3
A review of my Sky Watcher Esprit 150
Discuss this article in our forums
A review of my Sky Watcher Esprit 150
by Jeff Marsten (CN member Jeffmar)
Click on the image to load a full-sized (2304 x 2556 pixel) version
Click on the image to load a full-sized (2560 x 1734 pixel) version
I have done visual astronomy for over 20 years and imaging for nearly 10 years. I live in Salt Lake City, Utah. My neighborhood is as bright as a super max prison at night and I almost always travel someplace darker to do my astronomy. At present I own 4 Celestron SCT's and 5 apochromatic refractors of various brands. I have three working mounts; a Celestron CGX and a CGX-L, and a Losmandy G11T.
Did I really need this scope? The answer is probably no because I had an Explore Scientific 127 carbon fiber apo and an Istar Phantom 140 apo. They both are good scopes with Phantom being a bit better as far as sharpness goes. When I read the lists of apochromatic scopes a lot of guys on Cloudy Nights had I would shake my head and wonder how they could go so far down the rabbit hole. I guess you could say I get it now.
Why I bought this scope:
Last spring I was looking through my buddy James' Esprit 120 at the Coat Hanger asterism at a star party. I was very impressed by how incredibly sharp the view was with pinpoint stars and lots of contrast. About a month later another friend of mine, Lester, brought his new Esprit 150 to one of our favorite dark sites to try it out for the first time. I was so impressed with his scope I ordered one the next day. I haven't used my other two large refractors since.
Comparisons with my other refractors:
Focusers:
The Explore Scientific 127 has a decent focuser, but it has only had 2 inches of travel. The company compensates for the lack of travel by providing two 2 inch spacers that are a real pain to deal with in the dark. I replaced the stock focuser on the ES 127 with a Feathertouch focuser. What a difference that made with a lot more travel, and it is as smooth as silk! The Istar phantom had a focuser than was rough and inconsistent. I had to go through all the moving parts, do some lubricating and working the focuser back and forth until it smoothed out. So the Esprit gets a B+, the Explore Scientific gets a C for the stock focuser and the Phantom gets a B- (after I fixed all the issues). I probably would have given the Esprit an A if I hadn't experienced how good a starlight focuser is.
Optics:
Last fall I did a comparison of the optics with my three large refractors. I used a 2x2 inch sudoku puzzle I had filled in with various ink colors and put it a hundred feet away. I used my best Sony full frame camera to take multiple photos of the puzzle with each scope while making sure my focus was a good as possible. I am not knowledgeable enough about star tests to say anything intelligent about scope optics, but I can tell when one photo is sharper than another if I stare at it long enough. The result of the optical evaluation was the Esprit had the best optics so let's call that an A. The Phantom was not quite as good so let's say it's an A-. The Explore Scientific was a bit lower on the scale so it gets a B.
Fit and finish:
My Explore Scientific 127 was actually a bit better than my Esprit 150 only because of the dew shield. The dew shield on my Esprit is loose and floppy, but it will mostly stay in place once I tighten up the two screws. Coming in third was the Istar Phantom 140. When I got the Phantom the focuser was very rough as I mentioned before. There was a loose screw rattling around in the tube I had to put it back where it belonged. The screw that held the focuser in place seemed like it was bent, so every 360 degrees it would get very hard to turn. The scope rings would slip so the tube would slide back and I couldn't seem to tighten the rings enough to keep that from happening. I am giving the Explore Scientific 127 an A, the Esprit 150 an A-, and the Istar Phantom a D. Quality control should have been a lot better with the Phantom.
Using it for visual:
I will admit I don't use it for visual as much as my C14. The reason is that my C14 does a much better job on anything faint. It also usually does better on planets, the moon, and even double stars. It's just hard to beat a scope with 14 inches of aperture and good optics. I can say my Esprit usually beats my C8 because of the superior contrast that comes with a good apo. I use the Esprit mostly for imaging, but I always take advantage of the dark skies where I image to look at targets. At a Bortle 2 area my Esprit can show almost as much as my C14 I use for our club star parties which are closer to the lights of the city.
A comparison with a Stellarvue 180:
Last fall I went out to my favorite imaging site during a full moon to do some visual with my two imaging buddies. My friend, Lester, had just taken delivery of a Stellarvue 180 triplet and he wanted to spend some time doing some visual on Jupiter, Saturn, and the moon. Seeing was really good and the views of both gas giants were pretty spectacular. My two friends and I spent hours going back and forth between my Esprit 150 and Lester's Stellarvue 180. Yes, there was a difference between the two scopes, but it wasn't a big difference. The Esprit almost kept up. The views were spectacular through both scopes. We could see some of the lessor storms on Jupiter and a lot of cloud turbulence through both scopes. The rings of Saturn looked razor blade sharp on both scopes and the Cassini division was a black and defined ring. The difference was a slight increase in contrast through the Stellarvue. The moon was pretty impressive also. Since the moon was full, we didn't get the contrast of shadows the terminator brings, but the detail was still there if a bit more subdued. It was harder to see a difference between the Esprit and Stellarvue while looking at the moon. I would love a chance to get out with both scopes again to do visual. They were both very good with Lester's Stellarvue edging out my Esprit.
Imaging:
I have used all three of these scopes for imaging and have been pretty happy with them. I used the Explore Scientific 127 for a few years for imaging and noticed some weird looking inverted spikes around the brighter stars. I called Explore Scientific, and they suggested that I back off the extra screw they use to hold the objective lens in place. I did it and it helped but I still got remnants of spikes, but it was better. I didn't have any of those issues with either the Phantom or the Esprit. I would say that the Esprit is just a little bit better than the Phantom for imaging as far as resolution and detail goes but that could be a result of an extra 10mm of aperture. Both the Phantom and the Esprit seem to be better than the Explore Scientific for imaging.
Click on the image to load a full-sized (2304 x 2072 pixel) version
Click on the image to load a full-sized (2560 x 1824 pixel) version
Click on the image to load a full-sized (2560 x 1710 pixel) version
Click on the image to load a full-sized (2560 x 1710 pixel) version
Click on the image to load a full-sized (3827 x 2997 pixel) version
All of these images were done using my Esprit 150. I use this scope for two-thirds of the images I take. It seems to be a very versatile size and focal length. I am not into wall to wall cosmic clouds as much as some other people are, but occasionally I use my Astro-Tech 80 triplet for those wide nebulae. My Esprit 150 is large enough to get anything from a lot of nebulae to most galaxies. For me it is a sweet spot scope.
I use either my Celestron CGX-L or my Losmandy G11T with my Esprit 150. Both of those mounts seem to work just fine for good auto guiding with my 150.
Conclusion:
My Esprit 150 is a phenomenal scope. It is definitely the best scope I own as far as sharpness and versatility. I haven't used my other large refractors since I got my Esprit, and I haven't really missed them. I used to think that if I could only have one scope it would be a C14, but because of the how good my Esprit 150 is at so many things I might have to change my mind. It certainly is a lot easier to image with than my C14. I bought my Esprit on sale for 7000 dollars. It is still a chunk of change, but when I compare it to my friend's Stellarvue 180 costing 19000 dollars it seems like a bargain. The only downside is how heavy my Esprit is. My carbon fiber Explore Scientific 127 is so much lighter it's a breeze to handle compared to my Esprit.
- Jack Brown, bob midiri, Bob Campbell and 32 others like this
26 Comments
That's a very well written review, Jeff. Congratulations on what sounds like an excellent scope!
--Luca
Jeff:
I concur with your observations and findings. I have a Takahashi TOA 130 and a SW Esprit 150. I use them interchangeably on a Tak 400 mount in my domed observatory here in Ivins, UT. I also have a PlaneWave 14" CDK on a Tak 400 mount in a separate building.
I have done side by side comparisons with imaging between the Tak 130 and the SW 150 both fitted with a Tak 67 coma corrector. I have a FeatherTouch focuser on both scopes and ZWO EAFs. The Tak focuser was certainly not up to the quality of the glass and other components.
The results are that the images are indistinguishable in multiple side by side comparison using a ZWO 6200 camera with exactly the same settings. I can't really tell the difference other than imaging with the SW images seem a little more contrasty. That extra inch of aperture makes a difference.
The CDK is the best of the best for imaging the smaller fuzzies.
I got great deals on both of my Tak 400 mounts second hand here on CN and they are flawless workhorses. They have never required ANY attention or tuning or fussing and handle excessive loads without issues.
Congrats on your SW 150, an often ignored scope for impressive imaging. If you are ever visiting Ivins, let me know and we can meet for coffee or pizza or ?
Ron84738
I have a SW Esprit 150 and SW Esprit 100 and love these. I've wanted to buy a tak, but wont after seeing side by side comparisons. Love these scopes, the quality of everything involved, and the company as a whole. Great work SkyWatcher! You should be proud.
My only suggestion if I could make one: make the dew shields slide beautifully like I get with Explore Scientific.
Great article! I've sort of fallen into the refractor deep end too, and also find myself using my Esprit 150 more than any other telescope for imaging. The focal length (1073mm for mine) is perfect for many targets, and if I need wide field I just swap out the APS-C sensor for full frame. Occasionally I use a William Optic FLT91 (543mm) or Redcat51 (250mm) if it is very wide field. For visual, my EdgeHD 11 gets used much more and I think the added aperture and convenient viewing geometry (shorter) make it a better choice. My favorite kind of night is the Esprit 150 working silently on imaging and my EdgeHD 11 getting worked for visual.
I find the quality of the Esprit quite good, except for the annoying dew shield you mention - I usually make it work by tightening the screws more than I'd like and jamming a dew strap up against it. Like others, I have found the 1.0x field flattener very good, but the 0.77x reducer does not have pinpoint stars to the edge despite some experimentation in backfocus. The focuser is solid and I've not had issues driving it with a ZWO EAF. On very cold nights here in Colorado I do get a little pinched optics, but never bad enough for me to do anything about.
My only other complaint is the size and weight, but if you want a 6" triplet, that is to be expected! It's a wonderful telescope, glad you are enjoying yours!
An excellent review Jeff. I have been imaging with an Esprit 120 for the last 3+ years. It's a great scope, agreed the dew shield is a bit of a disappointment, not sure why SW couldn't have added a third screw. I'm impressed that you move this beast to dark locations, I'm fortunate to live in a bortle 3 area.
Clear skys,
Thanks for great review. You can't go wrong with a Skywatcher Esprit, quality build, pricing and excel in photography and visual use. If the dew shield is a little loose just set your mounting rings and balance where the cap snugs up against them for the night. Esprits rock!
Nice review. I too wish they would fix the dew shield design. I ended up wrapping my objective with thin foam that made the fit tighter and it is now less floppy. They are heavy and built like a tank but the images are rich with lots of contrast!
breathtaking photos
Thanks!
Think I will have to take out a loan of around $12k for this and a good mount and tripod. Then I would have to keep it somewhere else or my lady will have me sleeping with it for a long time. Great review.
An image from 8/7 using my Esprit 150
Nice review, there’s no question the Esprit’s are top notch refractors. Regarding the dew shield, every scope has it’s quirks but in the end the only thing that matters is how it performs and that you enjoy using it, it seems it delivers on both those fronts.
Great review! I bought the Esprit 150 a couple of years ago and it's my main AP scope. I have it on an EQ8 and it produces wonderful results. I toyed with getting a TOA 150, but I couldn't really justify the cost. I love my Esprit!
The TOA150 may or may not be noticeably better than the Esprit150 especially since the TOA is double the price. I really appreciate companies that can offer really good performance with their products and still be somewhat affordable. I have looked through some pretty amazing Taks, but I don’t think I would trade what I have for one especially for imaging.
Great review and fantastic photos. I completely agree with your mention of the focus system. The precise movements and repeat performance of the focus system are as important as the optical performance in OTA.
Re-reading your fine article and think it's quite amazing that you could find the Esprit 150 about a good visually as a C-14 reflector. Though praised for photography every chance I get I try and tell people what wonderful visual scopes they are. Paired my. Esprit 120 with Denkmeier Binotron binoviewers and been grinning ear to ear since. The photos you posted speak for themselves as far as imaging goes. Beat your 150 for the price? Twice the price? I haven't been to that star party yet! Tennessee
All things being equal, my C14 will do better on most objects, especially the dim ones. The Esprit can split double stars better in marginal seeing and do a fantastic job on gas giants and the moon. I probably wouldn’t be disappointed if I only had my Esprit 150 for visual.
This is from data taken from two Esprit 150 scopes. My imaging buddy, Lester, Shared his data with me. He has the same scope and the same camera as I do.
Nice review and yes a great scope. I have one of the early ones and for this strictly visual observer it doesn't get any better optically speaking.
Wow. Image 5, the galaxy, is simply mesmerizing. Must. Not. Get. APO. Fever.
How heavy is it? Their website does not say.
Around 14 kg (31 lb) without the tube rings, 16 kg (35 lb) with.
Great review! I have an SVX152T and have been looking at the Losmandy G11T. How do you like the G11T? Would you recommend it for a home mount/observatory? Thank you in advance!
That is a beautiful telescope and an extraordinary review. Great job, very well done!
I do like my G11T. It is extremely overbuilt and Losmandy mounts tend to last a long time as a result. It is very stable, even with my C14 on it. The tripod it comes with is very strong and not particularly heavy. All Losmandy mounts are easy to work on with regular tools and there are plenty of videos put out my Scott Losmandy to show you how to adjust things. It works very well with my Asiair and it is good with autoguiding. I have had really good success using it for my traveling imaging mount. It isn’t really expensive. It also looks kind of steam punky.
It has a few cons. The combined weight of the RA and Dec modules is 62 pounds. I don’t have trouble moving it around, but if your back isn’t healthy it can be a real issue. The goto isn’t as good with my G11T as it is with my Celestron CGX-L. It takes at least twice as many calibration stars to do as well as the Celestron mount in that respect.
I got my G11T because I wanted a mount I wouldn’t have to replace it for a long time.
I think it would be great for a permanent setup.