Meade stock within the UK

[osbourne one-nil]

So I spend weeks and weeks deciding what to do, and decide that, on balance, the Meade LX200 8" system offers the best value for money as far as I'm concerned (proven electronics, great optics, stable, simplicity of a fork mount with the potential to use a wedge for photography) compared to an LX90 or any Celestron offering. But then, can I find anywhere that has one in stock? Looking at the general stock levels within the UK for anything Meade suggests their scopes are really pretty hard to get hold of. Is this a post-Stargazers Live effect still manifesting itself?

Perhaps the CPC 800 is looking good after all, and will save me a lot of money in the process!

[rowan46]

I assume you have tried telescope House as they are showing as in stock?

[ronin]

Suspect the "problem" is that the importer is a retailer, sounds odd, but their primary business is selling scopes etc to the public. So importing an adaquate stock level can take second place. Skywatcher and Celestron have importers that are primarily importers not retailers.

There are "stockists/importers" of other manufacturers equipment and I find that their stock level can be zero, however as we have a recognised importer you cannot purchase from the US.

Have you tried Telescope Service?

Not sure if they do Meade equipment, probably do.

[osbourne one-nil]

Oh! I thought they were Meade's equivalent of David Hinds and didn't actually sell to the public (although I could be wrong about David Hinds too). I shall head over there now.

[Davey-T]

Yes Telescope House showing in stock but don't mention imaging with it on a wedge as Olly will get apoplectic.

Dave

[osbourne one-nil]

I'll get an EQ1 and some motors for the imaging then - that'll work!

[boris sputnik]

Mead had a lot of problems with the quality of their service for a while now. The are in a very uncomfortable position financially...Think about it !

[ollypenrice]

Think about it indeed. Also, since few people (very few) find the LX200/wedge satisfactory for deep sky imaging there are lots of LX200s for sale at attractive prices as people move to more workable DS imaging systems. Second hand LX200s really do go for a song. If you are dead set on one then why not try that? And if DS imaging is on your agenda I wouldn't touch one with a barge pole, quite honestly.

Olly

[osbourne one-nil]

No, the main reason for considering an LX200 was to get us some focal length; in addition to my Televue 85 I also have a very nice 10" Sumerian Optics Dobsonian, but there are so many possibilities/options that I've been changing my mind every five minutes. The prospect of being able to do photography was just a supposed bonus, but as you hint at, a wedge would only be required for DSO stuff, and for that I already have a TV85 which, I guess, could make up for lack of aperture with longer exposures on a decent mount.

[ollypenrice]

No, the main reason for considering an LX200 was to get us some focal length; in addition to my Televue 85 I also have a very nice 10" Sumerian Optics Dobsonian, but there are so many possibilities/options that I've been changing my mind every five minutes. The prospect of being able to do photography was just a supposed bonus, but as you hint at, a wedge would only be required for DSO stuff, and for that I already have a TV85 which, I guess, could make up for lack of aperture with longer exposures on a decent mount.

The TV85 doesn't lack aperture for AP. It's an excellent scope. It isn't the TV85 that would be catching up with long exposures, it's the Meade, even reduced to F6.3. (The flattened/reduced TV85 works at F5.3, significantly faster.) Aperture in DS imaging is a complex issue but with an 85mm scope I think you can take acceptable images. Here are a couple of mine from 85mm.

http://ollypenrice.s... FIN3WEB-X3.jpg

http://ollypenrice.s...OSITE FL-X3.jpg

Personally I wouldn't consider using my LX200 OTA for DS imaging because it wouldn't meet the house standard for its focal length. Your TV85 with flattener would meet most peoples' house standard including mine.

Olly

[ollypenrice]

Ooops, please ignore.

[osbourne one-nil]

They're not bad at all Olly....not bad at all!

[nytecam]

The TV85 doesn't lack aperture for AP. It's an excellent scope. Aperture in DS imaging is a complex issue but with an 85mm scope I think you can take acceptable images. Here are a couple of mine from 85mm.

Personally I wouldn't consider using my LX200 OTA for DS imaging because it wouldn't meet the house standard for its focal length. Your TV85 with flattener would meet most peoples' house standard including mine. Olly

Hi Olly - what's 'house standard' other than "what I use"? Long fl via the LX200 are great for close-ups of DSOs without an ocean of sky around them Google Rick Johnson's DSO work !

[badgerchap]

Hi Olly - what's 'house standard' other than "what I use"? Long fl via the LX200 are great for close-ups of DSOs without an ocean of sky around them Google Rick Johnson's DSO work !

He is on a Paramount ME though - a touch beyond a lot of wallets!

[ollypenrice]

Hi Olly - what's 'house standard' other than "what I use"? Long fl via the LX200 are great for close-ups of DSOs without an ocean of sky around them Google Rick Johnson's DSO work !

Well, the House Standard is also 'what I don't use.' When I had an LX200 I didn't offer 2.5 metre FL imaging. Now that I'm using Yves' ODK/Mesu 200 I do have that kind of FL to play with. I only found an M101 on the net from Rick Johnson. However, if it's on a Paramount it isn't an LX200. (I couldn't find much else. Can you link me?) These long FL SCTs need real mounts and, quite honestly, if LX200s could deliver at the focal length they offer then the forums would be absolutely bursting with galaxy close ups from these affordable scopes. But where are they?? Our own much respected Tim is a fine SCT imager but he has just bought a 10 Micron mount.

I couldn't get mine to work properly. I have many regular guests who found they couldn't either. People just don't use them in any number because the mount is too difficult to get working with the precision required by the focal length. Some people do succeed, yes, but what do most people find? To my mind the dearth of images from the thousands of fork SCTs out there says it all.

I totally agree that if you want galaxies without background sky you need focal length. That's not at issue. What is at issue is whether or not the LX200 mount is serious for the focal length it has to guide. I don't believe it is. If Rick Johnson bought a Paramount then I guess he didn't either.

Olly

M101 from a Mesu Mount 200; http://ollypenrice.s...ore3CROP-X3.jpg