Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

descions decisons

iantobach

Recommended Posts

iantobach

iantobach

Posted
Posted

some advice please guys.

looking at spending £1300 approx on a scope for imaging and viewing, have thought about a ldx75 schmidt newtonian 8 inch and meade deep sky imager 2 , I gather 10 inch ldx75 quite hefty to lug about , and deep sky imager has it`s problems. any advice? steve at flo very helpful on other set ups, I think i`d want a decent motorised mount ideally with goto but not the be all, and i`m quite enjoying the search for them.

thanks iantobach

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GordonCopestake

GordonCopestake

Posted
Posted

I wouldn't go with the LXD75 mount, but the SN8 and SN10 are great 'scopes (although you will probably want to upgrade the focuser). If you can get a HEQ5 or EQ6 mount and an SN OTA you have a great match. You can look on the second hand market to save a few pennies and the whole lot should come in under budget.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GordonCopestake

GordonCopestake

Posted
Posted

Yes. They are equivilent to the CG5/EQ5 and not really acurate enough for photography and have a high PE, although some people get great results from them. The main reason I personally wouldn't choose the LXD75 is the noise they make. The HEQ5 is silent by comparison. That being said the CG5 also suffers from being a noisy mount. The CG5 has recently been dropped in proce to just over £400 though which makes it an attractive alternative for a full GOTO mount especially as it has 2" steel legs. The HEQ5 is nearly twice as much though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
StarMan1701

StarMan1701

Posted
Posted

not really acurate enough for photography...

:nono: I disagree totally. They may not be the most accurate mount in the world, but they are more than adequate for photography. As you say, there are plenty of people who have had very good results with the LXD75.

The main reason I personally wouldn't choose the LXD75 is the noise they make.

While it is true that the LXD75 is noisy when slewing at top speed, slowing the mount down a little makes it pretty much as quiet as any other - in any case, is it really necessary to be able to slew to 100 objects an hour?

I think it is important to only give advice based on personal experience. My comments are not based upon 'hearsay' or reviews I've read somewhere - I actually use one of these mounts all the time.

Lee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FLO

FLO

Posted
Posted

Much of what is said on astronomy forums is offered in goodwill and is designed to help. Opinions are born from a mix of direct and indirect experience along with information gained from reviews and reports. It isn't a perfect system but it works more often than not and should not be discouraged.

Needless to say, first-hand experience carries more weight but even that can be flawed (knowing what I know now, I cringe at some of my earlier posts!).

On topic: The LXD75's poor reputation comes from the earlier version and from the original LXD55. A number of improvements have been made: First, Meade listened to their customers and gave the LXD75 two sets of bearings on each axis (the LXD55 had Sleeve and Ring bearings). Then, without announcement, they switched to higher quality bearings and larger 2" stainless-steel tubular tripod legs. It is still noisy (at high slew speeds) and Meade continue to offer it with the much too heavy SN10, otherwise it really is rather good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jakey

jakey

Posted
Posted

I once bought a LXD55 with the 10 inch snt. I will never again buy a meade product.

That is my experience.

The scope was great ( when collimated) but the mount was an absouloute joke. :)

The only thing it would goto was my left foot. When it was apprently tracking, all it did was make a terrible noise.

I cannot trust meade anymore, so the LXD75 is one I would not buy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
StarMan1701

StarMan1701

Posted
Posted

Gordon,

No offence meant.

I suppose it just bugs me when people make generalisations. If someone has actually owned a particular piece of kit, then they are qualified, (in my opinion), to pass judgement on it. Jakey and I have differing views on the LXD75, (maybe he got a bad one, or maybe I got a good one), but because we both own/have owned the mount, we can truthfully pass on our experiences, good and bad.

When generalisations are made about a particular product, be it a telescope mount, a car, or a dishwasher, those comments could influence a potential purchaser to make the wrong decision and end up buying something else which may not suit their needs, (or budget), as well as the 'discouraged' purchase might have done.

The LXD75 is not perfect and yes, there are most definitely better mounts on the market - but they are all a good deal more expensive. I have no doubt that eventually I will 'trade-up' to one of them, but I think the 75 is a good mid-price mount with a lot of good points for the money, and I will try to squeeze every ounce of performance out of it before it gets replaced.

Lee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
iantobach

iantobach

Posted
  • Author
Posted

still deciding on what to buy- wallet getting thinner by the minute- as manage to convince myself it`s worth it!

ok- would it be worth spending the extra cash on an lx90gps, compared to an 8 inch ldx75schmidt newtonian??- would be using 50/50 viewing and imaging- the pro`s for the extra cash appears to be aligning with the gps- but what about the imaging and the difference in focal length, and the slight increase in aperture according to meades blurp on the lx90??

would be intreted in peoples views if they have either scope

thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MartinB

MartinB

Posted
Posted

Well I can give you some views on an alternative, fork mounted 8" SCT in the form of the Celestron Nexstar 8" GPS which was the forerunner to the current CPC model. I struggle to be impartial here because I love this scope so much!! The Celestron is a bit more expensive but from everything I have heard (sorry Lee :)) a lot higher in quality - the LX200 probably being a closer comparison.

There are 2 things to consider here - 1) the 8" OTA as a scope for visual and imaging and 2) the fork mount arrangement.

Starting with the OTA. Generally speaking the optics on an 8" SCT are very good. The field of view will be quite narrow compared to the SN 8" but will provide excellent views of many DSOs. The big plus for the SCT is it's flexibility - it works very well with focal reducers. Celestron do a 0.63 reducer which really transforms the scope into a fairly fast and wider FOV deep sky instrument. For imaging (with small CCD cameras and modded web cams) you can reduce down to F3.3 or even F2 with a Celestron 8" CPC. These transform an SCT into a very effective imaging scope.

The SN design is superb for imaging - a relatively flat field and a fast design. It lacks the flexibility of the SCT in that, as far as I'm aware, it doesn't work well with focal reducers. It also, theoretically at least, shouldn't be able to hold a candle to an 8" SCT for high powered lunar views or for planets.

So for flexibility of being able to work at different focal lengths go for the SCT. It is also a more portable package. For a superb deep sky scope at a focal length around 800mm the SN a good buy.

2) Fork mounts Vs Eq mounts. The compact SCT design lends itself to fork mounts but, of course, they work perfectly well on Eq mounts as well.

Advantages of fork mounts: Very portable - tripod, mount and scope can all be moved around as one unit. Quick to set up - no messing around with counter weights and balancing. Very comfortable to use - scope stays in same orientation and only a small variation in EP height. No problem crossing the meridian unlike EQs which have to be rotated.

Disadvantages of fork mounts: Can only be used for that scope, unlike an Eq. Eq mounts tend to track better. Eq mounts track without field rotation whereas fork mounts need the addition of a wedge to do this.

There are some quite strong opinions about which approach is best (what a surprise!!).

I'm running out of impartiality now Ian! I bought a fork mounted NS8 GPS second hand off Roger Warner 15 months ago and it was the best thing I ever did! I have loved the visual stuff but it got me completely hooked on imaging. As time goes on, if you really get the bug this is a scope which you can go on developing by the addition of a wedge, rails for piggybacking a small refractor for guiding and ultimately, if you develop a serious imaging habit, adaptive optics for high end long focal length stuff. You will need a second mortgage and downgrade your car to an Austin Allegro though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
russ

russ

Posted
Posted

Well I can give my direct views on all the options available here.......owned them all, except the C8 Nexstar :shock:

LXD75 - owned it last year and thoroughly enjoyed it. Used it for long exposure imaging with a Canon 10D. Tried a few scopes on the mount and realistically this mount tops out with a 6" SN for serious imaging. Meade must have been smoking funny stuff when they decided to put the 10" SN on this mount. The 8" SN is okay on the mount for visual and short exposure work. But for me the LXD75 was at it's best when partnered with an ED80.

The drives are noisy at full pelt, noisy enough to start a feud with your neighbours. But there is a quiet mode which drops the max slew speed. Meade's polar alignment routine is worthy of note as it's excellent. The tripod is also pretty decent and the mount as a whole looks good in white.

EQ6 Skyscan Pro - simply the best mount I've owned. Does just about anything and carries just about anything. Ultra quiet with just a really cool turbine sound at full slew. Tripod is superb when fully retracted and still pretty good fully extended. Has ST4 autoguide port, the motors are huge improvement over the LXD75 and it's unguided tracking ability is a massive step up from the LXD75. This mount will do it all with a 10" scope attached.

HEQ5 Skyscan Pro - another great mount....love it to bits. All ditto above on the EQ6 accept it can't carry anywhere near the same load capacity. This is much closer in spec to the EQ5 than the EQ6.

A great setup would be the EQ6 with one of the Meade SN tubes. Or for pure ease the C8 Nexstar. The big thing against the EQ6/SN will be size/weight/setup. Once setup there'll be no moving it. And boy is it bulky to handle. Just a warning.

My personal preference would be an ED100 on a HEQ5 Skyscan. Easy to setup and move around. Visually the planets are knockout. Stars are true pinpoints and star colours are amazing. Doubles in this are so much better than the above scopes. It's also an awesome imaging scope....planets or deepsky. Perfect marriage with the HEQ5 Skyscan. Also zero maintenance required and ultra quick cool down. The above C8 and Meade SN are a complete disaster in this area.

Russ

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
darkstarshado

darkstarshado

Posted
Posted

Hi Guys,

I'd just like to chip-in with this 200mm F4.5 from:

http://www.orionoptics.co.uk/acatalog/Europa_200_f4.5_De-Luxe_model_.html

which is what I'd buy right now, if I was starting again.

Those Orion Europa OTAs have an exellent reputation

(I have an 8" F8 - but only for planetary work) and at

the moment come with a Crayford focuser, as well as

the *excellent* Vixen GP-E mount and wooden tripod.

That's £650 gone. Add a couple of MT1 motors and a

WinCTC GOTO controller (needs a laptop to drive it -

not costed here) and we're up to about £1150.

Add a cheap refractor as guidescope, a webcam,

a few cheap cables and some freeware and you'd

have a *very* nice autoguiding system, just about

bang-on the money! :D

You could also retrofit an Autostar and LXD motors

instead of the MT1s/WinCTC very simply (see Roboscope

Yahoo Group) and at slightly less cost.

Just my tuppence worth! :D)

HTH & Regards,

--

Rob (~52N, ~1W)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.