Orion Optiluxe 32mm 58° for £140
Meade 4000 26mm 70° for £100
Both in the end produce similar actual fields of view (1.55° for Orion vs 1.52° for Meade on our Ten Inch). The Meade does it with a wider apparent field of view, while the Orion does it with a longer focal length.
I'm leaning towards the Meade because I prefer the FOV over focal length approach. Long focal lengths mean larger exit pupils and the 32mm is close to limiting so the Meade will be less likely to waste light. Also, the larger FOV will look cooler. Then there's the fact that the Meade is £40 cheaper.
However, is there a tradoff with the larger FOV? Does it ruin the image quality? Is my FOV over focal length a wise approach or is the Orion's focal length over FOV the way to get better images? Presumably, the Orion gives better quality images hence why it is more expensive, but is the better quality worth an extra £40?