Skywatcher Starquest 102MC Telescope for the Moon and Planets Unboxing and Assembly
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ส.ค. 2024
- This telescope package from Skywatcher promises good performance from its Maksutov optical tube, coupled to a modern, lightweight equatorial mount. Could this be a perfect first telescope if you are new to astronomy? Let's open the boxes and find out!
So true about bad weather 😂 every time I buy new equipment I have to wait ages for a reasonably clear night!
Mine just arrived, Graham, I already had a 102 Mak so I went with the refractor. I really like the mount, I eyeballed a polar alignment and put a green laser pointer on it for a finder. Also ordered the drive with it, and was surprised how well it tracked. First light here in Southern Indiana was Saturn, Jupiter and the Moon. I'll put my 102 Mak on it tomorrow night and scan around the sky. If it's as sharp as the refractor that will be nice. Thanks for the videos you do, Graham. :) Definitely a great first scope.
Hi Don that’s great. I hope you enjoy the views. Clear skies to you, Graham
I love the Starquest mount for the money. Much better than the old EQ2 it sort of replaces, and it can even be used in alt/az mode if you crank the alt adjustment round to 90 degrees. I reviewed the 130p Newtonian version for FLO and liked the mount so much I bought the Starquest 102 R achromat. I suspect you're going to like it, enjoy :)
I completely forgot the alt-az option - I'll mention that in a follow-up review, thanks. Good to hear that you've got on with the mount, it's lightweight and i can see that there have been a few economies made here and there, but for the money you can't argue. EQ1s and 2s should take their place in history! Clear skies, Graham
Thanks for sharing ! Beats reading the manual any day :D getting mine tomorrow
Was the easiest assembly ever thanks to this video :D
If you had to choose between this and sky watcher startravel 102 which would be it? For a beginner?
Hello just an information: does this telescope need to be collimated when trasported, or as a refractor ,does it not need 👋👋thanks!!!
Maks should not need to collimated unless they take a hard bump.
Skywatcher grease is a bit on the thick side
For the Moon and planets is better this Maksutov 102 or the "Skywatcher heritage 130/650" ?
I’d say the Maksutov as it is suited to higher power observing.
Can you see the moon?
Test drive would compliment this review
The next video will test the scope out. Clear skies!
@@JenhamsAstro ,how stable is the tripod at high magnification ?
With the tripod at full height, if i nudge it the vibrations take a few seconds to stop. I'd say that this is tolerable, given the trade-off to make the overall package an easy one-hand carry.
Nice upload 👌🔭
disappointing that the starquest and AZEQ avant are not sold here in the US. This would be perfect for a grab n go setup. Nothing even comes close in size
Yes it’s a useful light visual setup. Also you can’t buy the mount on its own here in the UK, which seems like a missed opportunity.
Hi! Thank you for sharing this. May I kindly ask you what should I choose as my first telescope. The Skymax 102MC AZ Pronto or the Explorer 130/650 on EQ2? Which one would offer better image quality, ease of use and, of course, that Wow moment when viewing the Moon and the planets? The Explorer looks also quite big and not so good for traveling. But I would like to buy the one with the best performances. Thank you!
Hello Andrei, a couple of things. They are quite different scopes in that the 102 will be best for high magnification views of the moon and planets, but will need careful pointing as the field of view is small. You can manage this by aligning any finder/RDF well. It is smaller than a 130P and very portable. The 130 offers a wider, lower power view. I'm not a fan of any EQ2 mounts - they can be difficult to use. An alternative like the Starquest 130P has a better mount if you favour a reflector. But if moons and the planets are your target then the 102MC is a better option. Just don't expect too much of ANY small scope on fainter targets, and be aware that upgrading the standard eyepieces is a good next step once you get used to the scope. I hope this helps. Graham
Hi. Thanks for the video. I watched because I own a Skywatcher Heritage 130P and would like to get a mount for it. This seems an adequate mount, but maybe you might have another suggestion....?
I sold my skywatcher 8" expanding dob a little over a year ago... it was getting to heavy to use frequently, regret that its gone now as I try and find a decent small scope that gives planet views as good as it did. Let us know how this one performs. Cheers from the midwest.
Hi Lincoln, so far I'd say the 102 is good value for money but not any better than my C90 on planets (and well short of the 127 which is to be expected). But then SW had to make it for a price along with the mount. I'm making a video with some 127 vs 102 comparisons on Mars. But I do like the mount on the StarQuest range... It's not rock solid, but the whole setup is very light and nicely engineered. I see there is a 130P Newt in the StarQuest range which may not be ideal for planets but could improve on the Flextube 130P Heritage's focuser, and include the neat mount. I am probably not helping. Really I'd pick an C90 OTA on a the mount from the StarQuest range for a lightweight setup.
How big is the difference between this and the 127? This is non-collimatable right? Is this a problem?
Hi, I'm still in the process of assessing the optics, and will do another video or two on this. Yes, it is a non-collimatable OTA, which to me means you need to test a new scope carefully. My Maks have arrived well aligned and stayed that way with one exception which was a little off. I had a go at re-collimating my 127 as a result, which did improve the image, but the process was tricky compared to other scope types, as I nearly dropped the whole rear cell on the floor! Operator error. It is not ideal to have no adjustment, but I suppose SW built it to a price.
Hi! What would you recommend between a SkyWatcher 150/750 on an EQ3-2 and this Mak? I’m interested in astrophotography & both deepsky objects and planets, but sadly an EQ3-2 can hold up to 5kg scopes (the 150/750 OTA weights around 4.9kg so i’m thinking that this will be a problem if I’ll add a camera to the setup).
Thank you very much and clear skies!
Yes, forget the EQ3-2 for any photography. With a 150 you'd need a EQ5 size as a minimum. The 150 is best suited to DSOs and relatively poor on planets. The Mak will be the opposite! So sorry but there is no perfect choice (although SCT owners may argue). The 150/750 is a versatile visual scope whereas Mak's can be a bit niche for moon/planet work. It depends on your budget, of course, but maybe see about a 72ED apo on a lightweight mount? Less hassle than a 150 and grab and go!
Jenham's Astro Oh, thank you! I’ll check the 72ED apo on an eq3-2 mount (since the OTA only weighs around 1.5 kg the 5kg limit for the eq3-2 won’t be a problem and will definitely fit my 500$/400£ buget)
But is a 72ED apo good for visual too? It won’t really bother me if not, just curious !
Hi!! Many thanks for your video!! I have a question if possible to have your support, i bought this telescope but unfortunately is not collimated (i am sure because start test is failed). I realized that no screw exist to adjust the collimation!! Do you have any idea about that? What I can do? Many thanks!
Hi Davide, I don't have an easy fix sorry. Are you confident that the star test is showing a real mis-collimation? I only ask because Maks do give in & out of focus patterns that can suggest optical issues, but the scope's performance is good. I am no expert but I read this here: www.telescope-optics.net/Mak_spherical.htm
Graham
@@JenhamsAstro hi Jeremy, thank you for your answer, i solved the problem with the specialist shop, they open the tube and adjust it. It was out of collimation from manufactor or due ro transportation.
I have options to get this telescope, but it is offered with eq1 and starquest mount. Just how much better is starquest compared to eq1 or eq2?
The StarQuest mount is a lot better than an Eq1 and in my opinion better than an Eq2 as well. You can use it in alt az mode as well as equatorial, it has large clutch knobs and a lighter counterweight that is better suited to a 102 sized scope. I view the StarQuest as a 21st revamp of an Eq2. I would advise against ever buying an Eq1!
@@JenhamsAstro Thanks for the quick reply, I am new to amateur astronomy, every bit of information is priceless at this point 😃
How would this compare to the Skywatcher Skymax 102 Mak? They seem identical to me.
Yes it's a very similar OTA, but not the same. Only the Skymax can be collimated - a useful feature if you drop it and it survives, but otherwise a bit "nice to have" on a Mak. And I'm fairly sure the Skymax OTA is heavier duty and weighs more. The StarQuest's OTA is very lightweight.
@@JenhamsAstro collimation! Roger that, thanks for clarifying!
Hi cracking upload very informative, I’ve got a skywatcher heritage 150p and I’m thinking of selling that to buy this scope 🤷🏻♂️what are your thoughts please?
Thanks Owen. I'm still in the process of checking out the 102MC optically, and am waiting for a gap in the clouds, so watch this space for a follow up video. In general your 150P and the 102MC are going to have different strengths so a direct comparison is difficult. From my experience of the 130P I like the scope's optical performance, simplicity and wide field of view - great for scanning the milky way, but the focuser and tube assembly are not ideal, and I'd prefer a more conventional OTA like that of the StarQuest 130P. The Mak should do better on the moon and planets, double stars and globulars, but less well than a 130P/150P for larger larger targets like M31, M42, M45. So it depends what you want to look at. I can say so far that I like the mount on the 102MC - it is modern, simple and controllable using the slow motions, and an RA drive is available, which i may pick up in due course. Hopefully a "first light" video for the 102MC should appear in a week or so. Graham
Hi, can you do a review of the 4mm 58 degree planetary eyepiece clone?
I haven't got one of those EPs sorry, but will try to review if I come across one.
can it implements polar scope?
Again this awful OTA design, without collimation screws... 🤮
It is definitely made to a budget and a collimatable mirror cell obviously didn't make the cut. That said, with the exception of one, my Maks have arrived well collimated and hold it well. I'll point this out in the follow-up review so thanks for your input. Clear skies.
I have owned a Skymax 127 Mak for about seven years and it has never lost collimation
@@cliveroberts415 I also have a Skymax MAK 127 👍