Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Glen Baker's Avatar
    Glen Baker Guest

    Default Baader Genuine Orthoscopic Eyepieces



    Just saw the Baader Genuine Orthoscopic on the www.alpineastro.com site.
    Are these the Zeiss equivalents or rebranded UO HD orthos?

    G.B.

  2. #2
    RichA's Avatar
    RichA Guest

    Default Baader Genuine Orthoscopic Eyepieces

    On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 06:37:12 -0000, Glen Baker <Lens@nwc.edu> wrote:


    They are the same as the UO HDs as are the Antares orthos
    here: http://www.scopestuff.com/ss_eort.htm

    Baader's price is a RIPOFF! $119/ea!!!
    UO is about $79.00
    Antares about $59.00

    And they are ALL the same.
    -Rich


  3. #3
    Richard Darn's Avatar
    Richard Darn Guest

    Default Baader Genuine Orthoscopic Eyepieces

    Before you declare it a rip-off, be sure which UO orthos you are comparing
    the Baader's with. UO currently has three kinds - regular, HD and new
    "planetary orthos" which retail for exactly the same as the Baader. The
    Antares version is presumably the "regular" albeit with a flat top, as
    opposed to cone. My only really problem with ortho's has been ghosting - Ed
    Ting found the same on his review site. If the Baaders have better coatings
    and "proper baffling" - as it states - I might be interested. Not sure what
    "phantom mulit-coatings" mean though.

    Rich



    "RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
    news:6me8q0tap4mnfjki2f0jf7jseoeni4gkuq@4ax.com...



  4. #4
    RichA's Avatar
    RichA Guest

    Default Baader Genuine Orthoscopic Eyepieces

    On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 08:21:50 -0000, "Richard Darn"
    <mail@richarddarn.demon.co.uk> wrote:


    Since these are all coming out of the same factory in Japan (or
    China?) it would be very interesting if they differed from each
    other in any way apart from exterior cosmetic changes.
    -Rich

  5. #5
    Mileva Maric's Avatar
    Mileva Maric Guest

    Default Baader Genuine Orthoscopic Eyepieces

    Some things under the Baader logo are great (expensive)
    others are not.



    Richard Darn wrote:



  6. #6
    michaelmorris's Avatar
    michaelmorris Guest

    Default Baader Genuine Orthoscopic Eyepieces


    From my understanding Baader Orthos are probably the same as UO HDs.
    However, as the reproduced post below suggests, the Antare
    orthoscopics are probably not as good as the UO HDs. I've ordered a
    HD from University Optics and its costing me just £62 includin
    postage, VAT and the Royal mail's £4 admin charge.


    (POSTING FROM WWW.CLOUDYNIGHTS.COM)
    Hi Michael and others,

    I am a dealer for both lines so I have the luxury of checking the
    over.

    Similarities
    1 Both made in Japan
    2 “mechanical” design is identical. As you know the HDs (and th
    antares) are parfocal. You can mix 2 antares and 2 UOs together an
    never have to change the focus (maybe slightly)

    Differences that I can find
    1 UO … FULLY multi coated, antares .. multicoated.
    2 The baffling is different between the 2 brands
    3 about $25 US

    Performance differences … that is a difficult call and very subjective
    You won’t be disappointed with either brand. As a matter of fact I stil
    prefer the original Ortho’s (volcano top) because even though th
    performance is slightly less than the HDs, I find the shape makes the
    very comfortable. That is just my personal preference

    Hope this helped shed some photons on things,
    Tim Hagan
    Helix




    Glen Baker Wrote:

    --
    michaelmorris

  7. #7
    Phil's Avatar
    Phil Guest

    Default Baader Genuine Orthoscopic Eyepieces

    Watch Orthoscopic eyepieces when thinking they are the same as UO's. An
    example from my own experience, Pono Optics used to sell Ortho's and it was
    claimed they where the same eyepieces as the UO's, I brought a full set, yes
    they where the same eyepiece from the same factory, but the coatings where
    very different. I now have a full set of UO Ortho's as well.

    It very easy to see the different in coatings in daylight.

    Performance wise the Pono's where excellent eyepieces and I would have no
    trouble recommending them but, planetary the UO are the better eyepiece
    hands down, better colour and less internal reflections, deep sky is a bit
    subjective, but personally I prefer the UO's


    "michaelmorris" <michaelmorris.1mkq9n@spacebanter.com> wrote in message
    news:michaelmorris.1mkq9n@spacebanter.com...



 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Orthoscopic FOV ?
    By John Carruthers in forum Amateur Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-16-2005, 07:39 AM
  2. Orthoscopic FOV ?
    By John Carruthers in forum UK Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-14-2005, 05:17 PM
  3. orthoscopic EPs ?
    By John Carruthers in forum UK Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-08-2004, 10:30 AM
  4. Baader Eudiascopic eyepieces?
    By Lawrence Sayre in forum Amateur Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-18-2004, 10:25 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0
Powered by vBulletin®
All times are GMT. The time now is 07:56 PM.