Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21
  1. #11
    Richard Carlson's Avatar
    Richard Carlson Guest

    Default 127mm Mak-Cas or Orion 80ED?

    Szaki wrote:

    The Mak will provide more contrast and higher magnification than the 80mm ed
    you've mentioned. I own 3 refractors, a mak, and a 25" dobsonian. The mak is
    also by far a lot more portable because of size. Views of the planets have
    been excellent and I've pushed its magnification upwards using a 3.5mm
    eyepiece successfully. IMO the mak would be a better buy.


  2. #12
    Szaki's Avatar
    Szaki Guest

    Default 127mm Mak-Cas or Orion 80ED?

    *I can imagine, you own one those 80mm f/5 Chines achromat, great experience
    in refractor county. Good luck guy!
    You can suck on your Mak. If it would be that good, every ones choice would
    be a 5-6" Mak, but most pro astronomers go out and spend 3-5 thousand for
    4-5 APO refractor.

    *Hey, guy get lost, I can't tell, you don't know what **** you talking
    30x /inch on an 80mm or 3"+ ED refractor would be only 90 x power. A cheap
    achromat can do better than that. My 60mm Tasco outperforms that. You should
    have your examined first.

    *It was not specified, but when buy a small portable scope there's all ways
    time to use for that. He's not going to look it only the Moon 24 hours, 7
    days a week.

    In this case, the Mak is an
    *I'll eat my hat, if you can do 600x magnification with your 5" Chines Mak.
    Get real guy!
    Stop reading the Orion catalogs.

    less color dispersion, and potentially sharper views, if the

    *Bull Shit. That's why they advertising the Mak-Newt, "refractor like
    images", he? I did look through a 6" Mak-Newt, my friend had one, it's close
    but not quite. Mak-Newt has 19% CO.
    Why don't you read Suitor's book some times,than come back and argue.


  3. #13
    David Nakamoto's Avatar
    David Nakamoto Guest

    Default 127mm Mak-Cas or Orion 80ED?

    This is tiresome. You spout arbitrary assertions without giving the facts,
    other than some short sentences about your experience, to back them up. You're
    obviously a troll. On my kill list from now on.

    As for the others that might be reading this, I think it's safe to say that most
    professional astronomers do not own their own equipment. They're into research,
    which requires very large permanently mounted telescopes. A few do use
    equipment amateurs use, but this is the exception rather than the rule. The few
    I personally know, mostly from JPL, own a wide variety of telescopes, because
    other factors come into play, just as they do for any amateur astronomer,
    because when they use their own instruments, professionals become amateurs, for
    reasons I laid out above.

    As for the arbitrary assertion that I own an 80mm f/5 Syntha, totally wrong, but
    then since none of your statements are based on fact Szaki, why should anything
    you state about me be based on fact?

    Go away little man. I'll be willing to bet that I've been an amateur astronomer
    longer than you've been on this earth, with strong ties to a lot of people with
    a lot of experience that I find both enlightening and entertaining, unlike you.
    --- Dave
    It don't mean a thing
    unless it has that certain "je ne sais quoi"
    Duke Ellington

    "Szaki" <> wrote in message

  4. #14
    Szaki's Avatar
    Szaki Guest

    Default 127mm Mak-Cas or Orion 80ED?

    You told me a refractor can only do 30x/inch at best. Now that tells me,
    you don't know what the hell you talking about.
    50x/inch rule is for compound telescopes, a good refractor able to do twice
    as much. My TV Pronto 70mm f/6.8, on a good seeing night can hold 250-300x
    magnification on planets, using TVs 5x barlow, that's 100x/ inch. My old 3"
    f/15 Edscorp performed even better. That's why some people love those f/15
    achromatic refractors, cost and performance. I was on a star party, one guy
    had 8" f/15 refractor, it was huge, but he had the longest line at the
    Resolving power is another question, larger aperture can resolve more. But,
    still there is a limitation of seeing and atmospheric distortion. You may
    say theoretically an 8" or 10" SCT can resolve 1/2 arc-second or less, but
    you'll find very few days to achieve that, be cause the seeing, upper
    atmosphere turbulence etc....
    Told you, go read Suitor's book on optical theory JPL guy.
    I worked for Loral Space company 12 years and others before, you don't
    impress me.

    "David Nakamoto" <> wrote in message

  5. #15
    JJK's Avatar
    JJK Guest

    Default 127mm Mak-Cas or Orion 80ED?

    "Gaz" wrote:

    How do you propose to get to the Moon? ~`8^)

  6. #16
    JJK's Avatar
    JJK Guest

    Default 127mm Mak-Cas or Orion 80ED?

    "Tim Killian" wrote:

    Cooldown of a 127mm Mak is an issue here in MD's winter.

  7. #17
    Gaz's Avatar
    Gaz Guest

    Default 127mm Mak-Cas or Orion 80ED?

    JJK wrote:
    Duh! Thats why I'm going for a portable scope....



  8. #18
    JJK's Avatar
    JJK Guest

    Default 127mm Mak-Cas or Orion 80ED?

    > > "Gaz" wrote:

    Gaz" wrote:

    Makes sense, now that you mention it. ~`8^)

  9. #19
    shneor's Avatar
    shneor Guest

    Default 127mm Mak-Cas or Orion 80ED?

    The Mak will have better resolution. Resolution has to do with the
    distance between the boundary of the element collecting photons, and
    little or nothing to do with the central obstruction. The primary
    effect of the central obstruction is to reduce contrast. The loss of
    light resulting from the central obstruction is probably in the
    neighborhood fo 10%-12%. The Mak will still collect move than twice as
    much the 80mm refractor I'd go for the Mak (and in fact I
    have a 5" Skywatcher Mak, purchased from Khanscope in Canada for $400;
    I'm told it's quality is much better than the Orion version.)
    Clear skies,
    Shneor Sherman

  10. #20
    Alan Charlesworth's Avatar
    Alan Charlesworth Guest

    Default 127mm Mak-Cas or Orion 80ED?

    In article <1107016559.777882.46540@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups. com>,
    "Gaz" <> wrote:

    I have both the Orion 80 ED and Orion Mak 127 (as well as a 8" LX-90
    SCT). I use the LX-90 only at dark sites, and bought the Mak 127 for
    use at home in the city (Portland, OR) for the moon and plants. Later,
    when the 80ED came out, I bought it for its flexibility for both wide
    fields and planets. I mount either the 80 ED or the Mak 127 on an Orion
    AZ-3 alt-az. I use wide field Nagler eyepieces on both: 5 & 7 mm on the
    80ED (86x & 120x), and 7 & 11 mm on the Mak (140x & 220x). A wide
    field EP makes using an alt-az reasonable, as do slow motion controls.

    If I had to choose just one of the two Orion scopes, I would pick the
    80ED, since it can also do wide fields at dark sites. It is a great
    travel scope, since I am suspicious of the durability of compound scopes
    to survive bumps and stay collimated. If I only wanted high mag for
    planets at home, I would choose the Mak, because of its extra 47 mm of


Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. C5 or Orion 80ed
    By Dusty Ford in forum Astronomy Beginners Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12-09-2010, 07:30 PM
  2. Wanted: Orion Apex 127mm
    By NCAstronut in forum Astronomy Classifieds
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-20-2010, 07:02 PM
  3. Orion 80ED for imaging....
    By Stephen Paul in forum Amateur Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-19-2006, 12:01 AM
  4. TV85 vs. Orion 80ED
    By Szaki in forum Amateur Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 02-08-2005, 12:19 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 08:04 PM.