Dif between Orion and Antares 120mm Refractors?

Hi All,

Further to a recent thread, I too am starting to wonder if I should pick up a refractor in time for Mars. I don't have APO bucks, but don't want a kaleidoscope (of color) either. I have an xt8 as it is, but was wondering if i could do better on planets with an achromat without busting the bank.

I see that Orion's AstroView™ 120mm is now only $439, while Antares is at least double that. Both appear to be mounted on what is that? a cg5 or eq4 or gp mount (btw, are all these just 3 names for the same thing? i've never quite figured that out).

Aparently Synta makes the glass for orion, whereas vixen makes the glass for antares.

How are either on false color? and is 8.3 too fast to be a planet killer?

Thank you.
TomL

If you haven't already seen it, here's a review of the Antares. It sounds like the Vixen optics are superior to the Syntas.

http://members.tripod.com/irwincur/antares_812g_120mm_refractor.htm

Yeah, I've seen that one (it really doesn't say much), but I was hoping for someone here to pipe up about it instead

I can't comment on the Antares, but I do own the Astroview 120 ST from Orion.

I wouldn't say its' great for planetary viewing though it does handle some detail on Jupiter and Saturn. You can read my review on Cloudy Nights...

http://www.cloudynights.com/reviews3/Astroview120.htm

I have since built a new tripod for it and added a 2" diagonal. For it's intended purpose (wide field) it does remarkably well on planets and the moon.

I would think that it's longer focal length cousin (the f/8.3 model) would do even better. I wouldn't think that either are what one would describe as "planet killers" though.

A model something along the line of Meade's or Celestron's achromats in the longer focal lengths would do much better (for the price). But regardless of which refractor you go with, if it's a long focal length one, be sure to replace the stock tripod (why they still sell those cheap, flimsy, sorry-excuse aluminum tripods with these scopes, I will never understand).

If you keep the stock tripod, be prepared for alot of kneeling and images that bounce all over the place, even at lower mags.

Thanks for all the replies so far and so quickly. So Jim says the Antares is supposedly better on false color, but Mark says that even so, even at f8.3, you wouldn't go around calling it a planet killer. I just thought it fit the bill. I have an all-purpose 8" f6 dob, but want to have something a little more suited to the task for Mars this spring. Or Jup/Sat right now.

The Antares price is certainly attractive as are it's reviews, I just don't know if it is going to be any improvement over my f6 8" dob (XT8) for planets.

If not, then I will save my pennies for a real 'planet killer' .... if such a think can be had for $1000 or less.


p.s. terminological interlude...is f8.3 considered "wide field" or "long focus/planetary"? I think the concept of "wide field" is lost on me. Of course I don't live in a place where I can see the milky way, so its object-to-object hopping for me.