Telescope Reviews: TEC 200 Mak vs AP 152 f/8

Dave: I've got an MC200 and a TEC140 and live in the same city as you where I have a POD too. So I've done the 8" Mak vs. 6"-ish apo in a POD comparison from Toronto. Here's what I've found:

1. The MC200 is the better planetary scope, though the TEC140 gives great planetary views too. Both were clearly better than my C8 in side-by-side comparisons (no real surprise) on Jupiter and Mars. Get a binoviewer, which improves the planetary views with both (though with the TEC140 more than with the MC200, for some reason I haven't figured out).

2. The MC200 is a perfect fit for the pod; The TEC140 (5.5" f/7) is also OK in the POD but feeling a tiny bit cramped. A significant benefit of the MC200 is that it can be mounted a bit lower than the TEC140 which gives more zenith clearance with the lip of the pod roof. I suspect you'll still want a POD zenith table some nights though.

3. In general the MC200 is a better double star scope than a TEC140 (though again the latter is no slouch). The 8" aperture is perfect for double stars in our lousy seeing conditions - the airy disk + first ring can be made out nicely (albeit with a broken ring) most nights, and on account of only a 26% obstruction and the great optics in the MC200 if the seeing is at all reasonable you don't get a lot of moving gunk in the PSF from the broken rings so things look rather beautiful in the MC200. I just think it's the right compromise aperture in our seeing for close doubles to look pretty... if you go bigger the seeing limits you most nights, and if you go smaller you're not exploiting all the atmosphere can give you most nights. (For example, I found a C11 lousy for double stars from Toronto because the seeing was usually too poor for a stable airy ring pattern which I find is important for a nice aesthetic view of many close doubles; so even though obviously the C11 would split tighter doubles I liked it far less for doubles than the MC200). The only time the TEC140 is better for doubles is for very unequal pairs for which the secondary lies on the first airy ring.

4. Overall I find the MC200 to be the perfect city double star + planetary scope. But while it's great for use in the city, it wouldn't be my first-choice for a DSO scope; The FoV is too narrow and aperture is too small. The TEC140 solves the former and is more useful for wide-field imaging (and is pretty good at planets and doubles too) so is the more versatile scope.

5. Make sure you're equatorially mounted with the MC200 as you'll be up at 400x for doubles on many nights (particularly during the summer). My favourite eyepiece on the scope is the 8-24mm Baader zoom.

Hope this helps,

Bob

Edited by Bob Abraham (01/09/13 11:54 AM)