Orion XT-10 or Meade ETX-125

I'm going to hate myself for asking this, I suppose, but should I
abandon my long-planned purchase of an XT-10 in favor of an ETX-125?
I've almost got the money saved for either one. On the face of it,
what appeals to me most about the Meade is the portability; with the
XT-10, though, with its lower price, I could afford some accessories.
The deciding factor, then, would be the scopes, themselves.

You may fire when ready.


-------------
Beady's 11th Law of Social Harmonics: "Your spouse is precisely the kind of person someone like you would choose to marry."

On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 00:01:16 GMT, John Beaderstadt
wrote:

I'm going to hate myself for asking this, I suppose, but should I
abandon my long-planned purchase of an XT-10 in favor of an ETX-125?
I've almost got the money saved for either one. On the face of it,
what appeals to me most about the Meade is the portability; with the
XT-10, though, with its lower price, I could afford some accessories.
The deciding factor, then, would be the scopes, themselves.

You may fire when ready.


With such diverse types of scopes, comparisons can become difficult.
Therefore, if this issue is looked at purely from the perspective of
aperture, then a 10" scope opens a vast world of possibilities that can
not seriously be touched by a 5" scope. For visual only use (which for
the sake of this arguement, I'm assuming is your primary interest) the 10"
easily gets my vote. If you ever intend to look beyond the planets, then
~1.6 magniudes deeper seeing becomes truly quite significant! In fact, on
nights of good seeing the 10" Newt (if well collimated, well cooled, and
assuming reasonably well corrected optics, in conjunction with the use of
top quality eyepieces capable of good correction in fast scopes) will
simply paste the 5" ETX on the planets as well. This later point may
argueably be contested by the likes of a very well corrected high quality
5" APO, but the MCT will have in the range of a whopping 35% obstruction,
vs. closer to only 20% for the Newt., so there will be no comparison in
good seeing conditions regardless of the object to be viewed.

Lawrence Sayre

The deciding factor, then, would be the scopes, themselves.

You may fire when ready.

Have you had a chance to look at and/or through either one? Size up the
portability vs aperture issue?

What sort of viewing are you interested in doing? DSOs, planets? That factor
of 4 increase in light gathering is pretty hard to beat when it comes to viewng
DSOs, especially if light pollution is an issue.

How big is your car, how far do you have to carry the scope to use it?

This sort of thing is something only you can decide because only you know your
needs and your situation.

Me, well, I would go with the XT-10. I have a C-5 OTA, similar to the ETX-125
optically and I also have a 10 inch F5 Asian DOB. The 10 inch scope has the
same focal length but twice the aperture and a 2 inch focuser to boot, that is
too much to overcome IMHO. It fits in my small Escort or in the motor home
easily and it takes only a minute or two to haul out and setup, even if it is
only in the back yard.

So, yeah, thats what works for me, what works for you, probably something
different.

jon

"John Beaderstadt" wrote in message
...
I'm going to hate myself for asking this, I suppose, but should I
abandon my long-planned purchase of an XT-10 in favor of an ETX-125?
I've almost got the money saved for either one. On the face of it,
what appeals to me most about the Meade is the portability; with the
XT-10, though, with its lower price, I could afford some accessories.
The deciding factor, then, would be the scopes, themselves.

You may fire when ready.

Obviously the XT-10 will show a lot more. But tracking is nice, even if you
don't need goto. This is especially true for higher power viewing or
drawing.

I guess the biggest question would be: Because of its size/weight, would you
end up using the ETX a lot more?

If not, it would take a lot to give up all the aperture.

Clear Skies

Chuck Taylor
Do you observe the moon?
Try the Lunar Observing Group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/

"Lawrence Sayre" wrote in message
newsprv6suxwosib3zq@news-server...
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 00:01:16 GMT, John Beaderstadt
wrote:

I'm going to hate myself for asking this, I suppose, but should I
abandon my long-planned purchase of an XT-10 in favor of an ETX-125?
I've almost got the money saved for either one. On the face of it,
what appeals to me most about the Meade is the portability; with the
XT-10, though, with its lower price, I could afford some accessories.
The deciding factor, then, would be the scopes, themselves.

You may fire when ready.


With such diverse types of scopes, comparisons can become difficult.
Therefore, if this issue is looked at purely from the perspective of
aperture, then a 10" scope opens a vast world of possibilities that can
not seriously be touched by a 5" scope. For visual only use (which for
the sake of this arguement, I'm assuming is your primary interest) the 10"
easily gets my vote. If you ever intend to look beyond the planets, then
~1.6 magniudes deeper seeing becomes truly quite significant! In fact, on
nights of good seeing the 10" Newt (if well collimated, well cooled, and
assuming reasonably well corrected optics, in conjunction with the use of
top quality eyepieces capable of good correction in fast scopes) will
simply paste the 5" ETX on the planets as well. This later point may
argueably be contested by the likes of a very well corrected high quality
5" APO, but the MCT will have in the range of a whopping 35% obstruction,
vs. closer to only 20% for the Newt., so there will be no comparison in
good seeing conditions regardless of the object to be viewed.

Lawrence Sayre

I agree with everything said above!!

However, the allure of portability is something that is very hard to
quantify. On cold cold cold Wisconsin nights in January when the temp gets
down to -20F, it is then that portability rules.

I grab my little 4" refractor on it's altaz mount with one hand and brave
the cold to have a look at the night sky because I know I can grab that
scope with one hand again and be inside in a shot.

Or after work, when I'm dog tired and want to get to bed early I can grab my
little four incher and have a look for just a half an hour. It doesn't feel
like I've wasted my time because it so easy to setup and to break down and
take back inside.

My 8" SCT will show me more....if it ever gets used!

I'm going to hate myself for asking this, I suppose, but should I
abandon my long-planned purchase of an XT-10 in favor of an ETX-125?
I've almost got the money saved for either one. On the face of it,
what appeals to me most about the Meade is the portability; with the
XT-10, though, with its lower price, I could afford some accessories.
The deciding factor, then, would be the scopes, themselves.

You may fire when ready.

So far everyone has urged you to go with the XT-10. I'm going to suggest
that you go with the...XT-10. There is absolutely _no_ way one can compare
a 5" MAK with a 10" Newt. If you were to say that that you were considering
an 8" SCT for its portability, you would be standing on solid ground, but
the 5" MAK is just too small to be compared with the 10" Newt. Go with the
Dob, enjoy the cost savings, enjoy the extra aperture and don't look back.

Al

"Chuck Taylor" wrote in message
...
"John Beaderstadt" wrote in message
...
I'm going to hate myself for asking this, I suppose, but should I
abandon my long-planned purchase of an XT-10 in favor of an ETX-125?
I've almost got the money saved for either one. On the face of it,
what appeals to me most about the Meade is the portability; with the
XT-10, though, with its lower price, I could afford some accessories.
The deciding factor, then, would be the scopes, themselves.

You may fire when ready.

Obviously the XT-10 will show a lot more. But tracking is nice, even if
you
don't need goto. This is especially true for higher power viewing or
drawing.

I guess the biggest question would be: Because of its size/weight, would
you
end up using the ETX a lot more?

If not, it would take a lot to give up all the aperture.

Clear Skies

Chuck Taylor

if you're able to tolerate the price of an ETX-125 then another possible
option for only a little more money would be the Celestron Nexstar 8i which
is very portable _and_ would offer you 8" instead of only 5" .

matt

"Jim" wrote in message
...

My 8" SCT will show me more....if it ever gets used!

Yep... hence the reason I own three very portable refractors. I love big
mirrors, but I hate carting them around when it's 10 below zero-- which
sometimes happens here in Minnesota in the winter. :-) I know most of us
realize that the 10" will show lots more than a 4" refractor, but the 10"
XT10 weighs a LOT more than my 4" refractor too, and takes longer to cool
down. I can pick up my 4" refractor, mount and all, and bring it outdoors on
a moment's notice. There is always that portability vs. aperture thing in
amateur astronomy (unless you are lucky enough to have your own
permanently-mounted scope in your own observatory).

Beyond the portability and transport issues, your choice of viewing
instrument should probably be dictated by what you want to look at. For
planets, star clusters, doubles, and extended deep sky objects, a nice, 5"
instrument will do a nice job. One caveat is that Maks and SCTs take awhile
to cool down, especially if you bring them to the cold outside from a warm
inside. Best if you can keep those type of scopes in an unheated garage or
shed, so you can cut down the cooling time.

Jackie

I know most of us
realize that the 10" will show lots more than a 4" refractor, but the 10"
XT10 weighs a LOT more than my 4" refractor too, and takes longer to cool
down. I can pick up my 4" refractor, mount and all, and bring it outdoors on
a moment's notice. There is always that portability vs. aperture thing in
amateur astronomy .....

Put wheels on the dob. Instead of portability vs aperture, think portable
aperture.

For
planets, star clusters, doubles, and extended deep sky objects, a nice, 5"
instrument will do a nice job.

Truth!

One caveat is that Maks and SCTs take awhile
to cool down, especially if you bring them to the cold outside from a warm
inside. Best if you can keep those type of scopes in an unheated garage or
shed, so you can cut down the cooling time.

Truth! And this also applies to dobsonians. Then add active cooling.


john

The XT10 hands down. You can easily spend much more time fiddling
around with the ETX just trying to get it to work right than you would
actually observing. Not so with the dob. Just make sure it's
collimated. I recently helped some newbies with their new 125 and
they were very disapointed about their choice. The image shift alone
was disgusting. Go with the dob and you won't be sorry.


"Chuck Taylor" wrote in message ...
"John Beaderstadt" wrote in message
...
I'm going to hate myself for asking this, I suppose, but should I
abandon my long-planned purchase of an XT-10 in favor of an ETX-125?
I've almost got the money saved for either one. On the face of it,
what appeals to me most about the Meade is the portability; with the
XT-10, though, with its lower price, I could afford some accessories.
The deciding factor, then, would be the scopes, themselves.

You may fire when ready.

Obviously the XT-10 will show a lot more. But tracking is nice, even if you
don't need goto. This is especially true for higher power viewing or
drawing.

I guess the biggest question would be: Because of its size/weight, would you
end up using the ETX a lot more?

If not, it would take a lot to give up all the aperture.

Clear Skies

Chuck Taylor
Do you observe the moon?
Try the Lunar Observing Group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/