MAKSUTOV-CASSEGRAIN TELESCOPES: ARE THEY ANY GOOD?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 чер 2022
- I've never owned a Maksutov-Cassegrain telescope but in this video I tried one out. I discuss the differences between it and a Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope. Then I take it out at night and compare the visual experience of using a Maksutov-Cassegrain telescope toa refractor telescope of the same aperture, in this case both six inches. I end by concluding with my impressions of Maksutov-Cassegrain telescopes, their strengths and weaknesses and whether I would recommend one.
lovely, not only to see an expert with the subject and the equipment, but the genuine passion for the sky at night and all its wonders ;) 👍
Thank you so much!
@@tsulasbigadventures welcome 👍😁
I just subscribed to you after watching only part of a couple of your videos. You are obviously very knowledgeable in astronomy, but you speak in a way that even someone with my limited skills can understand. Thank you.
Thank you.
Loving your channel, Tsula. Best wishes from Scotland.
Thank you! My siblings just got back from a trip to Scotland. I didn't go and I've never been but it sure looks pretty. They went to a dark sky site to see the aurora but it was cloudy.
You did a great job explaining the differences between these scopes.
Thank you!
I have that exact 150mm Orion Mat-Cass as my first (and right now only) telescope. I live in suburbs in Germany and I agree it is great for planetary viewing. I replaced all the kit eyepieces with better ones and upgraded the diagonal to a dialectric which definitely helps. Thank you for your review and I am envious of your location, it looks fantastic in the background!
Thank you! Do you mind if I ask you about which diagonal you got? I want to replace mine.
Great! I have a celestron nextar 90mak, what eyepieces do You have now?
@@themusiclovercolombia5708 I have 32mm, 27mm Televue and also a 3x Televue barlow plus Explore Scientific 16mm and 10mm Orion and 11 mm Televue Plossl and an old Orion 6mm Plossl. Oh and a fantastic 7mm Nagler that I love.
Can you see Jupiter's belts and Saturn rings as separate?
@@pawelekodrowaz6199 Absolutely yes.
Thanks Tsula great video and valuable mak-cass/6" frac comparison. I've built a 12" hexapod dob and a 5" frac using an iStar lens. I'm researching mak.casses now and looking out for a skywatcher 180. Thanks for sharing shear joy at observing. It's why we look up! Love from Oz.
Thank you! Wow that's impressive that you made those two telescopes.
Wonderful video! I have the Orion Mak Cass that you are comparing your beautiful refractor and I enjoy it very much. I love your enthusiasm!
Thank you. I love that Orion Mak-Cass. It's too bad Orion discontinued it.
excellent. your honesty is refreshing.
Thank you!
Good job on not getting tongue tied between the two designs. I have got to say I'm in love with that Sky Watcher Evo on that EQ6. I have been an amateur astronomer for 10 years now. I don't have a lot compared to you. However I guarantee I have used my a EQ1with a 80mm refractor more than most people use their several thousand dollar setups. I have pushed that EQ1 to the max and been able to capture images that people can't believe with that lowly equipment. Recently I saved up and bought something I had been wanting for 7 years. A CG4 mount. I know, I know it's nothing comparable to other EQ mounts. To me though it's a huge upgrade. I luckily found a used one that someone took very good care of for $250. I could finally afford a mount that my 80mm refractor deserved. I bought a Celestron Power Seeker 80EQ back in 2013 with what little money I had to spare. This is only my second telescope I have ever owned. My Grandmother bought me a Tasco 60mm on a ALT/AZ back in the 90s for Christmas. I recall the first time I viewed the moon. I was astounded and looking through the eyepiece I had a feeling that I could reach out and touch the moon. I don't remember what eyepiece it came with but it was enough to give me views I'll never forget. The magic of seeing Saturn even through such a small scope is indescribable. Here I am nearly 25 years later with a scope that's really not much larger. I have heavily upgraded my Celestron Power Seeker 80 though. Slowly but surely I replaced everything on the optical tube except the lens. First I ditched the finder scope for a 8x40 and I'm so glad I chose that size as it has made finding objects so much easier. After adding a quality finder I ditched the included diagonal for a Dielectric coated one. Let me say that made a huge difference in clarity. Next was upgrading the eyepieces to some common mid quality plossls. Lastly I had to get rid of that nasty rack and pinion focuser. I found me a good 2" GAP crayford style focuser for a reasonable $120. Keep in mind the telescope with the included mount was around $140 back in 2013. At that point I had more money in the rear of my telescope then I had in the original purchase (around $300 at that point). I recently was gifted an old Canon DSLR and that really changed things for me. I was pushing that poor little EQ1 to the max and it was overloaded. I had to improvise and make a heavier counter weight which helped some but I was really over the mounts weight limit at that point. The gifted DSLR is what led me to keeping my eye out for a better mount. To say that I was ecstatic when I found an affordable CG4 is an understatement. I was thrilled beyond belief once I got that mount home last week. Since I had purchased a sidereal motor drive for the EQ1 I had my fingers crossed that I would not have to buy another one for the CG4. People told me there is no way that single axis cheap Logic Drive would fit a CG4. Well one washer from the good ole Home Depot later I had a motor drive mounted for my Right Ascension. Sure the motor drive is a bit finicky but the 400mah 9 volt I bought is more than sufficient to drive the motor for several nights of imaging before needing a recharge. I'm looking forward to being able to take much longer exposures. I could get 25 second exposures with the EQ1 but it was extremely difficult getting a good polar alignment with it. So far the skies have been cloudy of course but I'm patiently awaiting a night where I will have clear skies for several hours. I'm very use to staying out all night and even doing long sessions in temps below 20°f many times. One tip for winter sessions is those Hot Hands products. They even make them for your socks now as the feet are the first thing to freeze in cold weather. I usually put a couple of the regular ones in my eyepiece case to keep them from frosting and or dewing. Funny thing I do in winter is wrap my refractor in Ace Bandages. It really helps keep the objective lens from frosting if you are unable to afford heaters for a telescope. Well that about sums up where I am in my journey of viewing the heavens. Best wishes and clear skies.
Thank you. My father had a Tasco refractor when I was a kid. I'm sure it was terrible because I did not even remember it until my sister reminded me about it. My first telescope was this cheap 114mm reflector on a wobbly EQ mount. I have always been mostly interested in visual astronomy. How are you able to get those pictures with the EQ1 mount? By adding a clock drive to it? That's an interesting story of your journey. Thanks for sharing.
@@tsulasbigadventuresIn fact some of the old Tasco refractors were made in Japan by Vixen and were optically sound. Alas all the superceding ones were garbage by comparison.
@@Astronurd I think my father's old Tasco was one of the latter. But I never owned one myself. My first telescope was a terrible Meade ETX 4" or 4.5", I can't remember. I just remember thinking it was not a very good telescope other than the fact that it fit in a backpack and I could take it on a plane.
When you put a modern eyepiece on a Tasco 60mm (made in Japan versions) the scope starts to shine.
Thank you for this - sounds much like my sessions at night. In visual mode, I can never see small galaxies other than the large and small Magellan Clouds, and Omega Centauri. Good to hear the Maksutov did so well. I only have a 6" RC on an HEQ5 Pro.
When I took it on my camping trip to a Bortle 1 site it did very well. I looked at many deep sky objects and was very impressed. I wish I had a 6" SCT to compare it to. I think that would be interesting.
Loving your sense of humor Tsula! Seems these Maksutovs would be ideal travel telescopes. I bought a TSA120 for the lightness and image quality but might have considered this.
Thank you, Martin! We sure had fun with it on our camping trip this summer.
Great comparison video Tsula. Ive seen a few videos especially from Garnett O'Leary's channel on these scopes which he loves. For planetary/lunar they look killer little scopes!
Thanks. Yeah, and so portable too.
love your enthusiasm!
Thanks, Andre!
Tsula, you are adorable. 💖 I love this, and you! Wonderful. More, more.
Daniel, thank you so much. That is so kind of you to say.
Thanks. Great comparison. Thinking of getting a small maksutov for galaxy season. This helped a lot.
I'm glad it was helpful to you. Orion now sells the Mak-Cass 150 as an optical tube only. It's a great little telescope and will work fine on any mount.
Thanks! That was very informative and interesting.
Thank you!
Great video. What a good comparison. You know your stuff and now so do I a little bit!
Thank you!
thank you for this comparison, Tsula.
Thank you for watching.
What a fabulous comparison, I have a little Skywatcher Skymax 127mm ( 120mm actual) and love it. I can see the ring nebular in my Bortle 6 skies over here in Preston UK, more please as I really like your visual UA-cam reports, you have my subscription. 🙂
Guy: Thank you! I really appreciate your kind words. More coming soon!
Great presentation, thanks.
Thank you!
It's my first telescope, so I don't really have anything to compare it to, but I love my little Maksutov :)
It's just a 5" but the compact size meant that when I got a short window, I could just grab it and run outside.
Had only a few hours total when it didn't rain, so far, but I just sat there staring at Jupiter and Saturn. The Moon is a treat too!
I'll try later for some brighter DSO targets when I get the chance to do so; that's interesting to hear it didn't do too shabby.
Great video, thanks.
Thank you. Yes, I love the portability of it. It excels at the moon and planets but I thought it worked out fine on the brighter DSOs.
Nice report! I love Maks! Sooner or later I will break down and get another (last!) scope, the 180mm Skywatcher Mak or maybe if I can find one, the old 7" Meade. At my age comfort has become as important as all other factors!
Thank you. Your "last" scope -- that's funny. I hear you about comfort. The second thing I look for in a telescope after, how good are the optics, is how much does it weigh.
Thank you for this adventure.
You're welcome. Thank you for watching.
Super cool and informative videos
Thank you so much.
I believe it’s a very underrated design. I love mine. Great video.
Thank you. I had a wonderful time with it in the Bortle 1.
Awesome Video!
Thank you!
i really like you channel; you are very informative and knowledgeable. Ive just purchased a Russian Intes 6IN Maksutov! I am in the UK BTW
Thank you! I just looked up your Intes 6" and read a review. It sounds like a nice telescope.
Hi Tsula, really interesting video, thank you! I'm a relative new astrophotographer and have an 5" SCT for DSO imaging that works really well with a corrector/reducer. It brings the scope down from 1250mm FL f/10 to ~900mm f/6.3. I think a Cassegrain scope with a corrector/reducer are one of the best combinations that provides you with lots of flexibility.
I have not tried it yet for astrophotography because I have the refractor for that and it seems like the forks on the cassegrains are really susceptible to any kind of wind. But I will give it a try soon. Thank you.
Which reducer do you use please?
Terrible vignetting!
Very nice refractor! The Meade Cass looks special too! The Orion likely would also provide good viewing, even though it is the smallest of the three. I would say that you have some very nice telescopes, and I’m a bit jealous, ha!
Thank you. Thank you. The Orion is an awesome telescope but now that I have that 12" Meade I can't peal my eyes away from it except it's not that great on big wide field DSOs. For example the Pleiades won't even fit and the Dumbbell takes up the entire field of view. So there is still a need for it and of course the 12" is in no way portable.
I have a small Mak and I love it. It does what I need it to do. My true love has always been with Big Dobsonians scopes.
Me too but it wouldn't fit in the car or I would have taken it on my camping trip.
Ive always fancied a Meade ETX 90 or 125. Even though I have a gorgeous Meade 10" LX50. I am a huge fan of the moon and getting the LX50 out required a huge chunk of set up and tear down time. So, I found a great deal on an ETX 90 on Ebay. Well actually three great deals. Two are the original style with RA only drives and the third with the Autostar controller. My first night out with the two RA only models was astounding. I set up the tripod wedge using only apps on my Iphone. The tracking kept the moon in the FOV for at least 20 minutes. The views of the moon with a 26mm Super Plossl were very sharp and clear.
I havent had the opportunity to use the Scope with the Autostar yet but the optics appear to be just as crisp as the other two.
Those little ETX scopes take about 2 minutes to set up as opposed to the 45-60 minutes it takes to set up the big gun. Of course the LX performance is "out of this world"..... no pun intended.
Hail to the small and mighty! I can now observe whenever the mood strikes.
I had an ETX 90 years ago and stupidly gave it to my niece's husband and he claims the wind blew it over even though I used to put it in a backpack and take it on a plane to the desert many times with no problems. Oh well. I have the 12" now and yes it's a beast but fortunately I only have to wheel it out to the drive way a ways. Otherwise it would be too much work to use it.
My favorite. Small, lightweight, good magnification & perfect optics. My Meade 5" ETX125 always seemed to perform better than my Meade 8" LX90! An f5 ED80 APO refractor is the perfect travel companion for a Maksutov.
Better than your Meade 8"? That's pretty impressive.
@@tsulasbigadventures Meade used Grade A BK7 glass. Shame they don't make the 7" anymore it is legendary. Star clusters look amazing through a Meade Maksutov. 0.63x focal reducer should work too.
@@sang3Eta My Mak is excellent on star clusters too. I will look into a focal reducer for it. Thanks.
I believe these are the absolute best telescopes. Highly underrated because many people have not had an opportunity to use one.
I love mine.
Thank you Tsula for the nice review. I wanted to ask here if one can view also terrestrial with this type of Telescopes (macsutov-cass) such as wild life etc. or will need also a 90* diagonal prism as with most of the Refractor telescopes. Thank you
It is like other telescopes with a diagonal and will show a mirror image view. Baader makes a high quality prism diagonal but you might also need an adapter to make it fit into a Mak-Cass. Or you can just look at a mirror image with it.
I've got a 127 mak f15 and absolutely love it. Portable as all get out and clear vivid views. My brother has a c6r refractor and its great.... but it huge (takes a pickup truck bed) and then there's also the mount and tripod to consider with its size and wieght and leverage that long tube puts on everything its bigger to.
I forgot about the C6R. If I could find a used one in good shape I would buy one for myself. I looked at them years ago, never had the money to afford one. One thing I always thought was the fact it's a F/8 and being a achromat I figure the chromatic aberration is terrible. Have you viewed through your brothers? How noticeable is the chromatic aberration on planets?
@@snakepliskin3530 the CA isn't horrible as long as you keep the mag lower. Planetary is noticeable but tolerable for us the moon on the other hand if you push for crators especially if you follow the terminator gets bad
Exactly. if I could have made that 6" refractor and mount fit in my car with all the camping gear I would have gladly taken it but it's just too darn big.
First video of yours I’ve seen. I thought you were awesome, and had me thinking I could love a 6” mak. Then you had to bring the 12” sct into it! 🤨
I subscribed anyway🙂
i love my 7in mak its great for imaging small targets. i even put a focal reducer in mine and knock it down to about 1700mm focal lenght really enjoy that scope
7" Mak is a good size but not many companies make a Mak that size.
@@tsulasbigadventures celestron makes a real good 7inch mak with a 2700mm fl at f15. its a planet killer
Great life work.
Thanks you.
I had to add a pier extension to my eq6 r pro so I could observe through my 6 inch refractor with crawling on the ground. It's a must, great investment.
I need to look into that because the day will come when my old body won't be able to get on the ground like that. Thanks for the suggestion.
Another nice video. I am leaning to a 4 inch Maksutov for portability. I will still be able to see the rings of Saturn, right. Are there any big differences in the main stream brands, Orion, Skywatcher, Celestron, etc. I will be using it for viewing, not astrophotgraphy. Many thanks.
Thank you. Yes, you will be able to see the rings of Saturn with a 4" Mak. You will see Saturn and all the planets best when the seeing is nice and steady allowing you to increase your magnification to the maximum useful magnification. I own an Orion 6" Mak and I can speak for my Orion 6" Mak and say that I am very pleased with it. I have heard others say that the Skywatcher Mak also performs well. On a side note concerning Saturn, it will be at opposition on August 26, 2023. So, that is the best day to view it. Also Saturn's rings are not always in a favorable position for viewing from earth. This year you can still see them but next year they will be almost edge on and not easily discernible. Anyway, I think you would be happy with an Orion or Skywatcher. I don't know anyone who owns a Celestron Mak. So, I don't know how they are. I hope that helps.
I recently got a 5 inch mak-cassegrain. I also own an 8" newtonian, and I can confidently say that the little telescope has a better image of all the planets than the big reflector. I live in Hungary close to Budapest (the capital) so I get a healty level of light pollution, so observing DSO is quite hard, but the 8 inch telescope can collect enough light to see even galaxies, while with the mak, you can't really see anything faither than birght planetary nebulas, or some globular culsters. Nice comperasion video, sometime in the future I may also buy a similar refractor to yours.
Thank you. I bet that the Mak would not be able to compete with my refractor if I had had more time to find something really challenging.
The reason why it has better clarity of image is due to spherical aberations , and those you get from fast mirrors , yours is probably F4 or 5 , while this Catadioptric is F10 , cant compare F5 with F10. If you take any lens and compare it against it self , say F2 to f5 , F5 would be sharper , this is what we are talking about , Fast light is bent light , you have to bend it more , if you do that , aberrations show up lot more . Hence Fast Scopes need special mirrors and correctors to fix that . F10s dont .
What you can do is obstruct the aperture , and make your F5 in to F10 , and you will get sharper image ,
@@dedskin1 Thank you. You're correct. The fast scopes will show every little error but I went to the darkest place on earth. Any scope or just naked eye would have been and was spectacular.
@@tsulasbigadventures Dark skys are no prerequisite to see something . You know john Dobson the great John . He used to make huge scopes , went to darkest places on Earth, spent months looking at the moon , knows craters by name, knows where NASA landed :) sure he does .
And he never saw that those craters are not Circles but Hexagons .
While i saw it from my backyard in city with 4 inch scope .
Eyes are very deceiving because we dont see with eyes , but with inner eye . We see one picture not 2 .
So people see what they think they see .
And that is how John spent all his life looking and he never saw .
And that is very sad , to me very sad , so sad im sad even thinking about it .
drive.google.com/file/d/1mwOjfZy5fzX0esarSWA-2VQGkp-Q_fZT/view?usp=sharing
There is lots more to see and it doesnt take dark skys , its all there
You can't compare an F11/12 which is what your Mak will be unless it's the Explore Scientific/Bresser Mak in which case it would be F15 with an F6 8" dobsonian. The dob will be much brighter therefore better on dim targets. I own the 7" (180mm) Maksutov and it beats my 8" dobsonian on the planets and lunar. Remember that no single telescope will do it all.
Thanks for an Awesome and very comprehensive comparison between these two scopes. I've often wondered how a Mak-Cass would stack up. Excellent choice of dso's. I've got an old 8" Meade, but wish I had that 6" instead as my primary interest has shifted to planet astro photography. I just wonder would a hood or dew shield increase contrast as it does on smaller catadioptric camera lenses, or would that really only be the case in the daytime?
Thanks, TK. I had never thought about using the dew shield for increased contrast. I actually don't have a dew shield for the Mak-Cass yet because it was so dry last summer but I will need to get one. Thanks for reminding me! When I get one I'll have to experiment and see if it increases the contrast in a noticeable way.
@@tsulasbigadventures This was my first of your videos, and I was prompted to subscribe. Thanks for the great content! I'm looking forward to more.
Tim
@@TK-th9vu Thank you, Tim!
I use a 5" Maksutov to image and broadcast live. If you have a good polar alignment, they can do a pretty decent job on brighter DSOs. As far as solar system obects go, the 5" easily keeps up with an 8SE or equivalent SCT.
I noticed that Orion is now carrying a 180mm Mak-Cass. I know it would be a bomb on DSOs. I am so tempted!
I have the same Mak. Even here is light polluted Brooklyn, New York, I get great views of the Moon and planets.
I hope you turned it to Jupiter on Monday to see Jupiter at opposition and that you had clear skies.
I have a Meade ETX125 that I take off the fork now and then. Its a nice little scope, very good optics, but it just never seems to make it out as my SCTs, dobs and APOs tend do everything I want better... I might sell it and pick up a nice little 6" Mak like you got, and see if it can be my little planet killer.
Well, just the aperture increase alone will make the 6" Mak far superior to your ETX125.
Exactly video i was looking for, never used one, to see if I should get one?
I love mine but I own several telescopes to use for different situations. Buying a telescope is such a personal decision. It depends on your goals. I think six inches is a good size; you can see a lot with that size telescope. This telescope is very portable. So, you can take it out to a dark sky site very easily and travel with it. Now Orion is offering this same telescope in 180mm that I think would be an awesome telescope to have. I don't think you will regret getting either one. I hope that helps. I recently made a video all about factors affecting you can see in a telescope that might help you decide. Here is the link if you are interested. ua-cam.com/video/R3WKxSYoOAA/v-deo.html
I have an older C6-N reflector F5 scope and I had the mirrors sent to Optic Labs for their free test and my mirror they said was outstanding for a mass produced mirror. I had them re-aluminize the mirrors to 96% reflectivity or "Enhanced" with a quartz/titanium protective coating. I cannot believe how sharp everything looks after they did a minor "reconfigure" of my primary. Everything is like a sharp focused picture. Saturn is like a mini-Hubble pic.
I got a really good view of C-80 or the Omega Centauri Cluster here in Southern New Mexico before it went down. I live at 32 degrees latitude so the Centaurus Constellation stars set early.
That's impressive for such an old telescope. And I bet at 32 degrees latitude where you are it gets darker much earlier than here. It didn't get dark last night until 11:00 pm. I got up at 4:00 am to look at the planetary line up and it was already light again.
@@tsulasbigadventures Holy Cow! That isn't good for viewing the Planet Parade as I call it. It gets dark at 9:30pm and Mercury rises at 4:45am or thereabouts and while waiting I look at the Pleiades.
Since my tripod and mount are manual with hand controls I look up the rise time for Uranus and aim where it rises is one easy way to find it.
I use my most powerful planetary eyepiece an ED 3.2mm with a 1.3x to 1.5x lens screwed on from a 2x Celestron Barlow gives me around 330x magnification and acquired a good view of a tiny Uranus.
It was still with no wind and near perfect for viewing in Bortle 2 skies only 30 miles from home.
@@MountainFisher That sounds fantastic. I like it better when the planets make an evening appearance like last year.
@@tsulasbigadventures They will, Mars and Jupiter will be in opposition this Fall/Winter, December for Mars and 26th of September for Jupiter. They are getting closer everyday. edit; Saturn went into retrograde If I'm not mistaken.
@@tsulasbigadventures Can you see any of Centaurus constellation's stars at all? What is your latitude?
My only mak is a Celestron C90 and I love that thing. I am looking at the Explore Scientific 152mm mak but haven't pulled the trigger yet.
That's a good size. I love my 150mm Mak. It's so nice to have a 150mm telescope that doesn't break your back assembling. And I am very impressed with the optics too.
@Tsula's Big Adventures that's a big one for me. I injured my back pretty bad. I'm in my 40s but my back is in its 80s. Always wanted a nice 12in Cass too but it's off the table now.
@@aaronstewart5863 I hear ya. I keep my 12" SCT on a JMI Wheeley Bar and pull it out of the garage when I want to use it. if I had to lift it every time my back would be wrecked too.
Hi Tsula. Your Maksutov can track very well. Did you select your tracking rate. After doing your star alignment and selecting a target it should then track very well.
I feel certain it was set to sidereal rate. I'll have a look at that but it may have just been due to not levelling it that night because on subsequent nights it seemed to track better. It's a shame Orion no longer carries this telescope. Now they only have 90mm Maks which is too small in my opinion.
@@tsulasbigadventures
Yes leveling is crucial with the alt/Az mount. Skywatcher USA still sell the full range of Maksutov scopes. They are the exact same telescope made in the same factory but with a different paint job. I just bought a 150 Skywatcher Maksutov OTA. I fitted an electric focuser immediately which is fantastic for fine focus. I also use a Baader 2” diagonal.
@@Astronurd I have been taking better care with the leveling and had excellent tracking since then. Who makes the electric focuser you bought?
I have had all my electric focusers custom made for me from a guy in Portugal. He is a wizard with a 3D printer and supplies the entire kit which comprises of the bracket, electric motor and speed/direction controller, drive belt and screws. For our 150 Maksutovs It cost me £109 and that includes tracked postage. I received mine in the UK in just 4 days. I can give you a link to his UA-cam channel and contact information. Let me know. Clear skies Tsula. The price even includes PayPal fees.
Picked up a rumak-cass just a week ago. Its supposed to be F/12, but the secondary is not just a silvered spot on the back of the corrector lens, and instead its an actual separate mirror adhered to the back of the glass. Its supposed to be one of the best 6" maksutovs you can get without getting a custom built one. On paper, its design is supposed to be the most naturally flat image you can get, with relatively high contrast compared to other centrally obstructed designs.
Sounds like a fine instrument. I bet yours cost significantly more than the Orion Mak-Cass I have.
@@tsulasbigadventures It actually costs about the same because it comes with less stuff in the box. You don't get any eyepieces and the finder scope is significantly worse as far as I know. Considering i'll be doing everything digitally, I wont need many of these parts.
@@projectnemesi5950 OK. That makes sense. I think Orion likes to include everything you need to get started because that is a big appeal to many people. I immediately replaced the diagonal and eyepieces that it came with because they were low quality.
@@tsulasbigadventures One test I will do is trying to see if there are weird diffraction rings around stars, as that is the only issue I have heard of from a couple of people, and probably is just related to "pinched optics". In that case, one can just loosen the corrector cell or mirror cell. Have not heard that too often, though.
They say Dmitry Maksutov made his telescope back in 1940 with an idea to make a good compact telescope that is easy to use for school in astronomy classes. It had a small tube 10cm diamete and 18 cm length, x70 and a short az mount.
Well, he had a great idea. This little telescope has great optics in a very compact and lightweight package.
A Bortle 1..Im Sooo Jelly,Great Scopes,and Your Evostar,I Have A Mak90 And A 6se,Also A 114LCM,Explore Scientific 102/1000,The Evostar72ed With The Evoguide,Love That Big Refractor Tho..Thats Purty,Im In A Bortle 4,Cant Complain Much,Great Video,Clear Skies
Hello and thank you! Well, where I am in this video is Bortle 3 and it's going to be a Bortle 4 for sure in five years due to extensive development going on in Montana but I will take advantage of these great skies here while I can with my telescopes. I love that Evostar refractor; the views are so crisp and contrasty. Take care.
What do prefer reflector, sct,mak or a refractor telescope. I’m looking to get my first telescope that will grow with me without having to buy another. $1000 budget or less.
Pete: It's a very personal choice and will also depend on how much you can lift, whether you intend to take it to dark sky sites or just use in your backyard, and most of all how dark are the skies where you will primarily observe. A lot of aperture will certainly allow you to see more things but if the sky is polluted it will really hamper any telescope you buy. I always tell beginners their first telescope should be a Dobsonian becuase you get a a lot of aperture for a fraction of the cost of a refractor or Schmidt-Cassegrain. But they are bulky. I bought a 6" refractor during the pandemic because I couldn't find anything smaller but honestly that telescope is too heavy, long, and big. Refractors are great but once you get over 4.5 inches they become too heavy in my opinion unless you intend to use it solely at home or have a home observatory. Refractors are wonderful telescopes and are known for having sharp crisp contrasty views. But you pay for having and they are expensive. Maksutov-Cassegrains have sharp images too and are much cheaper but have their drawbacks in that they have a narrow field of view and you can only get on up to 6 inches. An 8" Dobsonian would be a good choice for a first telescope. Another good choice for an all around telescoe would be a Schmidt-Cassegrain but you have to factor in that you will need a mount as well. It will cost much more than a reflector. To stay under $1000 would be hard with a refractor because not only are they expensive but you will need to buy a mount as well but a 90mm Refractor is a wonderful and versatile telescope. However, you probably won't be able to stay under $1000. So, I would say a Maksutov-Cassegrain would be a good choice or a Dobsonian. I hope that helps but really keep in mind that your observation site has a lot to do with it. A lot of people mistakenly believe that just because they get a big aperture telescope they will see a lot from a light polluted area without considering that light pollution will crush the light gathering capability of any telescope.
Seems like you need to get an alt az mount for your refractor :) I am planning to do the same. I have a Skywatcher AZ EQ 6 on back order. I'm hoping to mount a StellarVue refractor on it. I've also been thinking about a Skywatcher Maksutov Newtonian 190. Have you ever looked through one of those? I haven't but they sound an amazing telescope. Clear skies!
I actually ordered a Primalucelab Pier for my 6" refractor but it was on back order as well. My big refractor has been banging into the tripod leg lately. I looked into that Skywatcher AZ EQ mount. It sounds like a great mount but I think once this pier comes it will resolve my issues of having to get on the ground at times and the crashing into the leg. I have never heard of a 190 Maksutov Newtonian but I saw that Stellarvue is now carrying a 180 refractor! That thing must be a beast. I don't know how you would lift it. Lifting my 6 inch is hard enough. Take care.
@@tsulasbigadventures
Hi Michelle
Yes, those big refractors are very desirable but one has to be practical in how it would be mounted ( and paid for ;) ) I've never actually owned a refractor, but would love to. I'd love a Stellarvue, I juist really like that company's ethos and skill they use in production.
Take care and keep up the amazing work with your videoa, I love watching all of them :)
@@tsulasbigadventures I also wantedc one of those 16" Meade fork mounted SCTs wen they still made them! One would need a crane to move that thing! Luckily for some of my larger scopes I use Scope Buggys. I saw that your 12" Meade was on wheels.
@@HollomanUFOLanding Thank you. I appreciate it.
@@HollomanUFOLanding Yes, if I didn't have that 12" on the JMI Wheeley Bar it would be very difficult for me to get it outside and on that little center post each time. It's not ideal but at least with the Wheeley Bar all I have to do is pull it out and I'm ready to use it in five minutes. That way it gets much more use than my 6" refractor. Thank you again.
Maybe the only scope that i really miss was my Meade 7"f15 UHTC OTA. Its wasnt too heavy maybe 22 lbs. BUT the cooldown time was the downfall. It even had a air-intake and a built in fan and still took 2 hrs for great view but 3 hrs for amazing views. equal to a 6" apo. I think my choice is now a large ed or apo
That's a long time to wait for cool down. I sometimes wish I could find a 7" Meade Mak but that 6" Apo has given me some wonderful views. What happened to your Meade 7"?
@@tsulasbigadventures going from the 6 inch to the 7 inch is a big difference in size and weight and cool downtime
So actually, I will, tell Ppl go for the five or 6 inch most likely after that problematic
I sold it, but that’s the only one I regret as it was a sharp as a 6 inch refractor so even though I miss it, I probably would use a 6 inch fracture now over a 7 inch Mac
@@JoeJaguar OK. Good to know. I'm happy with my 6" Mak and my 6" Refractor but that refractor is a beast to put on the mount.
@@tsulasbigadventures it is a bit long but it’s not too heavy. I believe it’s about 22 pounds which is decent I guess.
I use a plastic black eye patch on one eye ok I may look like a pirate but it means I can keep both eyes open and it give you a sort of bino vision your brain makes the image appear in the eye patch. It’s also more relaxing
I have never tried that but I just bought an eye patch to put over my viewing eye during the day before I again attempt to see the Horsehead Nebula this winter. So, I will try out the eyepatch while viewing to see if it helps. Thank you for the suggestion.
what are the two specific telescopes that you are comparing?
Orion Star Seeker IV 150mm Maksutov-Cassegrain and Skywatcher Evostar 150mm ED refractor.
And if you want to compare the 2 telescopes on double stars, use these stars under high power.
36 And Separation 1.0" ,,, 32 Ori Separation 1.1" ,,, or ζ Cnc Separation 0.9"
The moon look awesome in most astronomical telescopes, but if you want to compare
telescopes, count the number of small craters you can see inside the Plato or the Archimedes crater and see how sharp they look like.
The moon was coming up and washing everything out by the time I looked at Albireo but I will keep that in mind next time I compare two telescopes on a double star. Also those constellations were not visible from my location, date, and time of making this video.
@@msroper5287 Interesting information, normally laminar air is required. But when we have high-pressure in southern part of Norway we can completely resolve double stars less than 1" using telescope up to 10" (I have an old 10" f/10 LX3 Meade + a new 7" f/15 Skywatcher Mak.).
0.7" is obvious resolved with the 7". So called image motion is present. And I think the "old" lady loves these discussions.
Mak,s are very underrated
After having tried it out I would have to agree.
Is there a link to this particular telescope?
Hi. Unfortunately, Orion discontinued this great little telescope. They were manufacturing it at the Synta Factory in China and after Orion sued Celestron for price fixing and settled the lawsuit with them (Celestron is owned by Synta Technologies), it seems Orion moved all their operations out of the Synta factory. Since Orion acquired Meade they are more focused on the Meade line of Maksutov-Cassegrains. Orion currently offers a GOTO Mak-Cass with a maximum aperture of 127mm and it can be found here:
www.telescope.com/Meade/Meade-ETX125-AT-127mm-GoTo-Maksutov-Cassegrain-Telescope/rc/3729/p/133102.uts
I have owned a Meade Mak-Cass for over 25 years but I did not get the GOTO version.
Wherever you're from you've got the same type of conditions as here in alberta in the summer
I am in Montana in this video. So, that makes sense that the conditions would be similar. Probably the only difference is that my house is at 1890 meters.
@@tsulasbigadventures just found your channel last night and have been going through your videos and I have to say very good content I just got a nexstar 130slt and am learning how to use it still. If you get your hands on one and do a review or step by step that'd be cool. Keep up the great work
@@simonchau8675 Thank you, Simon! I will keep this in mind if I get another telescope.
Tsula, you need to get a 12" Mak and make the comparison fair!
Sure. Can I borrow your garage to store all these telescopes you think I should be buying? And I can also make a video comparing your garage to my garage in terms of its ability to store multiple telescopes!
@@tsulasbigadventures If you get a 12" Mak, I promise to take good care of it for you!
@@bowrudder899 I'm sorry to say that I did a quick search on google for a 12" Mak-Cass and could not find one for sale but I will definitely keep you in mind if I ever find one for sale but I'm curious whether it would go in your trunk or the storage space. You know how I feel about telescopes that end up in closets.
I have just got a Messier Maksutov. It's a compromise between cost and practicality. I've not had a chance to use it yet. Fingers crossed I'm not going to see a big black disk in the centre.
I'm not familiar with that particular brand but you should not see the black disc in the center except when you defocus on a star. Other than that I have never noticed the disc in the center of my Mak. Maks in general are known for their exceptional optics. Good luck!
@@tsulasbigadventures Thanks. I think I'll need it!
If the MAk-Cas tube is thermally equiabated, it will perform well on Lunar and Planetary objects. That's a BIG IF, I've owned Russian Maks from "10 to "5 inches for three decades.
It performed well on Saturn a few days ago.
Yeah, you have to let them sit for a while. What people are doing now is just wrapping them with cheap thermal insulation (sometimes letting it hang off the front of the telescope forming a dew shield). It completely eliminates the problem, and did I mention its cheap? People just leave it on like its apart of the telescope. The Russian designs are likely rutten mak (rumak) designs, and not gregorian maksutov designs. There is a big difference between the two. First of all, the places you can get the rumak's are far and few. Russia had intes, and china still has Bosma (rebranded under Ioptron in many countries). Bosma clearly got its designs from Russian Intes, and they both make very high quality optics, with Intes having the edge because they actually custom built their scopes and measure their mirror surface deviations. Still, Bosma's rumak's are absolutely fantastic from what I have heard. I recently got one because of all the hype, and there is a chance the Bosma rumak's might disappear soon! :(. Next, the Rumak's have a separate secondary mirror adhered to the back of the corrector lens, unlike gregorians where its just silvered on. Allegedly, this widen's the useable FOV, and the 6" Bosma Rumak for example uses a 2" barrel rather than a 1.25". I've heard its not completely perfect, and there is still some vignetting at the edge of the image circle on a full frame camera, but its flat to the edge and incredible for just a 6" scope (another thing I am going to test myself). The Russian Intes company had more variations, and they produced some of these designs for military reasons (terrestrial viewing). Thirdly, the build quality on the Rumak's tends to be of higher quality as far as I can tell. Some people report less or similar mirror flop to the gregorians on the market. The focuser on the Bosma/Ioptron rumak design is reportedly dual speed and very nice. The Bosma/Ioptron and Intes designs are really sturdy and tend to never lose collimation, but I've heard similar things from Orion gregorian, like the one in the video. The biggest downsides I see with the Rumak's are the much higher cost for the larger aperture designs. There are more sizes available at a cheaper price for the gregorian ones. Finally, the Rumak designs can ACTUALLY be used for astrophotography! This is due to the larger useable image circle on the Rumak designs, and Intes even made lower F-ratio designs for specifically this purpose. Many people don't actually know this fact very well, and so they have never tried it, but there are a few people who have figured out the secret on different forums. This picture was taken with Ioptron 6" maksutov: cloudynights DOT com/uploads/monthly_11_2019/post-226872-0-34065400-1572999423.jpeg
The guy said he was not even being that serious when he took the picture, and then posted the cropped version of it. So its likely the picture could look even better. Might take a while because it is f/12, but with a decent camera it clearly has potential. The history of these telescopes is incredibly interesting, and it is one of my favorite designs! I am an optical physicist, so I nerd out pretty hard with this stuff.
@@projectnemesi5950 Thank you for your comprehensive comment. I never considered using a thermal insulation for a dew shield. That's a good idea.
Wow, that's a pretty good picture of M51 to be taken with a Mak-Cass. I hope mine never goes out of collimation because the Orion cannot be collimated, I believe is what I read in the owner's manual. The field of view is so narrow on mine that I can't see how I could possibly take a long enough exposure with it. But I like it most of all for its portability and compact design making it ideal for camping or taking somewhere to view the night sky and I just enjoy the luxury of having a six inch telescope while traveling which is just not possible with my 6" refractor.
Well, I had my chance to try when Saturn was at opposition August 14, but I was too busy with my 12" SCT and never got around to trying out the Mak-Cass's capabilities. I will give it a try when Jupiter is at opposition in September.
A 6" refractor should slightly edge out the mak on the moon, that is if the refractor is a decent apo. Maks beat achromatic refractors, but generally nothing beats an apo on the moon.
My Refractor is an apochromatic refractor. It's a doublet but Skywatcher is very secretive about what kind of ED glass they used on it. I've never been able to find out. However, I will say that I have been very pleased with the performance of that telescope but honestly the refractor and Mak seemed to perform about equally.
Does it follow the target ?
It has a very narrow field of view. So the target will drift out of the field of view after a while but just hit the enter button again and it will again center it.
Your 6 inch Refractor should have beat out your 6 inch Mak/Cass unless it is of a much lesser quality then normal. As you know there is no central obstruction in a refractor so the image, sharpness, and contrast should be better.
I was considering buying a used Sky Watcher 102 Mak. My friend told me that my 80mm refractor is just as good and that If would not gain anything. He told me even though it's 4" that it is basically the same as a 80 to 90mm refractor. I thought it having a longer focal length it would be much better on the planets.
Next week I will have another test between the two when there is no moon and more darkness and I think you are probably right particularly when it comes to faint deep sky objects.
Ordered a 127mm Mak Cassegrain because using a 8" dob is a pain when there is snow and ice everywhere. Glad your neighbor turned off the light pollution for you.
Yes, that Mak sure is convenient. I rolled my 10" Dob out the other night and I was scared it was going to tip over in the snow but I made it. And the neighbor had turned that spotlight back on which was disheartening but what can you do?
Maks are not ideal for DSO but it can be done with a good mount and camera.
It can be done by taking your Mak to a dark sky site.
You can see very small and faint deep sky objects with the Mak also.
I sure hope so! I will try again when the moon isn't interfering.
@@tsulasbigadventures Nice! You should try a reducer and ultra wide angle eyepieces if you like wide field DSO´s.
@@Nopal.Cosmico.21 I love wide field DSOs. I would love to get a Televue 100 degree Ethos eyepiece but man are they expensive; well more than the telescope itself!
@@tsulasbigadventures I do love very wide field DSOs as well but 100 degree eyepiece is not a must for me, not to say I can´t afford it. A 70 degree eyepiece would do fine I believe, and there are some cheap ones out there. Of course not very well corrected at the edges but good enough to enjoy the wide field.
@@tsulasbigadventures I have a Skywatcher 127 mak which I use with a 20mm widescan III eyepiece and it's a great combination for deep sky objects. The widescan eyepiece has an AFOV of 84 degrees which is huge! If you see one of these eps on sale, buy it.
Price for the Mak ???
I paid $1300 US for the Orion 150mm Mak-Cass that came with a tripod, mount, telescope, red dot finder, and two aspheric eyepieces.
@@tsulasbigadventures : Thanks for the reply & Info.
Nice 'n interesting, but no images for comparison.
Thanks. It's harder than you think. In later videos I provided sketches.
I dont agree , why because Newtonian is better in all aspects except portability , say Parabolic Newtonian F10 should have comparable view angle , optic quality and should be cheaper and brighter , only thing is it would be huge . There is no way of beating Catadioptric folding and portability but in other aspects there are better scopes .
I agree with that. But I was going camping and I wanted something that would fit in my car. If it had fit I would have taken my 6 inch refractor on my camping trip but it was TOO BIG.
You also have pointy stars that you cant get rid of in a newtonian. And you have to collimate it way more. And the mirror will go bad a lot faster, requiring re-aluminization and more frequent cleanings. Also, the sky tends to be the limiting factor for astronomy, and its very likely you will need to drive somewhere to do your astronomy. Having designs that hold collimation better (like maksutovs) is a huge benefit for doing that. A 6" with good seeing can beat an 8" with crap seeing.
@@projectnemesi5950 oh but you can , spiral spider , there is also a way to fold Newtonian , called folded Newtonian , and catadioptric folded non obstructed Newtonian , suffers from same large F ratio as Catadioptrics for same reason .
But those wont be cheap any more
You take a primary mirror and tilt it , take another identical smaller mirror and tilt it the opposite way instead of secondary and there you go , folded unobstructed Newtonian
so there are ways for everything , you can even make it your self .
I would but there is no glass where i am , have to import large glass and then it gets expensive , then its no fun , more an expensive hobby .
What can you do .
@@dedskin1 Anything you put in the aperture will generate its own PSF. You are better off just having a secondary sitting in or on a front glass panel, like in a newtonian-maksutov. There is nothing about the catadiotropic designs that has a high F-ratio. Intes made rumak designs that had relatively lower F-ratios.
@@projectnemesi5950 yes , but in folded Newtonian you dont put anything in that aperture , there is folded Refractor as well , same thing no obstruction .
The point being folded telescope design is good for portability and use , but does not have inherent optical benefits necessarily over the non folded ones ,
On the contrary , no fold , better picture , no matter what it is .
So of course Newtonian a corrected one , will have better picture given equal F ratio to its Catadiptric sibling .
That is the point .
But it would be huge and not portable . of course
You should invite your neighbour over. It was nice of him to turn his light off.
You're right! Good idea!
So the Mak out did you 150 refractor? I would not have expected that!
Well, I never did get to compare on something really faint and difficult. I bet if I tried again on a moonless night the refractor would have won on fainter objects.
@@tsulasbigadventures It makes me want to get a 6 inch Mak lol! In my mind I always considered a refractor as the top performer in the telescope world, at least per aperture. I have a Skywatcher 4 inch Mak but was not really impressed with the views and that I guess reinforced my opinion. With Mars approaching I am up to get a good planetary telescope. Currently I am hoping my 10 inch dob is up for the task. I saw Mars yesterday with my 130 EON. Its really small but you can see the ice caps.
Excellent explained, Tsula. I really like all your videos and can't wait for a new one! Thanx so much and best regards from Germany's capitol city of astronomy: Heidelberg.
@@lornaz1975 Ha ha. Last Christmas one of my brothers told me he had a Mak and he was so proud of it and I remember thinking "why would you want a Mak?"
Your 10" Dob should do just fine on the planets. I couldn't believe how good my 10" Dob looked on the planets with the 3x Barlow attached. I waited and waited for Saturn to rise the other night but the clouds just kept getting thicker and thicker and I finally gave up. But I am determined to see the line up on June 24 even if I have to get up at an ungodly hour.
@@MW-hf5nk Thank you so much.
Newsflash! Apertures everything!
Well, almost everything. If your aperture is so big you cannot move your telescope it's probably not going to be used.
Beverley Stargazer
Although I think its great that she is promoting amateur astronomy unfortunately she appears to be a bid of a novice: The resolution of a telescope is mainly dependent on its aperture (bigger is better) and not so much on the type or F ratio, a lower F ration does not mean that it will be brighter when doing visual astronomy because two telescopes with same aperture but with different F ratios will display the same brightness when configured for the same magnification, the smaller aperture will never be as bright as a bigger aperture if the magnification are the same. Her LX90ACF has no or little coma, not because of its corrector plate but because of the Meade ACF (advance coma free) configuration: the corrector plate corrects the spherical mirror so that it has the same qualities as a hyperbolic mirror, its secondary mirror is a hyperbolic (similar to a Ritchey-Chretien type cassegrain) and this eliminate coma. The LX90ACF will totally outperform the 6" scope with the right eyepiece whether you are observing deep sky, stars or planets.
If you have watched any of my other videos you will hear me say over and over that the aperture is the most important factor. See my video about my 10" Dobsonian and my video about my LX90 12" SCT. It's all about collecting light and getting to a dark sky site. I've said it over and over.
@@msroper5287 Ms Roper thank you for this thoughtful , detailed, and well written response! I really appreciate it.
@@msroper5287 Thank you for taking time to comment on my interpretation of the video and giving us yours. The thing that you don’t seem to get that with visual observation the F ratio is of no concern its all about diameter and magnification…it takes a while to grasp. You also seem to think that using “optimized” components would make a big difference and although every little bit helps, it may help with sharpness but 5% more or less brightness the human eye cannot detect. Your conclusion that the size of your visual backs would have an effect on exit pupil is unfounded. The size of the visual back will determine the maximum field stop of your telescope and this would determine your widest view, for example the widest visual back for an 8” SCT is 38.5mm, a 35mm Tele Vue Panoptic eyepiece has a field stop of 38.7mm so that is the widest view eyepiece you can use with a 38.5mm visual back although it will be masking 0.2mm of the view, but it would have no effect on an exit pupil of any eyepiece with a field stop smaller than 38.5mm!
@@msroper5287 Thank you for taking time to comment on my interpretation of the video and giving us yours. The thing that you don’t seem to get that with visual observation the F ratio is of no concern its all about diameter and magnification…it takes a while to grasp. You also seem to think that using “optimized” components would make a big difference and although every little bit helps, it may help with sharpness but 5% more or less brightness the human eye cannot detect. Your conclusion that the size of your visual backs would have an effect on exit pupil is unfounded. The size of the visual back will determine the maximum field stop of your telescope and this would determine your widest view, for example the widest visual back for an 8” SCT is 38.5mm, a 35mm Tele Vue Panoptic eyepiece has a field stop of 38.7mm so that is the widest view eyepiece you can use with a 38.5mm visual back although it will be masking 0.2mm of the view, but it would have no effect on an exit pupil of any eyepiece with a field stop smaller than 38.5mm!
You are close, but still not completely right on what determines resolution. First there are different kinds of resolutions, angular and size. The aperture produces an airy disk, which is the smallest point of light that can be produced under lensing and Fraunhofer diffraction. The angular size of an airy disk is determined by aperture alone, but the absolute size is determined by f-ratio. The solid angle of the airy disk (2-dimensional angle) is the angular resolution density, and the absolute size is simply the resolution density. The "RESOLUTION" not the resolution density, is actually the useable image circle divided by the resolution density, and is a unitless quantity. So either use the maximum solid angle of the image circle divided by the angular resolution density, or use the maximum size of the image circle divided by the size of an airy disk. Either one produces the same value. Because you are usually dealing purely with circles, and we are comparing resolutions between systems, you can simplify by just using the 1-dimensional version, which is just maximum angle divided by angle of airy disk, or maximum radius divided by radius of airy disk. The point is, the useable image circle (the actual size you would use for your eyes or pictures) and the aperture are determining factors for resolution. That is how you determine the useable information in the light you are taking an image of or seeing with your eyes.
The only bad thing with any maksutove and a smid is the front Lens always Dres up unless one uses heat Band. No thank you il stay with a good ol Newtonian Reflector.
The best telescope is the one you use the most.
These mounts...Thats how money looks in real life.
There are more then 3 kinds of telescopes.
Which ones did I leave out?
@@tsulasbigadventures The Classical Cassegrain ( and if you want more, the optics of X-ray telescopes are unik and radio-telescope. Some amateurs have or had radio-telescopes )
@@otrondal Well, I stand corrected.
No, she's right. There are only three kinds of optical telescopes. Reflectors, refractors and catadioptrics. A classical Cassegrain telescope is just a reflector.
@@Roope00 Okay, I can agree on that, depending on the meaning of the word "types" she use (In the bible they use "kind").
So radio telescopes are just big Classical Cassegrain reflectors,
and X-ray telescopes are "pure" reflectors, being glancing reflection reflectors :
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray_telescope
Ya know I loved the video but I have to say , it was just U looking through the telescope and honestly quite boring !!!!! It would have been so much better if you could have SHARED the views so we could see what your talking about, it was just your opinion and nothing to back it up
Fair enough. I have made multiple videos since this one with live views of planets and also my sketches of deep sky objects in order to allow you to compare.
What a bad neighbor you have