A Mak 127 was my first scope as I was interested in solar, lunar and planetary photography. It's a gem and very portable. Now, I also have a Mak 180. It's a beast for lunar and planetary but you need decent seeing. Both give amazing contrasty images, especially of the moon. They never need collimation... no field flattener necessary but some form of autofocus is important and if you can add a Crayford type focus then that helps. I later moved into some deep sky stuff with a refractor but I love my Maks! You will have some great fun with that cute little SVBony.
My first real scope was a 127mm Mak-Cas. I love it for planetary. I also used it for traditional AP and it worked to an extent but was never really happy with the results.
i have a 127 mak cas and it does a reasonable job all round, i shoot galaxies and nebulas with it as well as lunar and the planets , it is a bit slow at f12 but its a fun budget scope, i just bought a svbony503 102mm refractor , it should be here in a few days , really looking forward to it, great channel by the way
@@TheNarrowbandChannel yep i watched your review on it , it swayed me to buying it instead of a 6 inch rc i was also looking at. i live out on a farm here in australia with bortle 2 sky's it really helps the imaging with the 127
A Svbony Maksutov? Interesting. Looking forward to your results with this scope, specially with star clusters. Will it give a well (or relatively fair) corrected field? Clear skies!
My 2nd scope was a 102mm mak. Really good for planets, got me going in astronomy, should have been my first scope instead of my 114mm newtonian. Beginners want magnification and that's what maks give you. Also, no chromatic error or collimation needed. It's no good for deep sky unless you have a very steady tracking mount and some method of finding targets. But, even with a tracking alt az mount, I am very happy with the planetary images i get.
I have a similar 100mm f/14 Maksutov on an EQ2 mount, and it is a great instrument - contrast is very high and free of chromatic abberation. The field is flat as a pancake, and there is no difference in apparent angular diameter between a Plossl or an R Kellner. Even in Auckland, it does all the bright DSO's with great ease (Omega Cen, 47 Tuc, Centaurus A, Jewel Box, M42, M45 etc), and is a spectacularly good planetary instrument, able to sustain about 150x with a 12.5mm Plossl. Its at its best with a 40mm and 20mm Plossl. And the focus, thanks to the long focal length, is tack-sharp. I've had it for 10 years, and its still as good as the day it came out of the box. It's easy to fold away and put in the boot of the smallest car, and the OTA fits in a small sports bag (cushioned with EPP foam). I've tried 4" and 5" SCT's before - and this is their equal ! And a darn sight cheaper when bought. I've also upgraded this year to an RA stepper, which has made this thing totally awesome.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel Very few, and they are strengthening/protective - I bought it direct off the manufacturer. The outer rear sheath is ABS, but the body, innards, focuser knob, and all else is metal. Even the screw-on front cap.
Most companies that do mass produce the Maksutov designs stop at about 7.1 inches. There are at least 2 companies in Russia that will periodically make a run of 8 inch Maksutov telescopes. BUT, these are hard to get outside of Europe and thus expensive too.
Hey Ben, thanks for the video, another fantastic chapter adding knowledge to the followers. I need your advice, recently I came across a good deal for a iOptron skyguider and a redcat 51. I am interested in photographing nebulas and have been confused as to what to use for the back end. I have a em1 that I will be using but also want to use a canon where I have the options of 800d apsc and 6d full frame. What would you recommend between the two canon cameras for nebulas.
I actually know very little about those two cannon cameras. You might check some of the equipment forums on Cloudy Nights.com to see what they are using. That place is a huge resource of info. And it is searchable too. I use it lot myself.
This one is quite affordable but if I like it maybe I will get a larger one. Orion does sell a 180mm though it is very pricy. I will need to like it a lot in that case lol
I'm curious what you are using to mount the Olympus to the Maksutov? I have a Konus Motorman 130HM that I would like to hook my Olympus OM EM-1 mkIII to and play around with some night photography and maybe some whale off shore photography on nice bright sunny days. Thanks for all the great videos!
hmm looks nice i would love to see them bring out a 5" and 6" version. love to compare to the other CATs i have. For Planetary imaging have u considered a Virtual machine on your mac pro to run windows to access the software.
I'm amazed how people pronounce differently words that are common to a genre. It's part of one's culture. The main thing is the general gist. Can you understand what is being described or stated? If so, just play along. No need to comment.
Can’t agree about the 5” maximum for a Maksutov. Skywatcher had them with 6” for quite some time. Meade had 7” Maksutov Cassegrain telescopes as smaller brothers to the 8” SCs for long time. Intes had a 8” Maksutov with f/10 focal ratio and smaller ones with the same focal ratio. I’ve never encountered a Maksutov bigger than 8” but on the other hand I am pretty sure you can buy them.
Indeed Russian optical manufacturor INTES produces 5", 6", 7", 8", 10", 12", 14", 16" and 20" models - 12" and above only based on individual order. Not easy to get though in particular under the current circumstances. Looking forward to the review. Could you please comment on the backfocus of these scopes?
If Maksutov has so many advantages over newtonian and SCT, in terms of small size, light weight, and smaller primary mirror with no movement problem during photo session, then why SCT and newtonian are more popular for planetary and galaxy imaging?
There are a couple of reasons for the Popularity of the SCT. IN larger sizes they are not as expensive compared to a Mak. Maks have a very curved front element and its quite expensive to make in larger sizes plus they are usually slower with their longer FL. The reason so many us an SCT is because they already have one not that it is better for the task its used for.
I've got an 8" Newt and a 5" Mak. They're about equal in power. I'd say the 8" is my preference for visual while the Mak is better for astrophotograpy (mainly moon). Mak definately took some getting used to. First evening simply didn't see anything : focus is a way bigger deal as you have a lot less light coming in : to far out of focus and you simply won't see a thing. On a Newt you can still find brighter targets easily without a finder scope, with the Mak a Finder scope is a must. There's a slightly higher learning curve and Newts def come with less frustrations for a beginner.
The Maksutov was designed to be simpler for the amateur to make than the Schmidt. The Mak, in the Gregory design, uses all spherical surfaces, while the Schmidt corrector has a complex curve. When Celestron invented a technique to easily mass produce the Schmidt corrector, they were able to take over the market. The Maksutov is more compact than a Newtonian and doesn't have coma. However, they are slower, and the larger central obstruction reduces contrast compared to the Newtonian. There are larger Maksutovs. Questar sells a 7", and made a few 12" Maks. TEC made 8" and 10" Maks, and the Russian companies made Maksutovs 7" and larger. Even Astro-Physics made a 10" Maksutov. They tend to take a long time to cool, though now that amateurs have discovered Reflectix, maybe Maksutovs will get another look.
My guess is they would be too slow for that. Galaxies are usually quite faint. I included planetary nebula only because they tend to be small and a little brighter. Though a lot of them do need narrowband filtration.
I have done Bode's Galaxy with the 102 Skywatcher Skymax , which is nearly identical to this telescope. Took 85x4 minutes exposures, but I got my galaxy, even if it's not that fantastic looking.
May be an ETX back then, but junk is a little harsh. They are optically slow so images will be dim. I had an ETX and the light baffle sagged over the secondary spot; poor construction quality does not mean the optical design is poor.
I can't watch this. Hearing you mispronounce everything just digs into my soul. Don't get me wrong. I appreciate the video and your efforts. I know it isn't easy putting yourself out there. I guess I'm OCD when it comes to proper pronunciation. Nothing personal as some of the commentors seem to think.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel Words don't change that much in pronunciation depending upon where you live. You think I'm not comfortable with diversity ?? My best friend of 45 yrs is gay and I know plenty of people of different races. I don't give a damn about anything like that. Keep your leftist comments to yourself You know nothing about me. He's very simply mispronouncing terms. Get over it !
The skywatcher 127 maksutov is a real jewel
YEs that one is approaching classic status. Orion has been selling a clone of that for close to 20 years now.
A Mak 127 was my first scope as I was interested in solar, lunar and planetary photography. It's a gem and very portable. Now, I also have a Mak 180. It's a beast for lunar and planetary but you need decent seeing. Both give amazing contrasty images, especially of the moon. They never need collimation... no field flattener necessary but some form of autofocus is important and if you can add a Crayford type focus then that helps. I later moved into some deep sky stuff with a refractor but I love my Maks! You will have some great fun with that cute little SVBony.
Thank you I will be.
Exciting! Can't wait to see the results of the svbony mak :)
Wonderful video, Thanks.
Thank you too!
That scope in the background resting vertically near the edge of the table is giving me serious OCD! 😢
Nice synopsis. I've gone for a Bresser 127/1900 for the same reasons.
Nice! They had a good line up of scopes in 2019 then I thought they went under but I see they are still around.
My first real scope was a 127mm Mak-Cas. I love it for planetary. I also used it for traditional AP and it worked to an extent but was never really happy with the results.
Yes if only they were faster.
i have a 127 mak cas and it does a reasonable job all round, i shoot galaxies and nebulas with it as well as lunar and the planets , it is a bit slow at f12 but its a fun budget scope, i just bought a svbony503 102mm refractor , it should be here in a few days , really looking forward to it, great channel by the way
Thank you. I have the 102 as well. I use it with the reducer.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel yep i watched your review on it , it swayed me to buying it instead of a 6 inch rc i was also looking at. i live out on a farm here in australia with bortle 2 sky's it really helps the imaging with the 127
A Svbony Maksutov? Interesting. Looking forward to your results with this scope, specially with star clusters. Will it give a well (or relatively fair) corrected field? Clear skies!
My 2nd scope was a 102mm mak. Really good for planets, got me going in astronomy, should have been my first scope instead of my 114mm newtonian. Beginners want magnification and that's what maks give you. Also, no chromatic error or collimation needed. It's no good for deep sky unless you have a very steady tracking mount and some method of finding targets. But, even with a tracking alt az mount, I am very happy with the planetary images i get.
Thanks. I am going to give Pluto a run with a camera in this tonight. Finger crossed. Won't get any details I am sure. Just a moving point of light.
I have a similar 100mm f/14 Maksutov on an EQ2 mount, and it is a great instrument - contrast is very high and free of chromatic abberation. The field is flat as a pancake, and there is no difference in apparent angular diameter between a Plossl or an R Kellner.
Even in Auckland, it does all the bright DSO's with great ease (Omega Cen, 47 Tuc, Centaurus A, Jewel Box, M42, M45 etc), and is a spectacularly good planetary instrument, able to sustain about 150x with a 12.5mm Plossl.
Its at its best with a 40mm and 20mm Plossl. And the focus, thanks to the long focal length, is tack-sharp.
I've had it for 10 years, and its still as good as the day it came out of the box. It's easy to fold away and put in the boot of the smallest car, and the OTA fits in a small sports bag (cushioned with EPP foam).
I've tried 4" and 5" SCT's before - and this is their equal !
And a darn sight cheaper when bought.
I've also upgraded this year to an RA stepper, which has made this thing totally awesome.
Are there any plastic parts on yours? The Orion scopes had some plastic in the focuser at least in the smaller ones.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel Very few, and they are strengthening/protective - I bought it direct off the manufacturer. The outer rear sheath is ABS, but the body, innards, focuser knob, and all else is metal. Even the screw-on front cap.
Bck in the day people used to fight over Maksutov vs Schmidt. Now a days you hardly hear about them.
Most companies that do mass produce the Maksutov designs stop at about 7.1 inches. There are at least 2 companies in Russia that will periodically make a run of 8 inch Maksutov telescopes. BUT, these are hard to get outside of Europe and thus expensive too.
Hey Ben, thanks for the video, another fantastic chapter adding knowledge to the followers. I need your advice, recently I came across a good deal for a iOptron skyguider and a redcat 51. I am interested in photographing nebulas and have been confused as to what to use for the back end. I have a em1 that I will be using but also want to use a canon where I have the options of 800d apsc and 6d full frame. What would you recommend between the two canon cameras for nebulas.
I actually know very little about those two cannon cameras. You might check some of the equipment forums on Cloudy Nights.com to see what they are using. That place is a huge resource of info. And it is searchable too. I use it lot myself.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel oh cool, did not know about it at all. Thank you for your comment. I will definitely go there.
I've thought about getting a Mak for planetary, I just might have to!
This one is quite affordable but if I like it maybe I will get a larger one. Orion does sell a 180mm though it is very pricy. I will need to like it a lot in that case lol
I'm curious what you are using to mount the Olympus to the Maksutov? I have a Konus Motorman 130HM that I would like to hook my Olympus OM EM-1 mkIII to and play around with some night photography and maybe some whale off shore photography on nice bright sunny days. Thanks for all the great videos!
I did a video on this topic about a year ago maybe more. Had links in it to what to buy.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel Found it Thank You!
hmm looks nice i would love to see them bring out a 5" and 6" version. love to compare to the other CATs i have. For Planetary imaging have u considered a Virtual machine on your mac pro to run windows to access the software.
VM is just too deep for me. When I was younger I would have but now I am like an old fart that hates tech.
I'm amazed how people pronounce differently words that are common to a genre. It's part of one's culture. The main thing is the general gist. Can you understand what is being described or stated? If so, just play along. No need to comment.
Do these scopes have a flat field for astrophotography?
Yes but I believe its a smaller image circle.
Hi can i use svbony sv135 telescope eyepiece zoom 7to21mm 1.25 inch. Reason for asking, so that i will not buy additional eyepiece.
Yes that will work. You will though need a right angle diagonal to hold it.
I would not go for planatery nebula with maks.
To faint?
Can’t agree about the 5” maximum for a Maksutov. Skywatcher had them with 6” for quite some time. Meade had 7” Maksutov Cassegrain telescopes as smaller brothers to the 8” SCs for long time. Intes had a 8” Maksutov with f/10 focal ratio and smaller ones with the same focal ratio.
I’ve never encountered a Maksutov bigger than 8” but on the other hand I am pretty sure you can buy them.
Indeed Russian optical manufacturor INTES produces 5", 6", 7", 8", 10", 12", 14", 16" and 20" models - 12" and above only based on individual order. Not easy to get though in particular under the current circumstances. Looking forward to the review. Could you please comment on the backfocus of these scopes?
Actually I forgot to list the 24" option.
@@wolfgangkuechle9085 INTES are no more.
@@davidbover7734 Ok. I dic miss that.
I knew of larger ones they are jus quite rare and the price on them goes up quite steeply.
If Maksutov has so many advantages over newtonian and SCT, in terms of small size, light weight, and smaller primary mirror with no movement problem during photo session, then why SCT and newtonian are more popular for planetary and galaxy imaging?
There are a couple of reasons for the Popularity of the SCT. IN larger sizes they are not as expensive compared to a Mak. Maks have a very curved front element and its quite expensive to make in larger sizes plus they are usually slower with their longer FL. The reason so many us an SCT is because they already have one not that it is better for the task its used for.
I've got an 8" Newt and a 5" Mak. They're about equal in power. I'd say the 8" is my preference for visual while the Mak is better for astrophotograpy (mainly moon). Mak definately took some getting used to. First evening simply didn't see anything : focus is a way bigger deal as you have a lot less light coming in : to far out of focus and you simply won't see a thing. On a Newt you can still find brighter targets easily without a finder scope, with the Mak a Finder scope is a must. There's a slightly higher learning curve and Newts def come with less frustrations for a beginner.
@@BennyKleykens Some really good info Benny. I might have to put some of this into my final review of this scope.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel Thanks! Good stuff! Very curiour to see if you can find Pluto with the Mak 105!
The Maksutov was designed to be simpler for the amateur to make than the Schmidt. The Mak, in the Gregory design, uses all spherical surfaces, while the Schmidt corrector has a complex curve. When Celestron invented a technique to easily mass produce the Schmidt corrector, they were able to take over the market.
The Maksutov is more compact than a Newtonian and doesn't have coma. However, they are slower, and the larger central obstruction reduces contrast compared to the Newtonian.
There are larger Maksutovs. Questar sells a 7", and made a few 12" Maks. TEC made 8" and 10" Maks, and the Russian companies made Maksutovs 7" and larger. Even Astro-Physics made a 10" Maksutov. They tend to take a long time to cool, though now that amateurs have discovered Reflectix, maybe Maksutovs will get another look.
What about galaxies? Too slow?
My guess is they would be too slow for that. Galaxies are usually quite faint. I included planetary nebula only because they tend to be small and a little brighter. Though a lot of them do need narrowband filtration.
I have done Bode's Galaxy with the 102 Skywatcher Skymax , which is nearly identical to this telescope. Took 85x4 minutes exposures, but I got my galaxy, even if it's not that fantastic looking.
Explore Scientific Maksutov MN-152 F4.8 David Levy Comethunter... I let mine fall last week and the correctorplate did break 😞
That is tragic. I hope they can replace or repair something like that.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel gone to the bin 😪 but who cares mate... thinking about you, sending strenght and love all the time!
Pronounced “ Cass uh grain”. Not Kesah gran
personally ive never been a fan.... but for people who are.... the skywatcher 127 would be a great choice
That is a popular one.
My wife bought me that same unit 30 years ago, I can’t give it away, junk.
SVBONY did not exist back then. Also scopes have come a long way in 30 years.
May be an ETX back then, but junk is a little harsh. They are optically slow so images will be dim. I had an ETX and the light baffle sagged over the secondary spot; poor construction quality does not mean the optical design is poor.
Are you comparing to a quasar?
I can't watch this. Hearing you mispronounce everything just digs into my soul. Don't get me wrong. I appreciate the video and your efforts. I know it isn't easy putting yourself out there. I guess I'm OCD when it comes to proper pronunciation. Nothing personal as some of the commentors seem to think.
You need to quit been an HATER.
It's depends where you are from how it is pronounced. I would say get out more and meet more people. It will make you more comfortable with diversity.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel Words don't change that much in pronunciation depending upon where you live. You think I'm not comfortable with diversity ?? My best friend of 45 yrs is gay and I know plenty of people of different races. I don't give a damn about anything like that. Keep your leftist comments to yourself You know nothing about me. He's very simply mispronouncing terms. Get over it !
I heard maksutov cassegrain shows left image at right and right image shows at left is that true
Perhaps you should learn the proper pronunciation of Cass-e-grain! I've been using one ( 150mm ) for years.
I have had this comment before. It is the way it is said here in this part of the worlds English.
Your in north America! learn how to pronounce the dam telescopes name I have a150 mm casoograin@@TheNarrowbandChannel
or I should say casegran@@TheNarrowbandChannel