One thing about fitting a fixed focuser that gets overlooked - the Gregory Mak design (aluminized spot) is tuned for a specific distance between primary and secondary mirror. Moving the image plane back too far can detune the system and you will not get optimal optical performance. If there is no image shift you are better off with the stock configuration. Thanks for the report! This scope has been on my wish list for a long time!
I own the (identical) Celestron version of this scope. It cost less as I didn't need the eyepieces and finder scope included with the Skywatcher brand. In addition, the Celestron is equipped with a Losmandy type rail which runs the full length of the tube. I replaced the stock focus knob with a Feather Touch two speed unit which works wonderfully. It's good to hear you're having good success with your 180 Mak. I love Maksutovs. I bought a used Questar 3.5" a couple of years ago.
Now if Skywatch would make a 250mm to 254mm Mak. They would sell a bunch I for sure would seek one. 9 inches of clear aperture is a sweet spot for solar system objects in terms of few parameters . Enjoy your Mak
Maks of that size take forever to cool. You would have to keep it outside. Maks of this aperture will show spherical aberration for several hours otherwise. The main reason they are not popular.
I've never liked the Schmidt and Maksutov Cassegrain telescopes because they utilize movement of the primary mirror to focus. But there doesn't seem to be much mirror flop based on your video. But it looked like there is some. The Vixen VMC200L utilizeed a fixed mirror and external focuser. But most of the Vixen line has shut down. As I understand, the only scopes they now make are sold under the "First Light" moniker. No VMC200 anymore.
Hi there, Yes there is a little flop there, but not as much as Ive encountered in other catadioptric design telescope. The addition of the crayford mitigates this though. Found it pretty rock steady during imaging. Thanks for the info and for watching! Cheers Ray
If you use an SCT or Mak sometimes for terrestrial viewing, mirror focus has an important advantage. It reduces spherical aberration due to close focusing. I have an old C5 which I can focus down to 20ft and the image is not bad at all. If I had to use a R&P or Crayford pulled right out to reach close focus, the image would not be sharp.
I own the classic 7" Meade Maksutov. Compared it to my friends SW Mak 180, and it's surprisingly a little bit better in contrast. I don't know much about the fabrication part of the scopes, but how can the scope that's almost 30 years old outclass a new one? 🤷
Hi Dirk...if the central obstruction of the meade is slightly smaller that may explain the difference. Other than that maybe generally slightly better quality optical materials? Does it have internal flocking/ baffles? Like all things production methods change over time - not always for the better!! Just my thoughts. Thanks for watching!!! Cheers Ray.
@@c.guibbs1238 Skywatcher is Synta Taiwan. Factories I presume in Taiwan and China. It doesn't matter if it is made in China. What matters is if a local company made it or an international company running a factory in China made it. International companies will make products to their standards, not Chinese standards.
Hi David! It largely depends on what the intended use of the scope is - and of course budget. The Skymax 180 specification makes it very much suited for planetary or lunar observation and all things being equal (sky, seeing etc) it is likely to outperform a 'typical' apochromatic refractor in this respect (which is was why I acquired one). However, its high (slow) focal ratio (f15) and relatively small field of view means it is much less suited for the vast majority of deep space objects where a good quality apo refractor will excel. Other catadioptric scopes such as SC designs are however, good 'all rounders'. Personally (and I know many people will have contrary opinions!) I have had several SC scopes in the past but I found I much prefer apochromatic refractors for DSO's (due to sharper/ more contrast views and simpler design) and consequently I now use these exclusively for this purpose. Its a bit like discussing cars or hi-fi's - everyone has their own opinion based on their experience and particular needs, however, I hope my humble opinion has been useful to you. Thanks very much for watching and subscribing!!!! Ray.
Hi Gunnar! I know there are such focusers for celestron and mead sct's...but Im not too sure if there are any that fit the skywatcher mak cass. I guess such a system would be more precise than manual. Personally I prefer the tube focus as it means keeping the mirror static which in my experience mitigates any flop or lag. For that reason if using an eaf i would be inclined to fit it to the micro focuser, however, Im sure other people will have contrary opinions! Hope that helps and thanks for watching !!
To be honest: I don't understand. Why should the focal length change in any way by just putting a crayford focuser on it? It doesn't change anything if you change the focuser of any other scope and focal length should be fixed by the optics. The only thing you should lose is some distance in focus travel since you've changed the distance to your camera.
Hi Michael, As I understand it, because catadioptric telescopes use mirror movement to achieve focus and focal length is calculated using the position of the 'native' optical back. The introduction of of crayford (or R&P) focusers to these types of telescope introduces a slight increase in optical path length which in turn results in a slight alteration of the focal ratio. The figures I used to calculate this increase were estimates which the vendor of the scope and focuser provided me with. In practice (which I hope came over in the video) the difference in practical terms was minimal. Ive provided a link to an excellent article (section 4.4) which I hope explains this better; agenaastro.com/articles/guides/upgrading-the-focuser-on-your-sct.html Hope that helps and a big thank you for watching! Cheers, Ray
@@astrogadge2276 Thank you very much. I thought that curvature of the mirrors isn’t changed so focal length doesn’t change. Thank you very much for clarification and the link. All the best and clear skies.
I enjoyed your video.....I recently picked up a Skymak 180 and wanted to see if you have any advicve....Having very difficult acquiring subject, such as jupiter.....Do you use wide angle eyepiece or finder scope? Any advice would be appreciated.
Hi Ted For solar system objects I roughly align the ota with the object, then use the finder scope to precisely align. You need to make sure your finder scope is precisely aligned with the main scope. Its best doing this in daylight...focus main scope/ ota on a distant object and tweek finder scope alignment to match the view. At night you can fine tune..but you should be pretty close!!!
That's a fine video to watch. Can you messure the back opening of this SW180, when you unscrew the focusser? Is it on this newer model wider than 30mm?
Thanks Matthieu!!! The rear thread on the skymax 180 is a standard sct thread - the older versions of this scope needed an adapter to fit sct accessories. The focuser I used was designed to fit sct scopes and so fitted this scope perfectly. Hope that helps! Thanks for watching!! Ray
Hi Vigo, It a generic (i.e. 'unbadged) SCT fit crayford; www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-focusers/dual-speed-2-crayford-focuser-for-sct-telescopes.html Hope that helps and thanks for watching!!! Cheers, Ray
Very interesting and informative. I have got one (Gold tube series) and want to buy one of those dovetail converters (to Losmandy) but am not sure which is the right one. Could you possibly help. Thanks.
Yes David it is the PS3-V I have! Other options; www.firstlightoptics.com/adm-losmandy-type-d-series/adm-losmandy-to-vixen-adapter.html www.365astronomy.com/most-popular/all-products/farpoint-vixen-to-d-losmandy-dovetail-bar-adapter Hope that helps!
Hello, Can I ask any owners of the current Skymax 180. Have you noted any knocking sounds resonating from inside the OTA if you rotate it. Mine does not sure what that could be. 😢
Hi, and again, thanks for watching! I've owned newtonian telescopes (such as those used in the dobsonian configurations) in the past and didnt get on with them for a number of reasons. I know lots of people love these designs - its just my personal preference. Also for astrophotography , I needed something that would mount on an equatorial mount rather than an alt-az design such as the dobsonian mount, which is more suited for observing than photography. Hope that answers your question! Cheers, Ray.
One thing about fitting a fixed focuser that gets overlooked - the Gregory Mak design (aluminized spot) is tuned for a specific distance between primary and secondary mirror. Moving the image plane back too far can detune the system and you will not get optimal optical performance. If there is no image shift you are better off with the stock configuration. Thanks for the report! This scope has been on my wish list for a long time!
Thanks for sharing and for watching!!
I own the (identical) Celestron version of this scope. It cost less as I didn't need the eyepieces and finder scope included with the Skywatcher brand. In addition, the Celestron is equipped with a Losmandy type rail which runs the full length of the tube. I replaced the stock focus knob with a Feather Touch two speed unit which works wonderfully. It's good to hear you're having good success with your 180 Mak. I love Maksutovs. I bought a used Questar 3.5" a couple of years ago.
Thanks for watching and sharing Michael!!! Ray.
Now if Skywatch would make a
250mm to 254mm Mak.
They would sell a bunch
I for sure would seek one.
9 inches of clear aperture is a sweet spot for solar system objects in terms of few parameters .
Enjoy your Mak
Thanks Kelly!
Maks of that size take forever to cool. You would have to keep it outside. Maks of this aperture will show spherical aberration for several hours otherwise. The main reason they are not popular.
Nice video. I'm number 50 subscriber now! Keep going.
Thanks for watching and your words of encouragement -much appreciated!!!
I've never liked the Schmidt and Maksutov Cassegrain telescopes because they utilize movement of the primary mirror to focus. But there doesn't seem to be much mirror flop based on your video. But it looked like there is some. The Vixen VMC200L utilizeed a fixed mirror and external focuser. But most of the Vixen line has shut down. As I understand, the only scopes they now make are sold under the "First Light" moniker. No VMC200 anymore.
Hi there,
Yes there is a little flop there, but not as much as Ive encountered in other catadioptric design telescope. The addition of the crayford mitigates this though. Found it pretty rock steady during imaging.
Thanks for the info and for watching!
Cheers
Ray
If you use an SCT or Mak sometimes for terrestrial viewing, mirror focus has an important advantage. It reduces spherical aberration due to close focusing. I have an old C5 which I can focus down to 20ft and the image is not bad at all. If I had to use a R&P or Crayford pulled right out to reach close focus, the image would not be sharp.
I own the classic 7" Meade Maksutov. Compared it to my friends SW Mak 180, and it's surprisingly a little bit better in contrast. I don't know much about the fabrication part of the scopes, but how can the scope that's almost 30 years old outclass a new one? 🤷
Hi Dirk...if the central obstruction of the meade is slightly smaller that may explain the difference. Other than that maybe generally slightly better quality optical materials? Does it have internal flocking/ baffles? Like all things production methods change over time - not always for the better!! Just my thoughts. Thanks for watching!!!
Cheers Ray.
I highly recommend flocking any scope’s internal tube.
@@c.guibbs1238 true to that 👍🏼
@@c.guibbs1238 Skywatcher is Synta Taiwan. Factories I presume in Taiwan and China. It doesn't matter if it is made in China. What matters is if a local company made it or an international company running a factory in China made it. International companies will make products to their standards, not Chinese standards.
@@c.guibbs1238 Early Japanese products after WWII and into the 70's were all shit, no matter what it was. Think TASCO.
Thanks for the video. I also have the Skymax 180 and I'm very interested in knowing your opinion comparing with refractors.
Hi David!
It largely depends on what the intended use of the scope is - and of course budget.
The Skymax 180 specification makes it very much suited for planetary or lunar observation and all things being equal (sky, seeing etc) it is likely to outperform a 'typical' apochromatic refractor in this respect (which is was why I acquired one). However, its high (slow) focal ratio (f15) and relatively small field of view means it is much less suited for the vast majority of deep space objects where a good quality apo refractor will excel. Other catadioptric scopes such as SC designs are however, good 'all rounders'. Personally (and I know many people will have contrary opinions!) I have had several SC scopes in the past but I found I much prefer apochromatic refractors for DSO's (due to sharper/ more contrast views and simpler design) and consequently I now use these exclusively for this purpose. Its a bit like discussing cars or hi-fi's - everyone has their own opinion based on their experience and particular needs, however, I hope my humble opinion has been useful to you. Thanks very much for watching and subscribing!!!! Ray.
Great video thank you.
Thanks for watching - much appreciated!!!
Would you reccommend an EAF electronic focuser instead of this additional micro focuser ?
Hi Gunnar!
I know there are such focusers for celestron and mead sct's...but Im not too sure if there are any that fit the skywatcher mak cass. I guess such a system would be more precise than manual. Personally I prefer the tube focus as it means keeping the mirror static which in my experience mitigates any flop or lag. For that reason if using an eaf i would be inclined to fit it to the micro focuser, however, Im sure other people will have contrary opinions! Hope that helps and thanks for watching !!
I have Mak 180 and ED 100. Do you think a 10 inch f/5 newtonian when seeing allows will show much more detail on the Moon and planets than Mak 180?
If its collimation is spot on, i would imagine it may well give better resolution.... although to what degree I have no idea. Thanks for watching!!!
To be honest: I don't understand. Why should the focal length change in any way by just putting a crayford focuser on it? It doesn't change anything if you change the focuser of any other scope and focal length should be fixed by the optics. The only thing you should lose is some distance in focus travel since you've changed the distance to your camera.
Hi Michael,
As I understand it, because catadioptric telescopes use mirror movement to achieve focus and focal length is calculated using the position of the 'native' optical back. The introduction of of crayford (or R&P) focusers to these types of telescope introduces a slight increase in optical path length which in turn results in a slight alteration of the focal ratio. The figures I used to calculate this increase were estimates which the vendor of the scope and focuser provided me with. In practice (which I hope came over in the video) the difference in practical terms was minimal. Ive provided a link to an excellent article (section 4.4) which I hope explains this better;
agenaastro.com/articles/guides/upgrading-the-focuser-on-your-sct.html
Hope that helps and a big thank you for watching!
Cheers, Ray
@@astrogadge2276 Thank you very much. I thought that curvature of the mirrors isn’t changed so focal length doesn’t change.
Thank you very much for clarification and the link.
All the best and clear skies.
@@michaelklemm-abraham7298 your welcome!
I enjoyed your video.....I recently picked up a Skymak 180 and wanted to see if you have any advicve....Having very difficult acquiring subject, such as jupiter.....Do you use wide angle eyepiece or finder scope? Any advice would be appreciated.
Hi Ted
For solar system objects I roughly align the ota with the object, then use the finder scope to precisely align. You need to make sure your finder scope is precisely aligned with the main scope. Its best doing this in daylight...focus main scope/ ota on a distant object and tweek finder scope alignment to match the view. At night you can fine tune..but you should be pretty close!!!
Thanks so much for watching!!
That's a fine video to watch.
Can you messure the back opening of this SW180, when you unscrew the focusser?
Is it on this newer model wider than 30mm?
Thanks Matthieu!!! The rear thread on the skymax 180 is a standard sct thread - the older versions of this scope needed an adapter to fit sct accessories. The focuser I used was designed to fit sct scopes and so fitted this scope perfectly. Hope that helps! Thanks for watching!! Ray
What Crayford do you use? Looks interesting 🙂
Hi Vigo,
It a generic (i.e. 'unbadged) SCT fit crayford;
www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-focusers/dual-speed-2-crayford-focuser-for-sct-telescopes.html
Hope that helps and thanks for watching!!!
Cheers,
Ray
Very interesting and informative. I have got one (Gold tube series) and want to buy one of those dovetail converters (to Losmandy) but am not sure which is the right one. Could you possibly help. Thanks.
Is it PS3-V?
Hi David..ill go and check and get back to you with the link!!
Yes David it is the PS3-V I have!
Other options;
www.firstlightoptics.com/adm-losmandy-type-d-series/adm-losmandy-to-vixen-adapter.html
www.365astronomy.com/most-popular/all-products/farpoint-vixen-to-d-losmandy-dovetail-bar-adapter
Hope that helps!
@@astrogadge2276 Many thanks, I got the PS3-V from 365 Astronomy. They were very helpful and got it to me quickly. It was the cheapest option also.
@@davidhenderson1073 They are generally v good. Glad you are sorted!
Hello, Can I ask any owners of the current Skymax 180. Have you noted any knocking sounds resonating from inside the OTA if you rotate it. Mine does not sure what that could be. 😢
Never encountered it....id take it back to vendor.
@@astrogadge2276 thank you for replying, I have emailed the shop to return it.
I had to subscribe…..you’re wearing a New York Yankee hat
Lol..yes I got it last time I was in "The Apple"!!
Thanks for watching Rocco! Cheers, Ray.
Why did you choose this Maksutov over a 10 or 12 inch Dobsonian?
Hi, and again, thanks for watching! I've owned newtonian telescopes (such as those used in the dobsonian configurations) in the past and didnt get on with them for a number of reasons. I know lots of people love these designs - its just my personal preference. Also for astrophotography , I needed something that would mount on an equatorial mount rather than an alt-az design such as the dobsonian mount, which is more suited for observing than photography.
Hope that answers your question!
Cheers, Ray.