Maksutov Cassegrain vs Schmidt Cassegrain Telescopes

Рет қаралды 24,733

Жыл бұрын

💡Learn More about astronomy, stargazing & space on our website👉 bit.ly/3yzKNhh
In this video, we're going to compare and contrast the Maksutov Cassegrain telescope with the Schmidt Cassegrain telescope.
Both telescopes are great for astronomy and can be used to view a wide range of objects, but which telescope is right for you? We'll compare the two telescopes and let you know which is the best option for you.
💡 Subscribe to get all updates: 👉 / @thealientechs
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related videos
Celestron NexStar SLT Series :- • CELESTRON NEXSTAR SLT ...
Celestron NexStar 8SE full Review:- • Celestron NexStar 8SE ...
Different Telescope Mounts Explained:- • Types of Telescope Mou...
How Equatorial Mount works:- • How does an Equatorial...
Playlist to learn Basics of Astronomy:- • Astronomy/Telescope Ba...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Amazon Affiliate links to The Telescopes **
(As an Affiliate we get a little commission if you purchase through these links, it doesn't add any extra cost to you. In a way, you are supporting the channel. )
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maksutov-Cassegrain Telescopes
1. Celestron 127 SLT:- amzn.to/3Xjx1Jx
2. Orion Starmax 90mm:- amzn.to/3U0gN5e
3. Celestron AstroFi 102:- amzn.to/3V6Lt5q
4. Celestron NexStar 4SE:- amzn.to/3V1Dd7j
5. Sarblue Mak Telescope :- amzn.to/3OBMosG
6. Sky-Watcher Skymax 150mm Mak:- amzn.to/3ODcrja
Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescopes
1. Celestron NexStar 6-SE :- amzn.to/31dTT1G
2. Celestron NexStar 8SE :- amzn.to/3Mie8RP
3. Celestron NexStar Evolution 6-inch:- amzn.to/3Fot4N3
4. Celestron Evolution 8 Edge HD :- amzn.to/3tM8xuU
Telescope accessories
1. Refractor telescope:- amzn.to/3fSeSkI
2. Equatorial Mount 1:- amzn.to/3Uv8Oxl
3. Equatorial Mount 2:- amzn.to/3h3gHM8
4. Equatorial Mount 3:- amzn.to/3G45Fkv
5. Anti-Vibration Pads:- amzn.to/3tGIrtd
6. External Battery:- amzn.to/3fErlsr
7. StarSense :- amzn.to/3DFMTgo
8. Celestron WiFi Module :- amzn.to/3heVqix
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
****************************************************************************
#celestron #telescope #astronomy
• Maksutov Cassegrain vs...

Пікірлер: 49

@Aboaye6163 Жыл бұрын

That "kay-say-grain" part is painful to hear 😅

@TheAlienTechs Жыл бұрын

hahaha 🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗

@EnuffsEnuff318 Жыл бұрын

Over and over again, yes-ay-grain! I can't stop hearing it. But excellent description of each-ay-grain

@Rockanory247 Жыл бұрын

Cat-a-di-op-tric 😳, how we meant to trust what they say when they can't even say it correctly?

@bobogliddabrun 8 ай бұрын

Cass-a-grain. Repeat after me kids

@tlinrin887 3 ай бұрын

It does bring the narrator's credibility into question.

@Booruvcheek 2 ай бұрын

4:06 - "Because of the thick corrector plates on the Mak, its light gathering is very slow. This is not ideal for astrophotography." -- I'm sorry, what does it mean? The corrector plate is a lens, so are you saying its thickness is so great it significantly reduces light flux? That I would find hard to believe. Also, not mentioned is that the secondary mirror, which obstructs part of the light is normally smaller in Maks than in SCT's. See 2:22 - compare Mirror 2 on the left and on the right.

@MarcoNeroDesign 7 күн бұрын

There's quite a few folks who have been able to screw on an SCT-type Focal Reducer to the back of their MAKSUTOV telescopes in order to widen the field of view and to speed up the f-stop ratio. Even the large 2700mm f/15 SkyMax 180 will come down to f/9.5 and offer considerably more light to work with if fitted with a 0.63x reducer. I've seen some pleasant deep space objects and nebulas photographed with 127 MAKs as well. The Schmidt-Cassegrain type scopes have their own set of problems... often requiring flatterers and regular collimation. The cool-down time for a MAK wasn't really covered here and is typically slightly longer than other types of telescopes. Other than Great Orion Nebula, you can't see much in the way of DSOs looking though telescopes with the naked eye, so that leaves the Moon, Stars and Planets... all of which are best served with a MAK. If buying for Astrophotography, I'd probably aim for the higher-end Celestron EDGE HD models or even a RASA type model. And of course you can do spectacular wide-field (24mm-50mm) to medium-field (85mm-600mm) images with just a camera, with or without tracking.

@mesenteria 5 ай бұрын

The name is French, and it's pronounced 'KASS-granh', almost like 'gran', but not quite getting the 'n'. But, that nit-picking aside, I liked your approach and informative delivery.

@petset77 Жыл бұрын

Thank you for the details. I'm a relative newbie with an 8" Dobsonian and EQ mount 4.5 reflector. I'm still soaking up as much information as I can.

@GeoffCurreymusic Ай бұрын

Nice and simple explanation, thanks. I have a NexStar 127SLT which is a MAK. I want to do astrophotography, but as I suspected, and you confirmed, this OTA is unsuitable. You can take shorter videos of planets and stack them but that is just as easily done using an SCT.

@TheAlienTechs Ай бұрын

I'm glad you found this video helpful 🤗🤗

@tel1jla 6 ай бұрын

I just bought a Celestron NexStar 4SE, which is a MAK. I am not interested in deep space astrophotography, so thanks for confirming that I bought the right kind of scope for my intentions.

@Caderic 5 ай бұрын

That is interesting, becase all the other Nexstar *SEs (5SE, 6SE and 8SE) are Schmidt-Cassegrain. I first read you post and wat like, "No it's not." Then I did some digging and found it is the only one in the line that is a MAK.

@ronrontall6370 5 ай бұрын

They say that Dmitriy Maksutov invented his MAK telescope back in 1940s with an idea to make a good compact telescope easy to use for schools and astronomy classes. It had a small tube 10cm diamete and 18 cm length, x70 and a short az mount.

@lrcustomspty Жыл бұрын

Thanks for the video!!

@ragheedeleyan429 Жыл бұрын

I always thought the MAK was better than the SCT, thanks to you I avoided a huge mistake :D

@TheAlienTechs Жыл бұрын

MAK Telescopes are good too. But it depends on what u want to observe primarily. If u want to observe planets and nearby objects in great detail then mak Telescopes are good

@nguoisat134 6 ай бұрын

@@TheAlienTechschất lượng hình ảnh và độ phân giải của mak có tốt hơn SCT không?

@tiberiu_nicolae 10 ай бұрын

Poor Cassegrain was massacred

@BariumCobaltNitrog3n 6 ай бұрын

They're both cassegrain.

@derek7793 Ай бұрын

lol this a joke?

@Dutch_Hardstylez Жыл бұрын

Which one is better for planetary imaging with high resolution? I havent found the answer in the video. Only astrophotography but i think that is deep sky imaging?

@pablocabrera1228 3 ай бұрын

usually longer focal ratio is better for planets. Maks have longer focal ratios so are better for planets

@Astronurd 29 күн бұрын

Maks are better for planets.

@mwaters210 Жыл бұрын

Have you considered making a video on different focuser types and how to choose the right focuser for your telescope? Maybe even how to measure to make sure you get the proper baseplate? I think this could be very helpful, especially for people customizing/upgrading older or more inexpensive scopes.

@dawidwitulski5712 Жыл бұрын

Thanks

@ronm6585 Жыл бұрын

Thanks.

@mesenteria 5 ай бұрын

@ 5:30, '...limited to observing planars...' Yikes! 😀

@Astronurd 29 күн бұрын

Maks are sharper and have better contrast than SCT's due to their smaller central obstruction.

@bobogliddabrun 8 ай бұрын

Wait a sec, I don't think I've ever seen a Schmidt cheaper than an equivalent Mak-Cass. Maybe I'm just Googling wrong

@mzuidema100 7 ай бұрын

They are about the same price, but the mak gets a bit more expensive if you get one with big aperture like the 180 mm mak. The big difference in price is the mount you get with it.

@Michael.Chapman Ай бұрын

I thought it was the typically long focal ratio of the Mak that made it photographically ‘slow’’-not the fact that it has a thick meniscus type corrector. BTW, it’s pronounced Cass-eee-grain rather than Cass-AY-grain.