Vixen R130Sf or VMC110L

[st1000 (Steve)]

I started another thread asking which of these would be better for binoviewing, but would like to specifically get comments from people who have used one or the other of these scopes to compare them.

I currently have the R130Sf - unused so far since purchase, because after purchase I moved to the UK, and after returning recently the scope is still in storage. I will be in Melbourne for at least the next 2 years so I am keen to start observing, but am interested in binoviewing now. Given I may be moving OS again in 2 years I want to get a scope that is portable, and one that is suitable for binoviewing. Hence I am open to selling the unused R130Sf and switching to the VMC110L, keeping the Portamount.

Thank you for the previous suggestions of a 6" used SCT. However I prefer either of these Vixens because they work with the Portamount, and I want something grab and go, not to mention easy to travel with (i.e. move to another country). The R130Sf has excellent reviews, including one from a chap who had had an 8 inch scope and said the R130Sf gave better images due to a better mirror, better construction throughout and a better mount. I just need some data on how suitable it is for binoviewing use based on other's experience. I have found one or two comments on the net that, due to the extension tube the R130Sf requires for eyepiece focus, it works with the WO binoviewer - but this doesn't say whether that is with or without a barlow and if it works with other eyepieces.

The VMC110L on the other hand has had more mixed reviews, with some praising the performance on targets (Jupiter for example) that other reviews criticise - for example performance on Jupiter has alternately been described as can't get a sharp image versus can get a sharp image. I think it may have to do with collimation of the scope, which for the VMC110L seems to be required to be done by the dealer. In terms of binoviewing, the VMC110L seems suitable enough that My Astro Shop sells it in a binoviewing package.

So, my requirements are for a scope that can be easily packed for travel if I move, is grab and go, great images and good for binoviewing. Any comments, experience or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

[MortonH]

MyAstroshop has the Skywatcher 127mm Mak-Cass on special just now. I would much prefer that over the VMC110. And with movable mirror no problem with binoviewers reaching focus.


Myastroshop lists the SKywatcher 127mm's weight as 5.6kg. This is incorrect. The 150mm model weighs 5.6kg but the 127mm is only 3.4kg.

[st1000 (Steve)]

Originally Posted by MortonH

MyAstroshop has the Skywatcher 127mm Mak-Cass on special just now. I would much prefer that over the VMC110. And with movable mirror no problem with binoviewers reaching focus.


Myastroshop lists the SKywatcher 127mm's weight as 5.6kg. This is incorrect. The 150mm model weighs 5.6kg but the 127mm is only 3.4kg.

Thanks; is that the SkyWatcher Black Diamond 127 mm OTA for $599? No indication it is on special though, unless you are referring to a different model or page that I am looking at.

[MortonH]

It's actually $559, while their regular price is $795.

http://www.astroshop.com.au/products/specials.asp

Realise it's still a bit more than the VMC110 price, but in my opinion it's a lot more scope. I have the 150mm model and it's pretty good.

[st1000 (Steve)]

Originally Posted by MortonH

It's actually $559, while their regular price is $795.

http://www.astroshop.com.au/products/specials.asp

Realise it's still a bit more than the VMC110 price, but in my opinion it's a lot more scope. I have the 150mm model and it's pretty good.

Thanks. I don't mind the extra $230 over the VMC110L also from My Astro Shop, and it has the extra aperture while, at your stated 3.4 kg, it will still fit on the Vixen PortaMount (it has a dovetail connector too). The R130Sf is around 4 kg so the 127 mm will be lighter and more compact to travel and for grab and go. With a moveable mirror it should do better for binoviewing.

In terms of image quality however, one Amazon review of the R130Sf mentions the owner also has an 80 mm refractor and a 127mm Mak Cassegrain and the R130Sf "totally out performs the 80mm and the 127mm telescopes by far" (http://www.amazon.com/Vixen-2604-R13.../dp/B001KW07Q4). The 80 mm comment jibes with other comparisons I have read of the R130Sf to an 80 mm such as on http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...ad.php?t=9484: "the R130 kills the ed80 as a visual scope".

So that is my dilemma; the R130Sf seems to otherwise meet my requirements for compactness, grab and go and image quality; small enough to fit on the Porta Mount and be grab and go and superior in images to the ed80 and a 127 mm Mak Cass according to the above. Compared to a 6" scope or bigger it has the advantage of better portability and being more grab and go. The only repeated criticism is of the plastic focuser. If I was just going to be doing cyclops viewing it would seem this is the best solution for me, but my desire to do binoviewing complicates the decision. The extension tube the R130Sf uses for cylops viewing augers well for binoviewing performance, and at least one comment I've read says the WO binoviewer does work with the R130Sf, but doesn't specify if that is with or without a barlow.

[Camelopardalis (Dunk)]

I'd actually say go with the C6 - it weighs 3.5kg (bare) the same as the 127 Mak, is only an inch wider (obviously) and packs considerably more light grasp. It's also well within the weight of the Portamount. I've used mine on a mini porta and it's at the limit tbh.

[MortonH]

Found this recent review on OPT website confirming binoviewing works:

http://www.optcorp.com/review/product/view/id/452/

Also found this old review from IceInSpace:

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...ead.php?t=9484


It does sound like the focuser is rather poor. The weight of a binoviewer might be too much.

[st1000 (Steve)]

Originally Posted by Camelopardalis

I'd actually say go with the C6 - it weighs 3.5kg (bare) the same as the 127 Mak, is only an inch wider (obviously) and packs considerably more light grasp. It's also well within the weight of the Portamount. I've used mine on a mini porta and it's at the limit tbh.

Can you give the full name and model please? Not sure which one this is.

[MortonH]

Steve,

There are different versions of it depending on whether it comes with a mount, but the OTA-only version is this:

http://www.celestron.com/astronomy/c...-xlt-cg-5.html

The "CG-5" designation means it has a Vixen-style dovetail (i.e. would fit the Portamount). Some Celestron tubes have the "CGE" dovetail which is wider and doesn't fit the Portamount, etc.

Note that the OTA in the picture appears to actually be the C8

[MortonH]

There's one for sale here if it's still available:

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...d.php?t=112931

[Camelopardalis (Dunk)]

Optically, the C6-A-XLT and the ota from the Nexstar 6SE are the same, they just differ in paint job (black or orange) and accessories...the former has an optical finder, the latter a red dot finder.

Btw, the weight I quoted is without diagonal and finder.

[Larryp (Laurie)]

Originally Posted by Camelopardalis

Optically, the C6-A-XLT and the ota from the Nexstar 6SE are the same, they just differ in paint job (black or orange) and accessories...the former has an optical finder, the latter a red dot finder.

Btw, the weight I quoted is without diagonal and finder.

These are on discount at OPT. and they can ship one to Australia
I once had a VMC110-a complete waste of money

[Tropo-Bob (Bob)]

I have a VMC110L and though it is a lovely looking scope that ticks the right boxes on paper, its image quality is below par. I only use it when I wish to look between the clouds when it is threating to rain.