Quote:

---

this is the closest review i have seen

Quote:

---

Well it turned out to be clear tonight so I got the scope out for a test. Jupiter was too low in the sky to view well so I had to go with the double-double in Lyra as my primary test subject. I was able to use Jupiter to check image shift though. At 450x the shift was about 1/2 diameter of the planet. I'm sure someone else can figure out the math behind that and what it really means but for me it was just my observation. The double-double split very nicely at 200x but I could tell that it would be a lot cleaner if I adjusted the collimation. I started that process with some success but by 11pm the mosquitoes were so fierce that I had to pack it in for the night. At this point I find the scope to be very similar to the Orion 127 Mak I had before with the benefit of more aperture. I plan on doing a side by side comparison with my Meade 127ED/APO once the collimation is to my liking and will make a report of my findings.

Greg

---

Follow up to my initial posting. The scope did not compare well to the Meade 127ED. The 150 Mak had a brighter image but was no where near as sharp as the 127ED. I tested the 2 scopes on Jupiter, Mars and several stars/doubles. The 150 Mak also had something I had never seen in any scope before. As a bright object such as Jupiter was coming into the field of view there was a large loop of light that filled the view and gradually went away as the object moved towards the center of view. Although my mount tracks and I do not need to worry about anything moving across the field of view, I felt it would certainly be bothersome to someone without tracking. I was able to collimate the scope very easily but it just never reached the level of quality I had hoped for. I sent the scope back.

Greg

Post Extras