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

Mewlon 180 vs 210

  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 SkyRanger

SkyRanger

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 603
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Prescott Valley, AZ

Posted 16 September 2021 - 06:37 PM

I am considering a Mewlon as a companion to my TSA 120.  It would be mounted in my back yard POD, possibly dual mounted with my 120. (G-11 mounted on a pier)  My budget says go for the 180, but my get-more-aperture side says “go for the 210.”  There is a significant price jump for a smidgen over a 1” increase in aperture.  Can anyone comment on the performance difference between the two scopes?  It would be visual only and used for both L&P and deep sky.

 

Looking forward to your comments.

 

Gordon G

Prescott Valley, AZ


  • Blueox4 and teashea like this

#2 Mrrodgerdelodger

Mrrodgerdelodger

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 121
  • Joined: 13 Dec 2019
  • Loc: Leicestershire, UK

Posted 16 September 2021 - 07:01 PM

I’ve got the TSA120 with a Mewlon 210. Both awesome scopes.  In good seeing I’ve used very high magnifications on the 210 on very close doubles, up to 600x.  If you can afford the 210 I’d go for it.  The TSA120 is so good that you need the max aperture difference to make it worthwhile IMO. 
 

Best wishes

 

John

 


  • SkyRanger, aneeg, Stopforths and 2 others like this

#3 rkelley8493

rkelley8493

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,836
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2019
  • Loc: The Emerald Coast

Posted 16 September 2021 - 07:15 PM

I haven't had much time out with the Mewlon 210, but judging from what I've seen so far, it's in the same league as my 130 triplet in terms of light gathering and weight class. They complement each other very well though.

You could designate your 120 for wide field observing and the 210 for high power lunar & planetary observing, which is what I'm planning to do.


Edited by rkelley8493, 16 September 2021 - 07:17 PM.

  • SkyRanger likes this

#4 Kevin Barker

Kevin Barker

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 969
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2009
  • Loc: Auckland, NZ

Posted 16 September 2021 - 07:16 PM

My brother has a Mewlon 180c and a fc-100. The Mewlon pulls ahead in planetary but not by much. On deep sky the extra aperture  goes deeper with DSO's. The 180 can also take high magnification and on DSO's it would perhaps deliver more like what you would get from a 140-150 apochromat. Having said that the fc-100 and 180c combination does work well.

 

Because you have a TSA120 already perhaps the Mewlon 210 might be a better match. The f11.5 Mewlon 210  has a slightly longer focal length than the f12 180 c. You will likely find the Mewlon just as easy to mount as the TSA120.

 

Interestingly 120x1.8 = 216mm and 100x1.8 =180mm


  • SkyRanger and Stopforths like this

#5 teashea

teashea

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,227
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2020
  • Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

Posted 16 September 2021 - 07:58 PM

I am considering a Mewlon as a companion to my TSA 120.  It would be mounted in my back yard POD, possibly dual mounted with my 120. (G-11 mounted on a pier)  My budget says go for the 180, but my get-more-aperture side says “go for the 210.”  There is a significant price jump for a smidgen over a 1” increase in aperture.  Can anyone comment on the performance difference between the two scopes?  It would be visual only and used for both L&P and deep sky.

 

Looking forward to your comments.

 

Gordon G

Prescott Valley, AZ

I have a TSA 120 and a Mewlon 180C.  They are both excellent telescopes.  I can certainly see why one might want them as companions.  The build/finish quality of these telescopes is the same - typical Takahashi excellence.  The TSA120 has better optical quality.  That certainly does not mean the Mewlon is not excellent - just not quite as superb.  The Mewlon is my only non-refractor and for that reason is rather fun.  

 

187187766_10222211059199810_8903683398579780622_n.jpg

 

202462975_10222456328731395_1267816109289772361_n.jpg

 

178716486_10222098720791420_573825271509543565_n.jpg


  • Kevin Barker, SkyRanger, alfogator and 2 others like this

#6 Stopforths

Stopforths

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 254
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2018

Posted 16 September 2021 - 11:03 PM

I just love the mewlon 180c.  Incredibly portable light and capable.    Stunning on Jupiter in good air.  Fits on my old HEQ5 very well and an lx65 mount also.  Works very well with a binoviewer.  Also own a superb fc100 the mewlon can never show stars like the florite f8 but its as good as it gets for a cassegrain type scope.

 

The 210 definitely appeals to me and is only 8 kg but I also have a nice 8 inch sct for dso's etc


  • Kevin Barker and teashea like this

#7 SkyRanger

SkyRanger

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 603
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Prescott Valley, AZ

Posted 16 September 2021 - 11:05 PM

Thanks for all the comments.  I'm hoping to hear more ideas and suggestions tomorrow.


Thanks!

GG



#8 dweller25

dweller25

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,340
  • Joined: 30 Aug 2007
  • Loc: Lancashire, UK

Posted 17 September 2021 - 12:31 AM

The M180 has less mass than the M210 so will cool quicker.

The M180 will show slightly more planetary detail than your FS102 and less than your TSA120, it will be a little better on deep sky than the TSA120.

The M210 will be a little better then your TSA120 on the planets with good seeing and definitely better on deep sky but it’s still only an 8” scope.

In my opinion it may be better to use the TSA120 for the planets and lunar and get a C11 for deep sky, which will be a little better than your 10” Teeter.

 

Alternatively, just stay with the three very fine scopes that you have and enjoy them waytogo.gif


Edited by dweller25, 17 September 2021 - 12:35 AM.

  • SkyRanger, Stopforths and teashea like this

#9 Traveler

Traveler

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,854
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2007
  • Loc: The Netherlands

Posted 17 September 2021 - 12:34 AM

The M180 has less mass than the M210 so will cool quicker.

The M180 will show slightly more planetary detail than your FS102 and less than your TSA120, it will be a little better on deep sky than the TSA120.

The M210 will be a little better then your TSA120 on the planets with good seeing and definitely better on deep sky but it’s still only an 8” scope.

In my opinion it may be better to use the TSA120 for the planets and lunar and get a C11 for deep sky.

+1


  • SkyRanger likes this

#10 Bill Barlow

Bill Barlow

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,221
  • Joined: 03 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Overland Park KS

Posted 17 September 2021 - 10:30 AM

The 210 will have a 34% light grasp advantage over the 180.  Not a big “wow” factor but objects will be a tad brighter.  About the same difference in an 8” SCT vs. the 9.25”.  Since you already have the 120 triplet, not sure the 180 will offer much improvement in viewing most objects, only smaller, dimmer targets like galaxies.  Probably go for the 210 if you can afford it and the mount can handle the extra weight.

 

Bill


  • payner, SkyRanger and Stopforths like this

#11 payner

payner

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,807
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2007
  • Loc: Bluegrass & SW Appalachian Regions, Kentucky

Posted 17 September 2021 - 11:22 AM

In addition to brighter images, the 210 will resolve more detail on planetary and certainly outperform a 120/130 mm refractor.  All this is prefaced with seeing conditions that support 210 mm aperture (the 120/130 mm will be less affected by poorer seeing conditions) and collimation dialed in.

 

Randy


  • SkyRanger and rkelley8493 like this

#12 SkyRanger

SkyRanger

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 603
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Prescott Valley, AZ

Posted 17 September 2021 - 04:05 PM

The M180 has less mass than the M210 so will cool quicker.

The M180 will show slightly more planetary detail than your FS102 and less than your TSA120, it will be a little better on deep sky than the TSA120.

The M210 will be a little better then your TSA120 on the planets with good seeing and definitely better on deep sky but it’s still only an 8” scope.

In my opinion it may be better to use the TSA120 for the planets and lunar and get a C11 for deep sky, which will be a little better than your 10” Teeter.

 

Alternatively, just stay with the three very fine scopes that you have and enjoy them waytogo.gif

You have a very good point about just enjoying the three fine scopes that I have.  I am blessed to have these scopes, and getting here was a journey of nearly 60 years.  One of the biggest events of recent years was to mount the 120 on a G-11 and pier in my backyard POD.  It is easy to get spoiled when all it takes is 2 minutes or so to open the POD and put away the tarp that keeps dust off of the scope.  I usually do this in late afternoon, turn the POD to put the scope in the shade, and I am ready to begin observing as soon as the sky is ready.  I am in my early 70s and sometimes it is just so much easier to open the POD than to move the Teeter 10" out of the garage. This got me wondering about what larger scope I could mount in the dome.  The Mewlons have long fascinated me, and the 180 fits my retired-and-careful budget much better than the 210.  The M 250 is just the stuff that dreams are made of. (The Teeter still makes regular trips to darker skies not too far from Prescott, AZ.)

 

The consensus is that the Mewlon 210 is likely the better upgrade (and companion) to my Tak 120 (which is a very fine scope, indeed!). I have been a Newt astronomer for most of my years (since I ground and constructed a 6" f/10 in high school), and I have never warmed to SCTs. It is probably not wise to make the financial jump to the M 210, so I think I will focus on enjoying what I have. 

Thanks for all the thoughtful comments!

GG


  • dweller25, ianatcn and alnitak22 like this

#13 dweller25

dweller25

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,340
  • Joined: 30 Aug 2007
  • Loc: Lancashire, UK

Posted 18 September 2021 - 06:16 AM

Hello Gordon,

One other thought now that I know you have a Pod - would a 6” F/8 ED doublet refractor fit in your pod ? 



#14 SkyRanger

SkyRanger

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 603
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Prescott Valley, AZ

Posted 18 September 2021 - 09:05 AM

I don’t think a 6” f/8 would fit.  I made my pier as tall as possible to keep my knees off of the floor.  My 120 just has a couple of inches of clearance from the dome.  A TOA 130 (Be still, my beating heart…) might barely fit.  Of course, that would be a small and very expensive upgrade!

 

GG


  • rkelley8493 and teashea like this

#15 dweller25

dweller25

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,340
  • Joined: 30 Aug 2007
  • Loc: Lancashire, UK

Posted 18 September 2021 - 09:44 AM

That’s a shame Gordon.

The best views I ever had were through a 10” Newt, but it was too heavy for my bad back and awkward to look through too so I sold it.

I have been looking for a folded design equivalent for a long time to match the 10” Newts performance and at a reasonable weight/price but such a scope does not exist.

If I had a pod then the Mewlon 250 would be the scope for me, but I don’t.

Very happy with my 4” and 5” refractors though waytogo.gif


  • SkyRanger likes this

#16 SkyRanger

SkyRanger

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 603
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Prescott Valley, AZ

Posted 18 September 2021 - 03:38 PM

My 10” Teeter gives extremely sharp and contrasy views with its quartz Zambuto mirror.  I bought it used about 2 years ago.  If I weren’t so old and lazy it would get yard duty more often, but I am very spoiled by having a scope in the POD.

 

Gordon G


  • dweller25 and lwbehney like this

#17 dweller25

dweller25

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,340
  • Joined: 30 Aug 2007
  • Loc: Lancashire, UK

Posted 18 September 2021 - 04:19 PM

You have made some good choices waytogo.gif


  • SkyRanger likes this

#18 lwbehney

lwbehney

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 182
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2018

Posted 18 September 2021 - 04:53 PM

I am considering a Mewlon as a companion to my TSA 120.  It would be mounted in my back yard POD, possibly dual mounted with my 120. (G-11 mounted on a pier)  My budget says go for the 180, but my get-more-aperture side says “go for the 210.”  There is a significant price jump for a smidgen over a 1” increase in aperture.  Can anyone comment on the performance difference between the two scopes?  It would be visual only and used for both L&P and deep sky.

 

Looking forward to your comments.

 

Gordon G

Prescott Valley, AZ

Hello Gordon,

I own an FS-128 and have compared it to a µ180c. The 180c has excellent contrast and I could see galaxies with  that instrument, which  I could not even detect in the 128. You would notice a great difference in DSO performance in my opinion. The others are correct in that planetary performance may not be as good, but that is only because your 120 is so much less affected by atmospheric turbulence. It can't beat your Teeter of course, but it is so light and portable, that you could double mount it just as you suggested. 

 

-Larry


  • SkyRanger and teashea like this

#19 SkyRanger

SkyRanger

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 603
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Prescott Valley, AZ

Posted 18 September 2021 - 05:17 PM

Hello Gordon,

I own an FS-128 and have compared it to a µ180c. The 180c has excellent contrast and I could see galaxies with  that instrument, which  I could not even detect in the 128. You would notice a great difference in DSO performance in my opinion. The others are correct in that planetary performance may not be as good, but that is only because your 120 is so much less affected by atmospheric turbulence. It can't beat your Teeter of course, but it is so light and portable, that you could double mount it just as you suggested. 

 

-Larry

Thanks, Larry!  It is invaluable to get this kind of first hand experience.

GG



#20 nva

nva

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: 01 Sep 2018

Posted 19 September 2021 - 10:50 AM

My 210 trounces my 127mm refractor on all targets except Saturn, Jupiter and Mars, still not entirely sure why this is, maybe bad seeing.

Edited by nva, 19 September 2021 - 10:52 AM.

  • SkyRanger and teashea like this

#21 ckwastro

ckwastro

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,715
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2005
  • Loc: Tempe, AZ

Posted 19 September 2021 - 11:21 AM

My 210 trounces my 127mm refractor on all targets except Saturn, Jupiter and Mars, still not entirely sure why this is, maybe bad seeing.

My old 210 was the same. Excellent lunar performance but lacking on the planets. My best guess is the mediocre seeing in my area. The 210 seemed much more sensitive to seeing conditions than both my refractor and 12.5” Dob. Not sure why and I have no quantitative data on it, but that was my normal experience with the 210. 


  • SkyRanger likes this

#22 lwbehney

lwbehney

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 182
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2018

Posted 20 September 2021 - 10:43 PM

I concur with nva and ckwastro. My FS 128 shows better details on the planets than either the µ210 I own now or the µ 180c I owned earlier with the exception of one quiet evening of very good seeing, when detail on Jupiter was astounding in my µ210. I think seeing conditions make a huge difference. Now on globular clusters and galaxies, the 210 always wins, but I usually use moderate powers on these objects. 

-Larry


  • Nippon and SkyRanger like this

#23 Nippon

Nippon

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,637
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2009
  • Loc: Central Florida

Posted 21 September 2021 - 02:29 PM

I concur with nva and ckwastro. My FS 128 shows better details on the planets than either the µ210 I own now or the µ 180c I owned earlier with the exception of one quiet evening of very good seeing, when detail on Jupiter was astounding in my µ210. I think seeing conditions make a huge difference. Now on globular clusters and galaxies, the 210 always wins, but I usually use moderate powers on these objects. 

-Larry

That is consistent with my experience comparing my Vixen ED103s to my Takahashi Mewlon 180. The 180 always exceeds the performance of the 103 on all deep sky objects. On planets during nights of average to good seeing the 103 gives a cleaner looking image and it appears I'm seeing most all it's 4" aperture can deliver. The 180 on the same nights shows as much or a little more detail but not as clean and it appears I'm not seeing all it is capable of. Every once in a while on an exceptional night the 180 will deliver outstanding detail on Jupiter and Saturn. My conclusion is the 180 is affected much more by the quality of the seeing.


  • SkyRanger and teashea like this

#24 Brollen

Brollen

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 611
  • Joined: 18 Feb 2012
  • Loc: Maryland, USA

Posted 22 September 2021 - 02:40 PM

At a recent star party I attended, 2 weeks back in PA, I had both my Sharpstar 140mm PH, a dual-ED f/6.5 triplet, and my Mewlon 180c. I had 2 wonderful nights under the stars in a yellow/green zone area, each night being similar in clarity and seeing - the 2nd maybe a tad worse than the 1st with some intermittent light haze/vapor passing through.

 

Unfortunately I did not use them side by side - I only brought a single saddle alt-az mount - using the 140 on the 1st night and the 180c on the 2nd. I wanted to spend as much time as possible with each scope on each night in a relaxed way. Also, the optical trains were not entirely the same - though using the same line of EPs (Baader Morpheus) with both, the 140 was used with a 2" AP MaxBright diagonal with the 9mm, 12.5mm and 14mm Morpheus EPs and the 180 was used with a Baader T2 1.25" 32mm prism diagonal and the 17.5mm and 14mm Morpheus EPs.

 

The planetary views of Jupiter and Saturn were very good with each scope. But I would give the nod to the Sharpstar - the clarity and detail especially on Saturn late in the evening after 3-4 hours of cooling, where very sharp.

 

Looking at M22 and M13 in each was also a thrill as no averted vision required. On the first night, I remember being wow'ed by the 140 when viewing these two globs - I felt like I was seeing fairly deeply into each. On the 2nd night with the 180c, well it blew me away on these 2 globs - the images were much brighter with greater detail and a definite sense that I was going deeper in each vs. the 140.

 

I wished I could have stayed up each night to catch Orion - but I was not able. That comparison will have to wait another month or two. Anyways, that was my take away from two nights of wonderful casual observing ... and that the Mewlon 180c was not outgunned by a 5.5" APO... at least to my eyes and sensibilities.

 

YMMV ... clear skies!


Edited by Brollen, 22 September 2021 - 02:53 PM.

  • Kevin Barker, SkyRanger, Xeroid and 1 other like this


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






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics