Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

Equipment Discussions >> Cats & Casses

Pages: << 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | >> (show all)
yweln
member


Reged: 08/05/11

Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: mmalik]
      #5050378 - 02/01/12 06:52 PM

A couple more beta testing images posted on Meade's facebook page:

http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10150534416924891.383857.17063499890&type=1

Looks promising.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gavinm
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 08/26/05

Loc: Auckland New Zealand
Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: yweln]
      #5050885 - 02/02/12 12:22 AM

Devils advocate (I'm planning on buying one) but the stars don't look very round in the M42 pic

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
sphelps
member


Reged: 07/03/10

Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: gavinm]
      #5050934 - 02/02/12 01:27 AM

I plan on buying one also but the star issue may just be that the scopes focus needs to be fine tuned. It could also be due to seeing conditions. I'm no expert so maybe someone else could chime in.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rmollise
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: sphelps]
      #5051053 - 02/02/12 05:49 AM

It's not focus or guiding. Some stars are round, some are not. Could be polar alignment, could be the scope or optical train.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mmalik
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 01/13/12

Loc: USA
Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: rmollise]
      #5051951 - 02/02/12 03:34 PM

Whatever may have contributed, including user expertise, quality of pictures is sub-standard; I had hoped Meade would do due diligence before releasing such pics just as they did with marketing the product. I do feel pictures may have been released prematurely, so I wouldn’t form any opinions on the product quality. By the looks of it, APO pics look little better than ACF so far. If Meade were reading this…I think, Meade needs to address picture quality concerns and may be release newer/better quality pics. Stakes are higher this time around with guided mount of LX800 caliber!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Peter in Reno
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/15/08

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: rmollise]
      #5051981 - 02/02/12 03:47 PM

Quote:

It's not focus or guiding. Some stars are round, some are not. Could be polar alignment, could be the scope or optical train.




Could be a lot of things. I think it's mostly lack of experience or poor quality/bad setup of astrophotography equipment. It takes time and experience to get to know new or different products. It took me a while to "know" my recently purchased A-P Mach1GTO mount.

Astrophotography is never easy.

Peter


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jared
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/11/05

Loc: Piedmont, California, U.S.
Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: Peter in Reno]
      #5052079 - 02/02/12 04:51 PM

Whoever they have doing the testing is not an expert imager. He/she knows the basics but clearly isn't an avid astrophotographer. Even though different length exposures were used, the Trapezium is blown out (not something a more experienced image processor would do). Also, I suspect something went slightly "wrong" in the registration process, which would account for the no-quite-round stars in certain sections of the image. If I were to guess, I would say that polar alignment was off a touch, and that rotation was not accounted for in the stacking. Depending on which star(s) were used in the registration process, you can get exactly this effect.

I agree that it may not be a good thing for Meade to post sub-standard images when promoting the development of a new product. Remember, nobody should ever look at how laws and sausages are made--the same may be true for astrophotographs.

Eight or ten years ago, these would have been considered very good images for amateur photographers, but those days are gone now. The bar is very high. I doubt that the flaws in the images, however, are a sign of any flaws in the equipment. Frankly, without better processing it is hard to evaluate how the mount/scope are performing. I'd love to see a five or ten minute guided raw frame (or a crop) with FWHM numbers! We'll probably have to wait till the scopes/mounts have been in the hands of real customers for a couple of months before we will know for certain.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Peter in Reno
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/15/08

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: Jared]
      #5052105 - 02/02/12 05:10 PM

+1 for what Jared said. I also agree a single RAW sub should be imaged, posted and evaluated. This should be done by an expert with high quality astrophotography equipment. This will show the best this mount can do.

Peter


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Alph
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 11/23/06

Loc: Melmac
Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: Peter in Reno]
      #5052638 - 02/02/12 11:09 PM

Quote:

+1 for what Jared said. I also agree a single RAW sub should be imaged, posted and evaluated. This should be done by an expert with high quality astrophotography equipment. This will show the best this mount can do.

Peter



Huh! A RAW sub? What mount manufacturer has ever done that?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Peter in Reno
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/15/08

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: Alph]
      #5052675 - 02/02/12 11:42 PM

How else would you evaluate the performance of the mount? Processed image is "cheating" because any software can make elongated stars round. Single unprocessed or uncorrected sub tells us the quality of the tracking. You can stretch an unprocessed RAW or FIT image and convert to high resolution viewable image in other formats like BMP or TIF.

Do you have a better suggestion to test the performance of the mount? Maybe run PEMPro to test for PE?

Peter


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rmollise
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: Peter in Reno]
      #5052972 - 02/03/12 07:51 AM

Quote:

How else would you evaluate the performance of the mount? Processed image is "cheating" because any software can make elongated stars round. Single unprocessed or uncorrected sub tells us the quality of the tracking. You can stretch an unprocessed RAW or FIT image and convert to high resolution viewable image in other formats like BMP or TIF.

Do you have a better suggestion to test the performance of the mount? Maybe run PEMPro to test for PE?

Peter




Yeah, let it get into the hands of the first users and tale will be told. If Meade wanted to hide the truth, they could do that _no matter what kind of file_ they sent you. Even if they did release a .raw file, people would say, "Well...but how do we know it was done with the LX800?!"


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
David PavlichAdministrator
Transmographied
*****

Reged: 05/18/05

Loc: Mandeville, LA USA
Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: rmollise]
      #5053028 - 02/03/12 08:45 AM

Quote:

[. Even if they did release a .raw file, people would say, "Well...but how do we know it was done with the LX800?!"




Ain't that the truth?!

David


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
BlueGrass
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 07/25/09

Loc: Wasatch Front, UT
Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: David Pavlich]
      #5053061 - 02/03/12 09:17 AM

I see that images are at least being release or posted. I agree that a raw image might help but just one image would probably just be the pick of the litter. A series would help. As far as posting calibrated, processed images, that would still be useful. The quality of the image doesn't just speak to the camera used but the quality of the optics and mount. Exceptional images would go a long way in selling this product.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mmalik
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 01/13/12

Loc: USA
Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: BlueGrass]
      #5053774 - 02/03/12 04:34 PM

Meade ought to address picture flop either here on this forum or at the source of the trouble (Facebook page); post a statement, retract images, and/or post new images, etc. This is not about selling a product; this is about the product that has already been sold with pre-orders!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Peter in Reno
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/15/08

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: mmalik]
      #5053780 - 02/03/12 04:38 PM

Meade should fire their marketing department.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
yweln
member


Reged: 08/05/11

Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: Peter in Reno]
      #5053864 - 02/03/12 05:32 PM

Quote:

Meade should fire their marketing department.




Yeah, that guy sucks.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
BlueGrass
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 07/25/09

Loc: Wasatch Front, UT
Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: mmalik]
      #5053880 - 02/03/12 05:43 PM

"this is about the product that has already been sold with pre-orders!"

Hmmmmm... someone have figures on how many have ordered one? Hmmmmmm? I know I wouldn't order one if I needed a new mount without knowing performance and reliability data, particularly at this price tag.

Edited by BlueGrass (02/03/12 06:49 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: BlueGrass]
      #5059974 - 02/07/12 09:41 AM

Seriously, if that guy is the most skilled astrophotographer working at Meade, that would explain a lot. And it would indicate caveat emptor would be the best review for this mount, because the manufacturer isn't equipped to judge success.

-Rich


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rmollise
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: Meade's new LX800... new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5060005 - 02/07/12 10:04 AM

All it explains is you shouldn't draw too many conclusions about a mount no one has seen from one picture.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
budman1961
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/25/11

Loc: Springfield, MO
Re: Meade's new LX800... [Re: rmollise]
      #5060289 - 02/07/12 12:48 PM

OK Uncle Rod......you are an SCT expert....Meade sent you one a few months back to beta test, didnt they!

KIDDING!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: << 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | >> (show all)


Extra information
18 registered and 19 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Cotts, Starman27, kkokkolis 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 56153

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics