Orion 80mm ED should i buy?

Just wondered if i should buy the Orion 80mm ED, i'm kinda bored and would like
a new scope to play around with. I have a CG-5 to mount it on, guess for $500
the price seems good, i know it's not a Tak or AP!

Chas P.

Why not? It has gotten good reviews.

http://www.cloudynights.com/reviews4/orion80-2.htm

http://www.cloudynights.com/reviews5/orion80.htm

Of course, remember that the nights are short now anyway and a new scope
will bring on several weeks of cloudy weather :-)

Also -- you will need to provide mounting rings, diagonal, EPs, finder, etc.

Phil

CHASLX200 wrote:

Just wondered if i should buy the Orion 80mm ED, i'm kinda bored and would like
a new scope to play around with. I have a CG-5 to mount it on, guess for $500
the price seems good, i know it's not a Tak or AP!

Chas P.

Subject: Orion 80mm ED should i buy?
From: Phil Wheeler
Date: 6/18/04 2:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:



Why not? It has gotten good reviews.

http://www.cloudynights.com/reviews4/orion80-2.htm

http://www.cloudynights.com/reviews5/orion80.htm

Of course, remember that the nights are short now anyway and a new scope
will bring on several weeks of cloudy weather :-)

Also -- you will need to provide mounting rings, diagonal, EPs, finder, etc.

Phil

**********************
Its cloudy from June to mid Sept, and i have all the goodies minus rings!

I loved the Tak FS-78, i just wanna try all other scopes in that size range...

Chas P.

Subject: Orion 80mm ED should i buy?
From: Phil Wheeler
Date: 6/18/04 2:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:



Why not? It has gotten good reviews.

http://www.cloudynights.com/reviews4/orion80-2.htm

http://www.cloudynights.com/reviews5/orion80.htm

Of course, remember that the nights are short now anyway and a new scope
will bring on several weeks of cloudy weather :-)

Also -- you will need to provide mounting rings, diagonal, EPs, finder, etc.

Phil

**********************
Its cloudy from June to mid Sept, and i have all the goodies minus rings!

I loved the Tak FS-78, i just wanna try all other scopes in that size range...

Chas P.

"Phil Wheeler" wrote in message
...
Why not? It has gotten good reviews.

http://www.cloudynights.com/reviews4/orion80-2.htm

http://www.cloudynights.com/reviews5/orion80.htm

Of course, remember that the nights are short now anyway and a new scope
will bring on several weeks of cloudy weather :-)

Also -- you will need to provide mounting rings, diagonal, EPs, finder,
etc.

Phil

No. Face it, your getting 80mm when it should be at least 90. I have no
idea what the fluky mentality
with 80mm aperture is. 80 was good 15 years ago and I just don't understand
the fixation.

"Mike" wrote in message news:nIOAc.2723$7d2.174@clgrps13...

I have no
idea what the fluky mentality
with 80mm aperture is. 80 was good 15 years ago and I just don't
understand
the fixation.

I think it's because 80mm makes for a reasonable wide field scope.

That said, I don't exactly disagree with you. An 80mm scope is really in the
toy category for intermediate and avid amateurs. It's a play thing.
Something you take along on the family trip. You convince yourself that it's
for observing nature, but deep down in your heart you know it's just a
pacifier for when you start jones'ing for the scope you would have brought,
if you hadn't brought the family. g

I think it's because 80mm makes for a reasonable wide field scope.

That said, I don't exactly disagree with you. An 80mm scope is really in
the
toy category for intermediate and avid amateurs. It's a play thing.
Something you take along on the family trip. You convince yourself that
it's
for observing nature, but deep down in your heart you know it's just a
pacifier for when you start jones'ing for the scope you would have
brought,
if you hadn't brought the family. g



That is the finest put down I have ever read. *laugh*

So the question remains. Why an 80 after soooo many years?? What is it with
the
companies?

"Mike" wrote in message news:mFPAc.4162$7d2.3214@clgrps13...
So the question remains. Why an 80 after soooo many years?? What is it
with
the companies?

They are simply responding to market demand, that's what companies do.

The more pertinent question might be, why is there a demand for "fast" 80mm
refractors? My demand for a small refractor had to do with compensating for
a large scope that was difficult to manage in and out of the house Couple
that to the fact that a fast 80mm provides fields of view that compare
favorably with binoculars, and you have a compelling solution.

I purchased a Universal Astronomics UniStar Light Deluxe and the D&S Compact
CS Short Tripod that I use almost exclusively with a Celestron FS80-WA. The
entire setup weighs just 12 lbs. and breaks down into three small pieces,
one being the OTA, and the longest being the folded down tripod at 24
inches. With the 24mm Panoptic I get 3.9 degrees of field at 17x, and the
13mm, 9mm and 7mm Nagler T6's range from 31x to 57x with generous fields of
view from 2.5 to 1.4 degrees. And, since the TV eyepieces do very well at
surpressing the astigmatism that plagues the more simple eyepiece designs at
F5, the views remain quite sharp across the field.

I personally don't foresee myself replacing the "ST80" with an 80mm ED
because it would add unwanted weight and stress to the mount and ultra-light
tripod combo. I've also concluded from experimenting with other telescopes,
that although the planetary views could certainly be better, scopes under 4"
aperture just don't provide the exit pupil and resolution that I need to
enjoy planets, so the incentive to go with the extra expense of ED glass, a
longer (and more narrow) F7 ratio, and a more robust mount/tripod combo that
can handle the extra weight and moment arm, simply isn't compelling. Rather,
I choose to keep a 5" Mak for a "walk out" (it's on a GEM so I can't really
call it a "grab and go") planet and moon scope.

The ST80 I keep assembled and ready for wide field views of bright objects,
for terrestrial and solar (Baader filter), and for cruising the Milky Way.
It is also the first scope I think of whenever I am going on a trip, or just
stepping out back for a minute before bed. No doubt the 80mm sucks for
serious observing of dim, nebulous objects under urban/suburban skies. Under
such conditions, it is at best, a DSO "detection" device. But, there's
nothing wrong with that.

-Stephen

"Mike" wrote in message news:mFPAc.4162$7d2.3214@clgrps13...
So the question remains. Why an 80 after soooo many years?? What is it
with
the companies?

They are simply responding to market demand, that's what companies do.

The more pertinent question might be, why is there a demand for "fast" 80mm
refractors? My demand for a small refractor had to do with compensating for
a large scope that was difficult to manage in and out of the house Couple
that to the fact that a fast 80mm provides fields of view that compare
favorably with binoculars, and you have a compelling solution.

I purchased a Universal Astronomics UniStar Light Deluxe and the D&S Compact
CS Short Tripod that I use almost exclusively with a Celestron FS80-WA. The
entire setup weighs just 12 lbs. and breaks down into three small pieces,
one being the OTA, and the longest being the folded down tripod at 24
inches. With the 24mm Panoptic I get 3.9 degrees of field at 17x, and the
13mm, 9mm and 7mm Nagler T6's range from 31x to 57x with generous fields of
view from 2.5 to 1.4 degrees. And, since the TV eyepieces do very well at
surpressing the astigmatism that plagues the more simple eyepiece designs at
F5, the views remain quite sharp across the field.

I personally don't foresee myself replacing the "ST80" with an 80mm ED
because it would add unwanted weight and stress to the mount and ultra-light
tripod combo. I've also concluded from experimenting with other telescopes,
that although the planetary views could certainly be better, scopes under 4"
aperture just don't provide the exit pupil and resolution that I need to
enjoy planets, so the incentive to go with the extra expense of ED glass, a
longer (and more narrow) F7 ratio, and a more robust mount/tripod combo that
can handle the extra weight and moment arm, simply isn't compelling. Rather,
I choose to keep a 5" Mak for a "walk out" (it's on a GEM so I can't really
call it a "grab and go") planet and moon scope.

The ST80 I keep assembled and ready for wide field views of bright objects,
for terrestrial and solar (Baader filter), and for cruising the Milky Way.
It is also the first scope I think of whenever I am going on a trip, or just
stepping out back for a minute before bed. No doubt the 80mm sucks for
serious observing of dim, nebulous objects under urban/suburban skies. Under
such conditions, it is at best, a DSO "detection" device. But, there's
nothing wrong with that.

-Stephen

I think it's because 80mm makes for a reasonable wide field scope.

That said, I don't exactly disagree with you. An 80mm scope is really in
the
toy category for intermediate and avid amateurs. It's a play thing.
Something you take along on the family trip. You convince yourself that
it's
for observing nature, but deep down in your heart you know it's just a
pacifier for when you start jones'ing for the scope you would have
brought,
if you hadn't brought the family. g



That is the finest put down I have ever read. *laugh*

So the question remains. Why an 80 after soooo many years?? What is it with
the
companies?