Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Maksutov: same enterprise group, different price and quality?

Cassegrain Catadioptric Celestron Equipment Maksutov Orion
  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

#26 cassini.astro

cassini.astro

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2021

Posted 14 March 2021 - 10:43 PM

That assumes he has a mount with a D saddle. I doubt he is putting a 4” Mak on any mount with a D saddle.

Shipping to Columbia is probably expensive. I would hate for him to get the Celestron one and find it doesn’t fit his mount.

Which brings up a good topic, what will the mount be?

Scott

I have a Ioptron CEM25p. Any advice to choose between Skywatcher, Celestron and Orion for buying a MAK 7"?



#27 cassini.astro

cassini.astro

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2021

Posted 14 March 2021 - 10:45 PM

The Synta180mm Maksutov is practically the same in the three cases you mention. Painting, support and accessories are the only difference as far as I know (Celestron uses a Losmandy/CGE dovetail, which should be a real improvement in stiffness).

 

From what I understand, it is a quite specialized instrument (ideal for planetary, lunar and double star observation), at f/15 and 2700mm focal distance it's not ideal for DSO imaging.

 

I suppose that you have a good enough mount for it. This review of an older copy might be interesting:

http://www.astro-bab... 180 Review.htm

 

N.F.

astro-baby.com  This domain has expired.



#28 cassini.astro

cassini.astro

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2021

Posted 14 March 2021 - 10:46 PM

OP these aren't a cheap Questar, accept that and move on.

 

The Schott sticker is meaningless. If you base your decision on a sticker... that's dumb - it is about as meaningful as a car with a TURBO sticker. Plenty of other cars have turbo engines without the stickers.

 

As many have pointed out they ALL COME FROM THE SAME FACTORY AND ARE OPTICALLY IDENTICAL. 99.9% they have the same glass because if the correctors were made of different glass this implies the indexes are different, the radii and mirror separations will be different, and the tools etc for the manufacture will be different. That is not economical for a factory relying on computerised machines to make the optics.

 

You will not find published specifications beyond the aperture, focal length, approximate size and weight.

 

Anyway.. there are maks with better optics than Questar, but I'll leave it to you to find that out, and how to find one.

Really I want to know or I want to understand why the order in price for MAK7" is Skywatcher (most expensive), Celestron (medium) and Orion (cheapest), There are very differences of quality between all of three? What is your opinion?



#29 luxo II

luxo II

    Gemini

  • -----
  • Posts: 3,395
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2017
  • Loc: Sydney, Australia

Posted 15 March 2021 - 12:26 AM

Really I want to know or I want to understand why the order in price for MAK7" is Skywatcher (most expensive), Celestron (medium) and Orion (cheapest), There are very differences of quality between all of three? What is your opinion?

Buy what suits you, they're the same optically and the differences are trivial.

 

If you're a cheapass, buy Orion (and take a chance on poor customer service) and a crappy dovetail;

if you want a better dovetail, buy Celestron;

If a Schott sticker is what you want - and that's literally what you're buying - a sticker, never mind the crappy dovetail, buy Skywatcher. 

 

But I don't think you're a serious buyer. Prove me wrong...


Edited by luxo II, 15 March 2021 - 12:47 AM.


#30 SeattleScott

SeattleScott

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,249
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011

Posted 15 March 2021 - 09:01 AM

I have a Ioptron CEM25p. Any advice to choose between Skywatcher, Celestron and Orion for buying a MAK 7"?

The CEM25 accepts a Vixen dovetail so that eliminates Celestron. The Skywatcher is more expensive but it comes with more accessories. If you already have a 2” diagonal or spare Finderscope then maybe get Orion.

Scott

#31 nfotis

nfotis

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 176
  • Joined: 22 Jun 2020
  • Loc: Athens, Greece

Posted 15 March 2021 - 04:44 PM

astro-baby.com This domain has expired.

Strange, probably my browser used a cached copy of the review (try accessing it through the internet archive).

The different prices of the various 180mm Maks are due to different accessories, dealer policies etc. The Celestron version has the large Losmandy dovetail too.

N.F.

Edited by nfotis, 15 March 2021 - 04:45 PM.


#32 petersmeadelx6

petersmeadelx6

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 143
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2011
  • Loc: Beeton, Ontario

Posted 15 March 2021 - 07:48 PM

I have had a number of 127 SW models (newer and older). The newer ones have longer dovetail mounts. I have never had one flop around. the older ones use a specific dovetail-type mount that is held on by 2 screws. I also have a 6" which is quite a bit heavier and again, no issues with the dovetail.

Regarding the Schott glass, is it meaningless? Yes and No. Schott glass is the actual name of the type of glass that is used and Corning swiped it and called it Pyrex. This, given to me directly from SW when I wrote to ask them about Schott glass (as I had 20 127 models, one with and one without).

I also have a Nexstar 6, 8, Meade 10SCT, and recently picked up an 6RC and 152 achromat. I still have to test them all against each other (when weather warms up a bit) but I am always pleased with the 6 SW Mak. 

My wife and I were looking at Mars when it was closest a few months back and she said "keep this, it is the clearest I have looked through (the 127 Sw Mak.)

As long as the collimation is good, you shouldn't be displeased with their product unless you have the odd lemon and that can happen with almost any manufacturer. 



#33 cassini.astro

cassini.astro

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2021

Posted 15 March 2021 - 09:26 PM

Buy what suits you, they're the same optically and the differences are trivial.

 

If you're a cheapass, buy Orion (and take a chance on poor customer service) and a crappy dovetail;

if you want a better dovetail, buy Celestron;

If a Schott sticker is what you want - and that's literally what you're buying - a sticker, never mind the crappy dovetail, buy Skywatcher. 

 

But I don't think you're a serious buyer. Prove me wrong...

Thank you Luxo II for your judgments. Consider the following perspective: I want to learn from the optical quality. Then, share your knowledge.



#34 cassini.astro

cassini.astro

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2021

Posted 15 March 2021 - 09:31 PM

I have had a number of 127 SW models (newer and older). The newer ones have longer dovetail mounts. I have never had one flop around. the older ones use a specific dovetail-type mount that is held on by 2 screws. I also have a 6" which is quite a bit heavier and again, no issues with the dovetail.

Regarding the Schott glass, is it meaningless? Yes and No. Schott glass is the actual name of the type of glass that is used and Corning swiped it and called it Pyrex. This, given to me directly from SW when I wrote to ask them about Schott glass (as I had 20 127 models, one with and one without).

I also have a Nexstar 6, 8, Meade 10SCT, and recently picked up an 6RC and 152 achromat. I still have to test them all against each other (when weather warms up a bit) but I am always pleased with the 6 SW Mak. 

My wife and I were looking at Mars when it was closest a few months back and she said "keep this, it is the clearest I have looked through (the 127 Sw Mak.)

As long as the collimation is good, you shouldn't be displeased with their product unless you have the odd lemon and that can happen with almost any manufacturer. 

I've been reading about the transmission and reflection characteristics of Starbright XLT coating vs Schott glass, but can't find which is better, which would make the decision between the Celestron and SkyWatcher easier to make.



#35 luxo II

luxo II

    Gemini

  • -----
  • Posts: 3,395
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2017
  • Loc: Sydney, Australia

Posted 15 March 2021 - 10:14 PM

 I want to learn from the optical quality.

See post #29. There is nothing for you to "learn".


Edited by luxo II, 15 March 2021 - 10:25 PM.


#36 cassini.astro

cassini.astro

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2021

Posted 15 March 2021 - 10:52 PM

The CEM25 accepts a Vixen dovetail so that eliminates Celestron. The Skywatcher is more expensive but it comes with more accessories. If you already have a 2” diagonal or spare Finderscope then maybe get Orion.

Scott

Thank you Seattle Scott. Then, the dovetail included with Celestron MK7 does nor work with iOptron CEM 25? Why?. I do not recognize the differences between the dovetails.



#37 cassini.astro

cassini.astro

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2021

Posted 16 March 2021 - 05:45 PM

I wrote to Celestron and Skywatcher and I receive the same answer. Both OTA are the same...the diferente is the color of paint



#38 RichA

RichA

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,236
  • Joined: 03 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Toronto, Canada

Posted 16 March 2021 - 07:15 PM

OP these aren't a cheap Questar, accept that and move on.

 

The Schott sticker is meaningless. If you base your decision on a sticker... that's dumb - it is about as meaningful as a car with a TURBO sticker. Plenty of other cars have turbo engines without the stickers.

 

As many have pointed out they ALL COME FROM THE SAME FACTORY AND ARE OPTICALLY IDENTICAL. 99.9% they have the same glass because if the correctors were made of different glass this implies the indexes are different, the radii and mirror separations will be different, and the tools etc for the manufacture will be different. That is not economical for a factory relying on computerised machines to make the optics.

 

You will not find published specifications beyond the aperture, focal length, approximate size and weight.

 

Anyway.. there are maks with better optics than Questar, but I'll leave it to you to find that out, and how to find one.

Also, variations are minor. These are made on machines designed for it  not in someone's basement.



#39 nfotis

nfotis

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 176
  • Joined: 22 Jun 2020
  • Loc: Athens, Greece

Posted 16 March 2021 - 07:56 PM

I wrote to Celestron and Skywatcher and I receive the same answer. Both OTA are the same...the diferente is the color of paint

And the dovetail (the Celestron uses a thicker Losmandy dovetail instead of a slim Vixen dovetail)

 

See the orange dovetail in the Celestron 180mm:

https://www.rotherva...arge/700mak.JPG

 

Compare with the green Vixen-style dovetail of the Skymax 180:

https://www.rotherva...ewskymax180.jpg

 

If your mount can accept the wider Losmandy dovetail, I would suggest going for the Celestron version.

 

N.F.



#40 Jaimo!

Jaimo!

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 4,331
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2007
  • Loc: 3rd Stone from the Sun

Posted 16 March 2021 - 08:33 PM

Color, mounting plate (the Celestron has a Losmandy format available), after sale support and accessories. I think SW has the most and Orion the least. For a new scope, I dont think it matters about support (at least in the US). Orion can be problematic if you didnt buy it new though.

 

 

The Synta scopes come from the same factories in China. Just different importers. I've never read of any quality differences between the Orion, Sky Watcher or Celestron models. Just different paint jobs really. I would examine the scopes specs closely and pick the retailer that has the best reputation for customer service. I have Maksutov's from Celestron and Orion. Also a mount from Sky Watcher and they are all good...Best of luck with your choice! waytogo.gif

 

 

Hi Andrei,

 

Yes these are all made by Synta and while the optics and mechanicals are the same, there are some differences:

 

1. Paint colour (if that matters);

 

2. The "Skywatcher" ones:

- usually have a "Schott Glass" sticker on the side, and

- have a vixen rail attached to the OTA that is mechanically weak,  the OTA will flex and flop depending where the scope is pointing

 

3. The Celestron ones have a much stiffer dovetail arrangement, which is preferable over the others.

 

Optical quality across all is generally very good.

 

 

They all come from the same factory - there is no distinction in optical quality. Some are excellent, most very good and a few not so good - this is standard manufacturing statistics 101.

Celestron/Orion/skywatchers sites all have specs.

 

 

I wrote to Celestron and Skywatcher and I receive the same answer. Both OTA are the same...the diferente is the color of paint

 

bangbang.gif bangbang.gif bangbang.gif bangbang.gif


  • eros312 likes this

#41 Auburn80

Auburn80

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,116
  • Joined: 01 Apr 2013

Posted 17 March 2021 - 10:08 AM

bangbang.gifbangbang.gifbangbang.gifbangbang.gif


🤣

#42 luxo II

luxo II

    Gemini

  • -----
  • Posts: 3,395
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2017
  • Loc: Sydney, Australia

Posted 17 March 2021 - 03:07 PM

My guess OP will not buy any of these.

#43 GSBass

GSBass

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,113
  • Joined: 21 May 2020
  • Loc: South Carolina

Posted 17 March 2021 - 04:32 PM

I think skywatcher has prettiest paint job, I think the comments made about Celestron dovetail are probably the best reason to consider one over the other but it’s also the ugliest paint job..... and of course Orion is the best because that’s what I have wink.gif

——

a bird in the pocket is better than two in the bush 


Edited by GSBass, 17 March 2021 - 04:36 PM.


#44 JohnH

JohnH

    Gemini

  • ****-
  • Posts: 3,332
  • Joined: 04 Oct 2005
  • Loc: Squamish BC Moved!!!!!

Posted 17 March 2021 - 05:58 PM

The one thing I see mentioned about these scopes is the have a certain lack polish on how they look and sometimes how they function mechanically. The accessories are sort of a mixed bag and don't alway match the look and feel of they main OTA.

 

 

Slow cool down and thermal artifacts impacting the view are to be expected, given the thick piece of optical glass in the corrector and the lack of ventilation of some models.

 

 

That said, optically, very few have come away disappointed at their quality.



#45 GSBass

GSBass

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,113
  • Joined: 21 May 2020
  • Loc: South Carolina

Posted 17 March 2021 - 08:15 PM

I keep mine in garage, that has pretty much eliminated any thermal issues so recommend owners do the same or buy a shed to store it, you may still have issues for large temperature drops while observing but that mostly solves that issue.... as far as fit and finish, somewhat agree it could be better, but they are functional, don’t break or lose colmination so I can’t complain too much, a little image shift on most of them so a add on focuser might be in your future if you photograph a lot. 

The one thing I see mentioned about these scopes is the have a certain lack polish on how they look and sometimes how they function mechanically. The accessories are sort of a mixed bag and don't alway match the look and feel of they main OTA.

 

 

Slow cool down and thermal artifacts impacting the view are to be expected, given the thick piece of optical glass in the corrector and the lack of ventilation of some models.

 

 

That said, optically, very few have come away disappointed at their quality.



#46 barbie

barbie

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,510
  • Joined: 28 Jan 2013
  • Loc: Northeast Ohio

Posted 17 March 2021 - 09:00 PM

I love my Synta made 90mm Mak!! For cold weather use, I simply set it up outside on my front porch for an hour before use and it's thermally acclimated and ready to go! It never disappoints with its tack sharp images of the moon, planets and brighter double stars!


Edited by barbie, 17 March 2021 - 09:02 PM.


#47 JohnH

JohnH

    Gemini

  • ****-
  • Posts: 3,332
  • Joined: 04 Oct 2005
  • Loc: Squamish BC Moved!!!!!

Posted 18 March 2021 - 01:06 PM

I keep mine in garage, that has pretty much eliminated any thermal issues so recommend owners do the same or buy a shed to store it, you may still have issues for large temperature drops while observing but that mostly solves that issue.... as far as fit and finish, somewhat agree it could be better, but they are functional, don’t break or lose colmination so I can’t complain too much, a little image shift on most of them so a add on focuser might be in your future if you photograph a lot. 

IF I am going to use it in the winter, it stays in the outdoor observatory.

 

In summer the garage in the coolest part.



#48 GSBass

GSBass

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,113
  • Joined: 21 May 2020
  • Loc: South Carolina

Posted 18 March 2021 - 01:24 PM

Yeah, goal being for scope to be closest to out door temp as possible.... weather is fairly moderate where I live, rarely more that a 20 degree swing from day to night

IF I am going to use it in the winter, it stays in the outdoor observatory.

 

In summer the garage in the coolest part.




CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Cassegrain, Catadioptric, Celestron, Equipment, Maksutov, Orion



Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics