NHRob
Post Laureate
Reged: 08/27/04
Loc: New Hampshire
|
nice 5" class Mak?
#5657684 - 02/02/13 08:19 AM
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Looking to downsize to a 5" class Mak-Cass for casual observing. Finances are an issue so I probably can't swing Russian optics.
Any good recommendations of one vs. another? ... Skywatcher vs. Orion, etc?
Thx,
Rob
|
t.r.
Post Laureate
Reged: 02/14/08
Loc: Upstate NY
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: NHRob]
#5657690 - 02/02/13 08:36 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Hey Rob, I Don't have any 5" Mak experience to relay to you...BUT, I can say that the C6XLT would go along way to satisfying as a casual scope. IMHO, the extra inch will trump the "better" image that the mak design gives. I had a C5 and it didn't quite satisfy, particularly when it came to deep sky. The C6 hit the mark. I have been absolutely mesmerized by the view of the double cluster in this scope! Everything, DSO's, planetary, lunar and doubles are just plain fun in this scope. Cool down is only about 30 minutes or even less in summer. Their quality really is very good. Add a quality zoom and casual doesn't get any better! Celestron got it right. Mine tested by Bob Piekel at close to 1/8th wave (1/6-1/7 solid), where mild undercorrection began to show. It is sharp and has depth of focus with snap. Sorry if I steered off topic for you, but in this size/price range, you must consider the C6! I think it is just what you are looking for. My  
EDIT: The C6XLT is the one scope that I find satisfying when putting away the AP 130 GT for winter if that says anything! All the smaller scopes I tried for that role, I was left wanting.
Edited by t.r. (02/02/13 08:47 AM)
|
NHRob
Post Laureate
Reged: 08/27/04
Loc: New Hampshire
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: t.r.]
#5657726 - 02/02/13 09:05 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Thx for the input Tim. C6 .... hmmm!
Down the road I will spring for a 5" class apo again (after downsizing the house) but, for the short term I will be going cheap!
Maybe I should wait for NEAF and see if any good deals pop up there??
|
Eddgie
Postmaster
Reged: 02/01/06
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: NHRob]
#5657876 - 02/02/13 10:36 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
There really isn't any benefit of the 5" MCTs over the C5. The COs are not really much different, and the f/10 C5 gives you quite a bit wider true field capability.
Some of these MCTs being sold today are actually not working at their full apeture. Keep that in mind.
I would recommend a C5 if size is the most important factor, or a C6 for more performance at about the same focal lenght (same true field size) and weight.
The short focal lenght of the C5 makes it a much better all around choice to me than a 5" MCT. I have owned both and kept the C5. It is just a more flexible scope.
But the reports of some of the 127 MCTs working at less than stated apeture, which means a slower focal ratio and narrower field than stated, really turns me off on them.
|
Eric63
sage
Reged: 06/16/12
Loc: Ottawa, Ontario
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: NHRob]
#5658017 - 02/02/13 12:07 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
For what it's worth, I love my little 127mm SW Mak. The image is very sharp, I can get approx 1.3 degree view with a 2" 32mm 70 degree EP. Also, at this size I don't find cool down to be too much of an issue. I have this scope to compliment my 102mmF5 Achro, but it is turning out to be the one I use the most.
Eric
|
RobertED
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/11/03
Loc: Johnston, RI
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: Eric63]
#5658048 - 02/02/13 12:31 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
I used to own the ORION 5" mak-cass....awesome little scope. I just traded it towards a C-11. I needed more aperture.
|
Binojunky
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/25/10
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: RobertED]
#5658087 - 02/02/13 12:51 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Most of the 127mm maks are coming from Synta, the Orion Apex is a good performer, however it suffers from the usual mak problems, cool down time, narrowish field of view and contrast suffers a bit but it can and does give some rather jaw dropping views,DA. 
|
rmollise
Postmaster
Reged: 07/06/07
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: Binojunky]
#5658123 - 02/02/13 01:08 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Another vote for the C5. The MCTs are nice, but the C5 is more versatile...
|
Binojunky
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/25/10
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: rmollise]
#5658223 - 02/02/13 01:58 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Just after I got my Apex 127 I was offered a 5" S/Cass: OTAfrom Japan special optics, probably as clean a specimen as you could wish for, complete with all its accesories and wooden case, I find myself useing that more than the Apex,DA.
|
KerryR
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/05/07
Loc: SW Michigan
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: Binojunky]
#5658300 - 02/02/13 02:56 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
I have a 127mm Apex MCT and a C6. There's no front on which the C6 doesn't significantly out-perform it, more so than can be attributed, I think, to the aperture difference.
I know there are some really good Apexes out there, but I think design, executaion and QC may be better with the c5 and c6, so you may be more likely to 'draw' a good sample by going with the C sct.
I think it's worth looking at 5 and 6" f5 or 6 newts, too. They're often really, really inexpensive, easily mounted, and SOMETIMES come with 2" focusers if you look around/wait long enough. Their simple design reduces the number of places optical errors can happen to 2, so you may get the best optics that way, if you can stand the coma.
|
Binojunky
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/25/10
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: KerryR]
#5658439 - 02/02/13 04:25 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Yuo can pick up the Vixen 130 newt on the Porta Mount for under $400 new,an excellent scope for the money,my apologies to Mak and Cass: lovers,DA.
|
Rat8bug
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 01/07/05
Loc: Michigan
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: Binojunky]
#5658478 - 02/02/13 04:45 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
If your interest is planetary,moon, double stars, then I would go Apex 127 mak. Mak is more rugged scope than SCT, and no issue with collimating.
http://www.barrie-tao.com/apex127.html
Ciao....Barry
|
rg55
professor emeritus
Reged: 08/02/08
Loc: western US
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: Rat8bug]
#5658590 - 02/02/13 05:45 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
What Barry said. My two G & G's are my 5" mak and my C80ED. Between the two of them I'm covered for everything.
|
RobertED
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/11/03
Loc: Johnston, RI
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: rmollise]
#5659528 - 02/03/13 08:50 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
Another vote for the C5. The MCTs are nice, but the C5 is more versatile...
Agreed!!
I found the 5" mak-cass not as good on faint-fuzzies as the Moon and planets.
|
Eric63
sage
Reged: 06/16/12
Loc: Ottawa, Ontario
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: RobertED]
#5659582 - 02/03/13 09:31 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
That's why I use both the 127mak and the 150f5 Newt. The mak is better for high power and the Newt for faint and fuzzies plus wide field.
|
moynihan
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/22/03
Loc: Lake Michigan Watershed
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: NHRob]
#5659633 - 02/03/13 09:55 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Another thread that illustrates the CN tendency for nearly any question about a Mak to generate a plethora of responses extolling the superiority of the SCT.
Has the time come for a new sub-forum, for Maks, as we have divided the newts/fracs/Cats 
|
t.r.
Post Laureate
Reged: 02/14/08
Loc: Upstate NY
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: moynihan]
#5659652 - 02/03/13 10:11 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
I don't think so, they are both catadioptrics, which other designs fall into as well. The purpose of CN is to engage in seeking and exchanging information. This is accomplished, but we often don't get the responses to our questions that we were expecting or perhaps desire. This is due to the posting of others experience that goes beyond our own. Also, it enables thinking outside the box and gives perspectives that we hadn't considered. Collateral learning if you will. If the OP doesn't want the topic to stray, they can simply limit and narrow the "conversation" as they desire. Mods do this as well. Personally, I welcome ALL comments when I post, positive to my position, negative and even tanget. What's the hurt in this? Playing "Devil's Advocate" is not necessarily...evil. In fact, the only disservice I see here on CN is absolutes!
|
moynihan
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/22/03
Loc: Lake Michigan Watershed
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: t.r.]
#5659723 - 02/03/13 10:55 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
... the only disservice I see here on CN is absolutes!
Indeed.
|
NHRob
Post Laureate
Reged: 08/27/04
Loc: New Hampshire
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: moynihan]
#5659863 - 02/03/13 12:06 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
I have no problem including SCTs in the discussion. Good information is always welcome, IMO.
|
hottr6
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 06/28/09
Loc: 7,500', Magdalena Mtns, NM
|
Re: nice 5" class Mak?
[Re: t.r.]
#5661240 - 02/04/13 07:52 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
I'd have to agree..... the difference between 5" and 6" cannot be overstated.
I don't have any experience with the 5" MCTs, but I do spend a lot of time comparing my 5" and 6" Newts (both f/5), and the 6" can go a lot deeper. The 6" hints at details that can be seen in my 10" Newt, details that are utterly absent in the 5".
My 6" Synta MCT is a heavy little bugger, and requires an appropriate mount... I recommend CG5 class as a minimum. No doubt the 5" would require a lot less mount.
The Synta 6" suffers the same shortcoming of the 5".... 1.25" visual back. The 6" may also require more cooldown time, something that I have found makes the difference between a great night under the stars, and a waste of time. I presume this is an area that the 5" would be a winner.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
