
Meade LXD55 5" vs SkyView Pro 120mm EQ refractor
#1
Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
Posted 30 November 2003 - 06:29 PM
I've been looking at two refractors and have been wondering which one yall think is better. They are the Meade LXD55 5" f/9 EC equtorial and the Orion SkyView Pro 120mm(4.7")f/8.3 EQ Refractor. The Meade cost $579 while the Orion is $549. Which do yall think is better? The Meade also has a polar allignment scope included, while the orion doesn't. I realize the Meade has a slightly bigger aperature(.3"), but does it really make any difference? Also, how does the Meade tripod compare with Orion's SkyView Pro tripod? And the Meade has a longer f ratio, although I'm not sure if that would make any noticable viewing differences for planetary viewing. And, if you buy a meade telescope right now you can get that $99 eyepiece offer. Any help really appreciated.
Thanks
#2
Posted 30 November 2003 - 06:48 PM
The mounts are very similar except the Meade has dual axis motors and can be ugraded to goto by plugging in a different controller. One important difference is the Orion has a dramatically better tripod (steel v. aluminum).
#3
Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
Posted 30 November 2003 - 06:51 PM
Ive got the Meade 5" it does have good optics as im sure the Orion does as well. Every bit of aperture does help especially at highest mags and a longer fl helps definatly on planetary as well giving smaller FOV but higher mag contrast. Only thing about mine I didnt like was the focuser Ive never owned an Orion refractor so I cant give a side by side on its focuser. My advise is this: Given an almost equal choice in aperture and quality go as big as poss unless your certain the quality is better on the smaller choice. I think from what ive seen that those 2 are about equal in scope and mount. You could however lateron add go-to to the Meade whereas on the Orion it isnt happening. Both Companys are good about returning lemons so your safe there at least. Personally I like the 6" Meade best has a nice focuser its just BIG is all, looks like a ground to air missle gun all setup, could scare some folks!
I traded my 6" off for the 5" only because it wouldnt fit in my backseat but the 5" just barely did. Im kinda sorry I got rid of it now. Dave
#4
Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
Posted 30 November 2003 - 08:27 PM
#5
Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
Posted 30 November 2003 - 11:06 PM
(I hate upgrading to get to where it should have been to begin with!)
amen......

best,
Chris
#6
Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
Posted 01 December 2003 - 11:30 AM
If you really wanted to splurge, go ahead and get the 152mm and be done with it. It already has the Go-To if you are looking to upgrade in the future plus the extra inch of aperture at the expence of f/ ratio. The focuser is much better on the 6" too. It's all metal.
As with many scopes in this class, the tripod is the weakest link.
#7
Posted 01 December 2003 - 12:05 PM
If you really wanted to splurge, go ahead and get the 152mm and be done with it. It already has the Go-To if you are looking to upgrade in the future plus the extra inch of aperture at the expence of f/ ratio. The focuser is much better on the 6" too. It's all metal.
...and it's prettier!

#8
Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
Posted 01 December 2003 - 02:03 PM
I have somewhat less confidence in the 120mm because there have been a few with less than ideal optics. I have yet to see or hear of any AR5 that didn't have very fine optics. The manufacturers for these 2 scopes are different.
The above is not absolute as you, very likely, will get a good 120mm scope. Besides 4.7" is a funny aperture. You can say 5" much faster.
Al M