
SW MAK180
#101
Posted 27 April 2018 - 10:41 PM
#103
Posted 28 April 2018 - 05:36 AM
It is worth pointing out that there is a slight "issue" with 180 Maks - the dovetail mount is inclined at a slight angle which requires the finder to be adjusted to allow for this. I have a RACI finder on mine on which I've mounted a Rigel finder, so that when I adjust the RACI, the Rigel is adjusted as well. Some finders cannot adjust far enough to compensate for the angle apparently. It sounds as though yours had a stripped thread as well?
BUT, a wonderful scope! The views and images of planets and doubles are simply excellent for 7".
Chris
- astroneil likes this
#105
Posted 28 April 2018 - 09:48 AM
sounds like the finder bracket needs a captive nut on the ota so when being tightened there is no chance of stripping the threads out of the otA back cell.
Edited by starman876, 28 April 2018 - 09:49 AM.
#106
Posted 28 April 2018 - 10:03 AM
I previously owned the SW 150 version and the finder mounting bracket was attached to the tube with nuts on the inside. So if they come loose, hard to tighten up again since you can’t hold the nut tight while tightening the screw. It seems possible that if loose enough, they would fall into the tube.
Bill
#107
Posted 29 April 2018 - 10:11 PM
Guys...don't compare telescopes by their sizes.It's not fair to compare 30 000$ scope to 300$ scope.It's like racing Ferrari with Opel Astra.We all have budget when we choose our new scope.So let's say 1000$ ...which is the best scope by this value ? Do I care if any scope by the same size as mine is better when it cost 10 or 20 times more....no.If I have unlimited bank account I know 20" apo will be the best....but who cares when that thing will cost 10 milion $ without the mount.
Well, I paid $550 delivered for a Discovery 8" DHQ Dob, sonotube with particle board Dob mount, in 2000. A few years later, I paid $1500 for a used Televue 101, unmounted with no diagonal. So with a $500 TV mount and $300 diagonal, it was $2300.
Which one di you suppose gives better views of DSOs, planets, and everything except terrestrial and solar? The 8" Dob consistently shows more detail and brighter images, as I said, on everything. Sure, what the 101 shows is pretty close to technical perfection with correct color, pin point stars, and maximum contrast, but the 8" still shows more. So price isn't everything.
- Jaimo! likes this
#108
Posted 29 April 2018 - 10:47 PM
Rather than a MCT of any size, I bought a used 9.25" Celestron SCT as a dedicated planet scope, possibly to replace the much bigger 5" f/12 Refractor with D&G lenses. There is no question which scope has better optics: the 5" refractor clearly does, and second-hand it cost me about as much as the used 9.25" despite having a lot less aperture. Yet, I've already observed variable coloration on Uranus with the 9" that would have been impossible with the 5.
Edited by Deep13, 29 April 2018 - 10:48 PM.
#109
Posted 30 April 2018 - 05:11 AM
Well, I paid $550 delivered for a Discovery 8" DHQ Dob, sonotube with particle board Dob mount, in 2000. A few years later, I paid $1500 for a used Televue 101, unmounted with no diagonal. So with a $500 TV mount and $300 diagonal, it was $2300.
Which one di you suppose gives better views of DSOs, planets, and everything except terrestrial and solar? The 8" Dob consistently shows more detail and brighter images, as I said, on everything. Sure, what the 101 shows is pretty close to technical perfection with correct color, pin point stars, and maximum contrast, but the 8" still shows more. So price isn't everything.
Bigger Newts will always beat out smaller APO's on cost and image detail on planets if they are built good. Now compare a 8" APO to a 8" Newt and the APO is gonna win, but at 20 to 30 times the cost of the Newt.
Edited by CHASLX200, 30 April 2018 - 05:13 AM.
#110
Posted 30 April 2018 - 05:12 AM
I previously owned the SW 150 version and the finder mounting bracket was attached to the tube with nuts on the inside. So if they come loose, hard to tighten up again since you can’t hold the nut tight while tightening the screw. It seems possible that if loose enough, they would fall into the tube.
Bill
No way to get inside?
#111
Posted 30 April 2018 - 05:29 AM
Bigger Newts will always beat out smaller APO's on cost and image detail on planets if they are built good. Now compare a 8" APO to a 8" Newt and the APO is gonna win, but at 20 to 30 times the cost of the Newt.
It doesn't really matter who is gonna win if you have 500$....in the end you will buy the scope you can afford no matter if it is good or bad.The answer you realy need is " Which is the best teescope I can buy with my 500$ ? " Than you can compare 12" dob to 9" SCT to 7" mac to 4" ED to 3" apo and you can choose which is the best scope for your needs.
12" dob - deep space
9" sct - deep space and planets
7" mak - planets
4" ed - planets and astrophotography
3" apo -astrophotography
#112
Posted 30 April 2018 - 06:26 AM
It doesn't really matter who is gonna win if you have 500$....in the end you will buy the scope you can afford no matter if it is good or bad.The answer you realy need is " Which is the best teescope I can buy with my 500$ ? " Than you can compare 12" dob to 9" SCT to 7" mac to 4" ED to 3" apo and you can choose which is the best scope for your needs.
12" dob - deep space
9" sct - deep space and planets
7" mak - planets
4" ed - planets and astrophotography
3" apo -astrophotography
So true. You buy what you got the cash for. everything else you dream about. Well, that is unless you want to max out that new credit card you just got. So which are you?? The dreamer or the guy that maxes out the credit card.
#113
Posted 30 April 2018 - 06:55 AM
I would think that any telescope that you make good use of is better than not having a scope because you cannot afford perfections or so many scopes you never get round to serious use with any. A well made inexpensive scope with a simple eyepiece can give any number of good views if conditions allow.
....still as some one with two refractors and a Dob and a large number of eyepieces who does not live in steady skies by the coast on in the tropics,.... I still feel the call of a nice slow 6 or 7 inch Mak!
Your scope and set up looks nice Hiroshi.
Hmm better take my own advice and go out and look at Jupiter rather than pics of astro toys before I do something expensive.
- Asbytec and astroneil like this
#114
Posted 30 April 2018 - 07:08 AM
I would think that any telescope that you make good use of is better than not having a scope because you cannot afford perfections or so many scopes you never get round to serious use with any. A well made inexpensive scope with a simple eyepiece can give any number of good views if conditions allow.
Enough to have kept me in the hobby for 5 decades with scopes between a 60mm refractor and an 18" Dob. For various reasons, my 6" MCT gets more use than any of them. Excellent tropical seeing and ease of set up and use are two of them. The views are amazing and I learned to use it, these are the main reasons. Got it on closeout years ago. Figure it cost me about $1/observing hour.
- paulsky, Jaimo!, astroneil and 1 other like this
#115
Posted 30 April 2018 - 07:10 AM
So true. You buy what you got the cash for. everything else you dream about. Well, that is unless you want to max out that new credit card you just got. So which are you?? The dreamer or the guy that maxes out the credit card.
You mean to increase the cash...than you have more options....but don't forget the accessories ,sometimes they cost more than the scope itself.Here is what I use on the back of my mak
Sct-T2 adapter 25$
Baader heavy duty quick changer 115$
Baader Zeiss prism diagonal 260$
Nikon supercharged bino with baader quick lock holders about 600$
Zeiss Jena 25mm ortho 400$
0.965" to 1.25" adapters 20$
Lymax cooler 100$
Dew shield 10$
The total is 1530$ and my mak was 550$
So keep in mind all of this when you buy telescope and you want it to perform at it's best.You can go with cheaper accessories but the performance will not be at this level
Edited by asenov13, 30 April 2018 - 07:14 AM.
#116
Posted 30 April 2018 - 07:22 AM
"The views are amazing and I learned to use it, these are the main reasons"
Yes I can easily see that from your sketches. I spend too much time fiddling with different options at present but a bit down the track I might yet settle down and just observe more, before us Aussie lose the planetary 'high' ground to the Northerners.
Nice binoviewers you have Asenov. I should give mine a go on Jupiter on another night with my fac.
Forgot to turn the fan on the Dob...now I get to see if the stock fan will make much difference on cooling autumn night.
Edited by Foc, 30 April 2018 - 07:25 AM.
- Asbytec likes this
#117
Posted 30 April 2018 - 08:06 AM
Yes I can easily see that from your sketches. I spend too much time fiddling with different options at present but a bit down the track I might yet settle down and just observe more, before us Aussie lose the planetary 'high' ground to the Northerners.
Foc, yea, a game changer for me was to de emphasize my equipment and emphasize using it. Settle down and use it, as you say. Especially when the planets are higher in the sky. Sometimes I want a better scope or a larger aperture, but after a night of use I always ask myself, "Why?" They are better, but I'm enjoying this one.
#118
Posted 30 April 2018 - 09:14 AM
You mean to increase the cash...than you have more options....but don't forget the accessories ,sometimes they cost more than the scope itself.Here is what I use on the back of my mak
Sct-T2 adapter 25$
Baader heavy duty quick changer 115$
Baader Zeiss prism diagonal 260$
Nikon supercharged bino with baader quick lock holders about 600$
Zeiss Jena 25mm ortho 400$
0.965" to 1.25" adapters 20$
Lymax cooler 100$
Dew shield 10$
The total is 1530$ and my mak was 550$
So keep in mind all of this when you buy telescope and you want it to perform at it's best.You can go with cheaper accessories but the performance will not be at this level
and good eyepieces are getting more expensive and now bigger and bigger. One of my new scopes came with a 4" focuser. A 4" eyepiece costs more than the scope
#119
Posted 30 April 2018 - 09:33 AM
and good eyepieces are getting more expensive and now bigger and bigger. One of my new scopes came with a 4" focuser. A 4" eyepiece costs more than the scope
It doesn't matter how big are your eyepieces.....Zeiss quality is unmatched.
#120
Posted 30 April 2018 - 10:13 AM
No way to get inside?
I had to remove the front meniscus and get the screws out. By doing that, the collimation was way off and needed adjustment. Would be nice if SW would have just threaded the holes in the tube so you wouldn’t need the nuts.
Bill
#121
Posted 30 April 2018 - 12:16 PM
do you have opportunity to compare with 6kg タカハシ mewlon 180 at 170,000 yen?
You could sell me the mewlon and buy a sw180 and an ethos and find out which is better.
#122
Posted 30 April 2018 - 02:01 PM
It doesn't matter how big are your eyepieces.....Zeiss quality is unmatched.
But that 120 degree view is unmatched
#123
Posted 30 April 2018 - 02:22 PM
But that 120 degree view is unmatched
Enjoy it than...but Zeiss orthos will beat it in every other way...
light transmission
contrast
light scatter
colour tone
aberations
sharpness
flat field
lighter
can be used on binoviewer
I am sure there is even more but that seems to be enough
#124
Posted 30 April 2018 - 05:02 PM
Enjoy it than...but Zeiss orthos will beat it in every other way...
light transmission
contrast
light scatter
colour tone
aberations
sharpness
flat field
lighter
can be used on binoviewer
I am sure there is even more but that seems to be enough
Nope, want that 120 degree space portal. Besides I have enough Zeiss eyepieces
#125
Posted 30 April 2018 - 05:50 PM
I had to remove the front meniscus and get the screws out. By doing that, the collimation was way off and needed adjustment. Would be nice if SW would have just threaded the holes in the tube so you wouldn’t need the nuts.
Bill
I jumped on a 6" version so i hope it is ok.