Quote:

---

I'm having no luck getting Scott to repair / replace my LX200R

He originally said he could garauntee that if I paid shipping both ways I would get back a working scope. So I have requested that if I pay for shipping both ways this time ($800) and it comes back still faulty that they will pay the shipping for it to go back next time. I don't think thats unreasonable given the position I would be in if it was still faulty.

As always when I asked an awkward question I get no reply at all. I have pinged him many times with no response.

Last time I ended up calling and he admitted there wasn't anything he could do since the engineering people were far more senior than him. He didn't mail me back because he didn't know how to tell me.

I am completely disillusioned with the all thing and considering selling up and moving onto a different hobby. I haven't had the scope out in over a month now.

Steddyman

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Steddyman,

You're completely right - astronomy can be disillusioning [edited for vendor bashing] . . . .
But it would me make sad if they push You off that wonderful hobby - since it's not astronomy that frutrates You [edited for vendor bashing]
So go and sell Your Meade [edit] and try another high quality product - quality is more important than size!

My astronomical life really began when I got rid of [my] Meade [stuff] - I lost a lot of money, but now I'm happy with the new equipment like never before...

Greets,
Martin.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Steddy, old fellow, things could be better, but they could also be worse. The collimation problem that JerryWise discovered may mean that your LX200R won't reach its peak potential, but the problem is a subtle one and you could still get some decent use out of the scope. You wouldn't lose a dime, for the time being, by using your scope for a while and selling it later (when depreciation would be setting in anyway) and getting something else then. I think the damage to yourself, emotionally and economically, would be worse if you gave up the scope at some sort of fire sale price now and abandoned the hobby. A lot of equipment has some sort of flaw in it.

---

Excellent Mr. Joad.

Side by side testing of one with the manifestation vs the latest scope from Meade shows them to be very close visually.

--------------------
Jerry
LX200ACF 14", Tak FS 152 & TOA 150
AP-1200 & Mach1

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Kim,

I've had very good experiences with RCOS for scopes, SBIG for cameras and Software Bisque for their mount and Software; service was prompt and all upcoming issues were fixed to my full content. For those companies the customer isn't just a number but they really want You to be satisfied because their high reputation stems from that at last!
Admittedly their products are not the cheapest, but on the long run its quality that pays off.
In case of a tight budget I would rather opt for a smaller, high quality refractor on a good EQ mount (Sphinx, for example) than for larger but shaky mirror scope...

Martin.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Oh Kim. That question has brought much..... um, discussion to the forums than most. So to be safe:

Question:

1. (..... tight budget.) Don't know that one.

2. (..... better result...) I can give you a definite maybe on that one. Also a "depends". It's a huge subject that will never be fully decided. Might want to spend some time in the refractor forum. Very helpful bunch there.

---

I just realise that quite a lot of people are asking about this.

By the way, would you tell me a summary about this issue at either here or private message.

--------------------
-Robin

QHY CCD
My Astronomy Blog - http://www.astronomynotes.net
Meade 8" LX90 + LPI + QHY5 + Denk's Power x Switch S2 Diagonal
More equipments @ here

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Kim,
the type of scope depends mainly on Your personal preferences - following is my personal view/experience of things:

- SCT:
Great for casual observing and planetary photography when You need no equatorial setup; those instruments give the most aperture for the money BUT have weak mechanics: Polar setup is very shaky with the vendor's forks and I also find it very annoying when the object to be focused wanders around because of mirror flip in an SC. The RCX has a fixed primary mirror but a quite large secondary mirror which diminishes the contrast on planets, and I wouldn't like that kind of complicate electronics in an optical tube (repair handling???!!!). Moreover, I felt that an SC never snaps into a tack sharp focus like a refractor or a pure mirror scope (newtonian, RC) does - I guess its because of the color errors induced by the Schmidt plate.

- Newtonian:
Had a 10" years ago - fine for deepsky viewing and planetary work (no color errors!) if the secondary isn't too large but very awkward in handling and viewing position.
Needs a much stabler mount than a Cassegrain type of equal weight.

RCOS:
the photo machine: absolutely great for the tube construction - no flexure, no thermal shift, has heaters and ventilators, focuser of secondary has absoulte encoders (makes reproducible focus position) and no image shift when focusing. No color errors, rather flat field for deep sky photographing and reduced optical aberrations compared to SC's (ask the optics experts for details...).
Also great for deepsky observing because of aperture, but of limited use on planetary views because of the quite large secondary.

High quality refractor:
like TMB, Pentax, Takahashi, TeleVue, ...
visually the best contrast on planets because of obstruction free design, also great for widefield/deepsky photographs (browse through the galleries and see what people are doing with that kind of instruments!);
A friend of mine has a 9" TMB and views are simply breathtaking in terms of sharpness and contrast, not to compare with an SC. All the high end models have very goot focusers -> no image shift! I never believed that the old rule of thumb "effective aperture for resolution = mirror diameter minus secondary diameter" holds but now I have seen that it's true! So with a refractor You get sharpness with a much smaller aperture and thus have a lighter instrument thats MUCH easier to handle!
But of course a refractor is a lot more expensive when You want light/aperture...

The second part of a scope is the mount: Never underdimension it!!! It's up to You to decide whether You want to stay mobile or have a fixed pier/observatory;
in case of limited budget or space I would always prefer a smaller refractor together with a German EQ mount over a larger mirror that needs a heavier mount...

Regards,
Martin.

---

Oh Martin, your reply is totally wonderful! After reading it, I have several questions. Why would a secondary mirror affect the contrast of the final image? What does it look alike?

Therefore, a refractor rules in planetary imaging? Is the magnification ratio of a refractor greater than a SCT? (both telescope with the same aperture, the usable magnification of a refractor is higher than a sct?

Seems like we are quite out of topic. I just recalled that a guy here who sold his LX200GPS and buy a refractor with losmandy G7. Is he Bill?

--------------------
-Robin

QHY CCD
My Astronomy Blog - http://www.astronomynotes.net
Meade 8" LX90 + LPI + QHY5 + Denk's Power x Switch S2 Diagonal
More equipments @ here

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Excellent Mr. Joad.

Side by side testing of one with the manifestation vs the latest scope from Meade shows them to be very close visually.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Excellent Mr. Joad.

Side by side testing of one with the manifestation vs the latest scope from Meade shows them to be very close visually.

---

I am VERY surprised to hear you say this Jerry. The difference between the terrestrial test targets when viewing with the old and new scopes showed a massive difference in resolution.

Bluesman, I can't return it to Telescope House even if I pay. It is an area I have already investigated. Telescope House do not perform optical repairs, they are all sent back to Meade in the states.

---

Steddyman, I have an idea here. What about you sell this scope to someone in US who is willing to send back to Meade for repairing.?

--------------------
-Robin

QHY CCD
My Astronomy Blog - http://www.astronomynotes.net
Meade 8" LX90 + LPI + QHY5 + Denk's Power x Switch S2 Diagonal
More equipments @ here

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Excellent Mr. Joad.

Side by side testing of one with the manifestation vs the latest scope from Meade shows them to be very close visually.

---

I am VERY surprised to hear you say this Jerry. The difference between the terrestrial test targets when viewing with the old and new scopes showed a massive difference in resolution.

---

Steve, please note I said visually. Photographically on test targets will have a different result. There are often times when seeing limits resolution to the point excellent optics will present no better image than poor optics. I've had nights here where a 4 inch cheap achromat does as good a job on planets as a Celestron 9.25.

Also, the one I tested last week that had the collimation offset is not one of the original two I tested with photographically. Those were sent back so I can't say how they would compare with the latest one. Remember, I've been through 2 LX200R 12" and 4 LX200R 10". The test have been run on 4 different 10" LX200Rs with varying results. And I'm not a dealer or affiliated with anybody but my wife and dog so I had to do a financial transaction on each one. Often getting a new one shipped by buying it and depending on the dealer to give me credit when the returned one reached him.

Many of us get frustrated with the QC on this high end equipment. As I wrapped up testing on the 10" LX200Rs I decided to go with a Celestron CGE-1400. Decided I would go right to one of the best OTA/Mount combinations out there. First light the mount slowed down and locked up on an RA slew. Three more times it did the same thing. After the LX200R experiences we have had I just lifted the whole works off the pier and sent it back to the dealer for a full refund. This dealer has had to endure the purchase of 6 LX200R OTAs and the return of 5 as well as the purchase and return of a 6,500 Celestron CGE-1400. And he still speaks to me. (I did buy a Takahashi NJP from him last night to use up the Celestron credit and he said "if it doesn't work, return it.... you know the drill by now".

I think the takeaway from these threads is on new equipment you are on your own if you don't buy from a good dealer that is certified to sell the product in your area. You have contributed and helped others in many ways relating your experiences. It doesn't help you any and I certainly feel for you but I take it as a lesson well learned.

--------------------
Jerry
LX200ACF 14", Tak FS 152 & TOA 150
AP-1200 & Mach1

Post Extras: