Hi Joe,
As you have discovered with the Meade QX there are any number of inaccurate reviews out there. Anyone is free to post their opinion or a review on the internet, the difficult part is sorting out the wheat from the chaff. This is the reason "Cloudy Nights broke up their equipment reviews into 2 sections, "Cloudy Nights Reports" and "User Reviews". The user reviews can be submitted by anyone and in a lot of cases are inaccurate, I take zero notice of them in most cases. The Cloudy Nights Reports are different, they are submitted by a small group of very experienced observers who have conducted a large number of equipment reviews previously for astronomy magazines, books or equipment websites. The link to the review on the UO 32mm MK-80 that Dave gave you is a Cloudy Nights Report, conducted by Tom Trussock, I know Tom and respect his judgement. I have read that review and pretty much agree with it.
Whilst I haven't used the UO 32mm MK-80, I have used the 25mm and 40mm MK-70's which are very similar. They are made in Japan and the machining, fit, finish and mechanical quality is 1st rate as you would expect with a Japanese made product. Optically they do a very good job in a slow scope like your F10 SCT. The slower the scope the better they work.
Many people will tell you that in a slow F10 scope they will perform just as well as a Nagler, Panoptic or Pentax XW, this is simply not true. They are not quite as good regardless of the scopes F-Ratio. The performance difference in a slow scope is minimal, in faster scopes the performance differential is major. In your F10 SCT I am sure that you would be happy with performance of the UO 32mm MK-80.
Another good option to consider at the mid price level is the the 2" 30mm Kokasai Kohki Widescan III, which costs $399.
http://www.sirius-optics.com.au/widescan.htm
Like the UO MK80 this eyepiece will be pretty useless if you subsequently buy another telescope with a fast F-Ratio, but it will work very well in your F10 SCT, again the slower the scope the better they work. This eyepiece may be a better choice than the UO MK-80. Here is a link to a "Cloudy Nights Report" again by Tom Trussock. I know Tom well and can email him and ask "which he liked the best between the Widescan III and MK-80" if you like ?
http://www.cloudynights.com/documents/widescans.pdf
CS-John B