Hi, I'm about to buy my first telescope for myself and my kids (9 and 11). It's been quite a learning curve getting my head around all the terminology and options, but I've narrowed it down to two models from the Celestron Starsense Explorer range - the DX5 SCT vs. the DX130AZ.
However, I'm going round in circles on the opticals: whether to go for the DX5/Schmidt-Cassegrain or the DX130AZ/Newtonian Reflector. Everything I read seems to list equal pros and cons for both SCT and Newtonian. I expect our usage will be the normal beginner level viewing (so planets, moon, star clusters etc, but not astrophotography) and I'd prioritize quality of imaging, magnification, portability and ease of use (so the kids can also go viewing on their own). I'd really appreciate any insight into which way to go - SCT or Newtonian?
These should both be very good general purpose telescopes. You stated the the scope is meant to be for you and your 2 kids (9 and 11 years old). Either one could be a good choice for all.
A big advantage of the DX5 that I have not seen brought up here is the ability to use it for terrestrial viewing. I used all my telescopes this way when I was young and I was never bothered by the inverted view from the star diagonal. (The reflector would give an upside down view and I find that a bit harder to ignore.)
HOWEVER, I lived in a wide open high desert landscape with distant mountains on the horizon. I had a lot to look at. I now live in a cul de sac, and there is nothing to look at during the day, so the fact that my 150mm reflector isn't really useful for terrestrial views doesn't bother me a bit.
The tube of the DX 5 is very compact and a bit more intuitive to "point" at objects you want to view. As many here point out though, the field of view is a lot narrower than what the reflector provides and there are certain objects that simply won't "fit" in the eyepiece of the DX 5.
To really get the full range what either of these telescopes can provide will eventually require purchasing some additional eyepieces. It looks like the 130mm reflector comes with a 25mm eyepiece that will give a nice wide 2 degree field of view at low power with a very bright view. The Pleiades, the Andromeda Galaxy, the Orion Nebula, and other large bright DSOs should look great in that eyepiece. The 10mm eyepiece will give 65x which will also be good for many objects and great on the moon. However, planets will look very small and won't show much detail. A separately purchased 2x barlow lens (and perhaps a low priced 8-24mm or 7-21mm zoom eyepiece) will allow the 130mm reflector to really reach the higher magnifications that are needed for good views of the planets.
Similarly, the DX 5 comes with what may be the exact same 25mm and 10mm eyepieces, but these will perform quite differently in the DX 5. The 25mm will give views not too different from what the 10mm eyepiece shows in the reflector, in terms of magnification, brightness, and field of view. The 10mm eyepiece in the DX 5 will give 125x. This is enough for good and detailed views of the planets. Your missing capability won't be high powered views, as with the reflector, but bright, wide field, low powered views. A separately purchased 32mm eyepiece or 40mm eyepiece will be needed to achieve this, though the field will never be as large and the view never quite as bright as what the reflector provides.
(Also note that a 8-24mm or 7-21mm zoom eyepiece is still a great idea for planet views with the DX 5. It will be more fun and more comfortable to look through than the 10mm eyepiece that comes with the scope and it will give even better planetary and lunar views when conditions allow. No barlow lens will be needed with the DX5.)
As you can see, these additional eyepiece purchases will make the two scopes more "equal" in their capabilities.
Still, there are still some differences that aren't so easy to account for. The DX5 will collect dew on the corrector plate quickly and easily unless you live in a very dry climate. There are ways to deal with that, but they add time and effort. The 130mm newtonian is ultimately "simpler" in many ways.
As for fear of damage, I understand what people are saying about the vulnerability of the corrector plate, but I tend to be equally concerned about things falling down into an open tube newtonian. Ultimately I view telescopes as somewhat fragile instruments (though I did ok with a Mak at age 11 and an SCT at age 13, and I was not the most careful youth).
Anyway, I don't know if you are any closer to a decision. I'm not. These should both be good telescopes. It is a hard decision!
Good luck and happy stargazing!
