Jump to content


Photo

LX90 vs LX200

  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 MattS

MattS

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 54
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2013

Posted 23 March 2013 - 10:47 AM

Dear All

I imagine this type of post has been discussed before, therefore could I request only those that have direct experience of both scopes (perhaps having upgraded from the LX90) reply?

In brief, is the £700 difference in the 8" ACF variants of these scopes really worth it? (I'm aware of the weight difference between each and that the LX200 has a primary mirror lock - the latter shouldn't bother me as AP is not a priority).

I am interested in replacing my ETX90 with a scope that is a quantum leap forwards, specifically in terms of highly accurate tracking and superb GOTO performance. Is the LX200 really far superior, or would I be better off saving my cash for EPs etc?

Your advice, as always, is gratefully appreciated!

MS

#2 neotesla

neotesla

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1123
  • Joined: 18 Nov 2010
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 23 March 2013 - 01:47 PM

The differences are in the fork mount, the LX200 is significantly beefier. The LX90 is still a good scope, I have one and it is pretty robust. If you were thinking of getting anything larger, go for the LX200 as the heavy duty fork makes for a steadier mount.

However, being lighter gives the LX90 an edge, as you will find it so much easier to setup.

I find the GOTO capability of the LX90 and LX200 I have are pretty much the same, aligned correctly they both are very good. There will be a huge change in what you see between the ETX90 you have and an 8" OTA, so for your visual needs go for the LX90 and get some good accessories as well.

#3 rutherfordt

rutherfordt

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 402
  • Joined: 07 May 2006
  • Loc: Northeast Tennessee USA

Posted 24 March 2013 - 09:16 AM

I'll second the LX90 vote. Optically, there is no difference between the two-- mechanically, the LX200 is much heavier and more robust-- it is a lot more effort to carry it out into the yard every night (if you have a permanent pier then that's another story).

Tom

#4 sgorton99

sgorton99

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3502
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2008
  • Loc: Wisconsin, Madison

Posted 24 March 2013 - 11:50 AM

Funny, but I went from an ETX90 to an 8" LX90 EMC. Far superior scope that LX90. Found an older EMC model used for a good price about 4 years ago. Still love it today, and tracking is dead on when I take the time to align it carefully.

Steve

#5 MattS

MattS

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 54
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2013

Posted 24 March 2013 - 11:50 AM

Tom

Thanks for your reply. As appears to be the case in the first response, have you noticed any significant (i.e £700!) difference between the GOTO and tracking performance of the LX90 against the LX200?

Cheers, MS

#6 MattS

MattS

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 54
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2013

Posted 24 March 2013 - 12:11 PM

Steve

Thanks for your post!

I would be grateful to learn more of your experiences of each scope. Despite my best efforts my GOTO/tracking performance of the ETX90 are often beset with problems associated with rubber banding and gear slop. I am very precise with my drive training, (I have used precision survey equipment at work) but the mechanical limitations of this scope are apparent.

Consequently, my main concern surrounding the purchase of the LX90 is whether I will encounter similar problems. Would the LX200 offer a more precise/reliable platform for GOTOs etc?

(As an aside, I have looked at the LS as an alternative purchase - because its gear train is metal and that it optically aligns itself - but don't let this sway the nature of this thread!)

Looking forward to hearing from you (and anyone else with experiences of these scopes).

MS

#7 sgorton99

sgorton99

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3502
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2008
  • Loc: Wisconsin, Madison

Posted 24 March 2013 - 12:25 PM

My ETX was embarrassingly noisy in the backyard. DSOs were impossible, mostly used it for Lunar and planets. Tracking was so-so, just more of a point and shoot thing. But, friends who came and looked at the moon or Saturn were still amazed, as they had never looked through a "real" telescope before.

I bought the LX90 used about an hour drive from here on a CL deal. Much nicer build, the EMCs were also still being built here in the US. Tracking is more precise, and the go-to is accurate. I would agree with prior comments that if you want a 10" or larger I would go with the LX200 to get the beefier mounting. As for now, I am happy with mine. If I ever get really ambitious, I may send it to Dr. Clay for supercharging.

#8 Matthew Ota

Matthew Ota

    Hmmm

  • -----
  • Posts: 2151
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2005
  • Loc: Los Angeles, California

Posted 24 March 2013 - 04:24 PM

If you are doing just visual, the LX90 is fine. If you want to do astroimaging, the LX200 features Periodic Error Correction (PEC) which makes autoiguiding easier.

#9 orion61

orion61

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4823
  • Joined: 20 Oct 2007
  • Loc: Birthplace James T Kirk

Posted 30 March 2013 - 10:06 AM

I have seen some pointing/electrical issues with a couple LX90's
the data base is also better in the LX200
Id go LX200 all the way.

#10 thesubwaypusher

thesubwaypusher

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 970
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2004
  • Loc: New York City

Posted 21 April 2013 - 08:58 PM

Dear All

I imagine this type of post has been discussed before,


A little bit. :smirk:






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics