Orion 80 mm ED Apo via Zeiss Telementor 63/840
Markus Ludes
Today I received my first 3 samples Orion 80 mm ED Apos and could
already test them. I would like to receive some feedback from customers
who already owns it.
In almost any review I know of today about the Orion 80 mm ED I read its
colorfree and of high optical quality.
I dont know the telescopes the owners have reported about, I dont know
if something changed in the design and quality now where the production
seems to run, but here is what I found.
My experience with orion 80 ED
1, collimation/lens centering is rather good, not perfect, but good
enough to show a nondistored airydisc and a complete first diffraction
ring with a hint of coma at an acceptable level
2, spherical correction estimated first by my experienced eye ( a
complete interferometrical test will be done next 8 days ):
- thinny central zonal deffect ( not real poor but visible)
- global undercorrection of about 1/3 to 1/4 wavefront p.t.v. Using a
red filter show about similar startest as in white light, using green
filter show even worser startest . The undercorrection is such bad, that
the image does not show a snap in focuse and the first diffraction ring
is as bright/wide as in a good quality Maksutov with 33% C.O.
3, colorcorrection: In defocused image you see one side bright red and
on other side bright green color, infocuse itself you see a white
airydisc, soroundet by a mixture colored red/white diffraction ring
soroundet by green straylight due the spherical aberration.
My Carl Zeiss Jena Telementor, a standart douplet airspacest achromat D=
63 mm f=830 mm ( r-tatio f/13.3) show by same 250 power nearly no color
accept very very little deep purple .
To find out how the colorcorrection is against a achromat, I took now a
Skywatcher Achromat 102F/1000 and made several masks. Doing a Mask with
60 mm , the Skywatcher offers a bit better colorcorrection, doing a mask
with 80 mm the Skywatcher was a bit worser.
The best matched the Mask of 70 mm , than my eyes saw about same level
of colorcorrection as in the 80 mm ED. This means estimated by huma eyes
the colorcorrection in the orion 80F/7.5 ED Apo is about equal to a 70
mm F/14 achromatic refractor.Such level of colorcorrection was called by
Zeiss Jena Semiapo as they have had in here AS Types.
For a cheap chinese made douplet ED Apo 80 mm the level of
colorcorrection is not bad and the pricerelation is rather good, so we
can say you get what you pay for.
One thing confuse me very much. Almost any report about this 80 mm ED
Apo I wrote stated zero or nearly zero color even at high power, but hey
there is quite some visible color even at lower powers.How such reports
can come up ? Or did the manufactor changed something in the production
run ?
All in all I would say you get a very good value for your money if you
want a short 80 mm Telescope , but if you want a good Planetary
Telescope I personaly would prefer the maybe not more expensive Vixen
80F/1200 real achromat which show way higher quality and not less ( or
at least not much less ) good colorcorrection but way better spherical
correction.
What I found is far away from the Top Notch douplet ED Apos , like Tele
Vue 76 or Tele Vue 85 .
If you like to do CCD Imaging, low power wide field deep sky observing
and looking from time to time to the planets, than the orion 80 ED is a
good purchase.
If you looking for a real high quality apo in the 80 mm range, you need
to look elsewhere ( or I received 3 lemons today, which is another but I
think rather small possibility)
clear skies
Markus Ludes
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Al
(even at the higher price), but now I'll take a pass.
Al
"Markus Ludes" <apm_tel...@web.de> wrote in message
news:fd5bf00f8d41fbccc6b...@mygate.mailgate.org...
Les Blalock
Thank for the report, Markus. I really appreciate impressions of new
products from such authority.
Les Blalock
http://www.txastro.com
Michael
ws:fd5bf00f8d41fbccc6b...@mygate.mailgate.org...
> Hi Everybody
>
> Today I received my first 3 samples Orion 80 mm ED Apos and could
> already test them. I would like to receive some feedback from customers
> who already owns it.
> In almost any review I know of today about the Orion 80 mm ED I read its
> colorfree and of high optical quality.
>
Ya, you get what you pay for. Why don't they make a 102 ED and sell it it
for a few hundred more?
Jon Isaacs
Vue 76 or Tele Vue 85 .
Markus:
Interesting. Obviously you have looked through a great many scopes, you bring
some real experience to the table.
If I remember correctly, Ed Ting said that he found the ED80 comparable to the
TV76 up to about 200X and that at 250X the ED80 showed some color whereas the
TV76 did not.
Reviews I have read all state that the color correction is significantly better
than a Pronto.
Would you agree with this?
Also, some folks have suggested that the initial batch would turn out to be the
best ones and once the reputation had been established, the quality would drop.
That seems possible though not likely.
jon
Tom Hole
Thanks for the review.
Maybe Orion can return the favor and post a review of some of your products.
Clear skies,
Tom
"Markus Ludes" <apm_tel...@web.de> wrote in message
news:fd5bf00f8d41fbccc6b...@mygate.mailgate.org...
Jon Isaacs
>
>Maybe Orion can return the favor and post a review of some of your products.
>
>Clear skies,
>
>Tom
You do know that Markus carries Skywatcher (Synta) stuff? I believe these
scopes are scopes he received from Synta to sell. Kind of puts a different
spin on his evalutation....
Jon Isaacs
Tom Hole
> You do know that Markus carries Skywatcher (Synta) stuff? I believe these
> scopes are scopes he received from Synta to sell. Kind of puts a
different
> spin on his evalutation....
>
> Jon Isaacs
Does he carry the ED80?
Tom
CLT
news:101dmvd...@corp.supernews.com...
No.
I've always taken it with a cartoon of salt when a dealer reviews the
competition. (or even his own products)
Clear Skies
Chuck Taylor
Do you observe the moon?
Try the Lunar Observing Group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/
************************************
> Tom
>
>
CLT
> Markus,
>
> Thanks for the review.
>
> Maybe Orion can return the favor and post a review of some of your
products.
LOL! It is a little strange when dealers post reviews of the competition.
This is even more true when their review is very different from what a
number of others have said.
;-)
Chuck Taylor
Do you observe the moon?
Try the Lunar Observing Group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/
************************************
RichardN22
This is even more true when their review is very different from what a
number of others have said.>>
On the other han. lots of the 'number of others' don't have the knowledge and
experience that some of the dealers have. How many times have you seen the
'number of others' post that there is no color with their fast achromat, even
on the moon.
Richard Navarrete
Richa...@aol.com
Astrophotography Web Page - http://members.aol.com/richardn22
Bill Meyers
I agree with you on the importance of real expertise here.. There are only a
few people I really believe when they speak of the optical quality of a
particular telescope. But those people I take very seriously.
I suspect it requires a lot of knowledge and experience to judge some of
these things. I notice for example, that I ( who am not expert enough to post an
evaluation of an optical system) differ from most people who look through SCT's.
I don't like the images, but my opinion is valid only for me. I always say, "very
nice images," and go on my way, back to my simple old Dobs.
Some telescopes are so good that almost anyone can notice it. I have looked
through one of the original Ceravolo 8.5 inch Mak-Newts at Astrofest a number of
years ago, and even I could tell that the images were superb. I have always been
sorry I didn't try to spring for the requisite money to buy one.
But as for crediting most of the posted reports on the optical quality of a
particular scope, I am very cautious.
Markus I am sure has the requisite knowledge and experience. As for bias in
rating a competitor's scopes,, I am not too worried since he went out of his way
to praise TeleVue scopes in this aperture range.
Clear skies,
Bill Meyers
matt
"Bill Meyers" <st...@auriga.uc.edu> wrote in message
news:40171E68...@auriga.uc.edu...
well, praising a competitor for a product that's at least as expensive is
different than criticising an inexpensive product which if successful would
mean a real blow to expensive small apo sales . I'm not implying anything
one way or another, just cautioning here that one simply can't alway
extrapolate some conclusions without risking serious error .
Best Regards,
Matt
Richard
So much for the review in the popular rag, er, astronomy magazine.
-Rich
Jon Isaacs
>
>Tom
>
As I said: "I believe these
scopes are scopes he received from Synta to sell."
1. From Markus's original post:
"Today I received my first 3 samples Orion 80 mm ED Apos and could
already test them."
2. If you take the time to checkout the APM-Telescopes Germany website you
will find they (Markus) are indeed the German Synta dealer.
I remember that when the Orion ED80 first came out, Markus had said that he too
was going the sell them. I finally found the link to the S.A.A. post where he
says that he will be getting some samples:
"Date: 2003-08-27 08:32:55 PST
Valery,
I think nobody have to worry for his business about that Orion 80 mm
Apo, why ? Simply it is a matter of fact that it is a Synta Technology
Product and every single dealer who selling Synta telescopes since years
knows the problems they have in most achromats : zones, spherical
aberration, decentering ( coma/astigmatism). Only a few coming out from
many with superb optics. Now if Synta cannot do a good job on a
achromat, do you really expect they doing a better job on a very low
priced ED Apo ? I doubt this for 100%.
So first samples who went in the market are made better to get good
reviews, but when the containers start to ship, chunk like before have
been loadet , you bet with me about that ??????
BTW: getting that scopes in next month for sale, too.
Markus"
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Orion+APO+ludes+group:sci.astro.amateur&
hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&group=sci.astro.amateur&safe=off&selm=42bdf2f4104e9cb0f
363bd1fb16a17c3.30545%40mygate.mailgate.org&rnum=3"
If the link is too long, do a google search on S.A.A. for "Orion APO ludes"
------------------
So, as far as I can see, Markus is a Synta dealer who received 3 ED80's from
Synta for evaluation and who posted an honest evaluation.
Given Markus's extensive experience in evaluating and selling all levels of
scopes both new and used, I do not find it strange in the least that his
evaluation is far less positive than those who have evaluated far few scopes.
I am sure that if Roland Christen, Thomas Back and several others who post here
were to evaluate the ED 80 they would have similar remarks. These people know
what "color free", "well corrected" really means and know what it looks
like....
So rather than thinking the worst of Markus, I suggest rereading what Mrkus
wrote with the respect due a guy has probably looked through more different
scopes in his time than all this group combined, save maybe a few....
Jon Isaacs
Robinson
would be refreshing to see a balanced review from Orion about there own
products. Markus has given similiar objective +/- evaluations about other
scopes he sells, when have you ever seen Orion do that?
BTW Markus does not, to my knowledge, sell Televues. Have you ever seen
Orion point anyone to scopes they don't sell.
Jim
"Tom Hole earthlink.net>" <tomhole@<NOSPAM> wrote in message
news:101djpp...@corp.supernews.com...
ValeryD
> To find out how the colorcorrection is against a achromat, I took now a
> Skywatcher Achromat 102F/1000 and made several masks. Doing a Mask with
> 60 mm , the Skywatcher offers a bit better colorcorrection, doing a mask
> with 80 mm the Skywatcher was a bit worser.
> The best matched the Mask of 70 mm , than my eyes saw about same level
> of colorcorrection as in the 80 mm ED. This means estimated by huma eyes
> the colorcorrection in the orion 80F/7.5 ED Apo is about equal to a 70
> mm F/14 achromatic refractor.
This does mean, that Orion 80mm ED has about (80/70)x (14/7.5)^2=4 better
color correction, than equivalent (D=80mm F/D=7.5) achromat.
We should conclude, that relative color correction in these 80mm ED scopes
is the same as in Meade ED refractors, where color correction is about
4.5x better, than in equivalent achromat. If a 80mm ED shows "less" colors
than ,say, Meade 4" F/9 ED, than this is purely threshold effect.
All in all, Orion ED 80mm is an entry level APO - about the same, as Meade ED
APOs. These days such color correction can be considered as semi-apo.
However, I can exclude tha trick with "establish reputation and then lower the
quality". If some scopes from China can be called semi-apo, while they are
plain achromats (Mergrez) or they can use such methods of color correction
"improvement" as internal aperture stop, then it is difficult to exclude
objective design change in worser side.
V.D.
Valery Deryuzhin.
ValeryD
> However, I can exclude tha trick with "establish reputation and then lower the
> quality". If some scopes from China can be called semi-apo, while they are
> plain achromats (Mergrez) or they can use such methods of color correction
> "improvement" as internal aperture stop, then it is difficult to exclude
> objective design change in worser side.
>
>
> V.D.
Must be read as "However, I CAN'T exclude a trick"
V.D.
Markus Ludes
news:LEyRb.18940$w41.9...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net
> Thank you for the report, Markus. I was about to order one of the 80mm EDs
> (even at the higher price), but now I'll take a pass.
>
> Al
>
>
Al,
why ? For that money its still a good value
Markus
Markus Ludes
news:101dmvd...@corp.supernews.com
yes I am selling the Orion 80 ED and we have a rather big backorder
list, like many other dealers.
In germany we have nothing similar for that low price, so it sells like
peanut butter
Markus
>
> Tom
Markus Ludes
news:iHGRb.7039$Iw6....@bignews1.bellsouth.net
Matt,
let me tell you 1 thing. I think the Orion 80 mm ED for such low money
is a great buy for
people who coming from todays chinese achromats into Apos.Its a cheap
way to enter the Apo feeling, just like Coronados new
PST is a cheap way to enter the H-alpha observing.
I know almost any owner of the scope is happy and this is completly okay
for me.
My impressions I posted because I want to hear some feedback from other
owners who report great stuff to see
is my one a poor sample or standart.
best wishes
Markus
Al
I'll go back and read what you wrote, but as I recall, you said that color
correction was not better than a Synta 120mm. For the price of the 80mm ED,
one can buy two Synta 120mm. Does not seem like a great value to me.
Al
"Markus Ludes" <apm_tel...@web.de> wrote in message
news:0be215f2e69665907eb...@mygate.mailgate.org...
Ratboy99
>peanut butter
>
>Markus
Around here they sell like hot cakes.
rat
~( );>
email: remove 'et' from .com(et) in above email address
Tom T.
<apm_tel...@web.de> wrote:
<snip>
>
>My impressions I posted because I want to hear some feedback from other
>owners who report great stuff to see
>is my one a poor sample or standart.
>
>best wishes
>Markus
Howdy Markus,
I've seen three, and used two rather extensivly.
The first one I saw I had the opportunity to do a side by side with a
TV76 (on the same mount yet) one evening last fall. Seeing moderately
decent but not spectacular (pickering 6-7), and optically *under those
conditions* there was *very* little difference between the two scopes.
As per color correction, I'd have to say that it's worlds better than
a Pronto, ST80 or other achromats in it's class, but it still not as
color free as the top of the line apo's like the NP-101. While they
are vastly different scopes, I've compared the ED80 to my TV102 and
Genesis SDF and found it to be in a similar league in regards to color
correction, with the SDF noticably having the worst. (How much false
color one can stand depends on the observer - the amount present in
the SDF does not bother me at all. Yes, it's there, and yes, I can
see it but eh...) There is some false color in the ed80, yes and for
the record there is some in the TV102 as well.
In regards to undercorrection: the two samples I've used extensivly
have shown a small amount of undercorrection but it's not as severe as
what you describe. Indeed, what I've seen hasn't been serious at all.
But then again, the ones I've seen have been earlier samples. I
wonder if there is an issue with the chinese trying to increase
numbers they are outputing and thus they are spending less time
figuring the lenses....
Of the two samples I've used extensivly one had very poor initial
collimation, but neither had noticable zones or astigmatism. The
unfortunate design of the lens cell means that exacting collimation is
extremely difficult, but fortunatly, acceptable collimation isn't.
Optically, it's performed as well as I would expect for such a small
scope. I was able to split the double double at 66x. Saturn showed
multiple bands, cassini, and the crepe ring where it crosses in front
of the planet. Contrast is high with little scatter. The samples
I've used have taken magnification up to around 200x with no problem.
And both samples I have used extensivly have that distinct *snap* to
focus you expect out of good optics.
I would agree if you want a dedicated planetary scope you would be
better off to go elsewhere, but that's not what I percieve the ed80 to
be. IMO the strength of the ED80 is that it allows similar
performance (wide fields and high powers) to that of many small and
extremely expensive APO's in a $500 package.
At this point, I think it's an excellent *first* apo, and makes a very
good second or travel scope for someone who does not want to drop 3x
to 4x the amount of money on such a small scope.
The biggest issue I've seen with the ones I've used is that I wish
someone would source the lens and put it in a, shall we say, more
mechanically sound OTA. Of course, this then bumps the price up
several hundred dollars and you begin to get into TV 76 territory.
If I was given a choice between a TMB80, TV85, TV76, FS78 and the
ED80, I'd take any of the premium scopes hands down. But I don't
think that's the point of this scope. What we have here is a small
(indeed airline portable with the right case), fairly fast scope that
shows decent color correction for an apo and retails for the price of
many achromats. Would I take an ED80 over a *comparable* achromat?
Yes indeedy.
Tom T.
Jon Isaacs
>someone would source the lens and put it in a, shall we say, more
>mechanically sound OTA. Of course, this then bumps the price up
>several hundred dollars and you begin to get into TV 76 territory.
>
I think we have discussed this before. But consider this. A Pronto with an
ED-80 objective. Seems like a pretty nice scope. Now if you could by an ED-80
objective for say $375 in a cell that mated to a Pronto, it would be expensive
if one did not own a Pronto but for those who did, it would really be quite a
bargin and a nice upgrade...
>Would I take an ED80 over a *comparable* achromat?
>Yes indeedy.
It sounds to me like essentially you and Markus are in agreement, especially
since these are somewhat subjective evaluations.
jon
Tom T.
>>The biggest issue I've seen with the ones I've used is that I wish
>>someone would source the lens and put it in a, shall we say, more
>>mechanically sound OTA. Of course, this then bumps the price up
>>several hundred dollars and you begin to get into TV 76 territory.
>>
>
>I think we have discussed this before. But consider this. A Pronto with an
>ED-80 objective. Seems like a pretty nice scope. Now if you could by an ED-80
>objective for say $375 in a cell that mated to a Pronto, it would be expensive
>if one did not own a Pronto but for those who did, it would really be quite a
>bargin and a nice upgrade...
>
Deja Vue... :) But - Jon what's the diameter of the tube on the
pronto? I'm wondering if it would be too small for that type of an
addon. I suspect that if you really wanted to go that route it might
be more feasable to buy a *used* TV76 or FS78 - then you are only
talking like 1.7x the cost of a new ED80. Heck, it might be more
feasable to buy one of those than manufacture a better tube for the
synta lenses for that matter.
It's still a good idea tho.
>>Would I take an ED80 over a *comparable* achromat?
>>Yes indeedy.
>
>It sounds to me like essentially you and Markus are in agreement, especially
>since these are somewhat subjective evaluations.
Yep, for the most part I concur with what Markus posted.
Tom T.
Tom T.
wrote:
>
>Yep, for the most part I concur with what Markus posted.
>
Mostly anyway. But the samples I've seen seem to have been a bit
better optically.
Tom T.
Jon Isaacs
>be more feasable to buy a *used* TV76 or FS78 - then you are only
>talking like 1.7x the cost of a new ED80.
Seems to me that used TV76's go for around $1200...
Jon
Jon Isaacs
>Mostly anyway. But the samples I've seen seem to have been a bit
>better optically.
>
>Tom T.
My guess is that Markus is tougher on these scopes than most. He did say here
or on Astromart that he can find color in just about any scope...
jon
Tom T.
an OTA at $500. Apples to apples.
The whole package (including diagonal, etc... is significantly more).
Tom T.
Tom T.
Jon
As far as I'm concerned, the amount of color is a non-issue. I pretty
much agree with him there. There is color in the ED80. Not much, but
it's there and everyone has different tolerances. FWIW, I was
extremely surprised when Ed said there wasn't any color in the 76. I
see color there too - just goes to show that everyone is a little
different. IMO when you get to a certain level, the amount of false
color is pretty much over rated, but everyone picks on it cause it's
fairly easy to spot.
From what Markus is saying, the ones I've seen simply haven't had as
much spherical abberation as the ones he has. But then again, he has
a later batch than I do - perhaps they are trying to get them out the
door quicker and they aren't spending as much time figuring them.
Given that it's undercorrection we are talking about I wouldn't be too
surprised. I'm not sure I'd mark it up to a chinese "trick", but hey,
who knows? Some folks were predicting exactly that. I had heard
they were having issues trying to ramp up production from 30 - 50
scopes per month. Maybe this is a "shortcut" they are trying. Not a
good move if that's the case. Especially considering Orion's already
raised the price from $429 to $499. (Gee - pay more money, get a
worse scope... I don't think so...)
Or maybe he's overestimating the amount of SA and/or I'm
underestimating.
Or maybe it's something else entirely - this reasoning may be
completely specious.
<shrug>
FWIW, I'm considering selling mine for a TV76 at some point (probably
way down the road). I don't have a problem with the optics on my
personal ed80 (they are just fine), but I miss the TV built like a
tank philosophy. Plus the 76 with it's case is a little smaller and
that can make a big difference for my uses.
Additionally, small apo's are a particular weakness of mine. <g>
Tom T.
Tom T.
From Astronomics:
TV76 OTA - $1275
Evergreen body with black trim; 3" ED glass apo optics; 2" rack and
pinion focuser with brass clamp ring accessory holder; self-storing
metal dew cap; thread-in metal objective lens cover; soft fitted
carrying case with shoulder strap.
TV76 Package - $1675
Evergreen body with black trim; 3" ED glass apo optics; tube
ring/photo tripod adapter; 2" rack and pinion focuser with brass clamp
ring accessory holder; 2" Everbrite dielectric coated 99% reflectivity
mirror diagonal and 1.25" accessory adapter, both with brass clamp
ring accessory holders; 1.25" 20mm Plössl eyepiece (24x); self-storing
metal dew cap; thread-in metal objective lens cover; soft fitted
carrying case with shoulder strap.
Ya know, $1300 really ain't that much.... (Uhhh ohhhh here I go.)
Tom T
Ratboy99
>Ya know, $1300 really ain't that much.... (Uhhh ohhhh here I go.)
>
>Tom T
I've got one, you could do worse.
Tom T.
Gee rat, just what I need. Encouragement. <g> I just ordered an 8"
starbuckets that I haven't even taken delivery on....
BUT - do I really need that GEM I'm saving for??
No - no... get thee behind me.... must... do... the... logical...
boring... thing... and... buy... good... GEM....
Tom T.
ValeryD
Tom,
You are right. ED 80 is a good telescope, but nothing special even
consider it's price. After reading several private reports and now
after Markus' one (the most valuable because of factual comparition
with
step by step stopped achromat), I can conclude, that CA in these ED 80
is about the same as in Meade ED. This mean, that Meade just missed
the
nishe for smaller ED scopes. Nothing else. Interpolating down the cost
of
Meade 4" F/9 ED, we can come to $500-650 for 80mm ED.
As for undercorrection. Again and again I want to underline one the
most
important thing: if one wish to use an advantage of unobstructed scope
(APO)
vs obstructed one (reflector, Maks), he must be shure, that his APO
has
very well corrected for SA and zones objective. 1/5 wave
undercorrection, as
well as 1/5 wave overcorrection (this is even worser) have a big
impact on
image contrast - the same as 33% obstruction. Also, such APOs has
residual
color aberrations and spherochromatism (they are fast enough for
having this
problem too). Total image degradation factor will be higher, than 33%
obstruction. So, any small aperture Mak with 33% obstruction and
excellent
optics (very small SA and no zones) will be at least same effective
with less
cost.
Mass production low level APOs is a lottery. One can have a lemon
(like Markus'
one) and one can have a very good scope. To make such APOs consistent,
each
objective should be individually tested and tweaked to nullify SA.
This is not
the case with chinese production and never will be the case.
Thouse, who need all 100% advantages of refractor, should consider
only
refractors from reputable manufacturers, where each objective has
enough
care about it's final quality.
V.D.
Jon Isaacs
>
>TV76 OTA - $1275
I looked at Astromart. Most TV76 OTA in the last year seem to have gone for
$975. Prontos are harder to nail but I think the OTA's are probably somewhere
between $500-$600.
So, one could sell a Pronto and buy a TV76 for something around $400-$500.
This is a wiser move than trying to patch on an ED80 Objective.....
Didn't realize TV-76s were quite so inexpensive.
jon
Tom T.
wrote:
>Tom,
>
>You are right. ED 80 is a good telescope, but nothing special even
>consider it's price. After reading several private reports and now
>after Markus' one (the most valuable because of factual comparition
>with
>step by step stopped achromat), I can conclude, that CA in these ED 80
>is about the same as in Meade ED. This mean, that Meade just missed
>the
>nishe for smaller ED scopes. Nothing else. Interpolating down the cost
>of
>Meade 4" F/9 ED, we can come to $500-650 for 80mm ED.
This has occured to me as well. This concept is really not as
revolutionary as many people (including myself) once thought.
I agree and I think Meade missed a rather significant portion of the
market in neglecting the "small, airline portable" scope, and from
what I've seen don't think the larger Chinese APO's would be all that
significantly better than the Meades (possibly a little in color
correction, but that's not a huge deal - as you point out there are
more important issues IMO). The APO market has already been here and
done that in regards to price points and ED scopes.
IMO, The scope lost a lot of it's "bargin" value when the price was
bumped from $429 to $499.
I've had my ear to the ground on this one, and Markus' report is the
first I've heard of significant (quantified) problems.
FWIW, a friend of mine bench tested his (on an inferometer - but I
don't know the particulars) at 1/8 wave, and another *extremely* well
recognized brand (which I won't mention here) came in at 1/7. It may
well be that the chinese paid more attention to the early scopes. It
may also be that this batch has some "problems". Or it may be
something else entirely.
IMO, it's still a good deal, provided you get a good one, but that as
you say, may be a bit of a lottery.
At this point, I'm mainly thinking of it as an "introductory" apo -
one that is priced very reasonably and might serve to get folks to use
one that would never have considered paying 3x the amount for that
size scope.
Tom T.
Tom T.
Jon,
Tempting, ain't it. You can pick up an FS78 in the same arena.
:)
This is the main reason why the ed80 lost a bit of it's "bargin"
status for me when they bumped the price from $429 to $499.
Tom T.
Tom T.
<apm_tel...@web.de> wrote:
>"matt" <mari...@removethisbellsouth.net> wrote in message
>news:iHGRb.7039$Iw6....@bignews1.bellsouth.net
>
>Matt,
>
>let me tell you 1 thing. I think the Orion 80 mm ED for such low money
>is a great buy for
>people who coming from todays chinese achromats into Apos.Its a cheap
>way to enter the Apo feeling, just like Coronados new
>PST is a cheap way to enter the H-alpha observing.
<snip>
Bingo! Markus, I agree completely and think that's the main point of
the scope.
Tom T.
Markus Ludes
> I've had my ear to the ground on this one, and Markus' report is the
> first I've heard of significant (quantified) problems.
>
>
> Tom T.
---------------
Tom,
hereover in germany the first samples arrived some time ago and there
have been discussions due coma in several such scopes,
best wishes
lal_truckee
> "Tom Hole earthlink.net>" <tomhole@<NOSPAM> wrote in message
> news:101djpp...@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>Markus,
>>
>>Thanks for the review.
>>
>>Maybe Orion can return the favor and post a review of some of your
>
> products.
>
> LOL! It is a little strange when dealers post reviews of the competition.
> This is even more true when their review is very different from what a
> number of others have said.
Competition? Markus sales the ED-80. Who's the competition?
Ref: Pogo.
Al
> >
> > I've had my ear to the ground on this one, and Markus' report is the
> > first I've heard of significant (quantified) problems.
> >
>
> >
> > Tom T.
> ---------------
> Tom,
>
>
> hereover in germany the first samples arrived some time ago and there
> have been discussions due coma in several such scopes,
> best wishes
> Markus
>
>
Please make me understand your motivation here...
First you write a report on the 80mm ED, which most of us who read it
(including me) find it to be less than sparkling for this new item. I wrote
to you and thanked you on this NG for taking the time to post the report.
Now it seems that you're backpedaling, telling us, in a variety of ways,
that we shouldn't allow your report to influence our buying decision. This
is the second post where you seem to be hedging. What is your thinking
here?
Al
Tom T.
<apm_tel...@web.de> wrote:
>>
>> I've had my ear to the ground on this one, and Markus' report is the
>> first I've heard of significant (quantified) problems.
>>
>
>>
>> Tom T.
>---------------
>Tom,
>
>
>hereover in germany the first samples arrived some time ago and there
>have been discussions due coma in several such scopes,
>best wishes
>Markus
Markus,
If it's like the ones in the states, it's probably due to
miscollimation. While the lens is not easily adjusted in the cell,
you can usually align/square up the focuser with the center of the
lens and achieve an acceptable collimation. The first one I receved
was this way initially - after the "alignment" it cleared up. The
second was "pre-aligned" by Company 7 and didn't show this. (I did
check the alignment with a laser, and it was spot on.)
Or are you refering to another problem that I've not met up with yet?
There are lots of small issues like that - paint chips around the
focuser are extremely common over here as well.
Like many chinese scopes, it's not what I'd consider to be a very
*polished* product.
Tom T.
Tom T.
IMO - Markus is not trying to encourage or discourage you from
purchasing. Rather he's trying to help make you an informed consumer
by giving a knowledgable analysis.
In short, the scope's not perfect, but it could be a good deal IF it
fits with you. Not all deals are for everybody. You need to determine
if you would fit with the ED80. Don't buy it expecting a TMB, AP, TV,
etc... Do buy it if you are looking for something better than your
ST80 or other comparable achromats.
All too often there is a deluge of happy satisfied owners who tend to
either over look the defects or simply don't spot them for lack of
experience. Markus is trying to inject a reasoned, experienced
viewpoint.
Please correct me if I'm wrong Markus.
Tom T.
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:24:09 GMT, "Al" <aocc1...@optonline.net>
wrote:
Al
I understand what you're saying. When I read the Markus review here, I
simply compared what he was saying to what Orion had advertised. Needless
to say, there is a large gap between the two. Since I trust Markus more
than I trust Orion's advertising hype, I decided to pass on buying the
telescope. I thanked Markus and told him that I had changed my buying
plans, which seemed to upset him (maybe "upset" is too strong a word).
Nevertheless, there is an axiom which I normally keep uppermost in my mind,
but often tend to push aside...you get what you pay for.
Al
"Tom T." <ttru...@nope.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c2cbb9d7d90bae4c...@news.teranews.com...
Tom T.
wrote:
>Tom,
>
>I understand what you're saying. When I read the Markus review here, I
>simply compared what he was saying to what Orion had advertised. Needless
>to say, there is a large gap between the two. Since I trust Markus more
>than I trust Orion's advertising hype, I decided to pass on buying the
>telescope. I thanked Markus and told him that I had changed my buying
>plans, which seemed to upset him (maybe "upset" is too strong a word).
>Nevertheless, there is an axiom which I normally keep uppermost in my mind,
>but often tend to push aside...you get what you pay for.
>
>Al
>
Al, just remember almost no scope is truely "perfect". Everybody has
different requirements, but IME, a scope has to fail the star test
pretty miserably to give truely bad images.
Couple that with the fact that the star test really isn't that easy to
give (it requires better seeing than many folks have a large part of
the time - especially on larger scopes, you also have to make sure to
isolate the scope as much as possible from outside influences - cool
down, localized poor seeing depending on where you set up, also note
that it's pretty pointless to star test a scope if it's not collimated
decently, etc...) or interpet (combined abberations tend to look
different than the nice pictures you see in suiters or on the web).
If fact, I was browsing through an old issue of Amater Astronomy just
the other night and found none other than Rod Mollise expressing his
concerns about the star test, threating to remove it from the next
edition of his book.
There are a couple of other things that tend to indicate acceptable
optics, but we aren't really talking about evaluating scopes here.
Depending on your level of experience, budget and what you are
satisfied with you/I/or anyone else could be quite happy with the
ED80. You could do a lot worse - especially if cost is a factor.
The best way to decide if you could be happy with one is to look
through it. If you can get to a star party and take a glimpse this
year you will at least get a chance to see what all the excitement is
about.
Tom T.
Richard
When they can produce an 8" parabolic mirror that gives a nice, symmetrical
diffraction image and then a refractor with tiny 3" spherical lenses can't
produce as good an image, it's depressing.
-Rich