Hello everyone. This is really important to me. I want to buy a telescope. My wishes are deep sky and planetary observation. the most suitable one for me right now is the nexstar slt 6 (I couldn't find almost anything about this telescope.). the price is 2 times the celestron astromaster 130 eq (For Turkey). And it looks really cheap. (I live in Turkey and the economy is really annoying. I can't find the telescope I want at local dealers, and most of what I can find is on amazon.com. But amazon's taxes are really too high. To give an example. Skywatcher virtuoso 150p is a telescope I love. Amazon Price is on average 450 dollars. If we convert it to Turkish lira, it makes about 9000 TL. But on Amazon, this goes up to more than 2 times with taxes. Something like 22000 TL happens.) Now I have to research it from local dealers because this is the case. And the price of Nexstar 6 Slt is 21000 Turkish liras. It's really cheap when I look at other telescopes. But I've heard a lot that the assembly is of poor quality. I really don't have the money for a 6SE. (6SE is out of stock, but the price of 5SE is 27500 TL. I can't give more price, the limit price for me is 6Slt. Considering the price is low for me, do you think it's worth it? I haven't had a telescope before, but I use my school's telescope. (Meade Lx85 8" newtonian. I'm also an amateur astrophotographer.) I think I know enough about telescopes. I think 6 SLT mounts aren't that bad considering the price? And how bad can it be? if that doesn't happen i might consider the nexstar 130 slt. (14000 TL). Please help me with this. Any opinions are valuable to me… ( minimum wage in Turkey : 8500 TL/430 Dollars)
Celestron Nexstar 6 Slt
Hi!
I have the Nexstar 6SE, the optics and quality of the OTA are good, for visual use is a really nice telescope, lightweight and affordable (generally). I think that the 6 SLT, 6SE and C6 are the same tube, no difference in the optics or quality. (cannot confirm that as the 6 SLT is not available here in Mexico).
I also have the 130 SLT, that OTA is also ok, useful for planetary or deep sky. Good optics too (the Focuser is its weakest point).
The SLT and SE alt az mount are not that good, backlash is the main problem but for visual use that is not a major thing to worry about. I have had those mounts for 3 years and they still work ok.
if you want a multi purpose telescope, 130 SLT might be a better choice, if you can get a barlow lens, can collimate the telescope and have easy access to dark skies. It is also cheaper because it is a Newtonian.
if you have a light polluted sky, do a lot of planetary observation and do not have access to dark skies, the 6SLT might be your choice.
also, if you add a barlow it’s going to be even better suited for planetary and if you add a focal reducer you can improve its use for deep sky.
in the end, you will have to analyze your situation (location, availability, budget, use, etc) to choose one or another.
I hope this info is helpful for you.
Clear skies
I have the Nexstar 6SE, the optics and quality of the OTA are good, for visual use is a really nice telescope, lightweight and affordable (generally). I think that the 6 SLT, 6SE and C6 are the same tube, no difference in the optics or quality. (cannot confirm that as the 6 SLT is not available here in Mexico).
I also have the 130 SLT, that OTA is also ok, useful for planetary or deep sky. Good optics too (the Focuser is its weakest point).
The SLT and SE alt az mount are not that good, backlash is the main problem but for visual use that is not a major thing to worry about. I have had those mounts for 3 years and they still work ok.
if you want a multi purpose telescope, 130 SLT might be a better choice, if you can get a barlow lens, can collimate the telescope and have easy access to dark skies. It is also cheaper because it is a Newtonian.
if you have a light polluted sky, do a lot of planetary observation and do not have access to dark skies, the 6SLT might be your choice.
also, if you add a barlow it’s going to be even better suited for planetary and if you add a focal reducer you can improve its use for deep sky.
in the end, you will have to analyze your situation (location, availability, budget, use, etc) to choose one or another.
I hope this info is helpful for you.
Clear skies
Helpful Respectful Engaging Supportive
Thanks a lot!
Your explanation is very helpful. And there is one more thing I wonder. If I take 130 slt, will the galaxies and planetary nebulae look a bit small because the focal length is 650mm? I'm testing it from astronomy.tools.
Your explanation is very helpful. And there is one more thing I wonder. If I take 130 slt, will the galaxies and planetary nebulae look a bit small because the focal length is 650mm? I'm testing it from astronomy.tools.
Yes, they will look smaller in comparison with the 6SLT, but remember that the 130 SLT is a F5 reflector that can capture more light than the 6SLT (f10) that is why it is considered more capable for deep sky objects, besides that, the field of view is bigger so you will find the objects more easily and the bigger ones are going to fit the field of view with no problem.
Both of them will give you nice views though, and if you get the reducer for the 6SLT, you will have a F6.3 telescope with 945 mm of focal length more capable for deep sky just remember that the focal reducer price is 150 dls aprox.
Both of them will give you nice views though, and if you get the reducer for the 6SLT, you will have a F6.3 telescope with 945 mm of focal length more capable for deep sky just remember that the focal reducer price is 150 dls aprox.
Helpful
Yes, they will look smaller in comparison with the 6SLT, but remember that the 130 SLT is a F5 reflector that can capture more light than the 6SLT (f10) that is why it is considered more capable for deep sky objects, besides that, the field of view is bigger so you will find the objects more easily and the bigger ones are going to fit the field of view with no problem.
Both of them will give you nice views though, and if you get the reducer for the 6SLT, you will have a F6.3 telescope with 945 mm of focal length more capable for deep sky just remember that the focal reducer price is 150 dls aprox.
Actually, this is another question I'm wondering about. Which of these telescopes is better for deep sky? Actually, the answer seems obvious. But there is one thing.
1- The Nexstar 6SLT has a diameter of 150mm, so it collects more light than the slt130.
2- However, since the 6SLT is an f10, the images on the slt130 will be brighter as it is an f5.
3- SLT6 tube has a StarBrightXLT. I've read things that this makes the image brighter ( Starbright XLT coatings are 16% brighter overall than even the original industry-standard Starbright multicoatings.) I don't know how true
And the objects I want to observe are usually galaxies and planetary nebulae. Which one will make it look brighter? If we accept the result as equal; If I want to enlarge the image on the slt130 (for example, if I replace the 25mm eyepiece with a 9mm eyepiece) how much light will the image lose?
Just interjecting to point out that either scope is totally unsuitable to deep sky astrophotography of any significant exposure length except, maybe, some form of EEA. If I were cash-strapped I'd go with a 6" f/4-f/5 newtonian of the cheap variety coupled with a cheap but reliable equatorial mount (such as SW EQ5) and add goto and guiding capability via open hardware such as OnStep.
Helpful Insightful
andrea tasselli:
Just interjecting to point out that either scope is totally unsuitable to deep sky astrophotography of any significant exposure length except, maybe, some form of EEA. If I were cash-strapped I'd go with a 6" f/4-f/5 newtonian of the cheap variety coupled with a cheap but reliable equatorial mount (such as SW EQ5) and add goto and guiding capability via open hardware such as OnStep.
Thank you for your advice
andrea tasselli:
Just interjecting to point out that either scope is totally unsuitable to deep sky astrophotography of any significant exposure length except, maybe, some form of EEA. If I were cash-strapped I'd go with a 6" f/4-f/5 newtonian of the cheap variety coupled with a cheap but reliable equatorial mount (such as SW EQ5) and add goto and guiding capability via open hardware such as OnStep.
Hi Andrea,
I think 🤔 Eta_carinae is more interested in visual use not astrophotography.
Also, astrophotography is possible with any of those mounts and OTA, I have shoot some photos with them, I started that way and there are some other users that use them too (YouTube and even here) There are a lot of limitations and the quality might not be good but it is a good way to start and see if you like it or not. For serious astrophotography they are - bad choice so I agree with you.
Yes, they will look smaller in comparison with the 6SLT, but remember that the 130 SLT is a F5 reflector that can capture more light than the 6SLT (f10) that is why it is considered more capable for deep sky objects, besides that, the field of view is bigger so you will find the objects more easily and the bigger ones are going to fit the field of view with no problem.
Both of them will give you nice views though, and if you get the reducer for the 6SLT, you will have a F6.3 telescope with 945 mm of focal length more capable for deep sky just remember that the focal reducer price is 150 dls aprox.
Actually, this is another question I'm wondering about. Which of these telescopes is better for deep sky? Actually, the answer seems obvious. But there is one thing.
1- The Nexstar 6SLT has a diameter of 150mm, so it collects more light than the slt130.
2- However, since the 6SLT is an f10, the images on the slt130 will be brighter as it is an f5.
3- SLT6 tube has a StarBrightXLT. I've read things that this makes the image brighter ( Starbright XLT coatings are 16% brighter overall than even the original industry-standard Starbright multicoatings.) I don't know how true
And the objects I want to observe are usually galaxies and planetary nebulae. Which one will make it look brighter? If we accept the result as equal; If I want to enlarge the image on the slt130 (for example, if I replace the 25mm eyepiece with a 9mm eyepiece) how much light will the image lose?
In my personal experience, the 130 SLT is better for deep sky observation as the objects (big or small) look brighter so you can see fainter objects.
1- that is correct but, the diameter/ aperture is more useful to see fine details in planets for example, however, the 6SLT has a long focal length (1500 mm) so the light becomes weaker as it travels and reflects inside the telescope, that is why it is an F10.
2-Yes, just like that.
3-StarBright XLT will improve the image you see, but the view with the 130 SLT is still brighter.
In conclusion, the 130 SLT is brighter in my personal opinion. For example, I can see Andromeda galaxy (faint), Hercules cluster, Orion Nebula or even the ring nebula (very faint) in my Bortle 7 sky (suburban sky) but can see only Orion Nebula (dimmer in comparison) with the 6SE.
Generally, a 25 mm eye piece (low magnification) is what is usually used for deep sky observation; the image definitely gets darker with a 9mm eyepiece, approximately 30-40%. I would recommend a 18-25mm eye piece given that usually it is difficult to see fine details in deep sky objects (200 mm aperture or more is needed and recommended. That is the reason why many experienced astronomers recomend a Dobsonian telescope), even Andromeda galaxy looks like a blurry white spot with only subtle details.
Helpful
Thank you very much for your answers. Actually, I am interested in both visual and astrophotography. In general, I use my school's Meade Lx85 8" newtonian and DSLR camera for astrophotography. Actually, I think I'm doing EAA there. But I really like doing EAA. And I really believe that good images can be made with 130 SLT. Since I don't have a personal telescope, I am observing with binoculars or even EAA from the city. I don't know if it counts but I'm trying to do it. It's a really tough challenge. I have a 10-30x25 binocular. I'm trying to get some nice images using it and the Phone. By combining 15-20 1 second photos of the orion nebula, I managed to get some detail. About 15-20 of them I threw it in the trash too. The photo is of poor quality, but when I observe orion nebula with scope I only see stars in trapezium. this result makes me really happy.
These pitcures taken binoculars and mobile phone camera.
These pitcures taken binoculars and mobile phone camera.
Engaging Supportive
I took these photos with the 130 SLT and it’s original mount. 20-30 sec exposure time per shot x 80-100 shots and a planetary camera (not cooled). I was just starting and I was also not good at processing the images, you can see bad focus, star trails and other defects… but I was happy with the results.With the 6SLT and its mount (the same as 130 SLT) it will be a nightmare and maybe not possible to take more than 5-10 sec exposure shots because of its long focal length. So the 130 SLT might be a better option if you plan to do astrophotography too.
BUT if you have a DSLR you will have to modify the telescope or it will not reach focus, a dedicated camera works with no problem.
I took this photo with the Nexstar 6SE its original mount AND an equatorial wedge + a guide scope, guide camera, 6.3 focal reducer and the same planetary camera. 120 sec exposure time per shot and 1:30 hr total integration time. You can see that auto guide, an equatorial wedge and the focal reducer are necessary to manage the long focal length of this telescope and its original mount.
Helpful Insightful Respectful Engaging
With the 6SLT and its mount (the same as 130 SLT) it will be a nightmare and maybe not possible to take more than 5-10 sec exposure shots because of its long focal length. So the 130 SLT might be a better option if you plan to do astrophotography too.
BUT if you have a DSLR you will have to modify the telescope or it will not reach focus, a dedicated camera works with no problem.
I took this photo with the Nexstar 6SE its original mount AND an equatorial wedge + a guide scope, guide camera, 6.3 focal reducer and the same planetary camera. 120 sec exposure time per shot and 1:30 hr total integration time. You can see that auto guide, an equatorial wedge and the focal reducer are necessary to manage the long focal length of this telescope and its original mount.
The photos are really satisfying. Which planetary camera are you using? For dslr you have to move the primary mirror forward a bit but planet camera has no focusing problem right?
Thanks!
camera ZWO ASI485 MC, but any dedicated planetary camera or deep sky cooled camera will work without any focusing problems.
Yes, with DSLR the primary mirror should be moved forward, you can find some tutorials in YouTube.
camera ZWO ASI485 MC, but any dedicated planetary camera or deep sky cooled camera will work without any focusing problems.
Yes, with DSLR the primary mirror should be moved forward, you can find some tutorials in YouTube.
I understand. Thank you very much for your answers
Well Written Respectful