Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Orion SVP 127mm Mak

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
16 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
  • topic starter

Posted 06 June 2004 - 09:35 PM

Hello everyone,

I have an intersting dilema that I thought I'd ask for help in. I've come across some extra cash and I am considering buying an Orion SVP 127mm Mak. After reading everything I could get my hands on about the Orion, I looked on astromart, to see if I could find it cheaper. Instead, I found alot of SCT's that I had always wanted in my price range.

The real question is should I stick with a new scope or a used one? If I purchased the Orion Mak this is what I was going to buy:

Skyview Pro 127 Dual-Axis Drive
ShortyPlus 3-element 2X
Ultrascopic 15mm
Ultrascopic 30mm

These roughly equal about $1000.00 which is my budget.

I've seen several Celestron C8 SCT's & Nexstar 8's for around $900 but that's all I would be able to get.

I was given a Meade DS60-EC about 3 years ago as a gift and
I've been wanting a -real- scope for planetary, lunar and some DSO's. I guess you could call me a "newbe" when it comes to MAK's/SCT's. Eventually I'd also like to get a
T-Adapter for my Nikon Coolpix 5000.

Any help would be appreciated.

Mike :help:

#2 wilash

wilash

    Fairy Godmother

  • *****
  • Posts: 5746
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2003

Posted 06 June 2004 - 10:00 PM

The 5" Mak and Sky View mount are good products. You are right that you don't want to spend all your money on the telescope and have nothing left for accessories. For what you want the scope for, the Orion Package is good. I would also add a dew shield and well as a good star atlas.

But I have one question, since you are buying a 2X barlow why the 30mm and 15mm eyepieces? The 30mm and 2X barlow will have the same magnification as the 15mm EP. I would suggest a 9mm orthoscopic instead of the 15mm Ultrascopic.

#3 Tim2723

Tim2723

    The Moon Guy

  • *****
  • Posts: 5765
  • Joined: 19 Feb 2004

Posted 06 June 2004 - 10:00 PM

I don't own the 127 MAK, but I've used one briefly. It's a nice scope, especially for planetary, and gets really good marks around here.

I do have the SVP mount with dual drives, and it's very good for its price range. It can hold a lot more scope than the MAK, which is good, but it could also handle a larger Newtonian or SCT for the future if you're leaning that way.

Double check you EP selections. A 30mm with a 2x barlow is the same as a 15mm, so you wouldn't want to get that combination, you'd only get three magnifications instead of four.

#4 StarWars

StarWars

    Mr. Postmaster Man

  • *****
  • Posts: 31755
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2003

Posted 06 June 2004 - 10:12 PM



Konus MotorMax 130 - 5.1" Maksutov Cassegrain Telescope

http://www.digitecop...s_maks_1797.htm

#5 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
  • topic starter

Posted 06 June 2004 - 10:36 PM

But I have one question, since you are buying a 2X barlow why the 30mm and 15mm eyepieces? The 30mm and 2X barlow will have the same magnification as the 15mm EP. I would suggest a 9mm orthoscopic instead of the 15mm Ultrascopic.

Ok. I can see that now that you pointed it out to me. :crazy: Like I said, I'm a newbe. Thank you. :grin:

Michael

#6 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
  • topic starter

Posted 06 June 2004 - 10:49 PM

I don't own the 127 MAK, but I've used one briefly. It's a nice scope, especially for planetary, and gets really good marks around here.

I'm usually a "leap before I look" guy, but I have been reading non-stop for weeks about the Orion and I just wanted to hear a "go get 'em"!

Double check you EP selections. A 30mm with a 2x barlow is the same as a 15mm, so you wouldn't want to get that combination, you'd only get three magnifications instead of four.

Wilash got to me before you :o, I'm learning as I go! Just a question though; the 9mm would give me roughly 171X, If I used the barlow with it aren't I going over the magnification limit of this scope? (F/L 1540mm)

BTW - I noticed that you are in North Jersey, I'm in the southern portion of the state. Where do you hide from the city lights? :question:

#7 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
  • topic starter

Posted 06 June 2004 - 10:55 PM

Konus MotorMax 130 - 5.1" Maksutov Cassegrain Telescope

Thanks, but I've read more than a few posts about problems with quality & repair issues. They may have better optics but being a newbe, I need that customer support! :grin:

Michael

#8 Tom L

Tom L

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 31061
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2004

Posted 06 June 2004 - 10:56 PM

MJC, I personally think it is a good idea to have an eyepiece, unbarlowed, for the majority of your high mag viewing. 171x is going to be the majority of your viewing because the skies will limit you beyond that. A UO 9mm is an excellent EP for planetary, lunar, globular and planetary nebula viewing at this magnification.

Another option would be to get a quality plossl in the 20mm range. I have the TV plossl and find it on astromart for $60-70 dollars on a consistent basis. This combined with the barlow would also fit that magnification.

#9 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
  • topic starter

Posted 06 June 2004 - 11:01 PM

171x is going to be the majority of your viewing because the skies will limit you beyond that. A UO 9mm is an excellent EP for planetary, lunar, globular and planetary nebula viewing at this magnification.

Thanks Tom, I have a feeling that I'm gonna be learning -alot- from you guys! :D

Michael

#10 wilash

wilash

    Fairy Godmother

  • *****
  • Posts: 5746
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2003

Posted 06 June 2004 - 11:26 PM

Yup, Tom is smarter than me (anytime you what to jump in here Tom and argue this point, you are welcome). A 20mm will be a better match for your scope (my 5" Mak is f/10 and so I can barlow my 9mm EP more often).

Are you buying this new? The scope comes with a 25mm and 10mm plossl EPs. With the 2X barlow, that would be a good start. I would use those eyepieces for a while and then look for others to complement them. Orion's Plossls are decent and should give good views. This will also let you shake down the system and see what other accessories would be needed - star charts, stool, anti-vibration pads, red light, bags, binoculars, books, filters, etc.

#11 Tom L

Tom L

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 31061
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2004

Posted 06 June 2004 - 11:45 PM

Will, surely you gest! I won't even go there. All I can say is that I've learned a heck of a lot from the guys here too.

#12 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 40384
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003

Posted 07 June 2004 - 10:29 AM

Tom, I own this exact scope, and it has been wonderful. It's been in the field with me many, many times. In good seeing, the images of the planets have been breathtaking. My eyepiece collection for this scope consists of:
24.5mm Meade Super Wide Angle (widest field in 1-1/4")
18mm Meade Super Wide Angle
2X Shorty + Barlow from Orion
6.7mm and 4.7mm Meade Ultra-Wide Angle eyepieces (borrowed from my other scopes)--don't use these much, and seeing is rarely good enough to use more than the 18mm barlowed (=9mm). But I have seen seeing good enough to Barlow the 6.7 (=3.35mm = 460X) on Saturn at the Zenith, and the image was a wonder to behold: creams, browns, and grey-greens on the ball, pure white and grayish for the A and B rings, and a yellowish-orange Crepe ring. Also, 5 visible moons near the rings. But such a night is not even an annual event--I see one like that about every 3 to 5 years.
One curmudgeonly opinion, here: Stay away from Orthoscopic eyepieces. Under 10mm, the eye relief is uncomfortable. Under AND over 10mm, the AFOV is so narrow, it's like looking at the sky through a drinking straw. These eyepieces should have died in the last century. It's as if people ONLY look at the planets. Some of the improvement in contrast that people report is due to the nearly complete absence of peripheral light in the field of view BECAUSE THERE IS NO PERIPHERAL FIELD OF VIEW! It's the eyepiece equivalent of cupping your hands around your eyepiece to shield from peripheral light.
With modern multi-coatings, the light transmission difference between an Orthoscopic and a Panoptic is barely measurable with a machine, and unlikely to be noticeable with the eye (where a 10% difference just registers). The UltraScopic eyepieces from Orion are fine eyepieces, and have well-corrected fields and would make a fine addition to the scope. Ditto the Highlight Plossls. Well, enough of that rant.
You'll find that the original diagonal is so-so. The optics are worthy of an upgrade to a Wiliam Optics, Lumicon, Vixen, or Televue mirror diagonal.
You'll enjoy the scope. Take it to some dark sites. You'll be rewarded with wonderful star images and excellent resolution.
Don

#13 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
  • topic starter

Posted 07 June 2004 - 12:14 PM

Mike,

I own the Orion 127 SVP and it is an excellent scope. Most of my observation is from my parking lot which has very bad light pollution. But I can still see impressive detail on the planets. As somebody else mentioned here, I would wait for some time before buying eyepieces. The two that come with the scope are quite handy for most applications - atleast for me. Only after using them for some time would you know what you want.
One word of caution - the eyepieces that came with my scope were not parfocal. It is not a big problem for me, but I know some people who hate focusing everytime they change eyepieces - especially if they are from the same manufacturer. :mad:

#14 Victor Kennedy

Victor Kennedy

    Pooh-Bear

  • *****
  • Posts: 12359
  • Joined: 22 May 2003

Posted 07 June 2004 - 01:56 PM

One curmudgeonly opinion, here: Stay away from Orthoscopic eyepieces. Under 10mm, the eye relief is uncomfortable. Under AND over 10mm, the AFOV is so narrow, it's like looking at the sky through a drinking straw. These eyepieces should have died in the last century. It's as if people ONLY look at the planets. Don


Chacun a son gout, mate. I've owned Meade Plossls and Meade Superwides, and I currently have a bucketful of Pentaxes, Axioms, and Tak orthos, and the orthos are my favourites (I seldom use the ones under 9 mm though).

#15 Tom L

Tom L

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 31061
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2004

Posted 07 June 2004 - 02:01 PM

Just goes to show you that each observer is different and has different parameters for what constitutes a good to excellent eyepiece.

#16 Victor Kennedy

Victor Kennedy

    Pooh-Bear

  • *****
  • Posts: 12359
  • Joined: 22 May 2003

Posted 07 June 2004 - 02:07 PM

I have to admit that I use the orthos more since I put the RA and dec drives on my mount. If I were a dob driver I'd probably prefer the widefields.

#17 Tom L

Tom L

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 31061
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2004

Posted 07 June 2004 - 02:15 PM

Well, I am a dob driver and I've gotten pretty darned good at keeping my target in the eyepiece. I would like to try a Nagler though! :D


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics