Skywatcher Skymax 127 Telescope First Light: Moon and Jupiter

[@GalaxyArtMedia]

Nice video Jenham! I want to test it soon with my Zwo224Mc. Was nice to see the views with a Barlow lens, at 2.5x. Clear sky!

[@paganphil100]

I've just ordered one of these from FLO complete with the EQ3-2 mount and same accessories as yours, so many thanks for the review.

[@Science_of_Mind_Magnet]

Beautiful Pictures. Thank you. 🔭🌕🌗🪐🌔🌒🌝👽🛸🔭☄️

[@Astrolavista]

Thanks, nicely put together video as always. I think it would be very interesting to do a side by side comparison with the 90mm and the 127 on the same targets to see that the real differences are. Maybe a thought for a future video?

[@JenhamsAstro]

Thanks. I agree, a direct comparison between the Maks is a must. I'll work on it when we have more hours of darkness.

[@Ralsagethi]

Thank you for your videos, I learn a lot with them. My favorite Moon targets are Plato and the Theophilus, Cyrillus and Catharina trio. But in my opinion the most photogenic crater is Clavius. Greetings from Teruel (Spain)

[@JenhamsAstro]

Thank you, I am glad they are useful.

[@MountainFisher]

I have a Sky Watcher 127mm Maksutov. OK, so then I bought the Celestron Nexstar 127SLT 5" Maksutov go-to for my son. The two scopes are the same scope, made by Synta and only difference is the Celestron comes with a 1.25" diagonal. The Sky Watcher ota is $550 and the Celestron was $670 and is a go-to system. I put the Celestron on my Twilight One mount with a 2" fireball adapter I put a 2" dielectric diagonal on it. It is an excellent scope, but the Nexstar cannot handle the weight of the 2" diagonal. So I put a 102mm Mak on the Nexstar.

[@markharris4539]

Hi Jenham. Hey, good stuff! I'll look forward to watching the vid. Regards. Mark.

[@valentinotera3244]

Very very, very nice Moon images.

[@maroairpower]

Started with this scope and alltough i have updated to a 12 dobson its still in use for planets, moon, sun. Quite happy with it. invest in a god diagonal and good okulars and it will serve fine.

[@GarnettLeary]

Great review. Nice to find you. Clear skies.

[@CarolinaSkyAstronomy]

Great video. I use a Celestron 127 mak and I love the views that I get with it. Really great scope

[@JenhamsAstro]

Thanks! As a big fan of the C90 I was hoping that the 127 would be a good step up without being too bulky. So far so good. Clear skies to you!

[@OscarGonzalez-qu3us]

127 mak it's the best of best

[@Chris2000SP]

Sorry for commenting old Video, but this shows the difference between Smartphone and Astrocamera or DSLR. Even though it was still taken at low resolution, it still has better quality than the smartphone. This is consistent with my experience. I'm going to buy a camera for my scope.

[@yogimarkmac]

It's high time that you post a correction about the aperture and remove the slur on the mfr. The front optics bend the light so that the rear mirror doesn't need to be 127mm. The effective aperture is that of the front lens and therefor correctly represented.

[@JenhamsAstro]

The Mak’s corrector diverges the light path - it is concave - so with a 127mm diameter corrector it would need a mirror diameter larger than that to catch the rays. So the true aperture is less than the corrector’s aperture.

[@Robb-jf7vg]

I've bought the 150mm version of this same scope. And it came with a 2 inch focuser and a single 2 inch eyepiece! Now, for small "backyard" Telescopes 🔭 I see ZERO need to go above the classic 1.25 inch eyepiece. I've a whole collection of 1.25 inch equipment, and it works just fine. I firmly believe the real purpose behind selling the instrument with the 2 inch focuser is to "Force" folks new to Astronomy to buy only more expensive two inch equipment!!!! I'm not falling for it!

[@JenhamsAstro]

A good 1.25” EP is better than a mediocre 2”. I’ve got a couple of decent 2” EPs but most of my collection is 1.25. A f/12 Mak works well with a Plossl!

[@africanmate8036]

beautiful

[@Nottsboy24]

Sure is beautiful ☺

[@TheAstronomer]

Well made video and to the point. Last night I tried the Meade LX90 ACF 8 inch telescope on Jupiter and was blown away by how much more atmospheric details I could see on the planet! The details I could see visually were close to what you showed here of Jupiter using Registax. Any chance to see how your SkyWatcher Skymax 150P Maksutov compares on Jupiter with this new telescope of yours?

[@JenhamsAstro]

Thanks. I owned a pre-ACF LX90 quite a few years back and it was a great scope. I'm sure the ACF is even better. Unfortunately the 150 Skymax had to go, so i'll concentrate on 90 vs 127 comparisons next.

[@TheAstronomer]

@@JenhamsAstro oh, you sold your SkyWatcher Skymax 150P? Would you mind if I ask how much it sold for? Looking forward to see more comparison and specially with you SkyWatcher Ed refractor.

[@JenhamsAstro]

Hertfordshire Allotment Life Hi, it sold for around £300

[@RaysAstrophotography]

Nice review of the Telescope!

[@JenhamsAstro]

Thanks Ray. It's only a first look but hopefully the darker nights will allow a more thorough review.

[@dschenk952]

Hi Graham. I have a Celestron 127 SLT and a 120 Camera also. As I'm still figuring things out I had questions about backfocus when I put the camera on. So where do I go to first? Yep, Jenham's Astro. I'll be using my 2X barlow as I shoot Saturn, Jupiter, and Mars tonight from my backyard. In a couple of days Io and Gannymede are going to be making a transition of Jupiter on the morning of the 23rd of August. At about 2AM my time, Io and Io's shadow will be "bracketing" the GRS. I hope to catch it. Later Gannymede's shadow will start it's journey across the surface, but I won't catch the moon itself as it will be close to sunrise when It starts. Thanks for all your help. :)

[@JenhamsAstro]

Hi Don, I hope you catch it. As you’ll have ironed out most setup issues before the transition night then all I’d say is focus very carefully - maybe up the gain and use one of the moons, and try to capture a few thousand frames in each capture. This allows you to stack only the best 10-25%. As the seeing is key I’d try to judge when it’s relatively stable. Easier said than done I know! Good luck.

[@dschenk952]

@@JenhamsAstro Thanks, Graham. Last night I did OK I did have some problems getting Saturn to show up using the 3x Barlow, I'll work through it. :) Jupiter came out OK, but I think I'll switch to my Nexstar Evolution 6 this evening.

[@dschenk952]

@@JenhamsAstro I missed my transition. (have back issues, and got kind of sore from the previous night checking my setup) I do have another question related to focal reducers for the 127. Have any experience with them. Thanks in advance, Graham. I did do a search and I find your videos and explanations are easier for me to understand.

[@JenhamsAstro]

@@dschenk952 Hi Don, I’ve got a new 0.63 reducer corrector but haven’t really used it much as yet. It’s the Celestron unit. I read up about it first and I’m hoping for good things.

[@galacticxgalaxy]

you just gained 1 more sub congrats

[@robinj.9329]

I am a decrepit, crippled up Old "Senior Citizen". And just days ago had delivered to my house a Sky-watcher; Sky MAX 150. I bought just the "OTA" because I have an excellent mount and many, many eyepieces and other accessories on hand. But alas! My "excellent mount" has apparently been in storage a little too long and is in need of an overhaul! That and the fact that both very necessary counter weights are missing make it temporarily unusable! This very nice mounting is just now "Off the market", or I'd have ordered a replacement. And nearly everything else, at least amongst the quality Equatorial mountings being offered, are very EXSPENSIVE "Computerized" or "Go To" mounts! Since I've always abhored these "LAZY FELLOW" toys, I'd never order one in a million years! So I found about the best "Manual" mount I could find and ordered that. Now I'm wondering if even that will end up being a waste of money. My older mount was rated at a full 20 pounds! And could, on brief occasions, handle a bit more. This new one I've ordered (and I didn't even discover this fact untill after I'd already "pushed the button!") is only rated for 15 pounds! And might not even be up to the task of handling that sort of weight on a full time, every night basis. Anyway, I'll try to let you know how it all "works out"! Thanks for the post and; HAPPY STARGAZING 😊

[@saraht.9203]

Good video and good explanation!

[@markharris4539]

Hi. Good vid. Maybe next time, could you cover a few doubles through the skywatcher maks, as, this is my main field of observing and I'm thinking of purchasing either the, 102 or 127.

[@JenhamsAstro]

Mark Harris Hi Mark, you read my mind. The other night I did a goto tour of a few doubles with the 127, plus a few globulars. I just need to translate this into a video! The views were very pleasing.

[@shaunmk]

just ordered this scope

[@Nottsboy24]

Great results 👍keep up the brilliant work my friend 👍

[@JenhamsAstro]

Thanks! Not quite the light grasp of your scope but hopefully it will be a good mix of performance and portability.

[@Nottsboy24]

@@JenhamsAstro ☺👍

[@jaq1967]

Nice video... The optical tube connected to the OTA: Any issues with in only holding accessories and imagers (Heavier CMOS like the HyperCam 183C TEC Pro or DSLR)? I note it is a 2 screw setup. Any recommendation on a suitable alternative/upgrade tube with compression ring? I feel these feel better (more secure?) and hold accessories more central.

[@JenhamsAstro]

Thanks Jacques. For my DSLR setup the supplied T2 thread does the job, but i fully see your issue if you want to attach other kit. I've seen a few options: a Baader clicklock which has a T2 thread (to mate with the supplied visual back), or alternatively an adapter to go from the scope's Mak thread to SCT and then a 2" Visual back with a compression ring & an SCT thread, or finally the Mak-SCT adapter and then a clicklock with an SCT fit. In the UK each route adds up to about £60+, with varying extra light paths that shouldn't be an issue. Hope this helps, Graham

[@jaq1967]

@@JenhamsAstro I didn't pickup the fact the supplied tube had a T2 thread. Screwed my 183C onto it with no problem. Seems pretty solid. Not sure how it would cope with a Barlow plus the 183C. 😂

[@eddwar8597]

Great video

[@Nottsboy24]

Sure is a great video ☺

[@johnbarry5036]

hi, since you mostly use maks, have you thought about using Reflectix to insulate? This was a very hot topic on Cloudy Nights and most seem to agree it works. Basically you take you mak out and instantly start viewing with no cool-down time. What do you think of this?

[@JenhamsAstro]

Hi, I’d not heard of this until your message. I understand that it slows down the process of reaching thermal equilibrium and hence reduces tube currents. Well, I guess it could work but I’m unclear how it helps the big block of glass that is the corrector, which must still be stabilising. My solution is to put the OTA in my unheated garage a couple of hours before I plan to go out. This helps but of course not everyone can do this. Let me know if you try it out.

[@mac3573]

Hey Graham Great moon shots...this was the scope I went for recently...not been able to use it just yet as the sky has not been clear. I've seen some videos where users have been using reducers to get a complete image of the entire moon. are they really needed to achieve that? If so what would you recommend? -- Hopefully a clear-ish sky tonight in Norfolk.. :)

[@JenhamsAstro]

Thanks. Take a look at this field of view calculator - astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/ I use it all the time to see what might fit into the field. with my 700D EOS camera the calculator shows (in imaging mode) that the moon fits - but only just! I've never gone down the reducer path as my view is that if you buy an f/12 scope and reduce it to f/7 then maybe you wanted a faster scope in the first place! Seriously though reducers can work with Maks, as many people testify.

[@mac3573]

@@JenhamsAstroThanks Graham... Will look into that.. Im just mindful of an old musical addage ... Which im adapting.. How many scopes does an astronomer hobbyist need?.. Ans.. just one more :) I realise now in order to not be bothering you will the multitude of questions that are brewing. Can you recommend a good UK forum so i can bother them instead? Thanks for taking the time to get back as you do.. much appreciated..

[@JenhamsAstro]

Mac The main UK forum is Stargazers Lounge, or SGL. The US equivalent is Cloudy Nights/CN. Both have masses of content. Just one more scope then?!!

[@mac3573]

@@JenhamsAstro So after much head scratching and forum surfing I eventually went for a used Nikon D7000... Thanks for the tips and forum info. Now I've just got to figure out how to use it.. (When it arrives)

[@astroshlibber9654]

Very short nights at the moment, not really fully dark untill about 10.30 11.00

[@JenhamsAstro]

Yep, mainly for insomniacs at the moment.

[@christophevoutsinas6130]

I enjoyed your presentation. It's exactly the set up I want to get ( I have already an Heq5 pro). I hesitate with a Bresser model with 1900 mm focale length. Just one question : do you use a Barlow to get these pictures ? Thanx for your feedback 🤙😎

[@JenhamsAstro]

Thanks Christophe. Yes, i used a 2x barlow with the 127.

[@christophevoutsinas6130]

@@JenhamsAstro Could you give me the reference of the model of barlow you are using. Thanx

[@JenhamsAstro]

Christophe Voutsinas It’s a Televue 2x Barlow. I have had it for years but I don’t imagine the design has changed much. I prefer it to a Bresser 3x barlow I also have, as I seem to be able to get a better focus with the 2x. Some people use 5x barlows, but for me a small Mak works better with a lower multiplier like the 2x.

[@gkseifert]

Have you ever had a chance to compare this to the Explore Scientific FirstLight 127?

[@JenhamsAstro]

I haven’t used one and have only read reviews on the forums.

[@chrisg9602]

What tripod do u uses can you use a celestron humminbird ? Does it need a adapter

[@ColinHensley]

Thank! love the pics, what was the name of the software that you used for stacking the video?

[@JenhamsAstro]

Colin Hensley Thanks Colin. I used Registax.

[@siegfried-karlheinzvonsilb2840]

Very helpful channel. I'm trying to start this hobby and i hope you could help me out. I was thinking to buy a skywatcher heq5 mount with an skywatcher n200/1000pds explorer. Is the mount quiet enough to use at night in the backyard or could the neighbours hear it at a few meters away? How much can i see with an n200/1000 telescope, for example jupiter is it stil a dot or a blurry ball or can i see the lines on it with some detail? I saw a lot of videos on installing and alligning the mount so i geuss it won't be a problem to start the hobby with this mount and i know the diffrent types of tubes but i have no cleu on how much you can actually see with it or how loud the mount in real life is. The closest telescope shop is 350km away so basicly its just online ordering to get a scope.

[@JenhamsAstro]

Hello Siegfried-karlheinz, the heq5 is very quiet when tracking, silent to a neighbour. When you are aligning or slewing around the sky at higher speeds it makes more noise but i would not be too concerned as it still isn't very noisy.A 200mm F/5 reflector is a capable instrument for a range of targets, especially large faint objects like galaxies and nebulae but it can also give some good planetary views. You will see the main bands on Jupiter and the great red spot, plus the moons. Visually the planetary detail you can see varies hugely with the clarity and steadiness of the atmosphere second to second. This is normal in all scopes! The amazingly detailed pics you often see are taken by stacking the best frames from a video recording. So all new visual astronomers should know that the view through with your eye is not as impressive as a photo, which may gather many minutes of light. The heq5 and that scope could be used for photography if you want to get into that at a later stage. In summary i'd say your choice is good, just make sure you can carry the mount and tube outside easily. I always take the mount out first minus the 5kg counterweight, then add the weight and connect the power and finally attach the tube. I mention this in case you are restricted in you viewing location; that scope would not be a good choice for a balcony for example. No problem if you can manage a few kilo for each part when you set up.If you want to see and touch a similar scope maybe you could look for a local astro society. Most astronomers will be very happy to explain their setups. I hope this is useful, Graham

[@siegfried-karlheinzvonsilb2840]

@@JenhamsAstro graham this was very usefull. Now i know that it is a good choice and i can order it. Thanks a lott your awesome u made my day.

[@OlliesSpace]

Interesting video Jenham I'm currently looking at options to go on my Heq5Pro. Do you have any experience with the Celestron C8 ?

[@JenhamsAstro]

Hi Ollie, in the past I’ve had a C8 on a fork. The Heq5 would handle it fine. Back then I wasn’t into AP, and have now gone mainly to and apo and Maks. C8s are great scopes, just slow for AP unless you use a reducer, as many people do. Clear skies, Graham

[@OlliesSpace]

@@JenhamsAstro Thanks Jenham yes I would definately go the reducer. I have an APO for wide field so looking for more focal length. The RCs look pretty good too. Many options.

[@whatnotzone6866]

Off topic for this video, but do you have any idea if that mount would handle a Celestron c8? Also, would a c90 be too small for that mount? Would the c90 balance? Thanks and always enjoy your videos.

[@JenhamsAstro]

WhatNot Zone Thanks. If the C8 has a vixen style dovetail rail, rather than being fork mounted, then the same mount could be used for C8 or C90. You may need to use a lighter counterweight with the C90, or at least to slide it fully up the counterweight bar. As for mounts for a C8 then there are many options and prices! One is the Celestron AVX, others include Orion Sirius/Atlas (in the US) or Skywatcher HEQ5/EQ6 in other places. I use an HEQ5 pro. Other mounts exist from iOptron. To narrow it down you need to decide if you want a tracked mount, or a Goto mount or a simple alt az. I suggest avoiding too lightweight a mount with the C8, as the vibrations will be a problem. I hope this helps a little. Graham

[@JenhamsAstro]

To more clearly answer your question, an HEQ5 Pro can handle a C8 easily. I just put my C90 on it. With a single 5kg counterweight at the top of the bar it is OK. It isn't perfectly balanced - the smaller 1.8kg SW weight would be ideal, but it is close enough to use it that way without too much stress on the mount.

[@thealienated2564]

Is there a way to do good photography and videos of galaxies/planets with this telescope (i know it’ll require unknown additional features)

[@JenhamsAstro]

Scopes like this are good for planetary photography and bad for galaxies, are they are designed for high magnification and have small fields of view. So galaxies generally don’t fit the field. For planetary, the way people take the image is to use a camera to record thousands of frames of video over two or three minutes, then to use freeware to stack the best few percent of the frames into a single image. The camera can be a cheap adapted webcam, or if you spend a litttle more you can use one like those from the ZWO company, eg ASI120MC or ASI224MC.

[@kevanhubbard9673]

Interesting Proclus has a crater named after him but the father of Neoplatonism, the movement Proclus belonged to, Plotinus isn't to be found anywhere on the Moon!

[@vascoribeiro69]

I have already the 127 so I just need the mount!

[@DiodeBandOfficial]

Do you think this would provide better planetary views than a skywatcher explorer 130? (Going on an EQ5 mount for astrophotography)

[@JenhamsAstro]

Yes, the Mak design and longer focal length should give a better result.

[@wajidiqbal84]

This telescope is sold on amazon with a goto mount. I wonder if that tracks objects once focussed?

[@JenhamsAstro]

If it has a goto it will track.

[@jpmorgan187]

3:15 plato crater is 100km (60mi) wide

[@dietgerherregodts2220]

hello I am looking for information about the skywatcher 127mm. I have a bresser mak 100mm do you think an upgrade to the skywatcher will make a lot of difference. regards

[@JenhamsAstro]

I haven’t used the Bresser Mak so I can only compare it to the sky watcher 102 that I’ve had. You will see a difference in optical performance but I’d say it won’t be huge. The sky watcher maks come with a shorter focal ratio (f/12 vs 14) so the magnification difference isn’t large. The SW 127 is also quite a heavy optical tube albeit a very well engineered product for its price in my opinion so I would definitely look at the transport portability aspect if you’re looking to take a 127 out and about. I really like my 127 but as it is solidly built you need to think about mounting it well to get the best from the scope.

[@dietgerherregodts2220]

@@JenhamsAstro hello thank you for your feedback i know this is not much difference in diameter but i think from what i have read and seen the quality of the skywatcher will be better i also only read good reviews. I would buy it together with an az-gti wifi mount. regards

[@JenhamsAstro]

@@dietgerherregodts2220 That sounds like a good plan.

[@dietgerherregodts2220]

@@JenhamsAstro yes i think so too. Have a nice day and clear skies

[@aaronramos6056]

Hello ! Your video is interresting ! I'm looking to buy ine of these, but i have few questions. Is it good for deep sky objects too ? I will go in the swiss moutain most of the time. I need a small portable scope for that, cause i go hiking... Do you think it could be enjoyable with a nice deep black sky in the mountains ?

[@JenhamsAstro]

Hello Aaron. I'm working on a 2nd 127 video, but i haven't got to deep sky objects yet (something for the autumn). Small maks like this are good for bright and small "bright" DSOs like globulars or planetary nebulae, but in my opinion if you are planning to take advantage of a dark sky and you are seeking large or faint nebula or galaxy views then the 127 is not perfectly suited. Also, whilst definitely portable the 127 is not super light if you want to hike far with it in a backpack. It is impossible to find a perfect choice (you can't carry a big dob!) but probably i'd look at a lighter, faster scope like a small refractor in the 70mm range, combined with a quality low power eyepiece or two. This will also reduce the weight of any tripod you need. These scopes fall into a couple of categories with high quality triplets or quads designed for photography from TS, Meade, William Optics etc, and much cheaper doublet scopes, I have a "short tube"80mm ST80 which is super light, very cheap and good fun if you can put up with a bit of false colour. Just pick your budget. I hope this helps a little, Graham

[@aaronramos6056]

Thanks a lot for your fast answer :) But with a 70mm i would see less than with a 127 mak isnt it ? I go hiking with a 25x100 and a fat tripod. Bagpack is ~15kg and it's ok. So the portability would not be a big problem i think. I can easily go for 4 hours in the moutains with it... What can i take to go with my binoculars (not both of them same time of course, but keep in mind i have a 25x100) that can show me some of the deep sky and of course the planets ? The nebulae and big objects are in the range of my binoculars. That's why i was thinking of this mak to go further. What do you think now that i explained a bit more ? Thanks a lot !

[@JenhamsAstro]

Hello again, thanks for the extra information. A 70mm refractor is probably equivalent to a 90mm mak as the mak has a central obstruction in the form of the secondary mirror. The 127 makes more sense than a 70mm refractor given your ability to carry the weight, and especially if you want to look at planets at high power. Are you planning to use an astro mount or a photo tripod? Many tripods designed for 1.5 kg of camera + lenses can struggle with 3kg scopes if you use them fully extended, so bear that in mind. Overall i think i'd still suggest you look into a quality refractor as an alternative, of 80mm or maybe 100mm size, such as a Skywatcher ED80/ED100 Pro. It is more expensive than the 127 OTA but will be a robust all round scope with a wider field than a Mak; for me it is more versatile.

[@aaronramos6056]

@@JenhamsAstro I have a tripod for camera that can carry 10kg so it's really not a problem. So a 100ED can do better deep sky than the mak ? I will go in a astro club and see from there if i can try a 100ED and a 127 Mak. Thanks a lot for your time and consideration. Really

[@ScrapYardDog64]

What are your favourite eyepieces for visual?

[@JenhamsAstro]

Currently I’m using a mix of a Baader Morpheus, Vixen SLV and a couple of BST starguiders. I wear glasses so long eye relief if a must for me, which can restrict EP choice.

[@FJano12]

Hello! Can I fit this on a mount that comes with the starquest 130p? Thanks

[@JenhamsAstro]

Yes, that mount has a standard dovetail bar. The 127 is heavier than the C90 I use on my Starquest mount, but I think it should be OK.

[@gkseifert]

Where did you get get the red dot finder? I only see this scope with a 6x30 finder scope. I would much rather have a red dot finder!

[@JenhamsAstro]

In the UK the RDF is standard. Other good options include the Rigel Quik Finder.

[@gkseifert]

@@JenhamsAstro Thanks! I don't know why they put that ridiculously tall finder scope on the US version. Hard to use and a good way to hurt your eye in the dark. Really like red dot finders. Just ordered the Celestron Starpointer RDF for my current scope and have ordered the First Light 127 rather than the Skymax.

[@JenhamsAstro]

@@gkseifert Nice, I hope you enjoy your new scope. I like RDFs too, although they get a bad press from some. On my Dob an RDF (a Telrad, but basically the same idea) is great in combination with a 10 x 50 RACI optical finder. An optical finder with a smaller aperture isn’t worthwhile in my opinion. Clear skies.

[@gkseifert]

@@JenhamsAstro Ha! Sounds familiar. I have a couple of old Coulter Odyssey 8's in the basement (one the standard f 4.5 and one the f 7) and, of course, one of them has an original, big, black Telrad on it. Works great! Probably better than the Celestron Starfinder RDF I just got today. The Celestron's lateral adjustment messes with the vertical aim a bit. Once adjusted it is great, but the adjustment IS fiddly.

[@JenhamsAstro]

@@gkseifert Yes I think the difficulty of getting them aligned with the main OTA and keeping them that way is one of the reasons that people mark them down. I have a metal bodied one which is better in that respect that the plastic ones. 8” Dob - nice scope.

[@dtaylor9501]

Hi, what's your opinion on the Orion SkyScanner 100mm, is there much difference between the skymax? Just think the Orion could double as an ornament

[@JenhamsAstro]

I assume you’re not a fan of the Skyscanner? It is more of a beginners scope or one to put in the car for a camping trip. Wide fields, fairly lower powers, simple astro like the 130P. The Skymax Maksutovs are at the other end of the scale in many ways - high power, small fields of view and suited to observing the moon and planets, ideally on a driven mount. Take your pick! Clear skies.

[@dtaylor9501]

No, I'm considering the Orion Skyscanner 100mm. Just wanting a compact beginner telescope that can see Saturn's rings. Would you recommend any? Looking for something sub £130 thanks

[@dtaylor9501]

Something small so the kids could use

[@JenhamsAstro]

D Taylor OK the Skyscanner is the same as the Skywatcher Heritage 100p which fits your budget. The 130p is more capable though and worth the extra £ if you can. BUT with both the planets will be very small. Saturn will show its rings but I’d describe the view as “tiny but perfect”. But these scopes are great for lower power views of other targets. For a kid I think they are better than a Mak scope even though the latter will do better on planets. A Mak will drive a kid mad in my opinion and they may say “I can’t find anything” due to the tiny field of view. Just my 2p. Graham

[@dtaylor9501]

@@JenhamsAstro is there a difference between the Orion and skywatcher? Would you have a preference?

[@gunnarjensen5910]

What about skymax 180 ? Overkill ? 11 inch SCT maybe better ?

[@JenhamsAstro]

Gunnar Jensen Yes maybe. A niche of a niche! Very heavy and lots of glass to cool down. I’ve seen some excellent planetary images from Edge SCTs. I’ve had 6, 8 and 10 inch SCTs (pre Edge) and they need more collimation than a Mak. Not a big issue. For me they are getting too heavy above 8”, but it’s a personal thing depending on your setup or strength!

[@bellbookandcandle97]

Hi Jenham. I am about to buy Sky-watcher Skymax 127 Synscan AZ GOTO computerized telescope. Plz tell me if that would be good for DSO photography?

[@JenhamsAstro]

Hello, the short answer is no. Now for the long answer! Any Mak like the 127 has a small field of view and long focal length, making the most obvious targets the moon and planets, as shown in the video. If you had an equatorial mount then DSO photography of small, bright-ish objects is possible, as shown in my C90 Deep Sky AP video. Photographing larger, fainter objects is not going to work so well. Aside from a Mak not being super-versatile for astrophotography, the main issue is that the AZ GOTO is not an equatorial mount. You really need an equatorial for most astrophotography. Why? Say you had M57 in the field of view with a camera attached. During a 60s exposure the mount will track it OK, but the field will rotate a little (as the alt-az mount is making changes in alt and az). This will make your life VERY difficult for photography. An AZ GOTO with 127 will be a fantastic VISUAL scope, but it isn't well suited to DSO AP. If you want to buy a scope and get into DSO photography, I would take a different route. I would look to buy a small "apo/ED" refractor like the Skywatcher Evostar 72ED Pro, and combine it with a lightweight but capable equatorial mount like a Skywatcher Star Adventurer mount. This setup may cost a little more but you will get results and be using a setup common to "grab and go" astrophotographers the world over. Don't be tempted to buy a bigger, not ED scope! I hope this is helpful, come back to me if you have more questions. Graham

[@bellbookandcandle97]

@@JenhamsAstro thanks a lot Graham for replying. I am definitely going to buy Sky-Watcher Evostar-72ED DS-Pro OTA. Just checked the website and it is very much available. Thanks for suggestion. I am confused about mount. As I have no idea about separate mounts. Can you elaborate about Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer. Is it computerized? How am I gonna use it ?

[@JenhamsAstro]

@@bellbookandcandle97 Hi, I suggested the Star Adventurer as it was a decent, simple, affordable tracking mount mainly aimed at DSLR + telephoto AP but also capable of carrying a small refractor like the 72ED. It is not a GOTO mount so you would need to learn to star hop, so possibly it doesn't quite fit your requirements if GOTO is a must and also if in future you get a heavier scope (not now though I strongly advice!). If you want GOTO then the next couple of options to look at from Skywatcher are the EQ3 Pro mount or the EQM-35 Pro. I'm not sure what your budget is but the either of these are portable, GOTO mounts. I use another mount which is a couple of further steps up, the HEQ5 Pro, which can carry a bigger (future?) scope but is also fairly portable. There are always trade-offs between cost, capability, portability and payload. Perhaps have a look at these 3 options and see if you what suits you best. AP is quite demanding compared to visual astro so it is best to get "the next size up" mount for a given scope, but make sure you read the reviews and the weights of any mount before you buy. A super heavy setup tends to sap enthusiasm in my experience! Graham

[@bellbookandcandle97]

@@JenhamsAstro hey Graham ! Thanks a lot for such detailed reply. You are wonder. I have stretched my budget a bit. Now I have decidee to buy Sky watcher evo 80ed with sky watcher eq5 mount. Can you kindly tell me accessories that are necessary with this scope? Except the camera. Thanks

[@JenhamsAstro]

@@bellbookandcandle97 You will need a T-ring for your camera. You will also need a 2" extension tube to ensure you can reach focus. Something like this: www.firstlightoptics.com/adapters/2-inch-t-adapter.html Otherwise the only other thing to get started is to see how you will power the mount. Please double check online but they usually come with a "cigar lighter" fitting on the cable so you need to decide whether to buy a portable "power tank" sort of unit or a power supply than plugs into the mains and has a 12V output to match. I'd ask your preferred supplier for their advise. I connect my camera to a laptop using the USB cable supplied with the camera, and then use the laptop to start/stop exposures. Don't use the camera's shutter button as it will shake the whole setup!

[@100smeet]

How did you get on over the winter with DEW? I'm interested in one of these but I really don't want to mess about with heaters.. did you find a dew shield enough? Thanks

[@JenhamsAstro]

100smeet Hi, generally it coped fine for a couple of hours using just a shield. It’s going to vary with conditions a lot so I can’t say for sure that you could avoid heating / “hair drying” at some point.

[@practicajack]

Jenham's has

[@EtherMagic]

Is there a cheaper alternative to the ridiculously expensive Tripod??? I have a budget of $520, i can afford the Skywatcher Skymax 127 but that leaves me with only a $100 left over. I been looking all over but can't seem to get an answer to this question. Thx to anyone that can answer this for me.

[@JenhamsAstro]

Hi Mikey, you definitely don't need an HEQ5 for the 127, i had one already for astrophotography so i just bought the 127 OTA. Here in the UK there are a few options to buy the 127 with a mount like the AZ-GTi. e.g. as seen here: www.firstlightoptics.com/sky-watcher-az-gti-wifi/sky-watcher-skymax-127-az-gti.html I'm not sure if this works for you buying in the US, but worth a look.

[@andrescuevas5968]

Hi Jenham. Would you recommend an Hyperion Baader Eyepiece on this Telescope? Thanks

[@andrescuevas5968]

In a 150 mm Maksutov

[@JenhamsAstro]

Hi. Yes I think that would be a good combination. Maks are tolerant of a wide range of EPs, but I’d say the Baaders should work well and also be useful if you get a second, faster scope in the future.

[@odisseo183]

Which program did you use to take Moon picture from the video?

[@JenhamsAstro]

It was Sharpcap. These days I also use Firecapture.

[@mb-gg3es]

Hi I have just bought the same telescope,which camera is best for video footage and photographs without spending a fortune.I cant decide the way to go DSLR camera or PC based one any ideas most welcome on the subject thanks.

[@JenhamsAstro]

Martin Brown Hi Martin. For video you can start for very little cash with a converted webcam like a Philips SPC900NC. Used examples to these can be found on auction sites. Alternatively something like the ZWO ASI120MC like I use is a good basic video camera for astro. DSLRs are better suited to stills than video, for astro. The Image of a planet looks very small in a DSLR video as its sensor is much bigger than in a dedicated astro camera like the ASI 120. So, generally video for planets and the moon using a webcam or astro video camera, DSLRs for deep sky imaging using a stack of still frames. I hope this helps. Graham

[@mb-gg3es]

Hi thanks for your reply. I have a logitech c270 and have attached a webcam adapter eyepiece with built in filter which works fine in my telescope for daytime viewing, do you have any ideas as to why it is not letting me skywatch at night. Martin Brown

[@JenhamsAstro]

Hi Martin, when you say it isn't working at night, have you tried it on an easy target like the moon? Also, have you initially found the approx focus position by focusing on a distant daytime object? The focus can be very difficult to find at night if you have changed anything since using the scope and webcam during the day e.g. adding a diagonal. In terms of "live" views of the night-sky, remember that the webcam should show bright objects like planets and the moon, but the FOV is very small and dimmer astro targets will be very hard to see. Hence the use of video and frame stacking. Let me know, Graham

[@pigdogmtb283]

I'm torn between this and a 150 Newtonian. Any input would be helpful.

[@JenhamsAstro]

It depends on your observing/imaging aims and experience. The 127 is excellent on planets and the moon but has a small field of view. Finding objects requires more care and precision on the 127 vs the wider, lower power field of a Newtonian. The Newt will be a better all rounder BUT the other thing to consider is the mount. The type of equatorials sold with many Newtonians are not easy to use for new astronomers. The same tube on a Dobsonian mount is easier to use. For the 127 you will also need a decent mount, but there are many options like the AZ GTI that can carry it.

[@pigdogmtb283]

@@JenhamsAstro Thanks. The mount that is with both scopes I'm looking at is an altaz goto

[@JenhamsAstro]

pig dog MTB OK, so the main choice is for a planetary/lunar scope or an all rounder.

[@pigdogmtb283]

@@JenhamsAstro I'd have to go all rounder I think, so reflector then?

[@JenhamsAstro]

pig dog MTB I’d say yes, just need to be sure your proposed mount can handle the OTA.

[@100smeet]

How do you get on with dew on this scope? I don't mind a dew shield, but didn't want heaters..thanks

[@JenhamsAstro]

Hi, it's a bit early to tell for the 127, as so far the nights have been mild, but based on previous experience with a C6 i found a shield was sufficient for a few hours on most nights. I had a Astrozap flexible shield (foolishly sold with the C6!)

[@sebastian-ev1te]

can i use skymax 127 on skywatcher star adventurer pro pack or is it too heavy. im thinking to get skymax 127or 102 for star adventurer

[@JenhamsAstro]

sebastian silfvenius I think it would be OK, just, for visual use but it wouldn’t handle any extra mass from an imaging setup. A bit borderline.

[@Fujikawa-hw6ij]

Can i ask what kind of camera you used and what kind of software jou is used for the pictures? Thinking of buying it

[@JenhamsAstro]

Fujikawa 1988 Hi, the Astro pics used a ZWO ASI-120MC camera, which is the cheapest one in their range. There are a couple of versions, MC gives colour output and MM is mono, for use with coloured filters. The USB 3.0 is better than the old 2.0 model as sometimes the bandwidth of data from camera to laptop can slow things down a bit on the 2.0. Hope this helps, Graham

[@Fujikawa-hw6ij]

@@JenhamsAstro thank you, iam going to look into it 🙂

[@flightfpv7945]

Tell me please. Is the dovetail mount size the same on the MAK127 and MAK150 ?

[@JenhamsAstro]

FLIGHT FPV yes both scopes have the same “vixen” size dovetail.

[@flightfpv7945]

@@JenhamsAstro Thanks for the answer!

[@ohwell2790]

Why do these frames appear so dark?

[@pivottech8881]

Not tryna be weird but doesn't sinus iridium look like a dinosaur or am I being like stupid

[@JenhamsAstro]

I can see that. Maybe a crocodile? But then sometimes it becomes the "moon maiden"

[@andreihorodincu542]

Hey what mount do you use?

[@JenhamsAstro]

Normally an HEQ5 Pro.

[@lornaz1975]

So what is the true aperture of the 102?

[@JenhamsAstro]

I haven't measured it on the 102 but read a forum comment saying it was operating at 97mm. I can't verify this though.

[@lornaz1975]

@@JenhamsAstro We are not talking about clear aperture equivalent but that the scope is somehow stopped down. Am I right in my understanding?

[@lornaz1975]

@@JenhamsAstro Ok so I started looking at my skymax and you are right.Its not that its stopped down, the aperture itself is about 97mm measuring from the inner obstruction.

[@JenhamsAstro]

lornaz1975 The reasons why a scope may operate at a lower value are various. It could be an undersized mirror although I don’t think it’s the case with the 102. More likely is that the secondary baffle is cutting off some rays. Either way it’s not quite 102mm.

[@lornaz1975]

@@JenhamsAstro Right! There is a ridge just inside the lens perhaps what you are calling a baffle. That ridge stops down the light to about 96mm. I used calipers to measure it to the best that I could. I also used a laser and determined that the mirror is not too small. The mirror is precisely made to aline with the baffle. The mirror is neither too small or too large but fits exactly with the optics of the baffle.

[@kindasport]

Hmm.. to be honest, it's a bit dissapointing that even with a barlow you can only guess Jupiter and his moons. You need a camera (and automatic tracking) with long exposure to get someting which looks interesting. :(

[@andrescuevas5968]

what mount doo you recommend for a 127 and a 150 mm maksutov Skywatcher?

[@JenhamsAstro]

Hi, the 127 and 150 are quite different in size, but if you want an equatorial as a minimum you need something of "EQ5" size (e.g. Skywatcher EQ5) . I use the "next size up" of HEQ5 Pro (also sold as the Orion Sirius). Others include Celestron AVX. Avoid the lighter EQ3-2 size - it won't carry a 150 well.

[@andrescuevas5968]

@@JenhamsAstro thanks, nice video

[@Daniel-uz5wg]

Hello, How work this telescope in deep sky? Thanks

[@JenhamsAstro]

Hi Daniel, I hope and expect that the 127 will be very good for clusters and planetary nebulae, but less suited to large emission nebula and galaxies. No scope does it all! I plan to make a video of the 127's performance on small bright DSOs, similar to the one i did for the C90. Graham

[@Daniel-uz5wg]

@@JenhamsAstro Ok thanks, I suppose the 150 mak will be better in deep sky objets...

[@tomasporrerogarcia5992]

no sacas calidad para lo que ese telescope es capaz de hacer

[@sterlingfoley2939]

My Orion 8"newtonian reflector giveaway a much better vew

[@irishlad7458]

Was gonna get one till I found out its made in China 😭😭

[@CriticalRoleHighlights]

Everything's made in China nowadays -_-

[@makemystronger..freemegapi6800]

Ocular 12mm?

[@JenhamsAstro]

The 127 is supplied with 10mm & 25mm eyepieces.