2.71
#...
·
 |
|---|
|
Hi, Want to ask DSO and Planetary performance difference between 8 inch Classical Cassegrain telescope vs Sky-watcher 180 MAK telescopes. What will be the image quality considering the same camera and sky conditions for above two scopes? Which one will be more suitable for galaxies and planetary nebulae imaging? I already have GSO 6 inch RC and looking for an upgrade. Thanks |
7.90
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
| Overall the classical cassegrain should deliver better results for deep sky and be head to head with planetary imagery. It would, however, more difficult to collimate than the Mak (which basically doesn't need any). If the Mak were a proper Russian-made one then the situation would be mighty different. |
|
6.89
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
They should be very similar in terms of weight, physical dimensions and suitability for tiny objects. Optically, the CC is fully apochromatic as a reflector but the Mak comes quite close. The CC has diffraction spikes, this is the only serious optical difference IMO. So it mostly comes down to the practical aspects. The CC has an open tube meaning it will cool down faster and be more tolerant to dew (considerably so, for both). The Mak has a moving mirror, on one hand this may cause mirror flop, although I was pleasantly surprised to find out it is not an issue at all with its smaller cousin the 127 that I own. On the other hand you won't have to worry about reaching focus. Note that CCs tend to arrive way out of collimation while Maks are more like refractors, you generally don't need to worry about collimation, ever. Personally, I am a huge fan of Maks but between the two I would probably go for the CC because of the price difference. Cheers, Dimitris |
