Zeta Reticulan

I think they are all made in one huge automated underground factory by robots. I'm not sure where the robots are made. Probably in a huge automated underground factory in China.

Yeah, a big Dob' is not really suitable for a baby lol. I'd love to know who actually makes the SvBony/Orion zoom. I did track SvBony to a residential area in the Yantian District at one stage. This area is also a 'Special Economic Zone' I believe. Who knows?

It's long been rumoured that the Meade 5000 HD60 and Celestron X-Cel LX eyepiece ranges have identical optics made in the same factory. It's a distinct possibility. These two 12mm eyepieces are so similar I can actually use them in a binoviewer.

I think the Meade was the most expensive. The 'Astromania' was almost half the price of the other two. Sometimes you pay for the name. Astronomy has a lot of ridiculous mythology. Something distributors can often take advantage of with disingenuous advertising. One of these myths is of the 'incredible' Meade zoom. Which supposedly was super brilliant with outstanding contrast and bionic abilities with super brilliance or something. Like an idiot I fell for this ridiculousness. Apparently Vixen originally made these super brilliant Meade zooms. Meade actually manufacture very little. So I acquired a Vixen zoom with this alleged super brilliance. They were made in Japan. Where all optics are super brilliant. Supposedly. I returned three in a row due to visible debris in the field of view. They weren't super brilliant either IMO. I don't own a Vixen zoom now. I wasn't that impressed to be honest and I preferred my other zooms. The myth of the superiority of Japanese optics is another that quite frankly mystifies me. Tele Vue eyepieces are actually manufactured in two factories. BASO in the ROC and a factory in Japan (I suspect Ohi Optical). BASO is the oldest optical company in Taiwan, originally an offshoot of a German company I believe. I have no idea where in Japan Tele Vue have their eyepieces made. The only TV eyepieces I've had to return due to being faulty were Japanese made. There's no difference in quality between Japanese made TV eyepieces and Taiwanese made TV eyepieces. Except in mythology. I still recommend the SvBony aspherics, although the Meade versions look quite reasonably priced (avoid the 4mm). There are a plethora of distributors and brand names. Most actual original equipment manufacturers are based in the PRC and elsewhere in Asia. Everything else is marketing, suggestion, mythology and advertising. Caveat emptor!

They did make a great pair.

They are identical and almost certainly made in the same Chinese factory. They are probably sold under other brand names. These Meade, Celestron and Astromania zooms are basically identical. The Meade has an aluminium barrel as opposed to the chromed brass of the other two. I can use two of them in a binoviewer.

I think I understand what you mean now. Small 4mm eyepieces are not easy to use without some practice. I'd still consider the 23mm SvBony aspheric as it has a 62 degree FOV. The 7-21mm SvBony zoom is lightweight and has good visual acuity. It really is worth the money.

I think it can only use 1.25" accessories.

We may have a difference of opinion on what widefield views are lol.

An eyepiece with a bigger AFOV would probably be better in many respects. It's just that an f/10, 90mm refractor isn't going to have a widefield view like a fast short tube refractor. A 15mm GSO SuperView would give you 61x and about 1 arc degree, 30 arc minutes of field. That's equivalent to around the diameter of three Full Moons. I don't know if your scope has a 2" visual back or not. To get very low power wide angle views you may need to use heavier 2" eyepieces.

I'm a bit sceptical about the 'ghost in the machine'. I just can't see software as consciousness. Although I've been unconscious for much of my life. "I drink therefore I am" as Des Carts (or someone) purportedly stated. *burp*

No one did. It wasn't 600 quid. My mistake. I can't remember what I paid for either of the MoonLites now, 360 quid each I think. I've had two strokes, my brain isn't what it was. I was probably thinking of both units. It's great shame I had to return one of them due to it being faulty. It never sat correctly in the OTA anyway. There were other problems with it. I think it must have been dropped in transit or something. They're not making them at the moment either apparently. They probably will be £600 by the time I get around to buying another.

Well, some people thought I was crazy putting a 600 quid MoonLite on a 170 quid OTA. But it's probably the best rich field scope I own. Not only that, but it fits into this bag! lol

The focuser should bolt directly into the 80ED DS Pro. I originally used it in my ST102. There are three screws holding it into the OTA, just like the GSO equivalent. Some of the 'OVL' Long Perng focusers didn't have holes for the finder shoe. I got my 'Sky-Watcher' from FLO. I'd check there are holes though.

DaveL59's right about the SvBony zooms. They are very good for the money.

About f/10 then, oddly the same focal ratio as most SCT's. It should be a good scope for lunar/planetary observing, and splitting doubles. It's not got a very wide field though. A 10mm eyepiece will give 91x. Add a 2x Barlow and you have 182x. A decent achromatic refractor should often be able to achieve that. Get a Barlow with a removable element and you can thread that element directly into the barrel of the 10mm eyepiece. Effectively making it a 6.25mm one. This will now give you a magnification of 145.6x. Although 182x and 146x will be near the highest for that scope. The 23mm SvBony will give a reasonable 39.5x with your scope. Again, with the Barlow you can make it into an 11.5mm eyepiece and a 14.3mm eyepiece. Getting very low magnifications on an f/10 scope is the tricky bit. I've threaded a focal reducer into the 23mm SvBony in the past to turn it into a 46mm eyepiece. Obviously it changes some of its visual characteristics and also shortens the eye relief. But you would get 19.7x as a low magnification, often useful for some open clusters. I made this 25mm TV Plossl into a 50mm with the reducer.

Sorry, I thought it was a catadioptric. Yes, a Barlow would probably help. What's the focal length of your scope?

Oh right. Yes, they are good.

Not sure whether this is the same OTA as the Synta 90mm Maksutov. A 13 or 14mm Plossl should give around a 1mm exit pupil. A 14mm Bresser 'Plossl' gives me 89x in my 90mm Maksutov. My Orion StarMax came bundled with 10mm and 25mm Plossls. It might be worth looking at the 10mm and 23mm SvBony aspherics. These are very good eyepieces, despite their inexpensive price. They have 60 degree fields of view so may be easier to view through for you. I am not convinced a Barlow will be of great benefit with a catadioptric scope as they are usually f/10 and slower. Oh yeah, avoid the 4mm aspheric, it exhibits a fair bit of chromatic aberration. The other two are fine though.

Well ... I have worked in sales ... lol.

This package has to be good value if you ask me. A 4" refractor can be a powerful instrument. Admittedly larger than an 80mm, but the ST102 is quite compact. With a yellow anti-cyan filter I can easily get 125x-150x on the Moon with mine. Mine doesn't get out as much as it used to (plus it has an aftermarket focuser). It's basically a bigger ST80.

You must have some expensive stamps lol.

I thought most zooms fundamentally had a moving Barlow element. One problem with zooms is the limited field of view at low magnification. I recommend the Orion/SvBony 7-21mm. For the money it really rocks.

+1 for the ST80. These are sold under different brand names but are actually made by a Taiwanese based company on the Chinese mainland. Mine (above) now sports an afermarket rotating focuser enabling the use of 2" accessories. These achromatic doublets are very versatile and don't display a huge amount of chromatic aberration. As refracting scopes have no central obstruction they will usually display better contrast than a reflecting telescope. Patrick Moore once stated that in many respects a 4" refractor was more or less equal to a 6" reflector. This ratio still hold true in many ways where an 80mmm refractor can be compared with a 127mm reflector. Obviously a larger aperture will resolve more detail. But many people, including myself, tend to prefer the better contrast of a smaller refractor over a larger reflector. Perhaps not in all cases. Sometimes I find I prefer my 127mm Maksutov over my 80mm ED doublet for some planetary observing. Maksutov scopes are not good all-rounders though in my experience. Astronomy, alas, is not a cheap hobby. Although this doesn't mean you can't enjoy the night sky if you don't spend tens of thousands of pounds on equipment. The ST80 has been a good starter for many amateur astronomers. It has a versatility, it is portable and can be taken outside and used straight away. A small refractor will have no real cool down period to attain the thermal equilibrium to obtain a stable image. Larger reflectors can take hours to cool outside. My 127mm Maksutov can take an hour. My 235mm SCT usually well over two hours. The ST80 can be used as a low power scope to sweep starfields and observe open clusters. It has a wide field of view. Yet you can get magnifications well over a 100x and see the rings of Saturn. The main problem with a short tube refractor is finding a suitable mount. A decent and portable mount is as important as the scope. I would recommend something like the SW AZ5. In this way you can get the scope out under the stars rapidly taking advantage of the weather and conditions. I have telescopes with apertures ranging between 60mm and 235mm. I've had nearly 90 observing sessions this year. The vast majority of those sessions have been with just two scopes: the 72mm Evostar (above) and the 60mm Altair (below). Bigger isn't always necessarily better.