My guess (up front) is that the Mak will suffer from lower contrast and lower image brightness, and that it will lose out on the 'nice' scale because of that. At f9 the refractor should be long enough that the design will deal with color fringes reasonably well.
I may have mentioned this before but I took out a 90mm achro and a 4 inch MAK. After a while looking at the Moon in both I took the MAK back inside cause. the cheap 90mm Orion achro was beating it.
@@lornaz1975 I don’t remember if he told me this so if he did, it could’ve been a long time ago, but thanks for sharing that again so your experience was pretty much what happened in this video
@@JoeJaguar Yeah they just can't compete with a refractor at least of similar aperture. Mirror scopes get better as they get bigger but as for refractors I can't imagine what those large D&G scopes must be like!
@@Vic-pz5oh I understand even though Mac gives you a nice image overall and ED version just give you a much wider view I always learn something new every time I do a test or comparison cause you just never know what you’re gonna get. Thanks for your opinion.
Joe, a test for you to do as a complement to this one that was very good. How many moons of Saturn can you see with them. I have a Bresser 127x1200 similar to this refractor and I see 5 moons of Saturn (Titan mag 8.7, Rhea 9.9, Tethys 10.5, Dione 10.7 and Iapetus 11.3). Here bortle 5. Hugs.
@@rodrigomm_astronomo with this location here at home I’m a zone eight so three zones worse so it would be harder to see the moons Three zones is a decent much better I was just trying to see the planet itself and how crisp the ring system looked the edge of the planet comparing to the background and any detail that I can see but thank you for your great comment I am sure your telescope is also a very nice one as well
@@janomacko5764 I agree the clouds of Jupiter would be a very good test as well. The building next-door blocks the view until it becomes much higher or unless I stay up much later.
@@supermario8416 I agree with your comments and I appreciate your comments. I actually did think the Mac would’ve been much more closer or probably would’ve been a tie, but I was surprised to see that the acro won
@@Hitzaponylife I purchased it from Alibaba. I believe you could also get it on AliExpress. I’m not sure if you can get that in Europe, but that’s where I got it from.
Great video! Well what did you think of the chromatic abberation in the refractor? Was it noticeable much at high power? Was there a brightness difference? I wonder how much the sky conditions has an effect on the Maksutov high power performance on Saturn here? They tend to need perfect skies to get the best from them at high power, but with refractors they cut through bad skies better. If you had perfect skies, maybe the results would have been closer? I say this because at the lower powers they were both a tie. But perfect skies are hard to come by thats for sure. Good job letting them cool down.
@@Astroturf100 the chromatic aberration was there. I definitely saw it wasn’t overpowering, but there are some people that just can’t deal with it if that’s the case of course maybe that’s not the best goal for them. I was guessing that it would be kind of like a tie and I probably wouldn’t see any difference at the medium and high power, but I definitely did see a difference. It was a noticeable difference. I guess you could be right that in different sky conditions things could be different but at least in the city and the sky conditions I had that’s the difference I saw
It would probably take a 150 Mak to beat the 127 Achromat. My C90 Mak was the equivalent to a 70mm refractor. My Meade 90mm F9 achromat easily beats a 90mm Mak. With a shorter focal length, the refractor can give wider fields of views. Nice comparison video.
@@robertsonsid thank you for the nice words and thank you for watching the video. Sometimes you never know how the video will go and that’s why I like doing them and a lot of people like watching them. Cheers.
@@jgcheak this one was made from the previous owner. It’s more of the homemade version. It does work but not perfect. I think buying a ready-made version would be more smoother. Gso makes then or amazon ebay or aliexpress also lacerta sells them
@@atiladudus3168 this is a tough call. It’s almost like you can use both. I think the sharpness of the Tele vue would be very hard to beat on the planets, the moons and double star splitting But an 8 inch SCT is also very big and portable for his size. So if you wanted more deep sky objects, I could see that coming in handy specially if portability was key. Only you can make the choice. Tell us what you end up getting.
My guess (up front) is that the Mak will suffer from lower contrast and lower image brightness, and that it will lose out on the 'nice' scale because of that. At f9 the refractor should be long enough that the design will deal with color fringes reasonably well.
@@amp2amp800 OK I appreciate the prediction and a lot of you guys have a lot of good points. Let’s see what happens.
That's about what I would expect. Personally, I cannot tolerate chromatic aberration.
@@tsulasbigadventures thanks for watching the video
I may have mentioned this before but I took out a 90mm achro and a 4 inch MAK. After a while looking at the Moon in both I took the MAK back inside cause. the cheap 90mm Orion achro was beating it.
@@lornaz1975 I don’t remember if he told me this so if he did, it could’ve been a long time ago, but thanks for sharing that again so your experience was pretty much what happened in this video
@@JoeJaguar Yeah they just can't compete with a refractor at least of similar aperture. Mirror scopes get better as they get bigger but as for refractors I can't imagine what those large D&G scopes must be like!
@ I’m sure they were good. Another name brand that I will be testing that would be similar to the DNG is the. Istar namebrand
@ I agree it’s a good telescope and a good price and not too big and not too heavy. Glad you enjoyed it.
Thanks for watching my video
thanks for the comparison !
@@manolismavrelis5854 you’re welcome and thanks for watching the video
I like my ed102 over my mak127 for planets but it's close.love these comparisons as I do it at home too😂.
@@Vic-pz5oh I understand even though Mac gives you a nice image overall and ED version just give you a much wider view
I always learn something new every time I do a test or comparison cause you just never know what you’re gonna get. Thanks for your opinion.
Very interesting video
@@3dfxvoodoocards6 thank you for watching the video
Joe, a test for you to do as a complement to this one that was very good. How many moons of Saturn can you see with them. I have a Bresser 127x1200 similar to this refractor and I see 5 moons of Saturn (Titan mag 8.7, Rhea 9.9, Tethys 10.5, Dione 10.7 and Iapetus 11.3). Here bortle 5. Hugs.
@@rodrigomm_astronomo with this location here at home I’m a zone eight so three zones worse so it would be harder to see the moons
Three zones is a decent much better
I was just trying to see the planet itself and how crisp the ring system looked the edge of the planet comparing to the background and any detail that I can see but thank you for your great comment
I am sure your telescope is also a very nice one as well
Saturn and Moon are great test for sharpness. Wen it comes contrast, the ultimate test is cloud bands on Jupiter.
@@janomacko5764 I agree the clouds of Jupiter would be a very good test as well. The building next-door blocks the view until it becomes much higher or unless I stay up much later.
And on DSO the 127 mm f9.3 achromat will also be better than the same size Mak. The only problem - it’s size… it’s gigantic.
@@supermario8416 I agree with your comments and I appreciate your comments. I actually did think the Mac would’ve been much more closer or probably would’ve been a tie, but I was surprised to see that the acro won
I thought the 127 mm achromat will lose to the 127 mm Mak at high magnification over 150x. Looks like I was wrong.
@@BurningFlame1999 I thought it was gonna be at least a tie is what I thought, but the acro came on top
Joe from where did you purchase 2 years ago the Maxvision 127/1200 mm achromat ? I cannot find Maxvision telescopes for sale in Europe.
@@Hitzaponylife I purchased it from Alibaba. I believe you could also get it on AliExpress. I’m not sure if you can get that in Europe, but that’s where I got it from.
Great video! Well what did you think of the chromatic abberation in the refractor? Was it noticeable much at high power? Was there a brightness difference? I wonder how much the sky conditions has an effect on the Maksutov high power performance on Saturn here? They tend to need perfect skies to get the best from them at high power, but with refractors they cut through bad skies better. If you had perfect skies, maybe the results would have been closer? I say this because at the lower powers they were both a tie. But perfect skies are hard to come by thats for sure. Good job letting them cool down.
@@Astroturf100 the chromatic aberration was there. I definitely saw it wasn’t overpowering, but there are some people that just can’t deal with it if that’s the case of course maybe that’s not the best goal for them.
I was guessing that it would be kind of like a tie and I probably wouldn’t see any difference at the medium and high power, but I definitely did see a difference. It was a noticeable difference.
I guess you could be right that in different sky conditions things could be different but at least in the city and the sky conditions I had that’s the difference I saw
It would probably take a 150 Mak to beat the 127 Achromat. My C90 Mak was the equivalent to a 70mm refractor. My Meade 90mm F9 achromat easily beats a 90mm Mak. With a shorter focal length, the refractor can give wider fields of views. Nice comparison video.
@@robertsonsid thank you for the nice words and thank you for watching the video. Sometimes you never know how the video will go and that’s why I like doing them and a lot of people like watching them. Cheers.
Where can I get one of those precision focuser add on for my Meade Acro?
@@jgcheak this one was made from the previous owner. It’s more of the homemade version.
It does work but not perfect. I think buying a ready-made version would be more smoother.
Gso makes then or amazon ebay or aliexpress also lacerta sells them
Guys televue 127mm is vs celestron C8. Cant make the decision. 😂
Was surprised but both performed the same, guess was the atmosphere
@@atiladudus3168 this is a tough call. It’s almost like you can use both. I think the sharpness of the Tele vue would be very hard to beat on the planets, the moons and double star splitting
But an 8 inch SCT is also very big and portable for his size. So if you wanted more deep sky objects, I could see that coming in handy specially if portability was key.
Only you can make the choice. Tell us what you end up getting.