Skywatcher 127 vs 102mm Maksutov telescope comparison when imaging the planet Mars.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 жов 2024
- Continuing on from my previous videos testing out the StarQuest 102MC Maksutov telescope and it's larger brother the Skymax 127, in this video they go head-to-head imaging the planet Mars, as it rides high in the sky during the 2020 opposition. Does an 127mm mirror beat a 102mm on a bright target? Let's see.
I see your cat thoroughly enjoying themselves and wanting in on your astronomy videos, top effort
3 cats for the price of 2, great work Graham!
I bought the 102, mainly because of its lesser weight, making things go easier with my Star Adventurer mount. Love it!
Awesome work Graham as always, the Mighty Maks never fail to amaze me when Planetary imaging is concerned!!
Martin Pyott Thanks Martin, I hope things are now OK with you.
@@JenhamsAstro Getting better bro, I'm loving the new MP ASTRO shed, finally my dream is now reality!!
Great video, thanks, and VERY cool stacked image of Mars at the 3 minute mark. Subscribed
Love the cat’s stage left entrance! Good comparison of two popular Maks. Not as much difference as I’d expect though, of course, the 127 image is superior. It seems that were one to want a smaller Mak that there would be little advantage in getting a 102 over the popular C90. Hey, how about a 127 Mak vs SCT comparo? Yes, this has been done but I’d really be interested in your take and your usual visual side by sides. Your site is among the best out there and I’m grateful for all the time your put into your videos. Thanks, Graham.
Doug in Oregon
Doug Rennie Hi Doug, I hope things are OK in Oregon. I’m going to return to the C90 to form a final view on its performance vs the 102. SCTs, yes I’ve seen some excellent images using new EDGE generation scopes. I’ve got an old C5 astro that I could pit against the 127.... but one is 1970/80s and it might be a little unfair re coatings etc. Still, I’ll have a think if this is doable as the C5 will need mounting somehow.
You are becoming somewhat of a maestro at capturing the planets Graham, Great captures once again 👍
Thanks Ian, with my latest Dob purchase I've been neglecting the planets a bit this year, but I'll get back to the Maks before long. Clear skies.
You can always use your Dob to image planets. The larger aperture should bring out much more detail.
Excellent education material. Comparison lessons always best approach. thank you!
Good video..I'd be interested in seeing the photographic performance of the 127 Mak against a C5 and a C6 SCT.
It's on the "to do" list!
Great demonstration that a little aperture makes such a difference
Very nice comparaison. One thing to mention is that your seeing condition is atrocious hence why the final images are ok. Also, I do hope that both scopes were used under the same seeing condition for a more like for like comparaison since details on planets is all about steady seeing.
Top quality cat videobomb
Holy CAT a dioptric Batman! Nice. Cat and vid BTW; have a 115 apo , 127 mak and Cat; love em all..when cooled or insulated the 127 can throw up great visual images of the Syrtis and Hellas and even the red spot and its hollow !
Huge help. Great video. Thankyou.
It looks like the atmosphere was pretty bad that night! Your showing a very "wobbly" image.
Where I live, in the far Northwestern U.S., I find any clear, cold night of winter to offer the Best Seeing of the year!
So you might try this same comparison on a better night.
THANKS 😊
Thumbs op for the cat.
Nice video. I’m certain it’s useful. I remember back when I fumbled over which of those two apertures to go for. I had a summer job and had to decide on a scope with extras or just the ota. Both are pretty amazing and easy to use. I absolutely love the Maksutov.
Thanks Garnett. After a while playing with the 102 and 127, I've now put my dusty C90 onto the StarQuest mount. Maybe a C90 vs 102 video beckons..!
@@JenhamsAstro did you ever do the C90/102 comparison? Would love to know if there is any significant difference in optical quality for viewing as opposed to astrophotography
@@amaury1264 Hi Marc, no I never did, and I ended up selling the 102 and keeping the 127 and 90 scopes. I like the C90's higher focal ratio and I doubt that the image quality delta between it and the 102 would be that noticeable.
Thanks to your Videos and especially this Video i bought as my first scope a Mak 127. I don't have GoTo But i allready saw Saturn and Jupiter. And Yesterday i saw Orion with my own eyes without scope in The middle of a City.
Thanks great, I’m glad you find the videos helpful. I really like being able to navigate around the brighter constellations with just my eyes. They become something familiar to see when you are away from home. Clear skies to you, Graham
@@JenhamsAstro do you recommend flocking a Maksutov? I bought a Acuter Maksy for a Child and i notice IT has better Image Quality then my big one. Of course IT IS a aperture difference. Flocking everything seems common.
@@Chris2000SPHi Chris, certainly for my C90 it was beneficial but I think I’d only do it routinely if I could see an obvious reflective surface, as I had with the baffle. I have chased an artefact in the 127 when trying a SCT reducer/corrector but I haven’t seen any benefit as yet.
I have a 60mm Mak, and it's great!
I was going to buy the 127 Mak but decided to get the 102 instead. It has less aperture but it also costs (in June 2023) over £200 less than the 127 from FLO so I'll be using the money I've saved for accessories. Mine is due to be delivered in about 4 hours according to DPD so naturally we now have 100% clouds at my location 😞
Typical!
Holy Catfish Batman..Luckily the Cat didnt knock over the lil' "Cat" could have been CATastrophic!
Nice black Cat and video BTW.
the cat was the very best part!
um, which scope does the cat recommend?
obviously either CAT scope!
priceless, just priceless. more cat, less talk, hahahahahaha!!!
will have to watch again- i was totally distracted. BUT, don't keep the cat away.
+1 bonus crazy kitty
Love your videos
Thank you!
Nice comparison. Would like to see how the 127 does Jupiter and Saturn. Does it resolve the red spot in Jupiter and the Cassini division on Saturn's rings?
Yes and yes!
I had the Skywatcher Skymax 90mm and I was able to make out Jupiter's Great Red Spot with my 7mm Nagler eyepiece.
Update: after suffering from sellers remorse, months later I saw a used Skywatcher 90mm mak on Ebay and immediately snapped it up😄.
More cats in your vids plz Graham 👍
127mm mak. is a nice scope for the money. this video give a good idea what you can expect out of that scope.
what this scope like for deepsky.
I’m going to find out soon
@@GarnettLeary people say its bad but I'm sure it can do the easy ones. Tell us when u do it.
@@AFKMeister It’s a hidden gem. At F12 it’s very demanding but optically it’s advantage is in an extremely flat field. I’ve mostly been toying with reducers. A 1.25” works great with a small chip sensor assuming it doesn’t have a flattener. The trick is to find a reducer without a flattener because it has an adverse effect on this scope that exhibits no coma. An SCT adapter will allow a 2” reducer but I imagine a soda straw effect. I’m in the middle of testing these concepts. Ultimately you’ll never escape the limited fov but for myself that’s why I like it. I imagine targets like the Ring Nebula to be very easily within the grasps of this instrument. I spend a lot of time on this channel because his work with them is very scientific and thorough. I value the opinions on this channel. If you seek a reducer on Cloudy Nights you find scrambled information, mostly guesswork. Skywatcher has a video regarding their 180mm Mak and claims a 2” 6.3 reducer can be used for “visual”. I doubt they would ever mislead their customers. That’s encouraging because in most cases what our eyes can resolve a camera can as well.. granted the proper back focus can be achieved. I already discovered that I can avoid clipping on a full frame simply by adding a 2” extension on the 127mm Maksutov. There’s two missing pieces to my study. 1) A chip around 3.75 that is capable of long exposure and 2) A 2” reducer that has no field correction. I’m going to mount it on an Orion Atlas 2 EQ-G and dual mount it with an Orion ST-80 for guiding. I’ll avoid spacing issues from an OAG this way and still be within range of a good pixel ratio. That’s the plan anyway. Getting hardware right now is extremely difficult unfortunately.
Great video, thanks. I guess the obvious would be to include150 and 180 for comparison. May be to cooperate with some astro shops if they could provide 150 and 180 for a day, that would be brilliant, dreams dreams :)
Thanks. Maybe someday if I can get a unit on loan, yes.
Great video.
i just bought an older skywatcher 127 mak, but its a silvery grey colour, hope its just as good 🤞
Hopefully yes, I think the changes are largely cosmetic.
Nice video. I see that you have also a black cat-sutov :-) I'm trying the Mak127 and comparing with a Celestron SC5" its similar but I found more accurate in planetary details. The focal ratio in 127 makes than the full moon is not complete when I use a Canon camera but the 102mm seems good for that. Maybe I will try it in the future. Regards!
Thanks. Yes the cat likes to get involved! Eventually I'll be able to summarise my thoughts on 90, 102 and 127s. The 127 is the clear winner, as it should be, but I'm not sure yet if the 102 offers anything over the C90. I weighed the 3 OTAs and the 102 is lighter than the C90, which is a bit mystifying and suggests some differences in design under the surface. Could the absence of a collimation facility in the mirror cell account for this, or a thinner tube? Not sure. Expect more experiments and comparisons! Clear skies!
@@JenhamsAstro I have the Skywatcher Skymax 102, having sold my 90mm, but I just don't get the same 'feels' as the 90. Indeed, the 90 seemed sharper to me somehow, especially on the Moon and planets. I feel like doing a downgrade now😃.
Everton Porter Hello Everton, so far I share your view. The 102 is “OK” certainly, and the StarQuest package is good value, but my example isn’t as good as my C90. The 127 is better, albeit not by a huge margin vs the C90, but I’m sure I can get more from it in time.
What is the diameter of the baffle tube on the 102 and 127? With my 90mm Maksutov, 32mm Plössl eyepieces vignette
I don’t have the 102 anymore but the 127 looks to be 27 or 28mm diameter.
Have to watch that the cat doesn't knock the other Cat off and onto the concrete floor!
Hi, if I can ask a Q. In the live video @ 1:50, is this what you would see looking thru the eyepiece? Or is the image cropped in the software and magnified? Also not just size, but is the detail what you would see with an EP, or does the software you use "stack" info and bring out more details? Thanks
The camera output is transferred in raw format so I processed the video in PIPP to debayer it into colour. You can see that the capture was of a small part of the sensors frame to reduce file size, so in the video this smaller ROI fills the video frame. The main difference in an EP is the size. Mars shows a lot of surface detail on a steady night but even at high power it is smaller in a relative sense in the field of view vs the video.
Nice. Do you have a comparable video for Saturn? I lean to a 4 inch for portability, but a 5 inch would be manageable.
Adc should go in first, the barlow is probably 3x with adc in-between the barlow and the camera, but that may not be a bad thing in this application. A
Now you should try the 8 inch.
One day, if I can get hold of one!
Hi, I want to buy my first telescope, which one do you recommend, the skymax 102 or the heritage 150p? to observe planets and galaxies thanks
I like your cat :)
Thanks for your video which is indeed very useful. In fact, I have been very considering and struggling whether 102 or 127 will be more suitable to me, since I need to strike the balance between the portability and performance. Will 102 still be able to see some brighter cluster or nebula by eyes? That seems to be my concern at this moment. I think most of the time the telescope will be used in my balcony but not very likely in the mountain.
Maks of any size are not ideal for large faint objects like nebulae as they have small fields of view and are made for high power viewing. A lot of clusters will fit in the EP though, especially globulars, which resolve into many stars. Generally I'd say try the 127, but make sure your tripod or mount is stable enough, as the 127 is a solid piece of kit which needs good support to avoid image shake.
@@JenhamsAstro The 102 is the one I've got. Believe it or not, I somehow managed to get it badly decollimated, to the point where what I see through the eyepiece slot looks like an eye rather than a pair of concentric circles, and a 10mm high magnification eyepiece can't reach proper focus. I can see no collimation screws on it. Is there any way to collimate it?
I Enjoy Your Video’s,I Finally Broke Down and Got a Guide Scope,I Went With The Skywatcher 50ed,So I Can Use It For Wide Angle Astro As Well,Literally Now Trying To Figure Out How To Put It On My 6se..The Base For The Starpointer Is Too Small..Any Suggestions..Have a Great Day,Be Safe,God Bless,and Clear Skies❤️🌏🔭🙏🏼
Hi great video and comparison 👍 do you think the 127 would fit on the startquests mount? Or would it be pushing it weight wise. Thanks
Thanks! I’d say that would be pushing it. The much lighter 102 OTA matches quite well. The 127 is a solid lump by comparison.
@Jenham's Astro thanks, iv seen its out of stock for quite some time. ordered the 102r and thought I'd get a mak too for more planetary observation. Will see what I can find 👍
Hey there. I’m thinking about purchasing either the 127 mm it the 102mm but I can’t decide. My question is, which one is better for observatory? That’s what I’m looking for.
Of those 2 Maks, I’d go for the 127.
Your videos are excellent. I love to watch them. Thank you very much. It describes in great detail the context. I have one question on you. I also own the SkyMax 127 and the camera about ZWO 224. In this video, there is a picture of how you put the camera together with the Barlow lens in Skymax 127 without a mirror diagonal. Why doesn't a mirror diagonal together with the camera go? It bothers something. One more question. I own only 3 barlow lens from Televue along with camera about ZWO 224 will there be any problem? You use 2x barlow lens from televue. Otherwise, Skymax 127 I have unfortunately I have no EQ installation on a fixed tripod. Only a solid tripod. I want to try astrophotography soon, so I ask you as an expert. Thank you for any answer?
Thanks very much! Whenever you do imaging it is best to have as few optical components as possible between the camera and the telescope, to reduce light loss and risk of distortions. So I never use a diagonal for imaging, just a Barlow, sometimes an ADC and then the camera. A 3x is OK but you’ll probably find it more difficult to focus than a 2x. If you use too much magnification you can also get into a situation where the image scale is not in the ideal range of arc seconds per pixel, in effect you aren’t getting any more detail as you increase the magnification beyond a certain point. Finally you really do need an equatorial for imaging, with the exception of the moon where exposures are short enough to not require one.
@@JenhamsAstro Grahame thank you for a detailed explanation. I am interested in taking pictures of planets without Barlow's lens, will the planet the resulting image be so small? Where do I change the size of planets such as Jupiter, Saturn, etc., so that the planet is large after processing? When recording without Barlow's lens, the planet is very small. So far I have tried it affocally via the mobile phone iPhone 7 Plus and eyepiece. I want to try the camera about ZWO 224 via Sharcap Planet record. I do not have EQ mounting. Will short 10 second videos be enough? The planet without EQ guidance quickly disappears from the field of view. Thank you very much for advice if it may be.
@@zdenatorzdenator2799 Without a tracking mount you are very limited, and you will find it difficult to even locate the planet in the small area of the field that a 224MC captures. This can be difficult even with a tracking mount. Using a barlow makes the image larger but makes the time before it drifts out of frame even less. Until you are able to track the planet (it could be an Alt-Az mount for video capture or an Eq) then "over the eyepiece" frames are the realistic limit.
Hi. Great video. Could you please talk about what settings you used on fire capture to get those great images with your ZWo camera please? I've got the same camera as you but have been struggling to get any good images as of yet. Thanks
As a couple of comments have noted, my pictures are not the best that the 127 can produce..., but here is what i do with Firecapture. Basically i select the planet icon as appropriate, centre the planet using the full pixel range, and then reduce the "ROI" to 640 x 480 once I'm sure the mount's tracking will keep it in the field. This allows the frame rate to go much higher than using the sensor's full area. Then I reduce the exposure fairly low on the slider and then increase the gain until the histogram colour with the highest % (red) is around 75%. The other colours will be less. Then start recording when I have tried to get the best focus. I stack and sharpen the pictures as i go, adjusting here and there to save capturing many GB of an mistake I've made. I do NOT profess to be a FireCapture expert, as I've only transitioned from Sharpcap recently, but the above is my basic method. Some nights the seeing is so bad that nothing will help, so persistence is needed.
@@JenhamsAstro Thank you very much. I will try your settings and see how I get on. Thanks again for your help
This aint the best those scopes could produce? Magnification isn't max? Or did I missed somethimg? Plus, isn't camera resolution distorting the image since it does seem the images are strecthed a lot on pc for that resolution
Hi Graham, I'm new to astronomy, just bought my first telescope, a Skywatcher 127 Maksutov with Goto Wifi AZ mount, 2 weeks ago. Thinking about getting a Barlow lens too, but which type/mark would you recommend? Or can you mention the specific Barlow you are using?
Hello Gerd, I use a Televue 2x barlow. There are many options and some of these cost as much as a scope! In general i would say don't buy a very cheap unit, and don't be tempted to go higher than 2x with a Maksutov. I've had my TV Barlow for years and it works well, I also have a Celestron XCEL 3x unit but i don't use it on my Maks. The other option is to buy a higher magnification eyepiece. As the field of view is already small with a Mak I might also recommend buying nothing extra at this stage, and instead become familiar with using the basic scope and mount. Maks at very high power can be frustrating scopes to use unless you have first found your target at lower power and then got the mount tracking accurately, so those skills are best mastered first. That's just my 2p though. I hope the weather is kind and that you enjoy the scope. Graham
@@JenhamsAstro Thank you so much Graham to take the time for your reply. Hope you can enjoy the conjunction! Here in Belgium it's not easy to see, bad weather and even more difficult to find a clear view of the SW horizon. Thanks again and congratulations on your channel with lots of useful info !
Very nice. I have the same mak127. I'm impressed with the mars pictures. Could you add some detail on your barlow and ADC please. Looking to pick up decent quality accessories. Thanks
Hi Martin, I use a Televue 2x barlow, which has been in my box of kit for years now. A couple of 3x units have joined it along the way but for my scope and camera combinations the 2x works better. 3x leads to over-sampling, so i gain nothing from it in the final image. I'd suggest checking this aspect if you are looking to go to 2.5x or 3x. A weak point of my TV barlow is that it has a single thumbscrew to tighten down on the long imaging train, and it isn't a shorty unit and hence doesn't fully engage in the 127's rear cell. I expect Baader offer better solutions to get a secure, "non-droop" line of optical elements? I wear glasses so visually I don't tend to push the magnification up too high, again favouring a quality 2x set-up. The ADC is from ZWO. I made a video on it. It's easy to use and quite affordable, and certainly helps when the planet you are after is not high in the sky. I hope this helps a little. Graham
@@JenhamsAstro Appreciate that thanks. Will check out that video. 👍
Found out some details??
Hey I have a question does the skymax 102 also have visual back threading to take in 2 inch diagonal? I believe skymax 127 have 2 inch visual back threading can you swap diagonals between the two?
Whats that yellow ring on the adjust knob?
Werner Radischnig It’s the lid from a jar of Marmite. It’s an easy way of improving the ability to get a fine focus. It looks odd but it does help. Clear skies, Graham
@@JenhamsAstro thx from austria, i´ll give it a try
Which is better, Maksutov 127 or Maksutov 102? Better is always ... Maksutov.
Hello sir. Please correct me if I am wrong, but the seeing would have a lot to do with the image quality, right? Are these telescopes usable for visual as well as imaging?
Hello Kevin, at high magnification the seeing has a large impact. This is very noticeable in the case of planets, but also when trying to split a double star. All Maks can be used for visual observation. Their long focal length and narrow field lends them best to higher power. They are great for close lunar study, globulars, doubles and planets, although for the latter the best results come from imaging.
Should I go for a 102 Mak or an 80 Short Tube as my first scope? I know they are completely different scopes for different purposes but all I care right now is learning. Not planning on doing astrophotography in the near future and I have access to rally dark skies.
Any advice is welcome!
You could also consider a Celestron Inspire / Explore 80/90/100 AZ for a first scope. You can use a mobile app to help you find things - never underestimate the need to locate an object before you can enjoy it!
Sub! Cool knowledge!
Hi, got a Q please. At 0:17 I can see the collimation screws on the 127mm but I dont see any on the 102mm. Same at the end pic, 4:07. Is it non collimatable because of the budget package, or is there a way to do it? Thanks.
Yes I think they excluded the option on the Starquest OTA to save cost. There is no alternative method I know of to align it, but thankfully Maks hold alignment well so it shouldn't be needed unless it takes a hard knock. Interestingly the more expensive version of the tube used in the Skymax 102 OTA does have collimation screws. In an ideal world I think it's good to have the facility, even on a Mak.
Is it possible to see the andromeda galaxy and ring nebula through the 127?
Mr1945pete The 127, like all Maks, has a small field of view and so the andromeda galaxy will not fit in the field. The ring nebula is a very good target though, as it is small and relatively bright.
Can the 127 be used with a SW EQ5 goto mount, for videoing the planets?
Yes an EQ5 would be fine for a 127.
Can you swap the diagonals between the two scopes? one is 1.25 another is 2 inch - is it possible - does the visual back threading allows it?
The supplied visual back and diagonals are the same ie 1.25” size for both, M48 thread for a DSLR. The 127 can be adapted to 2” though if you want, but personally I’m not convinced that the extra cost and weight makes sense for a Mak.
Can the 127 fit on any tripod ?? Also
The 127, like the 102 and 90, has a standard vixen dovetail bar which lets you attach it to most Astro mounts. The 127 weighs a fair bit more than the 102, so it needs sturdier mount.
I want to see the difference with the 7” maks... and why for nobody makes a 10” mak?
A 10" Mak's corrector plate would be a huge slab of glass. It'd make for a really front heavy telescope. Equalizing the temperature would be a long process too. These smaller Maks, have portability in mind. A 10" Mak would be just too heavy and unwieldy, to be comfortably portable. It'll give you a good workout though 🏋🔭😆.
@@AndyinMokum My 10” Meade SCT ain’t no lightweight, itself. The weight is not the issue because I can slide the scope in the mount until it balances. I love the much sharper detail and lack of distortion in my 5” mak... But I wish it had much more light coming in. And a 10” mak would have significantly longer focal length than a 10” SCT, wouldn’t it?
@@christopherpardell4418 Yeah more light is always a plus. You're right, a 10" Mak would be a long beastie. You'd get great resolution with it.
You've gotta give it to the Russians. When it comes to precision instruments, they design them to be sturdy. Dmitry Maksutov was a genius.
Would you recommend the 102mm mak for visual astronomy of planets?
Hi Bruno, personally I prefer my C90 but others really like the 102, so I cant answer definitively. I would say that visual on planets is unlikely to be amazing with any small scope. Video photography and stacking works wonders but there is no substitute for aperture and steady seeing for visual.
@@JenhamsAstro I have the 102, but the difference between this scope and my 90mm mak on the Moon and planets is negligible in my opinion. I'm seriously considering selling the 102 and buying the 127, which would be a big step up from the little big mak.
Everton Porter Hi Everton, I liked the 102s lightness but as per your experience the delta from the C90 was small. The 127 has taken me some time before I’ve seen that it’s results are distinctly better than the C90, but I can now say that they are. For planetary imaging the seeing is such a variable that it can mask the effect of the larger aperture. But all things being equal in this regard the 127 will show more detail than the C90. If your C90 is sharp like mine though I’d say the 127 won’t bowl you over on night one. But in time you will migrate to it. I have. I hope this helps. Graham
PS the 127 is quite a lot heavier!
That 102 is a cheapend out version. The original 102s had the collimation screws and the front cell.was more like the 127, flat on the sides
Certainly some cost saving on this model.
What tripod do u use for the 102
It came with a eq mount - there’s another video for this. But it’s very light and can fit on any sturdy camera tripod, or an Astro alt az mount like a Vixen Porta or Skywatcher AZ4/5.
@JenhamsAstro thank you for getting back to me so fast😊
Which one better celestron c90 or skymax az 102 ?
In use the 102 should slow slightly more than the C90, but the difference will be small. Both are made by the same company, Synta. One key difference other than aperture is the focal ratio. The C90's is longer, (f/13.9 vs f/12) which in my experience has meant it gives very good views.
Thank you.
This was not a real cat. This "cat" does not try to push telescope down from bench...
make if you could with the mak180
If i get hold of one I'll review it!
@@JenhamsAstro ok, thanks. I find one used celestron mak90 52268
Its a good telescope?
I like my C90 a lot - check out the videos on it.
@@JenhamsAstro thanksss
pause at 0:31 lol