Author Topic: 4SE vs. 127Mak vs. 5SE  (Read 44974 times)

Daniel Johnson

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 128
  • Activity:
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
4SE vs. 127Mak vs. 5SE
« on: December 24, 2017, 03:10:05 AM »
I am following the information I got out of jgroub to place my query in a separate thread.  So here it is:

As any beginner, about to make my very first telescope purchase, I also want to get second opinions.  This is my scenario:


I require a minimal care starter telescope, together with go-to performance so that it's available to my spouse and my son, great enough to watch planets and DSOs.  The telescope will be used on the balcony of suburban San Diego about 90% of the time.  I need the scope to be able to take newcomer's astrophotography pictures of moon, planets, and DSOs.  I want to have the option to bring it to the go on a minutes notice.  Finally, my son will probably use the scope with me.  We want to have the ability to sense wowed once both of us have completely committed and want to upgrade.

<strong>First recommendation out of Orange County Telescope:</strong>

I was pleasantly surprised that Mike did not recommend the biggest and baddest telescope on the market.  I previously appeared up the Celestron 4SE, 5SE, and 6SE, and narrowed the choice down to either the 4SE and 5SE.  Without hesitation, Mike recommended the 4SE.  I inquired about what he thought about the 5SE model, but he still said for my uses the 4SE will be better compared to this 5SE model.  His rationale: The 4SE is a Mak-Cas which inherently gives better contrast compared to some SMCs.  The difference between 4 and 5 " will not be that much in suburban settings with lots of light pollution, therefore contrast will be significant.  The 4SE is a small bit more portable.  However he recommended the 4SE system due to the wedge which will allow me to do intro astrophotography.

<strong>Question 1:</strong>

It seems plausible.  Can he be right?  Mak-Cas have better comparison compared to SMSs?  And that will make for better contrast from the light polluted skies?  Is it also true that in suburban settings with light pollution, there won't be much of a gap between the 4SE and 5SE?

<strong>My believing:</strong>

I am still worried that 4SE might not provide enough aperture to view more DSOs.  So. . .perhaps you will find 5" Mak-Cas on the market.  Afterall, I would find a larger aperture while still maintaining the benefits of mak-cas (high contrast, no collimation etc.).  I am comparing These models today:

Celestron 127 SLT Model:

Orion Model:
http://www.telescope...roductId=114849 iv 127

But my thoughts are also still with all the Celstron 5SE:

I guess I am still a lot confused.  Ideally, I would want a the 5SE for a Mak-Cas instead of an SCT.  Or I would like to Have the Ability to place an Orion or Celestron 127 SLT onto the mount and tripod of a 4/5SE.  But that doesn't appear possible as I have never been able to locate the entire mount/tripod system different from the telescopes.

In the absence of that, what should I go with?  4SE?  5SE?  Orion 127 Stargazer IV?  Celestron 127 SLT?

Thank you ahead of time for all of the discussion!