Orion ED100

"Astrosetz" wrote in message


I understand the appeal of small and short f/ratio refractors. I have a
TV-85 that is a totally different instrument than my Newts. But I'm
wondering what a 4" f/9 refractor brings to the table.

Its much more like a TV 102 (f 8.6) than the TV85(f7). Bigger aperture,
less well suited to travel. Sounds like the little tube suits you better.

Ed T.

I'm just not sure what a 4" f/9 refractor gets you over a 4.5" f/8
reflector.

For me: Heavier weight, slower setup, and not really taking a shine
to using an eq set-up in the dead of winter (didn't bother using the
tracking motors...). While I weigh in at app. 106lbs., my C102hd &
CG5 (w/dual tracking motors) proved cumbersome at best for me to fool
with. Yes I did haul it out more than a few times, but I finally sold
that CG5, still have the C102ota (anyone in the market for it, write
me...). It was a nice setup, I'll say.

While the stars are perfect little circles, I have a smaller
refractor, Celestron's C60 f/15 to bring out, a nice grab & go.

The Skyquest 4.5" reflector is f/8...

My XT4.5 is a good little grab & go, and while 4.5" might not be much
aperture, the f/8 I'd say helps in giving some knockout planetary
views esp. when the seeing provides. Here's a few shots from it (who
says you can't take a few snaps with a dob?):
http://albums.photo.epson.com/j/Albu...&a=30847724&f=
The photos don't really do justice to the view from the 'scope.

I guess I'd be a smaller refractor/setup girl, but I'm still leaning
toward that larger dob if I'd get another telescope.

All in all, I'm sure the 100ED will make many happy, I think it will
be a pretty nice telescope for many.

Regards,
KO
s.e. Louisiana
still in the swamps

On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 02:11:33 GMT, "Edward" wrote:

F/9, $999. This week, maybe.

Ed T.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Orion_ED/message/2365

http://starizona.com/telescopes/show...No=9975&Show=1


Upin the ante? That seems to be the perfect deal for this class of
refractor. 100mm at f9 and color correction is a long scope. 900
mm!! YUK! Anything over 800mm is too bulky.

Mick wrote in message . ..
On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 02:11:33 GMT, "Edward" wrote:

F/9, $999. This week, maybe.

Ed T.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Orion_ED/message/2365

http://starizona.com/telescopes/show...No=9975&Show=1


Upin the ante? That seems to be the perfect deal for this class of
refractor. 100mm at f9 and color correction is a long scope. 900
mm!! YUK! Anything over 800mm is too bulky.

4" is that important? Or is it the extra 4oz of aluminum to carry?

Mick wrote:

! YUK! Anything over 800mm is too bulky.

Rander wrote:

4" is that important? Or is it the extra 4oz of aluminum to carry?

Jon writes:

Just for your information, Mick is a troll that goes by many aliases. Avoid
replying and he will go away and try to find another victim to hook.

jon

(Jon Isaacs) wrote in
:

Mick wrote:

! YUK! Anything over 800mm is too bulky.

Rander wrote:

4" is that important? Or is it the extra 4oz of aluminum to carry?

Jon writes:

Just for your information, Mick is a troll that goes by many aliases.
Avoid replying and he will go away and try to find another victim to
hook.

jon

Rich:
For me, 100mm of aperture matters quite a lot in relation to 75-80mm, but
aperture has to be traded for portability in many situations. To me, the
Orion 100ED is way too large for a grab and go scope if a suitable mount is
to be taken into account.

Jon:
Mick may have a trolling addiction, but I find nothing objectionable with
his comments here.

Best regards,
Anders H.
--
correct address anhn at telia dot com

Anders Hansson wrote in message .. .
(Jon Isaacs) wrote in
:

Mick wrote:

! YUK! Anything over 800mm is too bulky.

Rander wrote:

4" is that important? Or is it the extra 4oz of aluminum to carry?

Jon writes:

Just for your information, Mick is a troll that goes by many aliases.
Avoid replying and he will go away and try to find another victim to
hook.

jon

Rich:
For me, 100mm of aperture matters quite a lot in relation to 75-80mm, but
aperture has to be traded for portability in many situations. To me, the
Orion 100ED is way too large for a grab and go scope if a suitable mount is
to be taken into account.

Jon:
Mick may have a trolling addiction, but I find nothing objectionable with
his comments here.

Best regards,
Anders H.

I agree to an extent, it all depends on the weight and length of the
scope. For instance, a TeleVue 85 cannot be mounted on a hyper portable
mount, simply because it is just too heavy, but a Shortube 80mm can.
The 100mm f9 is going to require at least a G5 (are they still called that?)
or basic GEM mount so the weight with a counterweight is going to preclude it
being a grab and go scope, but going from 800mm to 900mm isn't what would
make it that way. An 800mm x 100mm scope is still going to require a reasonable
mount. I can't help wondering if it isn't time to reconsider folded refractors
as a way to avoid length and perhaps weight issues? With mirror coating
techology where it is, a couple reflective surfaces wouldn't do the damage
to an image that people think they might. This way, you could have an f10 or
longer scope in a flat box type package. This could be mounted in a fork-style
mount and might conceivably be considered grab and go. But, as it stands now,
if you want aperture and portability, a reflector is the only way to go.
-Rich