TV85 vs. Orion 80ED

"Ed T" wrote in message
nk.net...

wrote in message

I have never seen anyone say that the Orion out-performs the TV85
except you. For those interested, you might read Tom Trusock's very in
depth review on CloudyNights.

Clyde


The problem with the TV85, as I see it, is excessive owner satisfaction. The
only way to meet this head on is to replace them all with Orion EDs. Once the
edification inherent in this self denial has been fully realized, one can move
on to more advanced ascetism.


The "excessive" owner satisfaction is due in this case to quality in the optics
and the overall construction. I don't own one myself, and I can't see myself
doing so simply because I'm not the type that goes for the expensive things, but
I've seen through a couple, and even did a side-by-side-by-side comparison of
images between, if memory serves, the Telvue 102(?), a 125mm f/5 Syntha
refractor, and a Celestron 150mm refractor (I don't remember the focal ratio).
Comparing apples to oranges to orangutans (^_^), but what the heck, and it was
the guy with the 150mm who wanted to compare. We picked a large crater with
smaller ones inside it, and went from scope to scope to see how many we could
see. Wish I could remember the crater.

Anyway, the score was pretty consistently - Telvue 4 craters, Syntha 2,
Celestron 1. This was only one example of each telescope of course, and mileage
is going to vary widely for the inexpensive refractors (the Syntha and the
Celestron), but from viewing through other examples I believe the quality of the
Telvues is pretty much guaranteed with a few exceptions. Not so with the
others, at least not to the quality standards Telvue sets for themselves.

So whenever someone, anyone, says something that goes against the consensus,
they're the exception that makes the rule, or simple a troll spouting off, and
in considering what to do with such positions, keep in mind that a wise man once
said that the race does not always go to the swiftest or the strongest, but
that's the way to bet.
--
Sincerely,
--- Dave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It don't mean a thing
unless it has that certain "je ne sais quoi"
Duke Ellington
----------------------------------------------------------------------

On 29 Jan 2005 19:36:21 -0800, wrote:


RichA wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 09:23:59 -0800, "Szaki"
wrote:

There is a huge price difference, TV has a better fit, aparture wise
about
the same, but which scope performs better?
Julius


Some have said the new 80mm does, some the TV.

Rich,

I have never seen anyone say that the Orion out-performs the TV85
except you. For those interested, you might read Tom Trusock's very in
depth review on CloudyNights.

Clyde

Actually, I've read most of them and I'd agree with you.
Except for one other person who did say the Orion was better but
since the response was second-hand to me, I'd rather not say who
it was. But if I did, pretty much everyone here would know him.
As always, if at all possible, people should compare.
-Rich

Ed, I'll volunteer as a repository for all those 85's. I mean they
gotta go SOMEWHERE, right? ;o)

Tom T.

Incidentally, for anyone looking for the article Clyde mentions, you
can find it he http://www.cloudynights.com/premium2/telescopes.htm
Look under the "4-way 80mm shootout" - Most of the scopes were on loan
for the comparision.

What about optical smoothness, Rich? Does that fit in somewhere with
focuser smoothness? Good glass is one thing, what you do with it is
another.

rat
~( );

On 31 Jan 2005 23:16:16 -0800, "Bill H" wrote:

What about optical smoothness, Rich? Does that fit in somewhere with
focuser smoothness? Good glass is one thing, what you do with it is
another.

rat
~( );

Sure it is. But anyone who is implying the Orion EDs are suffering
from rough optics, such that they produce a noticeably different image
quality versus TeleVue's is either wrong, or grossly exaggerating.
But like I said; If someone really does want to spend $1700 instead
of $400, obviously, it's a big decision. So I would try to find both
scopes at a star party and compare them.
-Rich

Only a retard would spell somewhere "some where"


"Szaki" wrote in message
...

"Lucy" wrote in message
...
The word is "aperture",. not 'aparture.

And there certainly was Holocaust in spite of your claims on the
internet
that there was not!

l'chaim.

*Take your politics some where else, retard.
JS




Szaki wrote:

There is a huge price difference, TV has a better fit, aparture wise
about
the same, but which scope performs better?
Julius

Only a retard would notice it and make a note of it.
JS

"H. Kellerman" wrote in message
. ..
Only a retard would spell somewhere "some where"


"Szaki" wrote in message
...

"Lucy" wrote in message
...
The word is "aperture",. not 'aparture.

And there certainly was Holocaust in spite of your claims on the
internet
that there was not!

l'chaim.

*Take your politics some where else, retard.
JS




Szaki wrote:

There is a huge price difference, TV has a better fit, aparture wise
about
the same, but which scope performs better?
Julius

Szaki: You are an idiot and a bigot

You, a moron who can't spell, deny the Holocaust and makes comments like "I
have to laugh every time I think of that Hitler made the lazy Jews work.
Hahaha!"

A Google search will show you are a lowlife.

Don't' bother responding, you have been killfiled..

"Szaki" wrote in message
...
Only a retard would notice it and make a note of it.
JS

"H. Kellerman" wrote in message
. ..
Only a retard would spell somewhere "some where"


"Szaki" wrote in message
...

"Lucy" wrote in message
...
The word is "aperture",. not 'aparture.

And there certainly was Holocaust in spite of your claims on the
internet
that there was not!

l'chaim.

*Take your politics some where else, retard.
JS




Szaki wrote:

There is a huge price difference, TV has a better fit, aparture wise
about
the same, but which scope performs better?
Julius