I've looked at the Ed Ting video on the Orion 120mm numerous times and I'm in a nit picky mood today so I've got some additional comments on the imaging comparo he does in the video. Before I begin, I'll preface my comments with the disclaimer that you can't equate optical quality by means of imaging and I'm not taking anything away from the excellent apo in the comparo. Additionally, as Ed point out, youtube compression of the images factors in here as well. That said, I gotta disagree with Ed on a couple of things he says. First, on the images of the dumbbell nebula, he states the stars are different in the apo with some sort of unique character to them. In contrast, he says there's a "sameness"in the stars as seen in the 120 achro image. I disagree because if you look at the double star at approximately the 2 o'clock position in both images, the stars immediately adjacent to those double stars appear brighter in the 120 than they do in the apo view. In the image of the North American nebula, Ed says the stars in the stowaway image are smaller and there are more of them despite the lessor aperture. I'm not about to get into counting the stars in the images but I looked at the stars in the darkest and dimmest areas in the images that I could easily compare and it appears to me the areas are similar but, ultimately, I'll take Ed's word for it. What is more obvious, however, is that the "beak" in the pelican nebula is missing in the stowaway image and clearly evident in the 120 image. So, if anything, the image in the 120 is demonstrating something the image in the apo is not.