Re: Orion Skyview Pro 127, Meade 7" Mak, or ETX 125?

  My guess is that the requirements are driven by the planet viewing factor,
and that means magnification and excellent optics.  The 127 and the 7-inch
Mak fit that better than an SCT, although the requirements don't preclude an
SCT.  The portability is another requirement, so the 127mm has go two marks
in its favor.
  -- 
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------
  There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to Man.
  It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity.
  It is the middle ground between light and shadow,
  Between Science and superstition
  And it lies between the pit of Man's fears
  and the Sunlight of his knowledge.
  It is the dimension of imagination.
  It is an area that might be called. . . The Twilight Zone.

  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------


  "David Haworth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  >
  > what gets me about this comparison  is not the scopes as such, but the
  > massive price difference, the etx125 is nearly twice the price of the
  > orion (and I've got one myself, I love it, the goto is very nice to
have)
  > but the meade 7" mak is nearly 3 times the size of the etx. it's not a
  > cheap scope by any means.
  >
  > if your budget can stretch to a meade 7" mak, then why not consider
  > something like the celestron nexstar gps's. bigger, lighter (CF tubes)
got
  > your goto and the extra size should give you more brightness which will
  > support higher magnifications which you want for planetary work.
  >
  > does it *have* to be a mak?
  >
  > dave