Jump to content
  • Join the online East Midlands astronomy club today!

    With active forums, two dark sites and a knowledgeable membership, East Midlands Stargazers has something for everyone.

A quandary!?!?


Recommended Posts

Bit of help required please.

Hopefully I should have soon finished making my tripod so I'll be in the market for a new scope.

I was for the most part fairly firmly set on getting a new skywatcher 250pds, but after a bit of searching managed to find a bresser messier 152/1200 OTA (new) for a bit less than the 250pds. £388

From what I can find this is about £300 cheaper than it usually is.

Now, the scope (which ever I choose) will be used for visual, with very occasional planetary photos (only using my smart phone or little camera). So basically I'd like people's opinions on which they think would be better for me.

A bit more criteria. I like modding stuff, so which type would I be able to mod more. Also which would have more light gathering power.

I know the refractor will suffer from CA, but that doesn't bother me to much as you can get fringe killers/semi apo filters etc. and the reflector will suffer from coma and get diffraction spikes etc.

Just interested in some input please.

Ideally I'd like both, but don't think SWMBO would be to pleased lol


Happy Christmas to you all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Tobias,

I have the Meade 127 version of this, and the fringing is very minimal, except on bright objects like the Moon, and less so on Jupiter. Doc had one, but this has now gone on tour, JohnC had it, and I think it now resides with Pete Sullivan.

I have looked though it, and it  is a impressive  Achro scope. 

If you are after a big frac, I think you could do a lot worse than one of these.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Baz  has said I used to have a Breeser 152R and it's a good scope on deep space stuff, but a little to much CA around the moon for my liking, but still a very impressive scope.


Cannot really mod it that much, maybe fit a dual speed focuser but thats about it.


Personally if you like modding then go for the newt, you can fit a new focuser, flock it, fit a fan, handles,  bobs knobs, and secondary dew heater.


After a while you will find one telescope is never enough you will end up with one of each.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose it depends on What you will be observing.

I would go for the 10" Newt if you are after DSO's, as it has far greater light grasp, which is way bigger than a 6" frac, and the difference between a couple of magnitudes can be seeing the objector not. This you also appreciate on brighter objects as it has no false colours. The size of that huge mount you are building should handle it. ( I can't wait to see it finished.)

In saying that the 152 is still good for Lunar, despite the fringing, as the contrast is better. I have also made a Solar filter with Baader film,  I have only made the aperture 70mm, as this is all you need, and it increases the focal ratio, giving a better view.

If you want come and have a squint through mine, it will give you an idea of it's capabilities, and limitations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If its just visual you are wanting it for I am told size matters.  That would indicate the 250pds.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without hesitation - 250p - Barlow it for great planetary views and on DSO's its fantastic as is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking more the 250 after looking more in depth into the specs for both. Especially for visual. Plus I can use it for Astrophotography if I ever get into it. Stll I'll probably get a big achro one day.

Thanks peeps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Tobias, I've a 200PDS and can recommend it (ans the 250PDS) for both visual and AP, great choice!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi there.

If it is any help I have a Helios 200 newt and a Helios 127 frac.

Both have pretty much the same specs as regards f ratios ect.

The main advantage I have found with the frac is it is half the weight of the newt.

This make for better guiding on my poor old EQ5.

It also has the advantage of no messing about checking collimation.

Having said that I still like the newt better.

I suppose if the frac was a modern one it would be different but as a direct comparison between the two the newt would have to get my vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with Graham, if it was an ED frac then the choice is difficult but achro frac against big newt no competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tweedledum

I have Doc's 152r, also have had 127mm and 120mm fracs, along with 250mm SCT, 203mm newt, 102mm mak, 110mm mak....


The sct was fab, the 152 unless you have an extended pier mount, you will get back ache!



So the newt is probably the better option, but beware there is significant windage and you are going to need a substantial mount (but that would apply to either). Both great scopes though.


Merry Chrsitmas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.