I have recently purchased a used Skywatcher Mak 180 Pro (Gold Tube) OTA and HEQ5 Pro Mount. I already have a Skywatcher 8" f5 on a Dob mount and a handful of lenses that came with the 8" scope (all average TBH).
The Mak 180 came with the original Lenses (Pictured) and they are seriously awful. I have been getting by with some Meade 4000 lenses that came with a Coronado PST.
I am awaiting the Mak to SCT Visual Back Adapter, and plan on adding a 2" Dual Speed Focuser and a 2" Good quality diagonal (as I suspect the stock 1.25" diagonal that ships with the Mak 180 is a POS).
I have a 1.25" Meade 4000 8-24 Zoom in transit (just cos I have always wanted to assess the zooms) but this was primarily purchased for the Coronado PST.
So my question... I am after a couple of good quality eyepieces... something around the 12mm mark and also a low power eyepiece (24mm to 30mm range). The Mak 180 has a 30mm visual back opening, so assuming anything over 30mm is going to be an issue (though I have read people happily using 35mm Panoptics).
Price is always a consideration, but I would rather spend once on quality rather than chasing my tail and buying/selling.
I am visual only (dabble in basic AP), and when planets are down, tend towards small DSO's and Double Stars.
Location: '34 South' Young Hilltops LGA, Australia
Posts: 1,327
Steve (Unipol) has a number of Televue Radian eyepieces for sale in the classifieds. There is a 12mm Radian there for $240 which will work well on both your scopes. He really looks after his gear so you should get a mint condition eyepiece.
A new 35mm Panoptic will cost you $559+post. It will give you a 0.75 deg field of view with a 2.3mm exit pupil and 77x.
It will also give you a 7mm exit pupil on your f5 with a 2 degree field.
At f15 your Mak is quite forgiving of eyepiece design. The GSO superview eyepieces at $89 should perform quite well with the Mak. The 42mm will yield 1.06 deg at 64x with a 2.8mm exit pupil, the 30mm will yield 0.76deg at 90x with a 2mm exit pupil. These eyepieces are less well-suited to your f5 and the 42 and 50mm eyepieces will probably show a dark spot in the centre of field from the diagonal mirror.
I don’t have a Mak but a 6” f12 Refractor and the Morpheus are great in it.
Have used Naglers, ES 82’s, ES 68’s and Pentax XW’s in this scope and the Morpheus are my keepers. I have 6.5 9 12.5 14 and the 17.5 on the way. Longer fl’s are Panoptics.
Agena Astro and others in the US sell them for USD 179 til May 18. Much cheaper than Delos and Vixen SSW.
I don’t have a Mak but a 6” f12 Refractor and the Morpheus are great in it.
Have used Naglers, ES 82’s, ES 68’s and Pentax XW’s in this scope and the Morpheus are my keepers. I have 6.5 9 12.5 14 and the 17.5 on the way. Longer fl’s are Panoptics.
Agena Astro and others in the US sell them for USD 179 til May 18. Much cheaper than Delos and Vixen SSW.
Hi Matt..
Those Morpheus are going out for a ridiculously cheap price now, for what you get... they use ED and Lanthanum Glass ...seem best value on the Planet ATM.
Bigjoe
Last edited by bigjoe; 26-02-2018 at 07:09 PM.
Reason: Add
I like an easy view even though I don’t wear glasses. The Morphs fit the bill with long ER and a big lens...just like longer fl Panoptics. Very close to XWs in feel. For slightly less scatter at high mags I’ll get out my orthos.... it I’m not really into the perfect view anyway.... only have long focal length achromat’s.
I like an easy view even though I don’t wear glasses. The Morphs fit the bill with long ER and a big lens...just like longer fl Panoptics. Very close to XWs in feel. For slightly less scatter at high mags I’ll get out my orthos.... it I’m not really into the perfect view anyway.... only have long focal length achromat’s.
Matt...
Had a wonderful looking and performing 4" Unitron once at f15 ..had long Depth of Focus, and never seemed to be affected by poor seeing..sold it to someone in Jamberoo years back..wish I hadn't!
I went for the Radian 12mm that UniPol had listed in Classifieds here. Nice to support the IIS community, quicker than Morph from US (I have a Mak to SCT adapter on order from Agena, and it is a 2 to 4 week wait) and I have always wanted to see what all the fuss is with regards to TV eyepieces.
Still looking for that 25mm to 30mm option, and I think until a 27mm Panoptic pops up at a good price, the GSO 30mm Superview eyepieces at $89 looks like it could fit the bill (thanks Joe).
I might still try the 17mm Morph to fit in-between the Radian and the 30mm GSO.... as the wait wont be as bad while I have a couple in the tube.
I think with a Mak, you'll want to go for a wider FoV than a plossl or orthoscopic type EP. I found the 11mm Nagler and 27mm Panoptic to be ideal at f10 and up.
The ES 11mm is also an excellent EP, but I've not used it in a Mak.
FWIW, my eyepiece set for my Intes (f15) was:
11mm Nag.
16mm Nag.
24mm Panoptic
27mm Panoptic
30mm Generic 80* from MyAstroShop (Can't remember the name).
Steve (Unipol) has a number of Televue Radian eyepieces for sale in the classifieds. There is a 12mm Radian there for $240 which will work well on both your scopes. He really looks after his gear so you should get a mint condition eyepiece.
A new 35mm Panoptic will cost you $559+post. It will give you a 0.75 deg field of view with a 2.3mm exit pupil and 77x.
It will also give you a 7mm exit pupil on your f5 with a 2 degree field.
At f15 your Mak is quite forgiving of eyepiece design. The GSO superview eyepieces at $89 should perform quite well with the Mak. The 42mm will yield 1.06 deg at 64x with a 2.8mm exit pupil, the 30mm will yield 0.76deg at 90x with a 2mm exit pupil. These eyepieces are less well-suited to your f5 and the 42 and 50mm eyepieces will probably show a dark spot in the centre of field from the diagonal mirror.
Thanks Peter that does help. Did you have a preference between the 24mm and 27mm Panoptic?
Andrew, I have read elsewhere that the 35mm Panoptic is a nice fit for the Mak Cas 180, but having a restriction of 30mm visual back opening, I wonder if this will cause any optical issues.
My wallet will only stretch to one of the Panoptics (substitute wallet for wife), and I am torn between 27mm and 35mm (or even the 24mm).
The 35 pan is the limit for this scope and will not vignette ,The 41 pan is a different story and would vignette ,I had a 35 pan and loved it in my refractor but had to sacrifice it to get my 21 Ethos or else it would never had left me ,Put a wanted in the classifieds and then if you don't like it can always move it on again but I don't think you will it's a lovely eyepiece.....
dont have a 180 Mak but a 150 which I mainly use for detail moon/planetary use I never had an issue using cheap Plossl eyepieces but the slighly more expensive celeston X cell LX work well , I certainly would not get expensive eyepieces for a Mak
He is asking for advice on a 180 not a 150 which i think the people who have posted their advice has all been good for the scope at hand ,Lots of different things at play here ,Coatings ,Fov ,etc ,etc.Premium ep's are for a lifetime of good viewing through whichever scope you throw them in and from one who learned the hard way good money spent on eyepieces is never wasted IMO....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rkonrad
dont have a 180 Mak but a 150 which I mainly use for detail moon/planetary use I never had an issue using cheap Plossl eyepieces but the slighly more expensive celeston X cell LX work well , I certainly would not get expensive eyepieces for a Mak
He is asking for advice on a 180 not a 150 which i think the people who have posted their advice has all been good for
Not true - I’ve had 2 SW 180 maks over 10 years, Bigjoe had one (I bought his a while back) and I’m now using a 9” f/13 mak.
Agreed I’ve resisted TV eyepieces and there are certainly some excellent choices in midrange and even budget pricing. Regardless of cost there are some aspects that remain important in the eyepieces - sharpness over the field, contrast, lack of ghosts and flare with bright objects, field curvature, lateral colour off axis and so-on.
The selection of eyepiece focal lengths however is primarily determined by the focal ratio of the scope, first and foremost. F/15 is f/15, regardless of aperture.
What the heck are you talking about i am talking about these 2 scopes and as far as i am concerned suggestions for the 180 are good
Skywatcher 180/2700 f15
Skywatcher 150/1800 f12
These 2 scopes are not both f15 which makes them different animals
a 35 panoptic in both scopes
180/2700 f15 ex pupil 2.33mm -77x mag-fov-0.88 deg
150/1800 f12 ex pupil 2.92mm -51x mag-fov-1.32 deg
Already said if you read it properly the properties of an eyepiece is so important and top shelf eyepieces give you this,Whether you have a 9'' Mak or not is irrelevant and cannot understand why you would throw that into the ring ,I am just trying to help someone out with a suggestion for an eyepiece which will marry well with the 180 Mak.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavytone
Not true - I’ve had 2 SW 180 maks over 10 years, Bigjoe had one (I bought his a while back) and I’m now using a 9” f/13 mak.
Agreed I’ve resisted TV eyepieces and there are certainly some excellent choices in midrange and even budget pricing. Regardless of cost there are some aspects that remain important in the eyepieces - sharpness over the field, contrast, lack of ghosts and flare with bright objects, field curvature, lateral colour off axis and so-on.
The selection of eyepiece focal lengths however is primarily determined by the focal ratio of the scope, first and foremost. F/15 is f/15, regardless of aperture.
I have to be honest, forking out retail price for some TV eyepiece would cost as much in marriage counseling as the eyepieces themselves. However, good brand and quality 2nd hand eyepieces change that considerably. This Mak Cass is my 6th telescope in about 10 years (I still have 3 and have sold 3). So my theory is to start building a nice collection of quality accessories that could be used with future scopes, or at least on sold if not suitable for a particular scope.
I have a collection of crappy eyepieces that gather dust and take up space... yet combined, probably still cost as much as a top quality eyepiece. So my belated new years resolution is to have less but better quality.
The suggestions so far have been really useful, thanks to all for taking time to comment.
