Will be keeping an eye out for a 2nd Hand TV Panoptic 35mm.... I think that will be a really nice Wide Field addition to the Mak Cass 180.
Having a few focusing issues at the moment (which is probably a thread on its own), but so far have been very happy with the scope (views of the moon have been breathtaking).
I "believe" that the current line of SW Maks use the same standard threading for the back as do Celestron and Meade SCTs. If so then the .63x reducers that are sold for those SCTs will fit. I used to have the Orion Apex 127 Mak and used the .63x Celestron reducer on it but needed special adapters from Scopestuff. At any rate, it worked wonderfully.
If the reducer fits your 180 then it will become f/9.5. The reducer itself cannot take the full field stop of a 2" eyepiece but I find they generally work well visually with field stops as large as about 36mm. Not sure the 35 Pan would work because its field stop is larger at almost 39mm. But if it did it would get you about 50x and 1.3 degrees TFOV, and a 17.5 Morpheus would get you 100x and .78 degree TFOV, and the 11mm ES82 would get you 155x and a .5 degree TFOV. That would be a nice lineup giving you 50x, 100x, 150x. And if the Pan is too expensive then just get the ES68 equivalent as they generally give you 95% or more of the performance of the TV equivalents IMO.
I "believe" that the current line of SW Maks use the same standard threading for the back as do Celestron and Meade SCTs. If so then the .63x reducers that are sold for those SCTs will fit. I used to have the Orion Apex 127 Mak and used the .63x Celestron reducer on it but needed special adapters from Scopestuff. At any rate, it worked wonderfully.
If the reducer fits your 180 then it will become f/9.5. The reducer itself cannot take the full field stop of a 2" eyepiece but I find they generally work well visually with field stops as large as about 36mm. Not sure the 35 Pan would work because its field stop is larger at almost 39mm. But if it did it would get you about 50x and 1.3 degrees TFOV, and a 17.5 Morpheus would get you 100x and .78 degree TFOV, and the 11mm ES82 would get you 155x and a .5 degree TFOV. That would be a nice lineup giving you 50x, 100x, 150x. And if the Pan is too expensive then just get the ES68 equivalent as they generally give you 95% or more of the performance of the TV equivalents IMO.
Hi William,
I could not find the threads, but a few have tried the 0.63 focal reducer with mixed results (mostly poor). The issue seems to be related to the fact that the reducer is designed for an SCT and has a field flattener component to the optics. The Mak Cass does not require the flattener, and as a result the Celestron based reducers are not ideal on the Mak.
From what I can tell with my limited use of the Mak Cass 180 and my research on the OTA, the main issue is the F15 nature of the beast (2700mm FL). For those solely into planetary visual... they say "what issue". However, with the growing popularity in Astro Photography, and some seriously amazing DSO images being posted from amateur telescope users, there is the urge to make the Mak try and emulate those DSO images (which it can not). Planetary images... that's another story I hope.
Bill, someone else spurred me to consider putting a camera on the back of my mak, but no.
The mistake most are making is hoping to use a cheap camera typical of what they use on fast small refractors - a small sensor with pixel spacing far too close for the focal ratio of the maks.
AP of DSOs with a Mak is definitely possible but it requires a sensor with much larger pixels - and pixel spacing - than the popular cameras offer, possibly in the range 7-15 microns.
There are one or two such cameras - but they’re not cheap - to the extent if you’re aiming to photograph DSOs it’s cheaper to buy another scope with a faster focal ratio.
Conversely if you did have this type of camera it won’t suit short fast scopes...
I dont have a 180 Mac only a 150 one and had those eyepieces not bad but not good depending on your budget the celestron X cell LX are better or if you need better then the ES 82 are really good but its all to do with how much!
Most of the time I use Plossel with maks small FOV but them my primary use with a mac is planets and double stars
What was the exposure time for these planetary images? I was hoping to give my Intes MK67 F12 a go on these when they get up a bit earlier in the night!
Not sure about exposure times or settings, used sharpcap to capture 500 frames and then stacked them in Registax. I just muck around with the sliders using live view till I get the best exposure then go from there.
Visual Back upgrades:
- Mak to SCT Adapter (New from Agena in US)
- GSO 10:1 Dual Speed SCT Focuser (New from Andrews)
- 2" WO DuraBright Diagonal (Used/Like New from IIS Member)
New Eyepieces:
GSO 2" 30mm SuperView (new from Andrews)
TV 1.25" 12mm Radian (used from IIS Member)
So far really happy with the setup (so nice to be able to focus easily now). No planets or moon in view for me ATM, so the 30mm has been pretty much the sole eyepiece in the finder.
I also have a Meade 8-24 Zoom, and this spends most of its time between 20mm to 24mm, down to about 15mm. Any lower than 12mm and just cant get a good focus.
Did a star test last night (as wanted to wait for the new diagonal), and it does need an adjustment, not looking forward to that (might be a new post just to get advice on collimating this thing).
I still have my eye out for a TV Panoptic (24mm or 27mm), but for now I have enough to keep me busy.
Once again thanks for all the interest and feedback in this post.
Did a star test last night (as wanted to wait for the new diagonal), and it does need an adjustment, not looking forward to that (might be a new post just to get advice on collimating this thing).
Ok so you have Dobs for wide field views and you got a 180 mac for planetary views why do you want to get expensive eyepieces for the mac to get the same result as with cheaper eyepieces on the dobs, The dobs will benefit from the quality eyepieces not the Mac I disagree with most posts Mac is is for fine detail views at high power dont change it