I hope you will agree with me when I say:
“Choosing your first telescope has never been easy, and when it comes to Celestron vs. Skywatcher, things become a bit further complicated”
If you are in the market for good telescopes to buy, then the chances are you might’ve stumbled upon two leading brands, i.e., Celestron and Skywatcher. Both of them are reputable manufacturers aimed at professionals and astrophotographers, and they excel in performance and can provide you with the clarity you rightfully need.
Although they may differ in terms of design and construction, when you consider their quality, both of them are great options. Even being reputable telescope makers, there are many questions like Are Celestron telescopes good? Or Should I go for the Skywatcher route? To answer these queries, we have put together an in-depth guide about Celestron vs. Skywatcher.
We will be looking for things like which is the best type of telescope from each owner and how well they stack against it in terms of affordability. Similarly, in the end, we will go through the best telescope buying guide to further ease out your decision. So, let’s get straight into it!
Celestron C90 vs. Skywatcher Skymax 127 – Heads-on Comparison
|Characteristics||Skywatcher Skymax 127||Celestron C90|
|Scopes||Red-dot finder||8x12 Optical finder|
|Viewing Mirror||90mm mirror||45-degree prism|
|Mounting||Vixen Dovetail||EQ mount|
|Extras||10mm & 25mm eyepiece||32mm plossl|
So, let’s start with the telescope’s most important feature, i.e., the aperture. The Skymax stands at 120mm with a 5inch mirror in this department, while the Celestron c90 at around 90mm. This accounts for a three-and-a-half-inch mirror which when you compare against skywatcher ed80 for sale. Also, before you buy any of these, keep in mind that the selective aperture might be a bit lower than advertised, so in the case of Skywatcher Skymax 127, it could be as trivial as 120mm.
In terms of focal length, there is a meter and a half (1500mm) of focal length inside the Skymax, while for the Celestron telescopes, including this one, it’s about 1250mm. Due to these configurations, we could say that the Skymax is operating at just under f12 and the Celestron at just under f14. The effect of this is apparent when observing deep space objects. With higher magnification, the Skywatcher Skymax 127 is clearly the winner.
Both of these variants have finder scopes attached, which are quite functional for their budget. The Skymax 127 comes equipped with a decent range of RD finders. On the other hand, the Celestron C90 is provided with an optical finder which is in an 8×12 configuration. Now accuracy for the Celestron telescopes like this particular model isn’t that high, and you want to change it as soon as possible, especially if you want to use it for stargazing.
Another crucial factor in Celestron vs. skywatcher debate is adjusting the angle of viewing. As expected, the Skymax 127 allows users a 90mm mirror diagonal, which is pretty standard with models like the skywatcher ed80 for sale. Whereas the Celestron C90 has a 45mm erecting prism that is lightweight and functional.
Due to this arrangement, you can use the Celestron c90 as a spotting as well as an astronomical telescope. Don’t practice it for almost every Astro target since the prism arrangement can induce strange artifacts and is generally not ideal for nighttime viewing.
Celestron vs. skywatcher mount
In terms of mounting, the Skywatcher Skymax 127 has a Vixen Dovetail bar with excellent green finishing. While the Celestron C90, a smaller unit, is compatible with an EQ mount. What this means is you will be limited in terms of attachment space.
Additionally, the Skywatcher Skymax 127 scales at around 3kg, while the c90 is approximately at 2.2kgs. So, in short, neither of them is heavy scopes. The Skymax series might feel a bit bulky, but both can be used as portable stargazing equipment.
When you buy either of Celestron’s Skywatcher telescopes, you will receive a range of accessories. The Skymax comes equipped with two eyepieces (a 10mm & a 25mm), which work wonders for astrophotography. Conversely, the C90 model provides you with a single 32mm Plossl, which is quite a durable construction as compared to previous-gen telescopes ( Celestron AVX vs. skywatcher HEQ5).
After a basic overview aside, it’s time to check how the sentiment of Celestron vs. Skywatcher compares in terms of real-world use-case. So, for this reason, the setup will be based on an ASI 120camera with 2x Barlow on an equatorial mount. The image under observation will be Great Red Spot (planetary) to provide ideal results. After processing the images from both telescopes, we can say that the 127’s visuals are better than the c90 ones.
We got more detail in the equatorial bands, and the contrast is a lot accurate for the Great Red Spot. So, in these conditions, the Skymax 127 beat the Celestron model but not by a huge margin, and in fact, there isn’t a huge amount of difference. Of course, the Skymax 127 may have a bit more detail than expected, but it’s not that huge compared to its smaller counterpart i.,e the Celestron c90.