Easy grab and go recommendation - Starsense Explorers

Pharian (Christopher) · #1 11-12-2020, 05:25 PM

Hi all,

I'm currently looking around for an easy grab n go option that I can take away camping with the kiddo's.

I'm looking at these Star Sense Explorer jobbies from Celestron, for the easy "point at the moon, oooh" but also easy finding other things without having to spend half the night star hopping (I'm terrible at that).

It's gotta fit in the back of the car with all the kids junk and these seem OK size wise when I look at them being unboxed. Definitely better than my current 8" SCT, NEQ6, and various accompanying tubs of crap.

Anyway, I've only ever used my 8" SCT, never a refractor or a newt. I'm trying to decide if the cheaper 130mm (StarSense Explorer LT 127AZ almost 6") newt is the go, or if I should kick in the extra $300 for the 102mm refractor (StarSense Explorer DX 102).

What would be the difference in what you can or can't see, and clarity of objects, between these two scopes?

Links here:

https://www.bintel.com.au/product/st...v=322b26af01d5

https://www.bintel.com.au/product/st...v=322b26af01d5

PS, I can't really tell from the images, but do you reckon those focusers would be able to take a Canon DSLR T-Ring? I'm obviously not planning any deep sky stuff, but grabbing a few point and clicks of the moon and jupiter/saturn wouldn't be terrible. Reckon it could take a standard T-Ring on that eyepiece setup? Or is it some non-standard job for cheap OTA?

Any advice would be awesome, thanks!

EDIT: fixed links to right models

sunslayr (David) · #2 11-12-2020, 06:44 PM

They look pretty neat, I would probably go with the refractor. The newt would probably beat it raw image quality but its not quite as grab and go, at f5 colimation onsite is inevitable. I'm a bit confused over the price difference though, bintel lists $50 between them, if it's 300 I'd get the newt and spend the 300 on something else. The eyepieces seem to be the weak point on these so if you don't mine sharing with the kids I'd bring some of yours. The focuser should be able to handle a DSLR as long as it's not too heavy you just need a t2 to 1.25" adapter.

Pharian (Christopher) · #3 11-12-2020, 06:47 PM

Thanks for the reply. Much appreciated.

My apologies, I linked the wrong one. This is the cheap newt.

https://www.bintel.com.au/product/st...v=322b26af01d5

It looks like one of the key differences between them is that the more expensive versions have the iphone mount on the mount rather than on the top of the scope.

I'd definitely be using my existing eyepieces. Have a few half decent Explore Scientific's that will do the job.

I've also got an old Orion ST80 that I used as a guidescope, so I'm tossing up between just using that and trying to find a cheap mount for it (though the cheapest AltAz thing I can find is $250 at Bintel, which seems expensive for what it is). If I got the more expensive Starsense Explorer with the camera on the mount I could possibly mount the ST80 on it too, for super compact grab and run.

Whatever I end up going with will now be my main and only scope. 102mm makes a pretty big difference from the 80mm ST80. But the cheaper newt, at almost 6", might be better.

Mainly I am keen to get half decent views of Saturn and Jupiter. So if the newt will pull that off better than the 102mm refractor (or ST80) then that's probably the go, especially at $300 cheaper.

How would the views from the newt vs the 102 compare, when looking at Jupiter/Saturn do you think?

I hadn't even considered collimation, being a SCT user before. Would this one with the correct model at F7.8 need collimation? That might be the clincher really, I don't want to have to do that every time.

Cheers, Chris

EDIT: this is the more expensive Newt, in case anyone is interested. It looks pretty good too
https://www.bintel.com.au/product/st...v=322b26af01d5

sunslayr (David) · #4 11-12-2020, 07:17 PM

Well this newt has a much larger focal length, 1000mm. I don't know how stable that would be, It should give better planetary views assuming there isn't a whiff of wind. Unfortunately it's a Bird-Jones Newtonian I wouldn't recommend those, they have extra optics in the focuser to correct a cheap spherical primary.

croweater (Richard) · #5 11-12-2020, 07:31 PM

Hi Chris, I would go with the dearer newt (I like Newts). The tripod is heavier and seems to be higher quality. Same with the OTA. It also has a dovetail to afix the scope so you could easily swap with your ST80 if you wanted to. At 650mm fl very portable. I have a 5 inch newtonian for grab and go and love it. I use it more than my main scope.
Cheers, Richard

Pharian (Christopher) · #6 11-12-2020, 08:54 PM

Cheers David and Richard. Sounds like the cheap Newt is out then. Nice one.

Would the Newt, with 130mm, give better views overall than the 102mm Refractor?

The option of the better Newt as a more substantial option (when it can fit in the car around the kids surfboards) and then my ST80 as a super portable moon gazer is not a bad combination perhaps.

How hard is collimation? That doesn't sound like something I'm going to want to do while I am on holiday (ha). So in that respect perhaps it would be better to get the 102mm for a more substantial option with the ST80 shorty as the super portable.

Hard to decide really. I guess it still comes down to how much better the Newt would be over the 102mm in terms of actual visual view of Jupiter/Saturn. Is it a significant difference between the views (all other considerations aside)

croweater (Richard) · #7 11-12-2020, 09:41 PM

Hi Chris, There probably wont be a huge difference between the two for the planets. They are about the same focal length. There won't be any false colour at edges with the reflector and may be a small amount with the refractor. (may be negligible , I have not much refractor experience. Someone else may chime in). I think the reflector would be a bit brighter deep sky. Collimation is really quite easy and doesn't usually need to be done that often. With a cheap cheshire(collimating) eyepiece only takes a couple of minutes and can be done in the daytime good enough for visual. It looks like they are both on the same mount.
Cheers, Richard

Pharian (Christopher) · #8 12-12-2020, 01:41 AM

Thanks again Richard, much appreciated.

Outcast (Carlton) · #9 12-12-2020, 10:31 AM

Christopher,

Two other scopes you might like to consider are the Skywatcher table top Heritage Dobs. They are of the collapsible tube variety & are relatively compact, I would suggest as compact as those you are already looking at.

Non-Goto & don't have the mobile phone mount setup but, available in 130mm & 150mm versions both, well within your budget.

I don't own one but, there are a couple of folk on here that do & they are very positive about them. The 150mm version would give you even greater deep sky reach.

Saxon have a version of the 150mm which is essentially a rebranded Skywatcher; Synta optics... comes out of the same factory just has Saxon on it rather than Skywatcher.

Another option to explore is the Vixen 130sf although, I'm not sure where you can get these (or even if you can anymore) in Australia. I own one of these & it punches well above it's weight... If I had to strip back to one telescope only, this one would figure highly in my thoughts of which one to keep (and I have plenty of options - see my signature)...

Alternatively, if you decide to go down the refractor path, don't discount the 80mm you already have or if you crave more aperture, look at the SW achromats in the 102mm range. In terms of light grab, don't forget in a reflector there is a central obstruction that actually reduces light gathering so, when you look at aperture in a refractor vs reflector, you're not exactly comparing apples with apples. Having said that though, my vixen 130sf is definitely brigher than my 80mm triplet or my 72mm ED on deep sky objects &, for what it's worth, my 130mm will provide greater magnification than my two refractors provided the seeing is good.

Cheers

Carlton

croweater (Richard) · #10 12-12-2020, 12:29 PM

Hi again Chris, just to add I have the Heritage 130 that Carlton mentions (he makes good points in his comments) and I'm very happy with it. Good value for the price. When collapsed, which takes only seconds the scope and mount takes up about 46cm x 36cm x 36 space. Has a carry handle to carry all as one piece and set up in seconds. Optics are very good. The helical focuser needs a bit of plumbers tape on the threads (dont worry it works pretty good and all users do this) and I have made my own light shroud out of 3mm black foam sheet. This makes a big difference too and is easy. I imagine the 150 would be a good step up from the 130 and would be excellent too. The mount has a dovetail attatchment too so your ST80 would fit on it too. I actually have my little vixen vmc95 on the dob mount and the 130 OTA on my Vixen porta 11 mount.
Cheers, Richard

dannat (Daniel) · #11 13-12-2020, 01:26 PM

i have the 130mm f5 on starsense, gives fine views but you need to be able to collimate, wasn’t impressed with the 102mm refractor specimen i saw, could have been a bad example?

Pharian (Christopher) · #12 13-12-2020, 08:54 PM

Fantastic, thanks Carlton and Richard and Daniel.

Great advice there. I'll make sure to check out those Heritage scopes before I make a decision.

And thanks for that information about the StarSense Explorers Daniel. I think that the 130mm f5 is the way to go if I go that road, fantastic.

Glad I asked everyone! As always, a trove of fabulous information and advice, with lovely helpful people. Kudos to all. Thanks.