Meade ETX90/125 or not?

[BlueAstra]

I have an observatory set up but I'm looking at getting a smalli-ish portable easy setup system for visual/webcam lunar planetary while the observatory is doing its thing, or for use at dark sites. I've come across the Meade ETX-90 or the new 125 as possible contenders, or maybe their LS brand. I think I would prefer the Maksutov system to avoid collimating issues (or do they still need collimating?). I know SW do something similar, but is it better? I seem to remember some years ago that Meade wasn't the flavour of the month, but maybe that's changed. So, comments welcome on these or other possible contenders, what to look out for, and any experience of similar systems.

[Grotemobile]

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/clearance/clearance_skywatcher-skymax-127-supatrak_69033.html

How about this. £70 off normal price.

[nightfisher]

I would say get the skywatcher skymax 102, this is a stirling scope for Luna imaging, almost never need collimating a right little work horse

[Anne S]

We started with an ETX105. It's a good little scope. We did change the finderscope for a red dot finder as it's so dark here is was difficult to see which star it was pointing at when aligning it. It's very accurate and we once left it pointing at Mars with a 6mm eyepiece for a couple of hours and it was still centred in the eyepiece.

if you are planning on imaging with a webcam for the moon and planets, be warned that the tracking works in small steps, it's not a worm drive. With a webcam you can see the stepping so only short exposures are possible. It does have a camera port with a flip mirror system to aid in centring objects before flipping to the camera. My husband upgraded to a LX90 10 inch eventually. 

Have you considered a Celestron SE 4,5,6 or 8? I moved onto the 8 inch which has the advantage that you can mount a different scope i.e. a solar scope? The 4 inch is a maksutov, the others SCts. All are so light you can pick the lot up and they break down into 2 or 3 pieces depending on whether you remove the tube from the motor section. The larger mount is quite suitable for imaging moon and planets as it's a worm drive so much smoother.

Anne

[ronin]

Meades had the reputation of stripping the gear cogs, not really Meades fault. The manual at the time said "tighten the clutches" so people did them up so tight that nothing could move, and if it did move then tightened it even more. Actually if I recall they all stripped gear cogs Meade, Skywatcher, Celestron the whole lot. One maybe interesting thing is that every club I have been to have all used Meades as the big club scope.

They are easy to set up, Meade got that right and they got the alignment stars right as well. Not many and selected for ease of identifing (I think someone liked big red stars). The electronics seems more robust also. My ETX 70 will run on 12v happily (Weasner site information) and seems to have reverse polarity protection - minor wiring mishap. I have not tried to blow up the ETX 105 with 15v and reversing it just to find out if it is as good.

Slightly noisy little whatsits, if the #497 handset drop the max slew rate. You do not want people in Liverpool complaining of the noise keping them awake. (Or do you?)

You will want a 40mm plossl to aid alignment (the wider the better) does not have to be good just has to be wide. A slightly blurred Arcturus doesn't matter. A small flexi focuser is very useful (if you can find one). A bubble level for the eyepiece location is useful also.

Meades do not really do firmware updates so go by the saying What you see is what you get.

The #494 has no idea of what the Sun is, not sure about the #497 so for solar viewing it means an additional step or two needs doing - effectively the Sun becomes a custom object and you have to give it the RA/Dec for that day.

Had my 70 since 2000, the 105 for the last 6 or 8 years, bought a friend another ETX-70 and work collegue has a ETX-90 that he adores.

[BlueAstra]

Any reason why the Meade 125 is so much more expensive than the SW skymax 127? Also the tracking comment is interesting, does the SW skymax 127 use a worm drive or does it jump like the Meade?

[Anne S]

19 minutes ago, ronin said:

 

The #494 has no idea of what the Sun is, not sure about the #497 so for solar viewing it means an additional step or two needs doing - effectively the Sun becomes a custom object and you have to give it the RA/Dec for that .

We put an asteroid in called 'sun' from the Weasner website on our LX90 which had the #497 handset. Before that I used to do a go to Mercury with a wide eyepiece and then move the scope manually. You do need to be careful with the start position of the mount though as you can't align it in daytime.

[ronin]

I just created a custom object called Sol, I know no imagination, supplied the RA+Dec and screwed a solar filter on the front, one of the AE items.

"Alignment" is simply level it accurately, point it North as accurately as possible (big red arrow thing on the tablet) then do a 2 star align and I simply say Yes at each one. Then I tell it to go to the custom Sol object. So far so good. Sidereal does a fair job of trtacking the sun.

Use it at the International SUNday event that Cambridge hold on June 21(ish).

[Cornelius Varley]

1 hour ago, BlueAstra said:

Any reason why the Meade 125 is so much more expensive than the SW skymax 127? Also the tracking comment is interesting, does the SW skymax 127 use a worm drive or does it jump like the Meade?

The Meade has a more complex mount plus the flip mirror system will probably add to the manufacturing costs... and its a Meade. The Skywatcher AZ goto mount has a simpler construction and uses gearwheels throughout the drive mechanism.

[BlueAstra]

11 minutes ago, Cornelius Varley said:

The Meade has a more complex mount plus the flip mirror system will probably add to the manufacturing costs... and its a Meade. The Skywatcher AZ goto mount has a simpler construction and uses gearwheels throughout the drive mechanism.

OK, just looking at the drive system more closely, Anne S said the Meade drive operates in small discrete steps that could be seen during a webcam run rather than the smooth motion that could be expected from a worm drive. Would a SW Skymax 127 on the AZ goto mount suffer from the same problem? I guess they both use gear wheels rather than a worm drive? The Meade 127 has a wedge incorporated into the mount implying astrophotography use, but a drive that 'steps' would tend to rule that out? I would like to do some webcam work on planets/moon, perhaps getting a couple of minutes worth of video for each 'take'.

[michaelmorris]

The optics on the ETX series are really nice. However, the mounts are a bit pants, with too much plastic and a bit wobbly.

I would seriously consider a Celestron 6"SCT. Collimation is really easy and you end up with more aperture and a smaller focal ratio. I've never owned one, but I've looked through a few and I've never failed to be impressed. 

Celestron sell a version on a small goto alt-az mount called the SE for not that much more than the ETX.

 

[nightfisher]

Still think a Mak 102 or 127 on a supertrack or goto mount is the way forward, keep the scope in a cool place and it will do stunning work

[Highburymark]

A couple of reviews of the new ETX I've read have only rated the optics as average. I was surprised by this as the older models are superb - I've got a 105 and it is incredibly sharp. But 90s and 125s also have a great reputation

[Conrad Edwards]

From what I've read the actual Meade ETX ota are really good quality, but the mounts aren't in the same league. They do generally go for a premium price over the Skymax though. The maks do need a cooldown period, dew shields, and maybe even heater bands too.

[Anne S]

As I said earlier, I had the 8se. A while later I acquired a cg5 go to mount which I planned to use for imaging. That was also much better for viewing as it had a more substantial tripod. As for polar aligning, you only need to get it pointing north. That's quite good enough for viewing. In any case there is a polar alignment routine built in which I uses 2 stars which is particularly good if you can't see Polaris for any reason. That's the good thing about the Celestron mounts, you can take the scope off! The cg5 was brilliant for viewing. So solid with 2 inch tripod and counterweights.

incidentally, I'm pretty sure the 4inch scope has a camera port as it is a Maksutov.

As to the stepping of the Meade drive, it's not really a problem with avi capturing for lunar and planetary. It definitely won't do for anything fainter. The larger SE mount moves smoothly. As to tripod build, I always used mine on those vibration suppression pads, particularly on hard surfaces. It's a bit pron to vibrations.

[BlueAstra]

Just been looking at the Celestron NexStar Evolution mount. This looks very interesting with the built in battery, WiFi and worm drive. I could then put a tube of choice on it (SW Maksutov, Celestron C6, etc), and if you get the Starsense module, auto alignment. Of course, the cost has now rocketed, but that's what happens in this game!

[Anne S]

2 minutes ago, BlueAstra said:

Just been looking at the Celestron NexStar Evolution mount. This looks very interesting with the built in battery, WiFi and worm drive. I could then put a tube of choice on it (SW Maksutov, Celestron C6, etc), and if you get the Starsense module, auto alignment. Of course, the cost has now rocketed, but that's what happens in this game!

The original Nexstar is still listed, quite a lot cheaper. You don't really need the built in battery as you could get a Tracer battery pack. You can get Starsense separately. It's also got a worm drive.

[Chris]

Just now, BlueAstra said:

Just been looking at the Celestron NexStar Evolution mount. This looks very interesting with the built in battery, WiFi and worm drive. I could then put a tube of choice on it (SW Maksutov, Celestron C6, etc), and if you get the Starsense module, auto alignment. Of course, the cost has now rocketed, but that's what happens in this game!

The Evolution is a great mount, I've often pined after one myself. Normally they are only available as a package with a C6, C8, or C9.25 ota, so it's a great time to buy one at the moment as FLO are very kindly splitting OTA's from the mount for the time being..I think while the Celestron spring sale is on?    

[Chris]

Come to think of it, this combo would do you proud for portable planetary and lunar work, and you get a decent OTA added, all within the price of the Evo mount:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/celestron-spring-sale-2017/celestron-nexstar-6se.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/celestron-spring-sale-2017/celestron-lithium-lifepo4-powertank.html

I had the 4SE a while ago and it was a lovely little compact mount. The 6/8SE mount is a bit more beefy but should still be very portable.

[BlueAstra]

I think I have narrowed it down to the following scopes: Meade LS6 (£1599), Celestron Nexstar evolution 6 (£1209), Meade ETX-125 (£699). I started out after a small portable easy to use scope for lunar/planetary with minimal setup time, few components, and the option for some serious webcamming. The LS6 is old but is fully automatic, the ETX-125 is new and cheaper, but both are small and easily transportable, but cannot utilise different scopes. The Evo 6 is also new, a bit bigger and heavier, but would allow different scopes. Any other views?

[RT65CB-SWL]

This site... http://www.weasner.com/etx/menu.html  is no longer updated; but it is still a valuble source of all things ETX related. 

I noticed in the original posting 'BlueAstra'' asked about ETX collimation. Truth is... the ETX 90/105/125 do hold their collimation pretty well. There maybe have been the odd one or two slip through the net, so to speak, but it is doable. I would not advise anyone do it, or at least until you read the link above, (see above). If you do... you do need to remove the plastic rear cell assembly first... failing that I know a man who can collimate them!  

[Chris]

I wonder how the new ETX range differ from the old ETX range. I had the old basic ETX90 back in 2001 so just curious how they might have changed?

[nightfisher]

A skymax 102 on the AZ goto mount would be ideal and a whole lot cheaper

[Skyline]

A long time I use to have a Skymax 127 (Blue) and it was a stonking scope, I bought because I did not like the Meade offerings at that time; very good on planets and the moon, with little obstruction.

A year ago I viewed through a Celestron Omni 127XLT SCT (Grumpy Martians old telescope), I was actually blown away with the XLT coatings especially with Alpine Valley on the moon.

I swore to myself if when I get the chance to buy a Omni127XLT I would buy one.

[Chris]

Just now, Skyline said:

A long time I use to have a Skymax 127 (Blue) and it was a stonking scope, I bought because I did not like the Meade offerings at that time; very good on planets and the moon, with little obstruction.

A year ago I viewed through a Celestron Omni 127XLT SCT (Grumpy Martians old telescope), I was actually blown away with the XLT coatings especially with Alpine Valley on the moon.

I swore to myself if I had when I get the chance to buy a Omni127XLT I would buy one.

Won't this be the case for the C5, C6, C8 etc xlt or is there something different about the OMNI. I had a cracking C6 xlt a while ago, wouldn't mind another!