SkyWatcher 4.7 inch OTA

Info	Votes	Messages	More Stats	Up One Level

Brand and Model:	SkyWatcher 4.7 inch OTA
Price ($USD):	$599
Type:	Achromatic Refractor
Attributes:	Go-To PEC
Aperture:	120mm (4.7")
f Ratio:	f/8.3
Focal Length:	1000mm
Finder:	6x30
Electric Power:
Mount:
Tripod:
Weight (lbs):	OTA 13lbs
Dimensions (w/h/d):
Description:	Dark Meade Blue OTA with 2 inch Focuser, and 1.25 inch adapter. 6X30 Finder scope, all metal lens cell.

Vote Highlights

SkyWatcher 4.7 inch OTA

Excellent! I just bought the OTA on EQ5 mount on 27 th sept. 2007 and I was able to see 4 bands in atmosphere on Jupiter even in some light and omogene cloudy cover!!! Maybe that clarity due to the zoom 8-24 mm eyepiece from Sky-Watcher...
Extreme sturdy that EQ5 mount and very easy to use...
I have made the polar alignment in my room, observing the southwest sky using small manually movements during up to 9 hours... and I obtained good enough alignment: about 4 mins and I start observing some movement in the FOV- of course with RA engine started. I ask my son to make a black dot on superior wall (sorry for my english- I'm romanian) and I can put the scope in station using this point in max. 6 mins- longest time until now- after 3 weeks of work with that scope.
So, thanks to Sky-Watcher for that amazing scope.
Good skies to you, all!!!

Overall Rating: 10
Optics:10 Mount:10 Ease of Use:10 Value:10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date: 10/22/2007 05:50:25 pm PDT
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.240.136)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=570607

Reply Replies: 0

SkyWatcher 4.7 inch OTA

I have sampled 2 of these in the past year. One had excellent optics with fantastic detail visible on the planets. The other was not quite as good.
Seems to be a lot of variation in quality in these Chinese made tube assemblies. I have a 4" f10 Skywatcher that is also excellent. Best to deal with a dealer who will let you swap if you get a lesser example.
Mechanically these scopes are clones of Vixen refractors with lower quality fit & finish. They're still a bargain if you manage to get a good one. The 4" ota sells for about $250 and the 4.7" for $300-325. It's a lot of scope for the $$.
The 4.7" is a great deepsky scope also. Put a 32mm erfle with a UHC and you can see the Veil from a dark site.
Brian Redman
Katy,Texas

Overall Rating: 8
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date: 09/07/2001 05:46:08 am PDT
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.110.241)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=39841

Reply Replies: 0

SkyWatcher 4.7 inch OTA

I borrowed a Sky-Watcher OTA to see how the optics performed, and also how well it was constructed. The tube is "Meade" blue. The 2 inch focuser is an exact replica of my Celestron 102HD. The Tube rings are also made the same as the Celestron, hence from the same factory in China. Since the OTA is relatively light I mounted it on my CG4. I wanted to do a direct comparison with my Celestron 102HD OTA. The skywatcher was very well color corrected for such a fast system, the color correction was comprable to the Celestron. Unfortunately that is were the similarity ended. With a chesire eyepiece the Sky Watchers optics were a little misaligned, not noticeable when observing though. I compared both scopes with Jupiter using the same eyepieces and diagonal on the same mount. Observing a transit with the Sky-Watcher, the shadow of the moon was pretty easy, but the detail on the planet started getting mushy at 150X. I did not feel that I was able to resolve fine detail on the planet. The atmosphere was a little turbulent, but I felt that was not the contributing factor. I had the scope sit out for an hour before testing. I then quickly took the OTA off and brought the Celestron out to test. Wow, the shadow of the moon was ink black, just jumped off the planet. Jupiter was tack sharp at 150X with at least 5 bands visible, and festoons quite apparent. I felt I was resolving all that 4 inch lens could offer. The view was so much more pleasing with the Celestron. Now either I lucked out and got an extremly good lens with the Celestron, and a subpar lens with the Sky Watcher, I can't say for sure. But with direct comparison of both, it was NO CONTEST! Bob Midiri astroramrx@hotmail.com

Overall Rating: 5
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date: 12/04/1999 07:08:11 pm PDT
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.115.169)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=39838

Reply Replies: 0

Click here to see all votes (3 total)