Very nice comparisons Chris. I love the Clip with you looking through the telescope and those moon clips. It actually feels very soothing and Relaxing to watch, without any Music, not gonna Lie, i did replay it a couple of times, haha! Brilliant video mate!
Hi Avanteesh! I'm happy to hear you enjoyed the video and even replayed it! I dropped the music because I wanted it to feel like an observing session with friends, it's good to know this was a good decision :)
I've bought a used 70/900 Celestron Astromaster 70, which was in "like new" condition, and it's not as sharp as other similar scopes that I have using 10mm eyepiece. I've already cleaned it's lenses, checked spacers in between them, replaced erecting prizm with a high quality mirror diagonal, and it's still noticeably blurry - it's fine with 20mm eyepiece, but the problem starts at 10mm.
Thanks for confirming. This it surprised be because the Sky-Watcher Super 10mm eyepiece isn't known for it's sharpness, yet it's seems to be sharper than the Celestron 10mm. I'm sure the Celestron 10mm is a Kellner design as well, and these can be made to be fairly sharp.
@@Astrolavista I probably wasn't clear - I used same 10mm eyepiece with several scopes, and Astromaster 70 (70/900 - not LT 70/700 that you tested) wasn't as sharp as other scopes.
@@A0111.on the Moon and planets the 70/900 mm achromat at high magnification should have a slightly better image quality and less chromatic aberrations than a 70/700 mm one.
It was this or the 60mm astromaster that I saw on astrobisxuits channel when he compared budget scopes & he was really impressed with planetry views. I did find it had a terrible diagonal that came with it
These diagonals aren't great, but not that terrible- they don't affect sharpness. The prizm narrows field of view, and has some light scattering, while cheap mirror diagonal isn't as bright as a quality one, but still sharpness is fine. The bad scope I am talking here has more serious problem with optics - something wrong with collimation - alignment of elements or spacers in between lenses, or with lenses themselves. I'll probably check it again to find the answer.
Very nice video, Chris. It's nice to see the comparison of both scopes. I'm kinda happy that skywatcher pipped the win to be honest. As you said, the balance seems to be better on the tripod. But more importantly, the view was superior. It's always nice to see the family evolved, mate 👍🏻 Clear sky's Ryan
Hey Ryan, thanks! the Sky-Watcher's included Super 10 and 25mm eyepieces did seem a touch sharper than those supplied with the Celestron. This was a surprise because the 10mm eyepiece included with the Sky-Watcher isn't known for it's sharpness. The Objective lens of the Sky-Watcher also seemed better figured but this is pot luck as both objective lenses are made on the same production line in China. The Sky-Watcher was so much nicer to use though; from now on I'm happy to suggest the Mercury 707 to those looking for a telescope under £120. I'll try and drag Alex away from MineCraft to look through telescopes more often :D
Great comparison Chris both scopes looks good for the price but the mount being more stable on the skywatchers wins it for me , just remember replace the finder
Good video Chris. Like you said if just get a rdf and put on the skywatcher scope. I know it's for beginners but putting a rigel qf or a raci finderscope if possible on the skywatcher would be good.
Thanks for watching! You will be able to see the rings of Saturn with both telescopes, though you will see a brighter more detailed view with the 150p f/5 Dob. For the planets I recommend upgrading to a dedicated 5mm planetary eyepiece for a larger sharper view: www.firstlightoptics.com/bst-starguider-eyepieces/bst-starguider-60-5mm-ed-eyepiece/ref/astrolavista/ Clear skies!
Thank you for all your hard work, realy enjoyed your comparison, I’ve got a no name brand 70/400 refactor and like you said the sag gets very irritating after a while.
Nice to get your son involved chris. These scopes are aimed at the younger astronomer. In a ideal world the red dot finder would be with the skywatcher.
I stumbled on your channel while researching beginner scopes. I've done so much research on which scope to get as a beginner and I'm still struggling to know which scope to get. I like the idea of just going out to the garden to get some views of stars and planets but don't want to wait for a dob to cool down. How long typically would you leave a dob to cool before using it? I also like that a refractor telescope doesn't need quite so much cleaning or collimating as a reflector. It is so difficult to know where to spend my money on a telescope.
Excellent video. I started with a 70/700 mm achromatic refractor and I was really impressed by its performance considering that it is just 100 $ with mount and 2 eyepieces. In that price category you can only find a 76 mm newtonian with I am sure it is a lot worse. I really wonder how a 70/700 mm achromat would compare to a 102 mm or even 114 mm newtonian, which cost around 120-140 $.
Don't waste your money on small scopes for visual- go for 6, 8, or 10" dobsonian. The more aperture, the more objects, and details on them you can see. 8" dob is the most recommended scope. I have 6" sct, 150/750 newtonian, 8" & 10" dobs, and if I want to do visual, I usually use 10", as I know others will be not as good, but 10" dob is heavy, so not for everyone's taste.
I accidentally deleted my comment. Was going to say the Astromaster doesn't do as well with light scopes, but I believe I have a heavier one than yours as my Vixen saddle has two bolts. For bad color fringing try a #11 yellow-green filter, works well if you don't mind the greenish yellow. For the sagging pop the cover off the left side and tighten the locking bolt a bit and hope you don't have to pop both sides like I did. Use contact cement to put the covers back on.
The Celestron mount does feel like it would benefit from weight further forward as it sags down at the back. However, it's also rather wobbly! Have you tried the Wratten #8 light yellow filter? it shows less colour casting and has good reviews as a fringe killer. I have this one plus a Baader Semi-Apo: www.firstlightoptics.com/astro-essentials-filters/astro-essentials-125-wratten-8-light-yellow-filter/ref/astrolavista/
@@Astrolavista The #8 was my first ever filter and it works well with achromat aberration, but the #11 seems to work when the yellow doesn't. Depends on the wavelengths being put out. I did a big study on the best light for the zooxanthellae in corals and trust me, not all aberration is the same, although it may look it. Spent 6 months dealing with it. edit; With 1980s equipment and sensors I might add.
I have the astromaster 102/660 refractor & it has same mount issue & the dovetail is so short that its impossible to balance. I also have the astromaster 127 maksutov (only £250 with eq mount.This mount isnt too bad & has slo mo controls plus cheaper than a SW 127 mak which costs £326 for just the scope & they are both synta)
That celestron behaviour is a no-go, it may become frustrating quickly. Lovely video, thank you!
Thanks for watching! I agree 100%
Good video. The addition of a backing dancer at the start of an astronomy video was a nice touch 😀
Haha thanks Steve. The next video will be an introduction to the new Vaonis Vespera smart telescope featuring river dance :D
Very nice comparisons Chris. I love the Clip with you looking through the telescope and those moon clips. It actually feels very soothing and Relaxing to watch, without any Music, not gonna Lie, i did replay it a couple of times, haha! Brilliant video mate!
Hi Avanteesh! I'm happy to hear you enjoyed the video and even replayed it! I dropped the music because I wanted it to feel like an observing session with friends, it's good to know this was a good decision :)
I've bought a used 70/900 Celestron Astromaster 70, which was in "like new" condition, and it's not as sharp as other similar scopes that I have using 10mm eyepiece. I've already cleaned it's lenses, checked spacers in between them, replaced erecting prizm with a high quality mirror diagonal, and it's still noticeably blurry - it's fine with 20mm eyepiece, but the problem starts at 10mm.
Thanks for confirming. This it surprised be because the Sky-Watcher Super 10mm eyepiece isn't known for it's sharpness, yet it's seems to be sharper than the Celestron 10mm. I'm sure the Celestron 10mm is a Kellner design as well, and these can be made to be fairly sharp.
@@Astrolavista I probably wasn't clear - I used same 10mm eyepiece with several scopes, and Astromaster 70 (70/900 - not LT 70/700 that you tested) wasn't as sharp as other scopes.
@@A0111.on the Moon and planets the 70/900 mm achromat at high magnification should have a slightly better image quality and less chromatic aberrations than a 70/700 mm one.
It was this or the 60mm astromaster that I saw on astrobisxuits channel when he compared budget scopes & he was really impressed with planetry views. I did find it had a terrible diagonal that came with it
These diagonals aren't great, but not that terrible- they don't affect sharpness. The prizm narrows field of view, and has some light scattering, while cheap mirror diagonal isn't as bright as a quality one, but still sharpness is fine. The bad scope I am talking here has more serious problem with optics - something wrong with collimation - alignment of elements or spacers in between lenses, or with lenses themselves. I'll probably check it again to find the answer.
Thanks for comparing these two scopes, Chris. This should be helpful for someone starting out in the hobby.
Thanks for watching, Kevin. Vaonis are sending me a smart telescope to take a look at next, the Vaonis Vespera.
@@Astrolavista I'm looking forward to it.
great video, love the boy!
Very nice video, Chris. It's nice to see the comparison of both scopes. I'm kinda happy that skywatcher pipped the win to be honest. As you said, the balance seems to be better on the tripod. But more importantly, the view was superior. It's always nice to see the family evolved, mate 👍🏻
Clear sky's Ryan
Hey Ryan, thanks! the Sky-Watcher's included Super 10 and 25mm eyepieces did seem a touch sharper than those supplied with the Celestron. This was a surprise because the 10mm eyepiece included with the Sky-Watcher isn't known for it's sharpness. The Objective lens of the Sky-Watcher also seemed better figured but this is pot luck as both objective lenses are made on the same production line in China. The Sky-Watcher was so much nicer to use though; from now on I'm happy to suggest the Mercury 707 to those looking for a telescope under £120. I'll try and drag Alex away from MineCraft to look through telescopes more often :D
Interesting vid. Also interesting that no-one has commented about your daughter dancing in the background! That me giggle...
lol I wondered if anyone would spot that! :D
Great comparison Chris both scopes looks good for the price but the mount being more stable on the skywatchers wins it for me , just remember replace the finder
Thanks Tony, spot on :)
Good video Chris. Like you said if just get a rdf and put on the skywatcher scope. I know it's for beginners but putting a rigel qf or a raci finderscope if possible on the skywatcher would be good.
Hey Lee :) a Rigel Quick finder would be perfect; nice and light so wont upset the balance too much. That's a good shout, thanks for watching!
Enjoying your videos. Very nice!
Can you see the rings of Saturn with the skywatcher or is a 150p f5 dob better for that?
Thanks for watching! You will be able to see the rings of Saturn with both telescopes, though you will see a brighter more detailed view with the 150p f/5 Dob.
For the planets I recommend upgrading to a dedicated 5mm planetary eyepiece for a larger sharper view: www.firstlightoptics.com/bst-starguider-eyepieces/bst-starguider-60-5mm-ed-eyepiece/ref/astrolavista/ Clear skies!
Thank you for all your hard work, realy enjoyed your comparison, I’ve got a no name brand 70/400 refactor and like you said the sag gets very irritating after a while.
Thanks Mike :) Yeah those saggy mounts sap some of the joy out of the hobby.
Nice to get your son involved chris. These scopes are aimed at the younger astronomer. In a ideal world the red dot finder would be with the skywatcher.
I stumbled on your channel while researching beginner scopes. I've done so much research on which scope to get as a beginner and I'm still struggling to know which scope to get. I like the idea of just going out to the garden to get some views of stars and planets but don't want to wait for a dob to cool down. How long typically would you leave a dob to cool before using it? I also like that a refractor telescope doesn't need quite so much cleaning or collimating as a reflector. It is so difficult to know where to spend my money on a telescope.
Excellent video. I started with a 70/700 mm achromatic refractor and I was really impressed by its performance considering that it is just 100 $ with mount and 2 eyepieces. In that price category you can only find a 76 mm newtonian with I am sure it is a lot worse. I really wonder how a 70/700 mm achromat would compare to a 102 mm or even 114 mm newtonian, which cost around 120-140 $.
Don't waste your money on small scopes for visual- go for 6, 8, or 10" dobsonian. The more aperture, the more objects, and details on them you can see. 8" dob is the most recommended scope. I have 6" sct, 150/750 newtonian, 8" & 10" dobs, and if I want to do visual, I usually use 10", as I know others will be not as good, but 10" dob is heavy, so not for everyone's taste.
I accidentally deleted my comment. Was going to say the Astromaster doesn't do as well with light scopes, but I believe I have a heavier one than yours as my Vixen saddle has two bolts.
For bad color fringing try a #11 yellow-green filter, works well if you don't mind the greenish yellow.
For the sagging pop the cover off the left side and tighten the locking bolt a bit and hope you don't have to pop both sides like I did. Use contact cement to put the covers back on.
The Celestron mount does feel like it would benefit from weight further forward as it sags down at the back. However, it's also rather wobbly! Have you tried the Wratten #8 light yellow filter? it shows less colour casting and has good reviews as a fringe killer. I have this one plus a Baader Semi-Apo: www.firstlightoptics.com/astro-essentials-filters/astro-essentials-125-wratten-8-light-yellow-filter/ref/astrolavista/
@@Astrolavista The #8 was my first ever filter and it works well with achromat aberration, but the #11 seems to work when the yellow doesn't. Depends on the wavelengths being put out. I did a big study on the best light for the zooxanthellae in corals and trust me, not all aberration is the same, although it may look it. Spent 6 months dealing with it. edit; With 1980s equipment and sensors I might add.
@@Astrolavistai have seen someone add a weight to the front of the scope which apparently helps. Found it works great with an az4 or az5 moubt
I see used Astromasters for sale all the time. A photo tripod isn't a good idea on a long telescope.
I have the astromaster 102/660 refractor & it has same mount issue & the dovetail is so short that its impossible to balance. I also have the astromaster 127 maksutov (only £250 with eq mount.This mount isnt too bad & has slo mo controls plus cheaper than a SW 127 mak which costs £326 for just the scope & they are both synta)
1% telescope image preview , 99% seeing 2 people talking 😊
My first scope was a celestron power seaker 60 az same type of yoke mount the mount is really bad doesn’t stay where you point it