Jump to content


Photo

Celestron Omni 127

  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 asaint

asaint

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2094
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2003

Posted 11 February 2009 - 05:48 AM

Celestron Omni 127

#2 rmollise

rmollise

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 15704
  • Joined: 06 Jul 2007

Posted 11 February 2009 - 07:33 AM

Great review!

IMHO, this little Celestron deserves a lot more attention...it is just right for quite a few folks and really priced right.

#3 proud uncle

proud uncle

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1717
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2007
  • Loc: Central Texas

Posted 11 February 2009 - 09:18 AM

Cathy, excellent review! Eventually, I want to purchase a smaller, g&g scope to complement my Dob. Your review contributes much to my growing knowledge base on such scopes. Thanks for taking the time to prepare, and then sharing, such a review.

#4 Bugsi

Bugsi

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 175
  • Joined: 20 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Sunnyvale, CA

Posted 11 February 2009 - 04:15 PM

Just a comment on the ST80 on an EQ-1: As a former GEM junkie, I have to admit that the best upgrade I ever did for my ST80 was to get a Vixen Portamount, along with the "Manny's Panhandle" modification. I ordered it from Optcorp and got a 5% discount for being a CN member. It is very solid and has really changed my opinion on alt-az mounts. It wouldn't be ideal with your Omni 127 for astro use, but it's very good with the ST80. I also swapped my ST80's focuser with a GSO dual-speed, and that makes a world of difference too.
(Sorry to direct my reply here to your ST80, rather than your Omni 127 review, which is very good, incidentally. It sounds like the Omni 127 is giving you very similar views to my Orion 150 Mak, but in a smaller package. Very nice indeed!)

#5 Doug76

Doug76

    Long Achro Junkie

  • *****
  • Posts: 10839
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Refractor Heaven

Posted 11 February 2009 - 04:50 PM

Until recently, I owned one of these, and found it to be a great setup. Having the larger 6" SCT on a Goto EQ mount made me let it go, but the friend that got it was very impressed with it. A really fine scope, and a good mount. Recommended.

#6 RocketScientist

RocketScientist

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 167
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2008
  • Loc: California (East Bay area)

Posted 11 February 2009 - 05:38 PM

My review of the XLT 127 wasn't really intended to be a parallel review of the ST80, but inevitably one ends up making comparisons between the scopes available!

As to Bugsi's comments about the Vixen Portamount: yes, my biggest complaint about the ST80 is not the OTA but the mount. The EQ-1 and HD-F2 are both too heavy for the level of convenience and portability that I expected from an 80mm f/5 refractor. Neither one is readily moved around with one hand.

But Orion didn't offer anything lighter. At some point I should look into lightweight mounts, but I'm going to be reluctant to pay more for the mount than I did for the OTA, which is pretty limiting!

#7 RocketScientist

RocketScientist

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 167
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2008
  • Loc: California (East Bay area)

Posted 11 February 2009 - 05:46 PM


BTW, there is supposed to be a picture showing the boxes and packaging, but it isn't loading. One of the Cloudy Nights editors might want to check why the link to that image is broken.

#8 Dr Morbius

Dr Morbius

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3708
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2007
  • Loc: ManorvilleNY-but not for long

Posted 11 February 2009 - 11:10 PM

That tripod in your excellent photos looks very substantial. Should do the job. :jump:

#9 edl

edl

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 605
  • Joined: 24 Jun 2004

Posted 11 February 2009 - 11:19 PM

A really fine article Cathy. Thank you.

I purchased this scope almost a year ago, mostly to use when traveling. Have you noticed any CA at higher powers (over 150x)? I've had two OTA's, and both exhibited slight, but noticeable, bluish halos on bright objects. Unfortunately I've yet to encounter another observer around here that has one for me to compare with.
BTW, I really like the CG4 mount. It performs well even in below freezing temperatures.

Best,
Ed L.

#10 Arizona-Ken

Arizona-Ken

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1457
  • Joined: 31 Aug 2008
  • Loc: Scottsdale, Arizona

Posted 11 February 2009 - 11:40 PM

Very nice, well written review.

Well Done!

Arizona Ken

#11 RocketScientist

RocketScientist

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 167
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2008
  • Loc: California (East Bay area)

Posted 12 February 2009 - 07:01 PM

Ed,

I haven't noticed any CA in the C5 so far, but I am rarely able to operate at really high powers. Much of my lunar observing is done at 139X, although lately I've been trying to push it to 178X. Massachusetts has poor seeing on most nights.

I can say this, though; if there's any CA, it's much, much less than what I see in the ST80. The ST80 can show a lot of lunar detail at 114X or 133X, but you have to ignore the brilliant violet haze on the limb.

I'm caught in something of a Catch-22, because at low powers (50X and lower) my skies are too bright as seen in the eyepiece of the C5, and at high powers (140X and higher) the bad seeing really blurs the image. So I wind up observing with a fairly narrow range of mid-powers.

However, I have eyepieces that can take the C5 up to 250X, so one of these days I'll get a night of perfect seeing and find out what it can do.

#12 RocketScientist

RocketScientist

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 167
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2008
  • Loc: California (East Bay area)

Posted 12 February 2009 - 07:04 PM


Since the link doesn't appear to be working in the article, I thought I'd upload the image here so that my readers can see it.

Attached Files



#13 edl

edl

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 605
  • Joined: 24 Jun 2004

Posted 12 February 2009 - 11:07 PM

Thanks Cathy. I'd be curious as to what you find when you are able to crank up the powers.
As a comparison, I'd rate the CA as slightly more than my original Orion 80ED, and much less than a Genesis I once owned. My CPC925 has virtually none.

Best,
Ed L.

#14 8ballsct

8ballsct

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 31
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2006
  • Loc: Calgary Ab.

Posted 13 February 2009 - 12:40 AM

I have not noticed any CA on either my Celestron or Meade 8" SCT's right up to stupid high power. I cannot say the same for the Meade LX90ACF. This difference was noted in an article showing the properties of RC, SCT and ACF scopes. Also, eyepieces can and do have their own CA problems.

#15 RocketScientist

RocketScientist

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 167
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2008
  • Loc: California (East Bay area)

Posted 14 February 2009 - 04:50 PM

Does anyone have suggestions on a reasonably-priced case for the Celestron XLT 127 (or any other C5)?

I've considered getting the Orion soft case designed for the 150mm Mak-Cass; while it is slightly oversized, it should work well.

http://www.telescope...roduct_id=15197

Or I could just buy another soft ST80 case; I've already confirmed that the C5 OTA fits nicely inside it. :yay:

Low cost is key; I'm not interested in a case that costs half as much as the OTA.

#16 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 23178
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 15 February 2009 - 04:53 PM

Does anyone have suggestions on a reasonably-priced case for the Celestron XLT 127 (or any other C5)?

I've considered getting the Orion soft case designed for the 150mm Mak-Cass; while it is slightly oversized, it should work well.

http://www.telescope...roduct_id=15197

Or I could just buy another soft ST80 case; I've already confirmed that the C5 OTA fits nicely inside it. :yay:

Low cost is key; I'm not interested in a case that costs half as much as the OTA.

JMI makes a "generic" 19" case that is ideal for this OTA.
Also, shop the tools area at Lowes, Home Depot or OSH for weekend specials on cases. I was able to find a case to fit my CG5 mount for $20.
The Omni XLT line, for the customer not needing a computerized scope, is truly excellent. There is a good 6" f/5 newtonian (how about a 2 degree field, huh?), and upcoming there will be a 100mm ED semi-apo refractor and an f/5 6" refractor!. [I'd like to buy two and make a big pair of binoculars] The 5" SCT is a good buy and quite a bit less expensive than the computerized version, yet more stable in winds.
You can add a dual motor drive with hand controller for $150, and, at that point, you can start (dare I say it) imaging the sky.

I feel for Cathy under her skies, though. In steady, high-altitude, western skies my 5" Mak fully resolves the same M22 at about 96X, and I've viewed Mars at 328X with fairly steady and sharp images. It's all about seeing.
Look at the weather map: when the pressure isobars are far apart, there is nearly zero wind at high altitudes and the seeing is often quite good. Then, you can really crank it up.

I'll be interested in hearing comments after a year with the scope.

#17 RocketScientist

RocketScientist

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 167
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2008
  • Loc: California (East Bay area)

Posted 15 February 2009 - 09:33 PM


At least the transparency is sometimes good here. I just spent a very clear night out with an informal local group of observers, looking through everything from an Orion ED80 (M44, Double Cluster, Pleaides) to a C8 on a fork mount with GoTo (M1, M35, M36, M42, M67, M78, NGC 2158, NGC 2159, tried to see M81 but failed) to a Meade 16" solid-tube Dob (M42, M81, M82).

It's fascinating to see how some objects really need the additional light grasp of the larger scope, and some don't. M42 looked glorious in both the C8 and the 16" Dob, and any differences between the two views were very subtle. But I could not see M81 at all in the C8 even with GoTo to point the way, while both M81 and M82 were blindingly obvious in the 16".

I'm looking forward to getting my scopes out in warmer weather, when I can focus on observing without feeling my toes slowly freezing. :snowedin:

I particularly look forward to putting my ST80 next to the Orion ED80 and getting a really good side-to-side comparison of the effects of ED glass.

#18 siriusly

siriusly

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2007

Posted 18 February 2009 - 10:25 AM

Cathy

That was my Orion ED80 you were looking through. I would be happy to get together for any scope comparisons you would like to make.

David :crazy:

#19 RocketScientist

RocketScientist

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 167
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2008
  • Loc: California (East Bay area)

Posted 18 February 2009 - 05:25 PM

Cathy

That was my Orion ED80 you were looking through. I would be happy to get together for any scope comparisons you would like to make.

David :crazy:


Thanks, David! I'm definitely interested in doing this. Vaughn and I swapped emails, so I will be on the list of any future group events that you do.

Cathy

#20 RocketScientist

RocketScientist

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 167
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2008
  • Loc: California (East Bay area)

Posted 25 April 2012 - 11:28 PM

It's been interesting to see how my relationship with this scope has evolved over time.

I purchased a Z10 about a year ago (see the review in Cloudy Nights), but I find that I still use the C5 about as frequently as the Z10. On nights that are moonless, dark, and clear, I'll pull out the Z10 and get it cooling down. When there are globulars to be studied, the Z10 gets the nod. I haven't taken it out to dark skies yet to really look for galaxies, but no doubt it would do well.

But the C5 still gets used a lot and isn't going anywhere. For lunar observing, the C5 wins hands down. The Z10 gathers so much light that I have to put a variable polarizing filter in place to keep from being blinded, and given typical seeing, it doesn't show significantly more lunar detail. The C5 is easier and quicker to carry outside, and I can sit comfortably in a chair to study fine lunar details. The Dob requires uncomfortable, unsustainable positions of my body and therefore gets used for shorter peeks rather than detailed study.

On the other hand, I found that once the C5 settled firmly into my routine, it pretty much displaced the ST80 for everything except camping trips.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics