Opinions on this for beginner

tom1ie

Hello all.

Im a complete beginner but have being threatening for years to get into astronomy.

The missus is thinking of getting me this for my birthday:

Celestron StarSense Explorer DX 102AZ

Does anyone have any opinions on it as a starter telescope good or otherwise?

thanks in advance.

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058231208/opinions-on-this-for-beginner

Hi - Il take a shot at this. I would NOT go for that one myself - Its not bad but assuming your budget is around 500 ish (im assuming this based on the current RRP of the linked scope) - i think you can do a bit better

https://ktectelescopes.ie/collections/telescopes-in-stock/products/skywatcher-skymax-102-az-gti

The above link is for a skywatcher 4" Maksutov Cassegrain scope, on a wifi (mobile fone) guided mount - It is a GOTO scope, meaning you can tell the mount what it is you want to look at, and provided it is set up correctly, the mount will automatically point the tube straight to the desired item.

I have used both Maksutovs, and refractors (the Celestron you mentioned is a refractor). The ones i have previously used were Bresser models, but the construction would be the same across all brands. In my humble opinion a Maksutov (MAK for short) is a far easier to manage tube. Its usually lighter, and thanks to the design, its a lot shorter. Yet this doesnt actually impinge on the viewing capabilities.

In a nutshell comparison

MOUNT: The Mak comes with a GOTO mount which will support up to a 5KG tube, meaning you could upgrade the tube at some stage, should you get into the hobby! The refractor comes with a non motorized AZ mount which you will have to manually steer. when looking at objects under reasonable magnification, you will need to re-center frequently as the objects will move out of your field of view. Granted the Celestron comes with a starsense, which is nice - i would prefer a GOTO mount over a manually push starsense system all day long

Tube: both 4" however the Mak (despite its short length) has a longer focal length - the longer focal length is preferable (to me anyway) when speaking in terms of observation

TBH the mount alone is worth more consideration here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYrG323Z4_U&t=1223s

Have a look at the review, and you will see how splendid it is to use - Also you can use it with any tube up to 5KG meaning you could always upgrade or splash out on a second tube (perhaps a refractor if you wished the best of both worlds)

liamtech

Alternatively you can get the same mount with a refractor

https://www.astroshop.eu/telescopes/skywatcher-telescope-ac-102-500-startravel-az-gte-goto-wifi/p%2C60130

Its a wee bit cheaper - but again; Since using my 4" Mak i have recommended them without hesitation, over refractors and reflectors - bang for buck, they are the best IMHO - I also just checked and if you got into it, you could purchase a 5" tube for the mount as an upgrade, at some stage - so there capacity to upgrade (anything up to 5KG according to the spec :)

tom1ie

Thanks for this info.

So am I right in saying there are 3 types of scopes, refractor, reflector and maksutovs? Or is the last one a make of either of the others?

Also I like the idea of a GOTO setup vs the manual of the Celestron.

So am I right in thinking the longer the focal length you have (not necessarily the longer the tube) the more magnification you can get?

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118583018#Comment_118583018

There are many different types of scope, and sub-types - If i wanted to be really simple i would say there are two types of Scope - Refracter (lens) and Reflector (mirror) -

However the second type, Reflectors, have many different types of Sub Catagory/designs -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflecting_telescope

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassegrain_reflector

The above Wiki links provide a good overview - The Maksutove we discussed is technically known as a Maksutov Cassegrain telescope - its a combination of a Primary Mirror, and a secondary mirror which is located on the inside of a Corrector plate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maksutov_telescope

If you have a read of the above - and also check youtube for reviews of Maksutov scopes - there are a few different reviews and in the case of this design, any review, of any brand will suffice - There is very little variation between a 4" Orion and a 4" skywatcher for example. You may wish to get some more opinions on this - some people swear by newtonians, others primarily use refractors - etc - different strokes for different folks. What i will say is that i started many years ago with a Newtonian which i found difficult to use. Refractors are easier but the length cane be problematic at times - The compact nature of a good Maksutov makes it a fantastic piece of equipment - if i could go back to my first purchase, i would definitely go for a MAK instead - and the one i recommended is excellent value - for me that is a far better starter scope than the non-motorized refractor that you are interested in

FOCAL LENGTH - yes technically the longer focal length does provide more magnification but the eyepiece focal length actually determines the exact viewed magnification

https://astronomy.tools/calculators/magnification

The above link provides several calculators for working out the magnification of any pairing of Tube and Eyepiece - its easy to use - FYI i think you get 2 eyepieces with the skywatcher - its a 25MM and a 10MM if memory serves

I hope you arent overwhelmed by the information download on all of these links - suffice to say, take your time! It will all make sense - and if you have any questions, fire away

tom1ie

Brilliant info. Thanks very much.

im definitely leaning towards the mak now.

With regard to looking at planets, what will give me a clearer more magnified picture straight out of the box, the MAK or the celestron?

The mak has a focal length of 1300mm and eyepiece of 10mm gives magnification of 130, meaning the moon would appear 130 times closer in the eyepiece I’m looking into.

The celestron has a focal length of 660mm and eyepiece of 10mm gives magnification of x66.

So the MAK would be better in this regard am I correct?

Also could I potentially get an upgrade to the eyepiece eventually to increase the zoom? (I notice in the specs the MAK says it has a useful potential upgrade to x250 zoom which would be a 5.2mm eyepiece).

Again thanks for all the info!!

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118585426#Comment_118585426

'Which is best for planets'

This is one of those questions that will be down primarily to opinion. What i will say is this. Both of the tubes in question are 4 inch. So aperture is roughly the same. However the focal length of the Mak wins this contest. Maks have a nickname; the 'Planet Killers' - they are widely considered excellent for planetary and lunar observation. Google 'planet Killer Maksutov' and see what the experts say. When using a refractor, you also have chromatic aberration to deal with (difficult to describe but if you google it you will see pictures - its a kinda of False Color that is due to refractors using a lens )

Magnification - yes your calculations look correct IMHO -

Eyepieces: A word on these. From what i am looking at, it seems both come with a 25MM Plossl and a 10MM Plossl - eyerelief (the distance ones eye has to be from the eyepiece) plays a massive part in choosing an eyepiece

25MM: Excellent lower magnification eyepiece will provide a reasonable field of view - will probably be your favorite eyepiece - very decent eye relief

10MM: Higher power, but thanks to the design/construction of the the Plossl's - the eye relief here will be poor - Its usable, but for me a 10mm or MAYBE a 9mm plossl is as far as i would go using these - the eyerelief for a 6 or a 4 is rather ludicrous - when using them it almost feels as though your eyeball has to be right up against the glass to see anything

Im a bit of an eyepiece fanatic! I have bought quite a number, especially during the pandemic. And they all have their uses - but some more than others. What i would say is start with what you get. If you want to buy anything else to start with, i would suggest a lunar filter, which will be useful reducing the glare when viewing the moon. They tend to be rather inexpensive.

My experience with the bresser Mak 4" is that 6mm was the limit in terms of magnification. Some might squeeze a bit more out of it, especially in ideal conditions. but for me i rarely if ever used an eyepiece with a shorter focal length than 6 on that size tube.

If you do decide to get better eyepiece, i will say; I never use Zooms. Its a personal choice and i invite someone to weigh in here with their opinion. Some absolutely SWEAR by a good zoom eyepiece. What i recommend as a decent 'eyepiece upgrade' would be those i listed here:

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058229867/upgrades

Have a look at my posts. I have these pieces, i bought em from china and for the price - they are among the best value eyepieces i have ever purchased. Again though maybe start with what you get with the Tube and make your decision based on hands on experience - keep the questions coming too - perhaps someone will weigh in and provide alternative opinions

DeSelby83

Hi both, am finding this very interesting reading. I am also threatening to get my first telescope so am learning a lot from this thread. The scopes being mentioned are probably a bit out of my price range for now but useful information none the less.

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118585912#Comment_118585912

In terms of budget there is always this

https://www.astroshop.eu/telescopes/skywatcher-maksutov-telescope-mc-102-1300-skymax-102s-az-pronto/p%2C69301

https://www.astroshop.eu/telescopes/skywatcher-maksutov-telescope-mc-102-1300-starquest-eq/p%2C62884

Same optics under discussion but with non GOTO electronic mounts - take a bit of getting used to, but the mount is the only difference. The TUBE itself is identical, as is my opinion on the optics and capabilities - just FYI - im enjoying the discussion too so :)

Rather curious no one has weighed in on the refractor - i know people who curse the MAK in favor of the refractor

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118585948#Comment_118585948

EDIT: The links to astroshop seem to be malfunctioning -

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p10016_Skywatcher-Skymax-102-Maksutov-on-alt-azimuth-Mount-AZ-Pronto.html

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p11757_Skywatcher-Telescope-Starquest-102MC---Maksutov-Cassegrain-Telescope-102-1300-mm.html

try these - from a different store but similar price - i think astroshop is a wee bit cheaper - like i said above - same optics - lower end non computerized mount

mossie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118582519#Comment_118582519

I've been reading through this thread with some interest as I am looking at getting back into astronomy. I have a dobsonian scope which I used in the past but I am looking at a somewhat easier to use scope this time around due to some physical constraints that make star hopping uncomfortable and somewhat difficult. The larger version of the scope you mentioned appeals to me as a good place to restart from.

https://ktectelescopes.ie/products/skywatcher-skymax-127-az-gti?_pos=1&_sid=9c1829de4&_ss=r

I also saw this Celestron at the same site which is slightly more expensive but seems very similar in specification.

https://ktectelescopes.ie/collections/astrofi-series/products/celestron-astro-fi-127mm-maksutov-cassegrain

Would there be anything to recommend one over the other or is it pretty much equal? Any opinions would be most welcome, thanks.

fryup

OP did you purchase that celestron telescope you mentioned in post 1?

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118630766#Comment_118630766

I haven’t got anything yet, I’m hoping to get to ketchtelescopes this week or weekend to take a look at the scope that liamtech linked to above.

I like the idea of the automated setup that moves the scope to your selected target.

Bit more expensive alright but I’ll put some money towards my 40th birthday present 😜

Have to add I wish I had it now! There’s some fantastic clear night skies out there at the moment.

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118628679#Comment_118628679

Hello again

So the question on the Celestron V Skywatcher in the 127mm Mak variety linked by Mossie above: I would break down the comparison into Tube, mount and Accessories:

Tube: Virtually Identical, if there is a difference here, it is undetectable (to me) - Both have the same focal length, and F number - so id call this a Draw

Accessories: both come with 25mm and 10mm eyepieces - and a 90Deg Diagonal - Really cannot say anymore on that score - a draw

Mounts: This is where things get interesting and for me there is no contest here: The Skywatcher wins - its smaller and more portable than the Celestron - what is far more important is that the Skywatcher mount has a Maximum weight capacity of 5KG. Versus the Celestron which is 3.6KG. May not seem a lot but put another way, the tube that comes with the Celestron is probably the heaviest the mount could handle. Where as the Skywatcher could take a heavier tube. Therefore upgrade-ability. The Skywatcher could take a 6" Schmidt, so long as it was a newer model which weighed in at 5KG and under

Plus having the safety margin of roughly an extra 1.5KG in case you decide to attach a camera, or larger eyepiece.

So on that basis i would say the skywatcher wins out - IMHO!

FYI here is a useful link to Celestron which lists the payload capacities of many of their mounts

https://www.celestron.com/blogs/knowledgebase/what-are-the-payload-capacities

mossie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118635475#Comment_118635475

Thanks @liamtech I've been leaning towards the Skywatcher myself. The scopes seem pretty much identical, even made in the same factory as far as I can tell so I was looking more for differences in the mount etc. There isn't a lot on the Celestron I can find. I hadn't noticed the differences in mount payload so this is something to consider and is further incentive to go for the Skywatcher.

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118636614#Comment_118636614

yea i think payload capacity is always something to consider - That skywatcher mount being rated to 5KG leaves a few doors open. This for example

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p12384_Celestron-C6-SC-XLT---150-1500-mm-Schmidt-Cassegrain-OTA--orange.html

In terms of decent GoTo Mounts the skywatcher is probably the best you can get within a certain price range - beyond that you are talking about getting something heavy duty equatorial that can take 10KG+ - i would say for a beginner that would be over kill - but nice to have the option of upgrading to a larger tube - the option just isnt there on the Celestron

mossie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118640806#Comment_118640806

Great, thanks. I've pretty much decided to go for that. Future upgrading prospects are an added benefit.

tom1ie

Eventually took the plunge and got myself a skywatcher explorer 130PS with the AZ-GTI go to thingy on the stand!

I’ve only unboxed it today and have it setup out the back now.

I’ve been messing around with the red dot finder and getting a good look at the wood pigeons in the trees about 500m away lol!

I bought from Ktec (thanks for the heads up liamtech). Very helpful guy who works there or owns that business. I have a feeling I’ll be visiting that place many times in the future.

I’ve also downloaded the synscan app which looks brilliant and moves the tube for me to targets in the sky. Can’t wait to give it a bash later.

can anyone recommend apps for forecasting good viewing conditions? I have downloaded clear outside so I’m trying to get my head around that.

mossie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118773574#Comment_118773574

I know it's been a while since anyone posted here but I am curious how you're getting on with the telescope?