Focal reducer for Meade SCT

[kev49]

Hi, I want to buy a focal reducer for my Meade LX90 8" to get better DSO viewing. I have looked at various outlets at the cost for Meade F6.3 and F3.3 reducers which are quite expensive. Are there any alternatives out there? And can anyone give advice on which to get (6.3 or 3.3)? Regards, Kevin.

[ollypenrice]

FIrstly the F3.3 is totally useless for anything other than imaging on tiny webcam chips. It dates back to the time of tiny chips and it is high time that it disappeared from the shelves. It has no application in visual astronomy and never did have. Decent dealers will tell you this. It is now easily classifiable as redundant. I gave one away for nothing.

Now, should you buy the F6.3 for visual observing? Not an easy question to answer. If you only have 1.25 eyepieces, 1.25 visual back, and wish to stick with them, then perhaps Yes. If you really want to open up the view of the F10 optical system than maybe not. With a 2 inch visual back and a top quality widefield eyepiece you will go as wide as is possible in the OTA because the final limit is imposed by its baffle tube.

Personally I would not buy the F6.3 for visual. I would buy 2 inch back, 2 inch diagonal and TV Nagler EP, maybe the 26 since the 31 can be tricky with kidney bean effects and blackouts. It is over 10 years since I tried a 31 Nagler in my Meade 10 inch so I'm not a reliable source on this. The 26 Nagler without reducer is very crisp indeed.

Get that F3.3 off the internet.

Olly

[kev49]

Thanks for the advice Olly.

[Davey-T]

As Olly says, I have 10" Meade SCT 2" visual back and diagonal works nicely with 21mm Ethos

Dave

[lensman57]

Hi, I want to buy a focal reducer for my Meade LX90 8" to get better DSO viewing. I have looked at various outlets at the cost for Meade F6.3 and F3.3 reducers which are quite expensive. Are there any alternatives out there? And can anyone give advice on which to get (6.3 or 3.3)? Regards, Kevin.

Forget the 3.3, it barely covers a 1/4" form sensor, the F6.3 is usable up to 1/2" format sensors so long as you could get the spacing right. There are equivalent reducers marketed under Antares brand that are slightly cheaper but not by much as they all might have been produced in the same factory, Celestron too perhaps. If you did manage to get a Meade reducer please ask the supplier for the exact back focus distance as I believe Meade redesigned the reducer sometime in the last 4 years to bring the back focus down to about 45 ~ 50mm so that in an upright position the telescope would clear the mount, 45 mm is very short to make any use of any imaging equipment, as for observation follow Olly's advice.

Good hunting,

A.G

[kev49]

Cheers for the advice guys. Kevin.

[astrokoma]

i used the 6,3 to make the full moon fit at the DSLR's fov (LX200 10").

It worked Ok, and it was good as a flattener also...

I think that the 6,3 is a "must" for SC users.

(then i installed a 2" visual back, and switced my eyepiece collection with TV's as mentioned above).

[Merlin66]

Although the current Meade version of the x0.63 was redesigned to give a very short distance to the focus - may not work well with DSLR's, the Celestron version is still a 240mm focal length and a focus distance of 110mm - which does work well.....