Two quite valid, but rather different points of view. Which raises the question, "when is a Questar a Questar?"
The quintessential virtue of a Questar is most often touted as being "a complete, high quality, lite weight, portable observatory in a box," that can be set up and used in a matter of minutes - no fuss, no muss. In that case, there is only one real Questar: the 3.5" Standard (and its various versions such as the Duplex).
In fact, when Questar owners try to "defend" their love of these little jewels, those are the points most often made. E.g., so what if a high quality 80mm - 90mm apo-refractor throws up a brighter, higher contrast image? It takes longer to set up the apo and it requires a clock driven mount, a diagonal, counter weights, etc. We're all familiar with such arguments.
A 5" Questar can only be high quality ETX 125. It will not be a quintessential Questar. It will never be as portable and will never be ready to use as quickly as the 3.5". (Cool down time will be extensive compared to the 3.5" largely defeating any grab and go utility.) In other words, it will lack the quintessential values as defined by several generations of Questar owners.
I apologize in advance to all Q7 owners. You folks are fortunate to own a fabulous telescope. But it's not a real Questar.
That said... I'm beginning to think that I might actually like to own one of those non-Questar 5" Questars.
Edited by elwaine, 01 May 2017 - 10:05 PM.