Mars through Celestron C90 and Skywatcher Skymax 127 Maksutov telescopes - which is better?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 ноя 2020
- This is the second comparison video I've made using the Celestron C90 and the Skywatcher Skymax 127. This time the target is Mars, and we'll look to see if the larger aperture translates into better image definition on the red planet. The set-up I've used is the same for each OTA. HEQ5 Pro mount, 2x TV barlow, ZWO ADC and ZWO ASI-120MC camera. In post processing i have used AutoStakkert to stack the best 25% of frames, with the app placing the alignment points (APs). Then the same set of wavelet filters have been applied in Registax.
Наука
I just purchased the C90 and waiting for delivery. I prefer the smaller scope considering performance to dollar value. I’m only using it for planetary and some bright sky objects. Not a total astronomy geek, just an occasional hobby for retirement. Thanks for the video. It convinced me that I made the best choice.
Nice comparison, and lot of detail pulled up with both apertures.
As always very succinct and useful video! Cheers!
Great video. That‘s nearly exactly the same image I took with my 90 mm Mak two nights ago. And I also did an animation of Mars rotation.
Clear skies.
Good job! The image processing is phenomenal.
Great job, pure test can help to make a right choice. Thank you.
J Money killing it with another amazing vid on some great products.
A very good and surprisingly close comparison, Graham. That C90 is certainly a keeper!
Thanks. Yes my C90 might have been a bit neglected of late as I've been trying out the 102 and 127, but when I go back to the C90 it reminds me what a great little scope it is.
Great Comparison of Both Scopes 👍
Great comparison, because of your earlier videos, I purchased a C90. I have used it for terrestrial and celestial viewing. No regrets, thanks again.
Michael Burkard Thanks Michael.
Good to know. The C90 will fit on my ES Nano EQ mount with room to spare for extras…the bigger scope is at max capacity naked. I’ll breathe east knowing I made the right choice instead of becoming unstable just to get those few extra details. VERY helpful, thanks.
Good job. Those two telescopes are suitable for birding aswell. That brings the question, could you please do a birding comparison of the two of them? Cause that would be so useful as nobody seems to have been done that before. Looks like you are the man for this job!
Great comparison. Thank you.
It begs the question of center obstruction. Impressive comparison. I want that 180.
Hi Garnett, yes I agree. Eliminating other factors like my technique, focusing etc by doing a back to back test, i think the f/14 vs f/12 and resulting CO must be an issue. I hear that the ETX 125, at f/15, is a great OTA, and having just checked I know you know that the 180 is an f/15 as well, unlike the other SW Maks. Just continue with the weight training and I'm sure the results will be good! Clear skies. Graham
I have been waiting for this comparison for some time :-) Excellent Graham just proves the c90 is a excellent mak in terms of weight size, price and aperture. Great work Graham thumbs up :-)
He’s The Reason I Got 1 About 5-6 Months Ago❤️Its My Little Grab and Go For The Car Now.And Have a 6se On The Skywatcher Eqm35Pro
Robert Garton Thanks Robert!
Here Italy, friend fantastic challenge between the "brothers" 90 and 127.
Nice Video,Thank You,I Havent Had a Chance To Play With My C-90 Lately,Your The Reason I Own 1,lol..I Got a New Mount,The Eqm35 Pro,With My 6se On Board,and Just Been Trying To Figure It Out,Balancing,PA,If We Have The Skies Tonight,Im Going To Give Uranus A Try❤️
I beg your pardon!
Great comparison. Your cat knows which is which and rests tail on the chosen one. lol
Had a 127mm Mak since October 2015 and still serving me well under Bortel 5 (probably 6) skies of suburban Northampton! Racked up quite a number of deep sky object (not as well suited) and 245 (split) double stars. I'm not as much into planetary but Jupiter and Saturn always look spot on :) I wacked a RACI finder on the mak, couple of half-decent plossls and as mentioned, never let me down.
You are very talented sir : ) I like your tips and skills : ) how you can show us power of small telescopes : D I thought they are weaker : ) greetings from Poland : )
Cheers Graham, geat imaging!
Thanks Martin! It feels like I've been imaging Mars all summer into autumn, but along the way I've knocked off a few rough edges on my technique. I just need that electric focuser now...Deep sky next methinks.
@@JenhamsAstro Hi Graham, well I have the C90 and recently bought a ZWO 120 then things started to go very wrong with my back! So no imaging or observing whatsoever, very frustrating with Mars around,
Martin Higgins Sorry to hear that. They’ll be another opportunity before long. Working from home has been good for osteopaths at least.
Got a SW mak 127 for Christmas 🎄
Hi Graham. Great comparison, and thanks for sharing it. In this video there is something I think I'm seeing. In the image from the 127, there seems to be a sort of double image at the right side of the disk that runs from about 12:00 to 4:00. It's almost like the image from the c90 is superimposed within the image from the 127. Is it possible that the 127 has a major double image issue?
Thanks Tim. I think the issue you are seeing is caused by one of two things. Firstly it could be my focusing; i'm planning to add an electric focus but until then it is guesswork. Secondly, and more likely i think, is that this is so-called "ringing". I've read a couple of articles on it (which weren't that comprehensible to me!) and I have seen it on many images from other people. So I doubt if it's a fault with the 127, although I agree it looks a bit like an "offset" disc. The darkness of the edge of this feature can be reduced by playing with wavelets, but if you fully remove it then detail is lost elsewhere on the disk. The jury is still out on this one for me. Graham
Great vid. Much difference between 127 and 150? I’m thinking about the 127 as a visual scope as it’s light enough for my SkyGuider but after this video I’m thinking perhaps c90. Does one handle a Barlow better than the other? Targets: Jupiter/Saturn visual only.
Hi, I’m new to the hobby. I have similar scopes (4in Astrofi and 5in LX 65, both being MCTs (Maks)). Your information is realistic and applicable so thank you! I would like to ask if you could do a video on the best cost : function accessories, that is, upgrades you utilize:: Barlow, AP cam, diagonal when observing, mount / tripod legs, barlows, filters for observation, EPs, and any specific brands you tend to stick with (even if the Amazon Chinese ones). I’m sure this would be subjective but I like to hear the n=1 experience. I feel like I’m chasing after this without killing the wallet to try and obtain the best possible optics with minimal pain and ruling out possible factors of having any low quality equipment or optical train 🚊.
I have 2 other video suggestions: using the digital processing tools you mention: Registax and Autostacker, Fire video recording, etc; in like a tutorial or walkthrough (you have a great no-frills educational tone about you that I’m more inclined to absorb and follow).
Video suggestion 3: a general LPT (life-pro-tips) for the noob, observer, and AP imager, if just going for planets, solar, and lunar (something I only subscribe to too, as DSO seems to be outside of my budget and physical space :D). Being honest I’m also not thrilled with either of 4in or 5in MCT scopes for observational quality on Jupiter or Mars (and would be cool to see more of saturns rings) but I wonder if my expectations are in the range of desiring 8+ inches, but the portability and cost of requiring a super robust mount to avoid wobble (kills me inside, lol) keeps me away from such. I do wonder how much is also my own lack-of-experience but don’t know if anything particular I could be doing too wrong. I know my eye certainly want to have the atmosphere part tho becuase it feels like just a tease, lol.
Anyway, Thanks for the valuable content that helps unconfuse us newbies.
ps, I have yet to find a mount I’m happy with. I really want a good Alt-Az (manual) mount & tripod, and a good Goto one. My current Goto gives wobble at high mag (7mm and lower) like it’s no-ones business, and Alt-Az just isn’t reliable with its turning knobs or its extendable height.
ps2, are you on CloudyNights? I’d like to follow your user / check out past post and info from you. But feel free to drop any of that info here to this comment if the video suggestions may be too much. Take care and clear skies 🌌 !
- Matt
Hello Matt, many thanks for the video suggestions; i have added them to my "to do" list. Certainly the topics of upgrades and expectations feature large (i'm not an expert in AS or Registax and there are a lot of videos on those - my method could easily have major flaws!) For the expectation topic I am already thinking about that - many people see my Mak videos and say "are they good for galaxies, DSOs as well as planets" and i have to caution against the idea. Maks excel at AP and in my view the visual view of planets can often be underwhelming as the atmosphere plays havoc with the view. Stacking video resolves the issue. For mounts, I'm not a big fan of the type on the Astrofi but I'm surprised if the LX65 is no better. Often these "mid sized" packages are supplied with under sized tripods and the rigidity translates to the scope. Some people fill hollow legs with sand (i haven't tried this BTW) but the best solution is to always have a mount that's payload far exceeds your setup. So my HEQ5 Pro is rock solid with a Mak or small APO. A lot of people like the AZ GTI Alt-Az from SW but if you already have the LX65 then maybe look to see if you can add some weight low down. The scope itself is f/15 and should outperform the Skymax 127 in my opinion based on its predecessor the ETX 125. Have you checked it is collimated well? Will a bigger scope give better views? Well generally yes, but buying a leviathan can be a sure way to kill your interest if it's too heavy to set up and languishes in your garage, having cost you the same as new used car.. Aperture fever is real. There are other ways to get "wow" views, again just my opinion, in the form of a small apo. The clarity and contrast of a low power view of a cluster can be amazing, as long as you accept that the same scope will not match a Mak at 400x on Saturn. Anyway, I'll cut the ramble there. I'm not on CN at the moment but am always happy to exchange via YT or FB. Graham
Good work there, thanks for the video you have given me something to think about, I was looking at a larger apiture refractor, but it seems this little c 90 can punch above its weight, very interesting, mars was the reason I got in to this hobby and unfortunately haven't had much luck, but I'm hoping that will change soon, managed to capture jupiter and sarturn, can't wait to have a proper go at Mars thanks for the upload, clear skies 😊
Great comparison. Do you have a comparison of DSOs? I'm on the bubble about which to purchase and think that would be helpful. Thanks, I've learned a lot from your videos.
Thanks Don. I don't have a comparison as yet, only my C90 DSO video. I have seen people capture good images of similar objects to the ones I chose like M27, M57 using a 127, with the extra aperture translating well into image quality. What i would say is that a Mak is great for planets and the moons, and good on these small bright DSOs, but NOT good on faint, diffuse DSOs like galaxies and nebulae. I would caution against buying a Mak if you are keen to see these faint objects as other scopes like a 8" Dob will do much better. In fact I'm thinking of making a video on the topic, to remind that no one scope is good at everything.
New to this hobby... Is the Celestron C90 the same as the Skywatcher MC 90?
Looks like the same telescope, just with different stickers on it.
Love your channel by the way, and love your photography work 👍
Thanks Anders. Yes basically it’s the same. Synta are the parent company that owns the Skywatcher and Celestron brands, so there is some product overlap.
Very nice. I liked it better, FWIW, when you showed both images at once.
Nice video. What camera are you using?
JAY RYL Thanks, it’s a ZWO ASI-120MC colour camera.
Thanks for this video. I just need such a comparison, because I wonder if it is worth changing my Bresser 100/1400 Maksutov telescope to the SkayWatcher 127/1500 or Bresser 127/1900 telescope. First of all, I observe the Moon, Jupiter, Saturn and Mars.
I have Skymax127 and can say that it is wonderful scope. It gives sharp and bright images of Saturn and Jupiter.
Ordered one today!
Hay there again!! How do you spend these days sir🙂
Hi, I am leaning towards purchasing the Celestron C90 go to. Obviously I may want to upgrade in the future. Are the telescopes interchangeable with the go to tripod? Or does one have to purchase the whole kit again? Love your reviews. You’ve helped a lot so far on my journey.
Petra F Hello Petra and thanks! Most telescopes use the same attachment method - a so called “vixen style” dovetail bar. The C90 has a short one of these. What mount are you thinking of, so we can check you could put a future optical tube assembly onto it? Aside from the fitting itself, the carrying capacity or payload of a given mount is another factor to consider when looking to future-proof your setup. Let me know, Graham
Thanks for your reply. Gee, after a humongous amount of deliberation, I have now ordered the skywatcher Maksutov 127/1500 BD AZ-S go to. It was one of your reviews that swung it for me. Now I just have to waiiiiiiiit till mid January
Petra F Excellent that’s a good choice. Let me know how you are getting on with it next year!
Whats your favourite diagonal and widest field eyepiece for the Skymax 127? I'd like to upgrade from the original supplied ones.
I use a mid-range dielectric 1.25" diagonal from Altair. For EPs the true field of view is linked to the size of the EP fieldstop. Depending on budget you could try a 32mm plossl or a more expensive 24mm EP with a 68deg apparent field. You can get to about a degree of TFOV. In general I'd say don't buy a Mak for wide fields as they are not made for that. A small, fast apo is better suited.
Hi, new C90 owner post Christmas :) Any tips for focusing for planets? Daytime and the moon using the kit that came with it plus a Celestron red dot finder, I've had no problem focusing. But when trying to view Mars or indeed any bright star I'm seeing nothing but pure black. Not even a lightening of the eyepiece to suggest I'm closing in or have just passed it. Thanks.
Hello, if you get the scope focused on the moon and then you are moving to look at Mars, then the focus will not need to be adjusted much or at all. If you see a black field with no planet then probably the scope is not pointing quite at Mars.Assuming you are using the standard 32mm eyepiece, which is quite low power with a relatively large field of view (for a Mak that is, they don't do any wide fields!) I suggest you double check that the RDF is accurately aligned with the C90. Cheap plastic RDFs are not great (metal ones are more rigid). I've had issues getting plastic RDFs well lined with the main scope, and even if they are it is easy to nudge them out of line. Your daytime and moon views suggest the C90 itself is working OK, which is good, so I think the issue is with pointing where you want. This is common with Maks - that field of view can frustrate your efforts! Let me know how you get on. Graham
@@JenhamsAstro Thanks for the advice. Forescast is for good for tonight so I'll give it another shot.
Hi from London Graham, great video, Thanks. I was wondering, do you own a large Dob? Whats your take on them? 6'' and above.
Hi Steve, thanks. I only have the 130P Dob, so I can't give any first hand advise. I can see the appeal of a large dob from a £ per inch aspect, and the potential for "Wow" views with a simple setup, but I have owned heavy SCTs in the past and sold them on as they didn't get used. I know that classic large dobs and hefty, and truss ones are still heavy, and require some assembly/disassembly unless you've got an observatory. So purely from a personal perspective they are not for me, as I'm more a grab and go observer.
@@JenhamsAstro I also own the 130P, I brought it as my first scope after watching your video, its great! so big Thanks for that :} I'm looking to upgrade as I'm really getting into the Hobby, what would you suggest for an upgrade please, I'm thinking 6'' region or above, not quite sure yet, I love the Celestron 6 SE but its way over my budget [The Mrs would roast me] lol....Any suggestions, possibly something beginner-friendly? Planets and DSO viewing would be nice, no Astrophotography just yet, just visual. Thank you.
Steve W What sort of budget are you thinking about?
@@JenhamsAstro Up to £500
Is there much difference between MCTs (Maks) and SCTs or is it primarily size / aperture, where SCTs = 6in+ ? { Newbie }
"Holy Cat out of the bag Batman.. Black CAT near other CATS!
Risky..Could of been CATastrophic"!
"Indeed Robin ..Indeed"!
Graham i just want to ask whether it’s worth buying a dielectric diagonal for my new Skywatcher 127 Mak?. Will the difference be noticeable?.Thanks in advance
I would recommend a dielectric as a step up from a kit diagonal but I don’t think you need to buy a top of the range unit to see the benefit in image quality. I’ve got an Altair 1.25” mid range diagonal but there are many alternatives. I would then save the money towards eyepiece upgrades if you are using the basic SW EPs.
should I buy a 6mm eyepiece to use in C90?
Hi, I really love your videos about C90. I have one question please.
How would you upgrade the C90 ? if possible.
Thanks! For the C90 I would start by adding a Red Dot Finder, preferably one with a metal body. Then replace the erecting prism with a 90 degree star diagonal, one with a mirror. Finally I’d get a higher power eyepiece. Something like a 10-12mm Plossl will give you a higher magnification but still be affordable. After this, take your time building your knowledge of the sky and enjoy the scope.
@@JenhamsAstro Hi, thank you, will definitely use your sugesstions. BTW, do you recomend to make an dew shield for the C90 ?
polmontwojtek Yes it is useful on a damp night.
You came SO close to petting the cat but you remained focused.
Great video,I have a entry level dslr,a c90 and a mount.I notice that i caanot get thi level of details using this setup,will uing a smart phone instead of a dslr be better so as to be able to zoom in on planets?
I haven’t had much success using my smartphone for planets. The accepted way is to use video to capture lots of frames and then stack and process them offline using freeware apps. If your mount tracks you could try this with a camera like the ZWO ASI120MC. It’s a basic astro camera that captures a smaller field of view than a dslr, that is well proven and quite affordable. There are other cameras from other firms but I like ZWO.
@@JenhamsAstro thanks for the reply,but how do I ge the level of zoom? Say for Jupiter i can see a bright body and it's moons,but no clarity as in bands of Jupiter etc using my camera along with the scope.howevr using a 10 mm eyepiece(higher magnification) or a Barlow i can see details in the eyepiece.How do i capture this detail in my camera?
@@machinelearningzone.6230 Have a search for “astronomy fov” and select the scope and camera in the imaging mode option. You can see the size of a planet in the field of view. It’s a very useful website for seeing whether an object looks big or small with a given setup. The use of stacking video frames along with clever software will stack the most stable frames and pull out more detail than you can see visually.
hello I love your videos I am a user of mak 127 and I am very happy. but at the moment I am with the idea of selling it and buying a mak90 from it for portability and buying a skytraker and a focal reducer to try to do deep space tests with them. thus have equipment with a long focal length and versatility. what do you think? I like the idea of watching a video of you testing your maks in deep space.
Thanks. Many people have used reducers with Maks with good results. Have you thought of keeping the 127 and just getting the reducer? I ask because the 127 is a good scope, albeit relatively heavy vs a 90, and often selling and then buying isn’t cost effective if you are making a small change (from 127 to 90).
I have skywatcher 90mm mak.Can you tell me any way I can see more details on Jupiter disc.Would like to see bands but it seems too bright.I can see 4 moons but would like to see more detail.Not necessarily for photos just viewing.Thanks
Simon Cook Hi Simon, you could try a ND or polarising filter screwed into your eyepiece to reduce the glare. It would be useful on the Moon as well and would not be a big investment.The classic answer would be to use a coloured filter like a yellow or blue, but the jury is still out to the improvement they offer. Graham
@@JenhamsAstro ok I will try that.Hopefully I will be going to Thailand at Christmas where Jupiter and Saturn are more or less overhead,so might be better seeing.
Thanks Graham for taking the trouble to reply.
Hi, I want to buy my first telescope, which one do you recommend, the skymax 102 or the heritage 150p? to observe planets and galaxies thanks
Hello, well the 102 is better for planets and the heritage 150p is better for galaxies! For a first scope which can be used across a range of targets I would recommend the heritage. It will be easier to use as it has wide field of view. Maks like the 102 are great - you can see I like them from my channel - but they have small fields of view and can be said to be best in a niche of planets & the moon. A beginner can find then harder to use than something like a 150P. For me it's the 150P. I hope this is useful. Graham
@@JenhamsAstro thank hoy, i Will buy de 150p and a barlow 2x
What would you say is the best value/image quality for planets out of this scope vs the Celestron C90 & the Sky-watcher 127?
Mike Lytwyn Hi Mike, if you already own a mount able to take either OTA then the 127 probably edges it, but for me it is not as clear cut as I’d expected. My C90 is super sharp, and happy on a lighter (and hence cheaper) mount than the bulkier 127 requires. I can’t be sure of all of variables impacting the quality but I am fairly sure the longer focal ratio of the C90 is a factor in its performance vs the 127. I’m probably not helping you much but only on quality per £ the C90 wins for me, just. Both scopes are good value though.
@@JenhamsAstro thanks! Can you pick out adequte deep sky targets with the C90?
Mike Lytwyn Bright small DSOs like globulars and the brighter planetaries are fine but otherwise I’d say no. I targeted a few others in my deep sky C90 video, but of course what you can get from stacking long exposure photos is very different to the visual experience. Maks have their limits like all scopes.
Last week, before selling off my 7" f/15 MCT, I did a comparo between it, its replacement 5" f/15 MCT, and my grab-n-go 3.5" f/14.6 MCT. From 3.5 to 5", the image quality didn't jump much, but from 5-7" it did significantly. Shame the 7" was so heavy!
Interesting. Was that the Meade 7”?
@@JenhamsAstro Yes, it was, on a dead LX200 mount. Fantastic optics, but I don't have an 'at home' viewing location, so moving a steamer trunk of stuff for the 7" versus a backpack for the 5" decided things. I loved that scope though...
@@oninoyakamo Tis a shame but I understand. You need a decent mount for a heavy lump of Mak corrector glass.
@@JenhamsAstro Luckily, the old LX200's had slow-motion controls, so I could still use it even though the computer was dead.
PS: 30 years ago I lived for a year in little Cossington, Somerset. About how far away are you from there?
@@oninoyakamo Small world! it’s about 20 miles away.
Mars ain't the place to take your kids... but it is to take your cat!
hi if you dont mind cant you help me choose between celestron c90 and skywatcher 102 ? because i cant find any sorce comparison for this 2 telescope. tq
In my personal experience there isn’t much difference in performance. The C90 can be collimated but some 102s cannot. Even though you should not need to re collimate any Mak the capability to do so is useful. The 102’s extra aperture will in theory give a brighter image but again the delta is small. Of the 2 I prefer the C90 but you should also consider the price difference where you live, to get the best value with the latest retail prices.
@@JenhamsAstro if they got same price at my place, do you still prefer c90 ? btw the SW skymax 90 mak ( red colour edition) has a price 50 dolar cheaper than c90 at my place. and i aiming for moon observation at 200x magnification and above, is that possible with barlow. ?
Dunlie Zamri The C90 is optically the same scope as the SW so you could save some money that way. You can easily get to 200x with long focal length Maks, e.g with 6mm EP or a 12mm plus 2x barlow. But bear in mind that this is around the maximum recommended power for this aperture. With very good conditions (“seeing” as it’s called) then around 60x per inch of aperture is a rough maximum.
@@JenhamsAstro if I buy SW 90 mak, should I replace the diagonal ? I heard the Included diagonal is bad, I dont know how bad it is but I just need a clear sharp view for visual eye at 180 - 200x for the moon, if the rumor is true, please suggest me one cheap diagonal that can bring me to my dream ( 45 or 90 degree is okey for me coz I will use this also for terrestrial viewing ) maybe GSO or svbony brand ?
“Thank you in advance”
ive found a nice offer for a 90mm 12.9 f ratio MAK from Levenhuk, would it be comparable to a celestron C90?
They aren’t sold in the UK but are likely to be similar to the C90, and possibly manufactured by the same supplier as the Explore Scientific 90mm Mak. As always try to read online reviews of any scope you are considering.
@@JenhamsAstro yeah I just can't find much on this one which leads me to believe it might not be too worthwhile
I tend to agree. It might be the same as the explore scientific scope, not sure. Fyi the C90 and Skywatcher 90 Mak are the same scope made by Synta, but I don’t see a lot of info online for the Levenhuk to know if it a clone of a more familiar scope.
@@JenhamsAstro i found some posts on CoudyNights that suggest it is a clone of the C90/Skywatcher 90, regardless ive been searching for a telescope without buying one for so long now that im tired and this seems promising
How do you attach cameras to skywatcher.
Some SW scopes like the 127 incorporate a thread on the visual back which allows you to attach the scope to a t-ring fitted to your particular DSLR.
Hello, what is that disc affixed to your focusing knob?
It’s the lid from a jar of Marmite! It helps to get a finer focus.
@@JenhamsAstro I thought that is what it was for but wanted to verify. Did it take much effort to get the lid to conform to the ridges on the focusing knob?
It was not too difficult to make it work as the plastic is easily trimmed. I’m not a fan of the stuff - the odd one out in the house - so it was good to find some benefit from it! You can find sellers on eBay who will 3D print these sort of things for a few pounds- I got a larger diameter one for my Evo 8 this way. It works but obviously not as good as an electric focuser. Much cheaper though.
@@JenhamsAstro Thank you for the reply!
why dont you have the Skywatcher Maksutov Teleskop MC 150/1800 anymore?
Stephan R Hello Stephan, I found it a bit heavier and slower to cool than I liked, and it didn’t quite deliver the sharpness and contrast i was looking for. Based on my sample of Maks the f/12s are a little softer than a longer focal ratio OTA. Note the the SW 180 Mak is an f/15. This is just my personal experience though and not highly scientific as it’s based on only testing one OTA of each model.
@@JenhamsAstro thank so much for your answer. but I do not get it. the 150 is a 12f and the 127 is a 12f as well. the 180 is a 15f. so you say that it is not worth the money for a 150 and I should get a 127 instead?! the 180 is out of my budget.
Stephan R Personally I prefer the 127 over the 150. And the 127 is lighter with faster cool down. But it is just my view and others may disagree.
Wouldn't you expect a telescope with a larger diameter to be able to handle higher magnification and to get higher resolution? Maybe a better test would be under higher magnification, or double stars or the bands of Jupiter.
All other things being equal yes. But the 2 scopes have different focal ratios which favours the C90 for contrast. But… having used both scopes over a longer period I’d say the 127 has edged ahead on many targets.
I’m tied between the skymax 102 and 127! I can’t decide! Lol
Benji Johns Between those 2 I’d say the 127.
@@JenhamsAstro The 127 is very tempting🤣.
Lets compare it with Mak 180 asside.
Im Sending You Another Subscriber,In Our Beginner Astro Group On FB,He Has a C-90.Already Taking Pics But Not Sure About DSO,And You Have The Best Videos Ive Seen On It..❤️🔭❤️Im Going Back To My 6se..Im Looking For Uranus Tonight❤️🔭🙏🏻
I've seen some great planetary shots taken with a 6SE - i think you've got a great scope there. Clear skies.
I Want to buy a telescope
Between this 2 options .,,,Wich would you buy : Celestron Omni 150 mm XLT vs el Skywatcher 150 mm EQ3
Thanks
Hello, when you say Skywatcher 150mm, do you mean their 150P Newtonian, which is similar to the Omni 150 XLT, or the Skywatcher 150 Skymax Maksutov?
@@JenhamsAstro newtonian
@@JuanHV2000 Synta make both scopes so they are essentially the same.
@@JenhamsAstro Between Skywatcher 8 flex dob vs Skywatcher 8 solid dob vs Skywatcher 150 mm EQ-3 ( very simiilar price) ....what would you recommend ? I have no experience with dobs and Also no experience with EQs , I am just a beginner with a 76 mm AZ TASCO and want to upgrade my wiews.
@@JuanHV2000 You may find this article interesting. astronomysource.com/reviews/skywatcher-flextube-200p/ EQ mounts are often clumsy and frustrating, and the best scope is the one you use the most. The 150 EQ3 is a decent scope but better views with a simpler setup can be had with a Dob. An 8” classic Dob is cheaper than a flex tube in the UK, and is a classic scope that it big but not too big. BUT think carefully about the practicalities of storing it and moving it to where you observe, as they are quite bulky. An 8” can easily be carried in 2 pieces and fairly easily in one piece for a short distance (much easier than a 10” which is BIG!) Overall if you can store and move it the solid tube 8” is a good option and you can use any money saved by not buying the flex tube to buy a nice EP.
What sensor resolution have you used?
Jean Figaro Hello, I am not using binning so the sensor resolution is 3.75um.
I am kind of wondering what the point is about this video? Compare a mass produced Chinese 90mm Mak against a mass produced 127mm Mak? Forgive me if I have completely missed your spoken explanation of this point during the video, I have wine on the go plus Dire Straits on the hi-fi. As both of these scopes are made by Synta at the same factory, isn't it just a case of one is smaller and lighter, the other gives brighter images and has higher resolution. If not, you have a duff 127mm. ........oh and the 90mm can be used successfully as a spotting scope.....unless it rains.....and this is England!
The 127 has only about 119mm clear aperture, that's why it doesn't perform like it should..rubbish really..
@@martinwarm4041 How have you measured that?
@@offraed6156 Hi, my brother has the 127mm scope and great as it is.. it's resolution increase was not that great over the 90mm I have. Reading the cloudy nights/stargazer forums it has become clear that the primary mirror is undersized resulting in-between 118mm and 119mm clear aperture..
@@martinwarm4041 If its true that the primary has been measured at 118mm then has Synta (Skywatcher) been informed they have been rumbled? What diameter is the Meniscus? As the meniscus is a negative lens, it is diverging, so should be even smaller than the primary? This doesn't make any sense.
@@offraed6156 I don't know...but it's been a talking point from people who know more than me about optics. Look them up...the 102mm is the best buy. 👍
Other detail. Not better. Save money on Mak.
BOTH OF THEM ARE TERRIBLE LOL.😄
Nice video Sir. I was just about to buy my dad a c90 for bis birthday. Hopefully it is a good beginner scope
Thank you. The C90 is a great little scope and perfect for the moon and bright planets which are easily located. For other targets like star clusters or the brighter nebulae, as a Maksutov it has a small field of view which can make finding targets more difficult. For an all round beginner’s scope then it’s worth looking at a few options, including a 150mm Dobsonian like the Heritage 130, or an 80mm refractor.
@@JenhamsAstro thank for the tip.. you sold on your idea. I just changed the order to a celestron 80mm refractor. The 80mm Travel Scope.. I watched a few videos from Astro Biscuits and he swears by it as a starter scope.
Thanks for your advice. Great channel & content btw!