypfc said:

Yeah for sure. Certainly not a cheap hobby, but I'm sure it'll be an enjoyable one. 

Just need to buy a house outside the city now for less light pollution 🤣

No, for sure it is not a cheap hobby in reality, well cheaper than what it used to be, but it is one that keeps you interested and constantly learning as well as once you have the kit the upkeep is cheap as very little in consumables unlike my other hobby of RC of which is now on the back burner.

[Nightspore]

Yeah, this is my 'cheap' grab and go rig:

 

 

All prices are approximate:

TS dew shield £30

Orion ST80 OTA £100

Aftermarket TS/GSO focuser plus finder shoes £210

Rings/dovetail £30

Reflex finder £30

2" Synta dielectric £100

15mm GSO SuperView £40

30mm GSO SuperView £70

Orion zoom £60

Orion Shorty Barlow £30

Orion Tri-Mag £45

SW AZ5 Deluxe £245

TS carrying case £70

Flight bag £15

 

 

£1075 if my maths is correct. And that not including several 2" and 1.25" filters that regularly go out with them.

[Padraic M]

Hi Gerry the guys are right to temper your expectations re photography through either of these scopes. All other things being equal, the extra aperture of the 130P is better. For visual, this scope will give you good views of Saturn and Jupiter and the moon will look great. You will see some detail in the larger DSOs if you have a dark sky, but otherwise DSOs are hard to see by eye. Star clusters will be nice - it's always a joy to look at the Pleaides or Hyades and there are some lovely open clusters in Auriga to view, just to start with. 

 

My first scope was the Celestron Astromaster 130EQ - a very similar scope, but with a manual EQ mount. It confirmed that I had the bug so I've upgraded A LOT since then! Once you decide on astrophotography, there's very little that you can do without getting into the thousands. The two best ways to start would be (1) eyepiece projection using a smart phone holder on the 130P and short exposures or (2) with your DSLR body and lens and a decent tracking mount like the Star Adventurer, and leave the 130P for visual.

 

Something to keep in mind about the 130P - the Skywatcher Newtonian range for AP is the 'PDS'. The 130P has the P for Parabolic mirror but not the D or the S. The D is for dual-speed focuser; getting good focus for AP without this will be very difficult, even with a Bahtinov mask. The S is for Short (the primary mirror is moved up the tube, so the focal point projects farther out the focuser tube); without this, you will not be able to achieve focal distance at all with a DSLR without using a Barlow, and this will increase the focal length x2 = 1,300mm. That's a very long telephoto lens, and unless the mount is very sturdy (the Celestron 130EQ mount was anything but) you will get camera shake and star trails. 

 

You're right to think that the £165 is a cheap experiment to get started and probably get you hooked. You may also need to upgrade the eyepieces - if they're anything like the stock ones that came with the Celestron 130EQ, the best upgrade you could do would be to buy 2 or 3 half-decent Plossls. Cheap ones like the BST Starguider range would give a huge improvement.

[Gerrypfc]

45 minutes ago, Padraic M said:

Hi Gerry the guys are right to temper your expectations re photography through either of these scopes. All other things being equal, the extra aperture of the 130P is better. For visual, this scope will give you good views of Saturn and Jupiter and the moon will look great. You will see some detail in the larger DSOs if you have a dark sky, but otherwise DSOs are hard to see by eye. Star clusters will be nice - it's always a joy to look at the Pleaides or Hyades and there are some lovely open clusters in Auriga to view, just to start with. 

 

My first scope was the Celestron Astromaster 130EQ - a very similar scope, but with a manual EQ mount. It confirmed that I had the bug so I've upgraded A LOT since then! Once you decide on astrophotography, there's very little that you can do without getting into the thousands. The two best ways to start would be (1) eyepiece projection using a smart phone holder on the 130P and short exposures or (2) with your DSLR body and lens and a decent tracking mount like the Star Adventurer, and leave the 130P for visual.

 

Something to keep in mind about the 130P - the Skywatcher Newtonian range for AP is the 'PDS'. The 130P has the P for Parabolic mirror but not the D or the S. The D is for dual-speed focuser; getting good focus for AP without this will be very difficult, even with a Bahtinov mask. The S is for Short (the primary mirror is moved up the tube, so the focal point projects farther out the focuser tube); without this, you will not be able to achieve focal distance at all with a DSLR without using a Barlow, and this will increase the focal length x2 = 1,300mm. That's a very long telephoto lens, and unless the mount is very sturdy (the Celestron 130EQ mount was anything but) you will get camera shake and star trails. 

 

You're right to think that the £165 is a cheap experiment to get started and probably get you hooked. You may also need to upgrade the eyepieces - if they're anything like the stock ones that came with the Celestron 130EQ, the best upgrade you could do would be to buy 2 or 3 half-decent Plossls. Cheap ones like the BST Starguider range would give a huge improvement.

Thanks for the informative reply. Certainly food for thought. 

I'll get the 130p for now while I research further and compile a list of equipment I want for next Christmas 😂. 

The missus will probably tell me.... Not so politely... What I can do with said list 🤣

[Gerrypfc]

I do like the look of the 150pds eq5 Pro goto (£999) or 200pds heq5 Pro goto (£1299). 

Something to consider if I catch the bug. 

Or would there be something better you'd recommend for that price range? Would like the goto function. 

 

[Nightspore]

 

I'm strictly visual, and a bit 'old skool' as I prefer non-powered mounts (except with my Big Cat). But one aspect that I think you should consider is thermal equilibrium or cool down time. My 102mm Altair ED doublet (above) is basically good to go by the time it's in the mount. My 150mm GSO Newtonian (below) can take anything between forty minutes and an hour to cool enough to get a stable image. You can actually see the swirling air currents inside the tube if you defocus on a bright object. 

 

[Gerrypfc]

52 minutes ago, Nightspore said:

 

I'm strictly visual, and a bit 'old skool' as I prefer non-powered mounts (except with my Big Cat). But one aspect that I think you should consider is thermal equilibrium or cool down time. My 102mm Altair ED doublet (above) is basically good to go by the time it's in the mount. My 150mm GSO Newtonian (below) can take anything between forty minutes and an hour to cool enough to get a stable image. You can actually see the swirling air currents inside the tube if you defocus on a bright object. 

 

Thanks for the tip. I'll be sure to set it up outside in plenty of time, before I plan on viewing 

[Nightspore]

16 minutes ago, Gerrypfc said:

Thanks for the tip. I'll be sure to set it up outside in plenty of time, before I plan on viewing 

 

This is why I use refractors a lot lol. 

 

 

Cat's are even worse. The 90 and 102mm Mak's can take forty minutes even on a good night. The 127mm needs a good hour.

 

 

235mm SCT at least two hours. It's usually clouded over by the time it's ready lol.

[Gerrypfc]

Certainly need to plan ahead then. What sites do you use to check cloud cover. I tried a few, but they were massively inaccurate 

[Nightspore]

45 minutes ago, Gerrypfc said:

Certainly need to plan ahead then. What sites do you use to check cloud cover. I tried a few, but they were massively inaccurate 

 

They're ALL inaccurate lol. I found a local Met Office site that's a bit accurate. 'Windy' is popular.  I have other apps but it's probably best to go on your instinct and look out of the window. If you can see stars you may be in with a chance. I logged 140 sessions last year. Which is a bit above average for me. The year before I barely had over a hundred. Last year I developed four rigs that can be taken out at a moments notice. 

 

2021:

 

Overall Winner

 

Sky-watcher 72ED DS Pro (rev 1): 65 Sessions.

 

 

Runner Up

 

Altair EDF 60 (V2): 32 Sessions.

 

 

Third Place

 

Sky-Watcher ST80 (modified): 20 Sessions.

 

 

Honourable Mention 

 

Sky-Watcher SkyMax 102mm: 10 Sessions (only lunar & planetary).

 

 

The 72ED is the most versatile and is a good all-rounder. Due to physical disability I tend to only use it with 1.25" accessories as it has no rotating focuser. The 60 EDF has the best glass (FPL-53) with a 0.961 Strehl number. The ST80 is only an achromat but good for rich field. I can split doubles with it although much below a 1mm exit pupil and the CA cuts in. The Mak' is great for the Moon, although it still needs 30~40 mins cool down before you can push the magnification above about 60x. The other three are ready to go as soon as you take them outside.

 

 

A lot of amateur astronomers have a light 'ready to go' rig as well as a larger scope. Which is why I usually recommend a small refractor and alt-az mount to beginners. Once you get a feel for the sky and know more then you can go bigger. A refractor is far more economical with light than a reflector, and there's no obstruction. Patrick Moore always reckoned in real terms a 4" refractor equalled a 6" reflector. I tend to agree with him. A good 60mm refractor will give 73.47x better magnification than the unaided human eye utilising a 7mm exit pupil. My f/6 60 EDF is the only scope I have that can properly frame Coma Berenices at 10x. Big isn't always better.

[Nightspore]

It's also worth pointing out a quality 80mm refractor can be as effective as a 130mm reflector. Admittedly there are certain laws of physics that govern aperture sizes. My 80ED DS Pro (below) has 2.52x less light grasp than my 127mm Mak'.

 

 

However, it does have an FPL-53 Ohara 'flint' with a Schott 'crown' doublet. 

 

 

During the last Mars opposition, which was a good one, I viewed a lot of the Martin surface with these two scopes. They're both fairly easy for me to set-up. Both gave some excellent views of albedo features such as the Syrtis Major Planum. The MCT can resolve to 0.91 arc seconds (Dawes' Limit) compared to the 80ED's 1.45 arc seconds (0.45 arc seconds difference). With no obstacle in the refractor's light path the contrast and acuity was that much better with the refractor. So it was very much a case of swings and roundabouts between them. There is a rule of thumb that a ratio of 1.5x can compare a refractor with a reflector. So 80mm multiplied by 1.5x = 120mm. However, an 80mm aperture is limited to a 12.2 limiting magnitude compared to the 13.2 of the Mak'. Although bear in mind that is only a one magnitude difference. Refracting and reflecting scopes have their respective vices and virtues. Although in my opinion a refractor, especially around f/7 will always be more versatile.