Sky-Watcher Heritage P130 Information (5" Dobson)

Look | Basic Data | Photo Attempts | Conclusions | What Others Say... | Links

On this page, I present some information about my first travel telescope (Dobson), a Sky-Watcher Dobson Telescope Heritage P130 FlexTube DOB, or Heritage P130 for short (purchased in February, 2010). In the end, it proved too big for travelling, but I still own it for home use, eithet on its own base or on the Sky-Watcher Star Discovery AZ GoTo Mount.

 

Look

First Day: Unpacking and Assembling

Outer package

Package of the Heritage P130

Package of the Heritage P130

Opened package

Content of package, telescope collapsed

Ditto

Telescope assembled and at full length

Accessories: 10mm and 25mm eyepieces; red dot finderscope

 

The ingredients of my eyepiece bag are usable for this telescope as well.

 

Second Day: Outside

On the Following Days...

Collapsed

Collapsed

Expanded

 

Expanded and "in use"

 

Comparison of my Dobsons (2010)

Meade Lightbridge 10" versus Skywatcher Heritage 130P

Ditto

Ditto

Mount with Heritage P130 Telescope Tube

The Heritage P130 tube weighs less than 4 kg and can therefore be used on the Star Discovery mount. Here are some photos:

P130 "compact" seen from the side

P130 in "working mode" seen from the side

Ditto, seen from the other side

P130 "compact", seen from the other side

P130 in "working mode", overview

Ditto, seen from the other side

 

Basic Data for Sky-Watcher Dobson Telescope Heritage P130 FlexTube DOB (in Comparison)

Telescope
Meade
Sky-Watcher Skymax/Heritage
GSO
8" 10" 12" 16" ETX 90EC 102 76 100P 114P P130 GSD 680
Optical Design Newton
(Parabolic)
Newton
(Parabolic)
Newton
(Parabolic)
Newton
(Parabolic)
Maksutov-Cassegrain Maksutov-Cassegrain Newton (Spherical) Newton (Parabolic) Newton
(Parabolic)
Newton (Parabolic) Newton (Parabolic)
Primary Mirror Diameter 203 mm 254 mm 305 mm 406 mm 96 mm (90 mm) 102 mm 76 mm (3") 100 mm (4") 114 mm (4.5") 130 mm (5") 200 mm (8")
Focal Length, Focal Ratio 1219 mm
f/6
1270 mm
f/5
1524 mm
f/5
1829 mm
f/4.5
1250 mm
f/13.8
1300 mm
f/12.7
300 mm
f/3.95
400 mm
f/4
500 mm
f/4.38
650 mm
f/5
1200 mm
f/6
Resolving Power (arc secs) 0.56" 0.45" 0.38" 0.28" 1.3" 1.15" 1.51" 1.15" 1.01" 0.9" 0.58"
Limiting Visual Stellar Magnitude ca. 14 mag ca. 14.5 mag ca. 15 mag ca. 16 mag 11.7 mag 12.7 mag 11.2 mag 11.8 mag 12.1 mag 13.3 mag 14.5 mag
Maximum Practical Visual Power ca. 550 x ca. 600 x ca. 700 x ca. 900 x 325 x 204 x ca. 100 x (152 x) 150 x (200 x) 170 x (228 x) ca. 220 x (260 x) ca. 300 x (400 x)
Optical Tube Dimensions (diam. x length) 28 cm x 115 cm 35 cm x 119 cm 40 cm x 144 cm 51 cm x 170 cm 10.4 cm x 27.9 cm 10.4 cm x 27 cm n.a. 11.5 cm x 37 cm* n.a. Tube collapsed < 37 cm
(14.5") long
23 cm x 115 cm
Net Weight Basis 9 kg 12.2 kg 15 kg 24 kg 3.5 kg (complete) --- 1.75 kg (complete) 1.3 kg* 1.6 kg 3.1 kg* 11.2 kg
Net Weight Optical Tube 10.9 kg 17.2 kg 21.3 kg 33.6 kg 1.9 kg 1.2 kg*
(2.5*/2.8 kg complete)
3.7 kg
(5.3 kg complete)
3.25 kg*
(< 6.5 kg or 14 lbs. complete)
9.5 kg
(appr. 21 kg complete)

Dark Blue: Telescopes that I still own; italic and dark red: telescopes that I owned; black: for comparison; *) own measurement

 

Photo Attempts

First Photos with Camera held to the Eyepiece

Mond     Mond
My first, usable attempt (April 20, 2010)   My second, usable attempt from a series of similar shots (April 20, 2010)

See more photos of the moon from April 2010

However, Saturn was too much for my camera (24.4.2010):

3 photos of Saturn

3 photos of Saturn

See more photos of Saturn from April 2010

Moon Photos 2016

Mond      Mond
     
Mond  

Photos with 16 mm wide-angle eyepice, Leica-M (Typ 240) with 50 mm lens held to the eyepiece (1:50 method)

Photos taken on April 14, 2016

The following versions of the photos are the result of some post-processing to show more details in the lighter region of the moon:

Mond      Mond
     
Mond   Mond

Bottom row: Two different attempts at the same photo...

Venus Crescent March 2017

On March 16, 2017, I observed the Venus crescent with my Sky-Watcher Heritage P130 (4.5") telescope, using a 16 mm and a 4 mm UWA eyepiece. The selected photos below are 100% crops. The photos were taken with the Ricoh GR (1:50 method).

16 mm UWA eyepiece (about 40 x)

4 mm UWA eyepiece (about 160 x)

4 mm UWA eyepiece (about 160 x)

Photos with Camera (Ricoh GXR) Mounted to the Eyepiece

See my photo attempts with the camera (Ricoh GXR) mounted to the eyepiece on pages:

 

Conclusions

My experiences with the Heritage P130 telescope (purchased in February, 2010) are quite encouraging up to now . Photos of the moon are surprisingly sharp, and the planets Venus, Jupiter, and Saturn can be identified well by their details (crescent, stripes, ring) (the Cassini division cannot be identified, however; perhaps the air turbulence is too high). This judgment refers to an "adjusted state" as well as to the state before my adjustment attempts in 2015. Obviously, the parabolic mirror shows its advantage.

Since I purchased the Sky-Watcher Star Discovery AZ GoTo Mount (July 2016), I can also use the tube as a GoTo telescope, especially for deep sky objects. Here I am still at the very beginning and cannot report anything yet.

There are two things that do not like about this telescope:

Everytime I change the focus and thus, have rotate the eyepiece the view gets into trembling. This is very disturbing for me. Unfortunately, it does not seem possible to replace the eyepiece with a better one. These two items were also addressed by other owners (see below).

The quality of the eyepieces is also judged very differently on the Internet. Most reviewers find the 25 mm eyepiece (a Kellner-type eyepiece) acceptable. On the other hand, I found strong red color fringes when using it (in daylight). Others think that the 10 mm eyepiece is very poor. I found that it has at least less fringing.

Comparison with Sky-Watcher Heritage 100P (Dobson)

Compared with the Heritage 100P, this scope is definitely bulkier, heavier and not as easy to use - although as a table-top Dobsonian it is still easy to use. But it takes more effort to take it out on the terrace or balcony and start observing. I also do not take this scope on vacations (only to friends, relatives, or where we do not sleep in our car). The mount seems to exhibit more shivering, probably becaue of the higher weight on a one-arm mount.

Quality-wise, the P130 clearly has the lead and magnifies about 1.5 x more than the 100P, given the same focal length of the eyepiece. The same accounts for the different types of maximum magnification (see Basic Data). It can also be collimated (adjusted) correctly, while for the 100P only the secondary mirror can be adjusted. Nonetheless, because the 100P can be grasped and used quickly and easily, it is significantly more often in use than the P130.

Comparison with Sky-Watcher-102 OTA (Maksutov-Cassegrain)

In the summer of 2016, I bought a Sky-Watcher Skymax-102 OTA (a tube only) because a dealer persuaded me to do so. It is a Maksutov-Cassegrain telescope with approximately the same opening as the Heritage 100P (the Skymax-127 would be a direct companion), but twice the focal length, and thus, you get twice the magnification for the same eyepiece. At maximum, the P130 gets a little bit higher: 220 x (factor 1.5) or 260 x (factor 2) versus 204 x (factor 2).

With my existing eyepieces, the Heritage P130 reaches a magnification of 162,5 x (4 mm eyepiece) the Skymax-102 reaches 186 x (7 mm eyepiece), with respect to the beneficial magnification. The 102 can exceed the beneficial magnification: the 6 mm eyepiece reaches already 217 x. But for certain deep sky objects you might, according to Stoyan, even go to 300 x, provided the seeing permits this. The 4 mm eyepiece reaches a magnification of 325 x for the 102, but then the image is, for my taste, no longer good...

The Heritage P130, like the 100P, has the advantages of a wide field of view and a "faster" focal ratio (1: 4 versus 1: 12.75) over the Skymax-102. Such a "fast" focal ratio puts higher demands on the eyepieces, but now I have some better eyepieces in my collection... In this respect, the P130 should be more suitable for deep sky observations, in particular, for more extended objects. I have already used it, more or less successfully, for this purpose, but a direct comparison with the Skymax-102 on the same sky objects is still lacking. I cannot say anything about the deep sky abilities of the Skymax-102, whereas I was disappointed by those of the Meade ETX 90/EC (I was barely able to see the Andromeda galaxy, but this may also have been due to the observation conditions...).

A comparison of the image quality at day-time and at night between the Heritage P130 and the Skymax-102 is still on the waiting list...

 

What Others Say...

A Brief Review and First Conclusions

Skywatcher Heritage 130P Flextube Dobsonian (Dodge, Stargazers Lounge, 2011-08-18): stargazerslounge.com/topic/113026-skywatcher-heritage-130p-flextube-dobsonian

This is a nice review of the Heritage P130, from which would like to cite a few remarks:

Someone else in the thread (nick-named "Astronomical") suggested using Teflon tape for making focusing smoother. This seeemed to work for other posters.

My Comment: In my opinion, the poster pointed exactly to the shortcomings of the telescope: the inaccurate focuser and the wobbling (or trembling) of the telescope each time you touch it, which can be very disturbing. The poor 10 mm eyepiece can be easily replaced by a better one...

Why Isn't the Skywatcher Heritage 130p Ideal for Astrophotography?

There is a thread in astronomyforum.net (requires registration) asking the question above. Here are the answers that "Super Moderator" KeithBC provided:

There are several reasons why it is not suitable for astrophotography:

  1. A Dobsonian mount (any alt-az mount, really) limits you to 30 seconds maximum exposure due to field rotation.
  2. It does not have tracking motors, which further limits you to less than 1 second exposure time.
  3. Newtonians are not generally able to focus a DSLR camera.

You can do planetary astrophotography (AP) without a tracking mount, though tracking will considerably improve the convenience. Planetary AP is usually done using video, at fast frame rates. You would be able to shoot a few seconds of video before the scope has to be repositioned.

You absolutely need tracking for imaging deep space objects, though. A tracking alt-az mount will allow exposures up to 30 seconds. To go beyond 30 seconds, you need a tracking equatorial mount. Deep space objects benefit from exposures that are several minutes long.

 

Links

 

An den Anfang   Homepage  

gerd (at) waloszek (dot) de

About me
made by walodesign on a mac!
17.03.2017