Orion shorttube 80 vs 90
Ray Porter
scopes. I'm considering getting one as a secondary scope and to use
piggybacked on my SCT. How do the optics compare? I've heard that the 90mm
isn't nearly as good as the 80mm but I'm interested in hearing the opinions
of someone who has actually used both scopes.
Thanks,
================================================
Ray Porter
Applications Analyst Programmer
Administrative Information Services, UNC-CH
Phone: 966-5878
email: ray_p...@unc.edu
dra...@email.unc.edu
Home Page: http://www.unc.edu/~dragon/
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons,
for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Howard Lester
Ray Porter wrote:
>
> I'm interested in hearing from anyone who has had a chance to compare these
> scopes.
Hoo boy! (wiping sweat from brow). I have looked through both, and I
found the 80 to be excellent at low power with a high quality eyepiece
(a 22mm Lanthanum superwide was the one sampled). With the supplied
Kellner, I couldn't get a central star to focus properly. The 90 was
ok with the cheap low power eyepiece it came with. With its supplied
higher power one, the images were soft.
For 40% more cost, I don't think the 90 is worth the extra money
if you already have a decent eyepiece in your arsenal. I found
the 90 to be awful at powers over 30 or 40, even with a Meade 4000 plossl.
My dealer told me the 90 is made in Taiwan, and the 80 made in China,
making the 90 allegedly better than the 80.
Howard Lester
Dave S
of these scopes (the ST 80 and the ST 90) and look behind it you will see
that the back side of the lens is actually the same size on both scopes.
This of course would be making Orion slightly dishonest at calling this a
90mm scope.
I haven't seen this myself. Someone who owns both scopes told me this.
In other words, buy the 80mm. With the 90mm, all you are getting is a longer
focal length.
Dave
----------
In article <7ph4a9$3b0$1...@fddinewz.oit.unc.edu>, "Ray Porter"
<ray_p...@unc.edu> wrote:
> I'm interested in hearing from anyone who has had a chance to compare these
Bill Reinehr
When I checked the various dimensions on the two scopes, I found that the
objective of the ST90 was indeed 90mm - however, the optical tube is exactly
the same diameter as the ST80. The objective of the ST80 screws into the
tube. The objective of the ST90 threads over the tube. To make it even
better, the ST80 has one proud baffle, the ST90 none. For all practical
purposes, you are correct. It behaves like an 80mm telescope but it weighs
and costs more. Thank goodness for the 30 day return policy.
Bill
Dave S <dssh...@mail.idt.net> wrote in message
news:7phs18$j...@nnrp3.farm.idt.net...
Robert OLeary
scope it`s working real well and as a 400mm lens for my camera it`s great and the price is right
--
Bob O`Leary Lincoln MT wea...@linctel.net
ERIC K. CHEU
Agreed. Not worth the price/extra aperture. You might as well get a
105mm if you want to get something in that "class" or niche of scope,
if you want something bigger than 80mm.
80mm also makes a good guide scope.
: Ray Porter wrote:
: >
: > I'm interested in hearing from anyone who has had a chance to compare these
: > scopes.
: Hoo boy! (wiping sweat from brow). I have looked through both, and I
Frez
Bill Reinehr <rei...@sprynet.com> wrote in message
news:7pi092$9m9$1...@nntp2.atl.mindspring.net...
> Hi,
> When I checked the various dimensions on the two scopes, I found that the
> objective of the ST90 was indeed 90mm - however, the optical tube is
exactly
> the same diameter as the ST80. The objective of the ST80 screws into the
> tube. The objective of the ST90 threads over the tube. To make it even
> better, the ST80 has one proud baffle, the ST90 none. For all practical
> purposes, you are correct. It behaves like an 80mm telescope but it weighs
> and costs more. Thank goodness for the 30 day return policy.
> Bill
>
shows the tubes to be the same diameter. I found this odd until now.
Does this mean they both have the same effective aperture at the
eyepiece? Humph...The ShortTube sort of 90.
Frez
Bill Reinehr
diameter. Of course I always try to refrain from any activity that might be
construed as intelligent. So far, so good. This is apparently the ShortTube
Short of 90.
Bill
Frez <fr...@greennet.net> wrote in message news:37bc...@news.greennet.net...
Phil Wheeler
Frez wrote:
>
> Funny thing...The page 7 comparison diagram in the Orion catalog
> shows the tubes to be the same diameter. I found this odd until now.
> Does this mean they both have the same effective aperture at the
> eyepiece? Humph...The ShortTube sort of 90.
>
Maybe the ST 90-10
Phil
p.s. I was feeling bad that I bought the ST-80 on sale just before the
release of the ST-90. Now I'm feeling real good!
Frez
Phil Wheeler <w7...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:37BC9CCA...@mindspring.com...
Nice when it happens that way isn't it Phil. I have a ST-80 and love
it for quick peeks and Milky Way stares. It seems Orion is doing
some coat-tail riding on the 80's rep. I'll bet there are some
ETX-90EC buyers that uknowingly purchased just before the 125
release that feel the same way as you.
Frez
Jeff ®
I considered selling it to buy the 90. Not no mo!
-Jeff
Frez
Jeff ® <asl...@the.stop.light> wrote in message
news:rrp9kd...@corp.supernews.com...
> I guess I'm "more happy" with my st80 now.
> I considered selling it to buy the 90. Not no mo!
>
> -Jeff
>
have some of the best scope reviews one could find. What
mount do you use?
Jay Albright
After looking thru it, I'm not sure how to tell him it's, well, uh,
not great. I sold my 80mm about a year ago, but I recall better images
than I saw in the 90. To be fair, I have not done a detailed
examination of the scope nor a true star test.
Jay Albright
On Thu, 19 Aug 1999 10:28:23 -0400, "Ray Porter" <ray_p...@unc.edu>
wrote:
>I'm interested in hearing from anyone who has had a chance to compare these
Ratboy99
>Just goes to show that SAA, and it's member's sites,
>have some of the best scope reviews one could find.
Ya got that right. I bought my first telescope before I ever got 'on line'.
That was a mistake. This place is ideal for learning about equipment and such.
rat
~( );>
Chris McGill
purchase it new because I only recently bought my first scope, a Discovery
8-inch EQ. Well, whaddya know, a used one just happened my way, and I
snapped it up for less than $200.
I took it to Florida last week and, although the skies weren't what I'm
accustomed to seeing here in SoCal, the scope serves up excellent views! I
never considered the 90 because of the cost and weight factors. It even
fits into my backpack! ; )
Cheers,
--
Christine McGill
Orange County Astronomers
Ray Porter wrote in message <7ph4a9$3b0$1...@fddinewz.oit.unc.edu>...
Ran
>Funny thing...The page 7 comparison diagram in the Orion catalog
>shows the tubes to be the same diameter. I found this odd until now.
>Does this mean they both have the same effective aperture at the
>eyepiece?
Not necessarily: the older Celestron C-80s and C-90s also had the same
diameter tube. It was sized for the C-90, though.
At F5, the light cone tapers pretty steeply, so you wouldn't have to
move the ST90 objective too far forward to reach the point where it's
down to < 80mm before entering the "main" tube.
I have an 80mm F15 which is only 60mm in diameter for most of its
length: I grafted a larger tube onto the front of an old 60mm F15.
I don't know whether Orion actually did something similar for the ST90,
but it's possible.
At the same time, though, unless there were some evidence that they're
*much* better made, I wouldn't choose one over an ST80: the increase
in light grasp and max theoretical magnification is minimal, and they
charge you bunches more money for it. But, they make up for that by
giving you an even worse ratio of diameter to the minimum focal length
desired for good performance from a simple achromat ;-)
Ran
Jeff ®
I'm using the SV Deluxe mount, with some custom
hardware so that I can mount a 6" Newt and the ST80
at the same time. Check my homepage for pictures of
the setup. (Click on the astronomy page).
I am currently motorizing it. The motors are in place
with a manual control. As we speak, I am building a
microcontroller for it that should be able to track exactly,
and talk to a PC. No pictures of this part of the project yet.
--
Jeff Taipale
POP Mail: j.ta...@popmail.csuohio
Web Mail: jeffi...@hotbot.com
My Home Page: Hanging by a Thread®
http://homepages.infoseek.com/~jefftaipale
My Home Town: Virtual Fairport Harbor, Ohio
http://pages.hotbot.com/family/jeffiscool
My Art Gallery: V Scapes®
http://www.ncweb.com/org/zionlc/vscapes/vscapes.html
-------------------------------------------------------
Jeff ®
Ran <r...@netgate.net> wrote in message
news:rrq4tq...@corp.supernews.com...
On the plus side, you get a star diagonal instead of the 45° diagonal.
I had to buy one extra anyway for the ST80. I got the mirror one instead
of the prism.
-Jeff
Ray Porter
ST90 should be avoided but that the ST80 is a pretty decent little
scope, which pretty much confirms the rumors and speculations I had
heard before.
One of our club members has had reasonable success using the ST80 as a
telephoto, mounted piggyback on his C8 (which is one of the uses I
intend for the little scope when I finally get one). A couple of folks
here also mentioned using it as a guide scope. How has that worked and
what scope are you using it to guide? I would have thought that the
ST80 wouldn't be able to produce high enough power views to make an
effective guide scope?
At any rate, I know which model I want now, I've just got to find one
used (either the Celestron or Orion versions) since my wife probably
won't let me spend yet another $300 on astronomy right now.
Thanks again,
Ray
Ray Porter wrote:
>
> I'm interested in hearing from anyone who has had a chance to compare these
> scopes. I'm considering getting one as a secondary scope and to use
> piggybacked on my SCT. How do the optics compare? I've heard that the 90mm
> isn't nearly as good as the 80mm but I'm interested in hearing the opinions
> of someone who has actually used both scopes.
>
> Thanks,
> ================================================
> Ray Porter
> Applications Analyst Programmer
> Administrative Information Services, UNC-CH
> Phone: 966-5878
> email: ray_p...@unc.edu
> dra...@email.unc.edu
> Home Page: http://www.unc.edu/~dragon/
>
> "Meddle not in the affairs of dragons,
> for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
--
Robert Berta
only getting a marginal 20% increase in light gathering ability. The existing
80 is capable of outstanding performance. Put a good star diagonal on it and a
higher quality eyepiece and you will be amazed. I have one as a second easily
portable, knock around scope and also it find duty as a wide field imager on my
8" SCT. I usually use a Lumicon Enhanced Star Diagonal on the Orion along with
a 10.5mm Pentax XL eyepiece....or a 5mm University Optics Abbe Ortho. The
combos give some amazingly high quality views that would surprise a lot of high
end small APO owners. Of course I don't think that the average 80ST owner will
rush out and buy an eyepiece and a star diagonal that cost twice what his scope
cost,,,,but you can certainly get a good 90 degree mirror star diagonal from
Orion or similar for a few bucks and a good Plossl or Ortho eyepiece for some
pretty good views for the bucks. And this scope is one that will always be
usefull....even if you get a fancy big scope down the road. I really enjoy the
ability to throw this little scope and a camera tripod in my backpack and hike
into the woods to get some nice dark night views. And of course the erecting
prism and the 26mm eyepiece make a great setup for daytime viewing. The 26mm
Kelner isn't actually bad. The 10 kelner is so-so but certainly serviceable as
is the erecting prism.
And the scope is easy to "improve" with some hopup tips that anyone can do
themselves.
When you consider the extra $100 for the 90 I think that it is time to start
looking for what you are getting for the money and if you could spend it better
elsewhere.
Bob Berta
Ray Porter <ray_p...@unc.edu> wrote in article
<7ph4a9$3b0$1...@fddinewz.oit.unc.edu>...
Fcathell
the 90 to the ST-80 and will now get immediate delivery. These are the kind of
reports that really make this newsgroup what it is!
Frank
Howard Lester
John Steinberg wrote:
> Howard Lester convinced me that the 90 was subject to much more chromatic
> aberration, and to my knowledge he's never been wrong. Unless his opinion
> revolves around Steely Dan song lyrics, in which case, all bets are off.
John, sometimes I think my life IS a collection of Steely Dan songs! ;^)
Howard
RKB
use a 5mm Abbe Ortho from university Optics. This gives 80x which is a sweet
spot for this scope. But you can also barlow it and the scope image holds
together pretty decent even at 160x which is pushing it for a 80mm scope
normally. Ideally you need to get a better star diagonal than the erecting
prism they supply....it is ok for terrestrial use but a mirror diagonal
would be a lot better in imaging.
Bob Berta
Ray Porter wrote in message <37BD3F9B...@unc.edu>...
>Thanks to all who replied. It sounds like the consensus is that the
>ST90 should be avoided but that the ST80 is a pretty decent little
>scope, which pretty much confirms the rumors and speculations I had
>heard before.
>
>One of our club members has had reasonable success using the ST80 as a
>telephoto, mounted piggyback on his C8 (which is one of the uses I
>intend for the little scope when I finally get one). A couple of folks
>here also mentioned using it as a guide scope. How has that worked and
>what scope are you using it to guide? I would have thought that the
>ST80 wouldn't be able to produce high enough power views to make an
>effective guide scope?
>
>At any rate, I know which model I want now, I've just got to find one
>used (either the Celestron or Orion versions) since my wife probably
>won't let me spend yet another $300 on astronomy right now.
>
>Thanks again,
>Ray
>
>Ray Porter wrote:
>>
>> I'm interested in hearing from anyone who has had a chance to compare
these
>> scopes. I'm considering getting one as a secondary scope and to use
>> piggybacked on my SCT. How do the optics compare? I've heard that the
90mm
>> isn't nearly as good as the 80mm but I'm interested in hearing the
opinions
>> of someone who has actually used both scopes.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> ================================================
>> Ray Porter
>> Applications Analyst Programmer
>> Administrative Information Services, UNC-CH
>> Phone: 966-5878
>> email: ray_p...@unc.edu
>> dra...@email.unc.edu
>> Home Page: http://www.unc.edu/~dragon/
>>
>> "Meddle not in the affairs of dragons,
>> for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
>
>--
R.D. Elliott
- Thanks to all who replied. It sounds like the consensus is that the
- ST90 should be avoided but that the ST80 is a pretty decent little
- scope, which pretty much confirms the rumors and speculations I had
- heard before.
-
[snip]
Absolutely; have the Vista 508 version (blue, with tube rings) and I'm
happy as a clam with it. Have it on a secondhand cheap*** German
equatorial mount from an old Bushnell 4.5" newt. Works like a charm, and I
can fit scope and mount in a smallish knapsack and use spare clothing for
padding. If I had to start all over I'd probably buy either the same scope
or the Vista f/7 version of the same scope...
R.D. Elliott
Phil Wheeler
Frez wrote:
>
> Phil Wheeler <w7...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:37BC9CCA...@mindspring.com...
> >
> >
> > Frez wrote:
> > >
> > > Funny thing...The page 7 comparison diagram in the Orion catalog
> > > shows the tubes to be the same diameter. I found this odd until now.
> > > Does this mean they both have the same effective aperture at the
> > > eyepiece? Humph...The ShortTube sort of 90.
> > >
> >
> > Maybe the ST 90-10
> >
> > Phil
> >
> > p.s. I was feeling bad that I bought the ST-80 on sale just before the
> > release of the ST-90. Now I'm feeling real good!
>
> Nice when it happens that way isn't it Phil. I have a ST-80 and love
> it for quick peeks and Milky Way stares. It seems Orion is doing
> some coat-tail riding on the 80's rep. I'll bet there are some
> ETX-90EC buyers that uknowingly purchased just before the 125
> release that feel the same way as you.
>
Funny you should mention it: I DID buy an ETX/EC-90 just before the 125
came out; but I bought it for the small size (much lighter and more
compact than my C5+), and very good optics. However, it is at Meade,
because of slop in the Alt axis and the GOTO not working as well as I
think it should. What I like most abt it is that I can take it and
tripod in the trunk of my Honda Civic on ALL trips .. and it can be used
in the Az-El mode.
Phil
Ran
>On the plus side, you get a star diagonal instead of the 45° diagonal.
>I had to buy one extra anyway for the ST80. I got the mirror one instead
>of the prism.
I just picked up a second-hand mirror diagonal, partly in hopes that it
would improve the ST80's "spectroscopic" tendencies, but haven't had a
chance to try it yet. But, based on comments I've heard from other
ST80 users who've switched, I wouldn't count an included 90-degree prism
diagonal as "plus": at least the 45-degree one is useful if you want to
use it as a spotting scope.
Ran
DonMFox
wouldn't count an included 90-degree prism
diagonal as "plus":>>
My experience has been quite different. When using a 90 degree mirror diagonal
on a Celestron SS80 versus the 45 degree diagonal that came with it, the image
is much better. If someone were planning on using the scope for astronomy, I
would also count the inclusion of a 90 degree diagonal as a plus (unless I were
going to use it as a finder on a larger scope, and wanted the convenience of a
non-inverted image, and I didn't mind the degradation).
Howard Lester
John Steinberg wrote:
>
> In article <37BDD069...@as.arizona.edu>, Howard Lester
> <hle...@as.arizona.edu> wrote:
>
> >
> > John, sometimes I think my life IS a collection of Steely Dan songs! ;^)
>
> Howard, as long as it's not exclusively 'Hey 19', you should be okay.
>
> ;)
>
> Regards,
> John
What if I 'move down to Scarsdale?'
;^)
> ----
>
> E-mail Address: manbytsdog at aol dot com
Shane Dexter
After ready all the posts, I was encouraged to return my new ST90, so I
called Orion. The Orion representative informed me that they have found a
defect in the ST90. They will be sending out a "fix", which includes some
hardware. I am planning on giving it another try. I hope this will make
the ST90 worth the extra $$$!
Ray Porter <ray_p...@unc.edu> wrote in message
news:37BD3F9B...@unc.edu...
> Thanks to all who replied. It sounds like the consensus is that the
> ST90 should be avoided but that the ST80 is a pretty decent little
> scope, which pretty much confirms the rumors and speculations I had
Nathan356
curious. -Nathan357
Peter Santangeli
beginning of the thread). I just purchased an ST80 for a trip. I was
considering using it as a finder for my C11 (when I get it... new
equipment on order).
It did occur to me that it might be a good CCD guide scope if I could get
it to work with some low power eyepiece projection. Anybody tried this?
Also, as a finder, I'd love to use it as a 12x80 or so. Anyone know of a
source for REALLY BIG cross hair reticle eyepieces? (say, 40mm or so)?
As for other uses, I spent 2 weeks in northern Ontario with it under great
skies. A wonderful little scope. Sort of a cross between a scope and
binoculars.
Pete
Shane Dexter
soon.
Nathan356 <jhk...@sowest.net> wrote in message
news:7pvvgm$60p$1...@paxfeed.eni.net...
Matt Leo
> can fit scope and mount in a smallish knapsack and use spare clothing for
> padding. If I had to start all over I'd probably buy either the same scope
> or the Vista f/7 version of the same scope...
Hey, I've been thinking about the benefits of giant binocs against this
scope as an ultraportable instrument. What do you think of it with a wide
angle 24mm ep on a monopod as a backpackable deep space setup?
Matt Leo
On Fri, 20 Aug 1999, R.D. Elliott wrote:
> Absolutely; have the Vista 508 version (blue, with tube rings) and I'm
> happy as a clam with it. Have it on a secondhand cheap*** German
> equatorial mount from an old Bushnell 4.5" newt. Works like a charm, and I
> can fit scope and mount in a smallish knapsack and use spare clothing for
> padding. If I had to start all over I'd probably buy either the same scope
> or the Vista f/7 version of the same scope...
One more thing.
The Vista scopes look like good deals, especialy if you buy them through
Canadian sources. I have the 90mm f10 vista (I forget the model number).
It may not be so great a deal, however, if you factor in the accessories.
The 25mm SMA ep is OK, but not outstanding. I chose the alt-az version
because I expected the mount to be flimsy; I wasn't disappointed, in fact
it was a little better than I expected but not much. It comes with a
prism diagonal, which as far as I can see is uncoated. The barlow is
likewise uncoated, and seems to introduce quite a bit of off axis glare. I
tried using the barlow on the moon, and the glare actually made it
difficult to find the exit pupil at higher mags. The finder isn't bad at
all, except that the cross hairs are way too thick.
That, said, the rig works well enough for the pittance I paid for it.
A higher quality eyepiece, diagonal, barlow and mount can easily add up to
the total cost of the scope, therefore make sure you are comparing apples
to apples when looking at different versions of this scope.
Matt Leo
On Wed, 25 Aug 1999, Peter Santangeli wrote:
> Also, as a finder, I'd love to use it as a 12x80 or so. Anyone know of a
> source for REALLY BIG cross hair reticle eyepieces? (say, 40mm or so)?
I've been using the Speers-Waler 24mm eyepiece, which I recommend -- it's
cheap and stunningly wide angle; eye relief is a little small (about
10mm), but OK with the eyecup. This could easily be adapted IMO because
the exposed surface of the field lens is at focus. The downside is that
for daytime use you see every spec of dust; however you could get some
spider silk and stretch it across with tweazers. Better yet, if you could
find a clear filter that threaded into the eyepiece, you could put a
red dot on that.
The SW 24 would be a blast with this scope, IMO. It would give you 16.6x,
a 4.8mm exit pupil and four degree true FOV.
RAnder3127
Matt Leo <mat...@mattleo.ne.mediaone.net> writes:
>The Vista scopes look like good deals, especialy if you buy them through
>Canadian sources. I have the 90mm f10 vista (I forget the model number).
>It may not be so great a deal, however, if you factor in the accessories.
It's performance is light years better than the Shortube 90mm which is
a mistake, IMO. The 80mm Shortube is ideal.
-Rich
"Politically-correct revisionism doesn't help
explain history, it only confuses those trying to
learn from the past."
Mick
the topic, is anyone familiar with Telehoon's 80MM f/5 and f/7 refractors?
In article <19990828211353...@ngol02.aol.com>, rande...@aol.com