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 >> Mounts

Pages: << 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | >> (show all)
ur7x
sage


Reged: 01/08/12

Re: Why me? new [Re: blueman]
      #5392621 - 08/29/12 03:32 AM

Quote:

Well, I for one do not understand at all. The mount doesn't work as advertised, it will not handle the scope it shipped with, the fixes and attempts at making it work did not result in it working as advertised and yet somehow they get credit and a sale for selling a mount that is not what it is suppose to be?
Why should anyone pay to be a beta tester and accept a mount that is obviously not a very good mount, even if the price was cheap.
It is rewarding a poor job and encorraging manufacturers to produce faulty equipment with no repercushions.
Oh well, I guess that is just astronomy.
Blueman





Ya I don't get this either... The analogies are endless. It would be like buying a brand new 5.0L Mustang that Ford says goes 0-60 in 4.3 seconds, and yet everyone who drives the car says the best they can do is 6.7 second 0-60 runs. ...You check everything on this brand new car, even take the transmission apart several times... and all you get is... "That's OK, there are aftermarket kits that will make the car as fast as Ford said it should be in the first place"...

This mount, like the LX800, does not operate within the specifications that Meade said it would. We can all see that this is no longer up for debate and is pretty much a documented fact now... Like the LX800, they should all be recalled until Meade can figure out what they can do to fix all of the problems that Nelson (and other new owners) have discovered and posted.

This mount has huge promise... but has not managed to live up to half of them...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Stew57
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 05/03/09

Loc: Silsbee Texas
Re: Why me? new [Re: ur7x]
      #5392795 - 08/29/12 08:18 AM

They could always change the specs to 20lb load capacity and do nothing. does make it not quite so good a value though.

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

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: Why me? new [Re: blueman]
      #5392848 - 08/29/12 09:01 AM

Quote:

Well, I for one do not understand at all. The mount doesn't work as advertised, it will not handle the scope it shipped with,




The way I understand his thread, what he is trying to do is use a 10-inch SNT for imaging. That scope, which is big and heavy, is out of production and doesn't ship with the mount. Otherwise? I'm not at all surprised that this Atlas/CGEM class mount has a hard time with a 10 inch Schmidt Newtonian for imaging. Or anything else. I don't care who makes it, using a scope that's _at_ the recommended payload weight for the mount is asking for trouble for visual and anything else.

When all the smoke clears, I suspect this will be a decent, convenient mount for use with 8-inch SCTs and useable with 10 inch SCTs.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
neilson
professor emeritus


Reged: 08/22/10

Re: Why me? new [Re: rmollise]
      #5392990 - 08/29/12 10:36 AM

Hi Uncle Rod,
This mount came as a package with a 10" SCT. I do also own an SN10" but have not even tried it yet. I would of liked to use it on this mount, but its too big. I was trying to get this mount to handle the 10"sct it came with in polar. It would not work for visual, It bounced around with 1/4" slop in RA from the spring loaded wormblock. After lots of tweaking the wormblock adjustment, it still wouldn't work for visual. I inspected the RA bearings and they were dry so I used super-lube synthetic light grease. After more tweaking it finally works good for visual. AP is a different story. This mounts max is advertised at 40lbs in polar mode. Out of the box mine was maxed at about 23lbs. until I tweaked it all I could and reached 30lbs visual max. As for as the 40lb. max in polar I don't think its possible.
neilson


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


Reged: 01/12/07

Order cancelled new [Re: neilson]
      #5393246 - 08/29/12 01:36 PM

I cancelled my order for LX80 and 8" SCT. I wouldn't have time to troubleshoot all these issues... I guess it is better to pay a bit more to have less troubles or maybe wait for Meade to improve their design.

E.


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

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: Order cancelled new [Re: Enzino]
      #5393292 - 08/29/12 01:57 PM

If there are "all these issues." Clearly a couple of the mounts have had problems, and all of them needed a software update, but it's not at all clear that many owners are having problems.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
blueman
Photon Catcher
*****

Reged: 07/20/07

Loc: California
Re: Order cancelled new [Re: rmollise]
      #5393579 - 08/29/12 04:29 PM

Hi Rod,
Have you read or heard of anyone that has received a new LX-80 or LX-800 that worked well out of the box?
Blueman
Quote:

If there are "all these issues." Clearly a couple of the mounts have had problems, and all of them needed a software update, but it's not at all clear that many owners are having problems.




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

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: Order cancelled new [Re: blueman]
      #5393672 - 08/29/12 05:17 PM

Quote:

Hi Rod,
Have you read or heard of anyone that has received a new LX-80 or LX-800 that worked well out of the box?
Blueman




Yes. But I have only heard the experiences of a few people, as have you. That's the point.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JimMo
I'd Rather Do It Myself


Reged: 01/08/07

Loc: Under the SE Michigan lightdom...
Re: Order cancelled new [Re: rmollise]
      #5393736 - 08/29/12 05:59 PM

Hi Rod and Floyd,

I made a post last week that stated I am very happy with my LX80. People only notice when something bad happens and I only got a couple of responses till it got buried in the forum.

It works great in alt/az, in polar mode I have no slop in the RA, I've only mounted my two refractors and they aren't as heavy as what Neilson was trying to mount. I did my second polar alignment last night and tracked Altair for over an hour in a 70X eyepiece. Haven't done a polar alignment in ten years and I got pretty close to the pole.

BTW- I asked this in the Meade forum but you guys might know this. Can you use the iterative method of polar alignment with Audiostar, like I used to do with my wedge equiped LX200 classic?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
brokenwave
sage


Reged: 05/10/11

Loc: Scottsdale, AZ
Mine works fine new [Re: JimMo]
      #5393826 - 08/29/12 07:24 PM

Other than the rough start I had with my LX80 in early May, I have found it to be a great mount in Alt/AZ mode with approx 25 lbs attached in 2 scope mode.
Holds target for 25-30 minutes with a quick alignment. I plan on using it in EQ mode in a couple of months using a ES102APO. I am fully aware of the 25-30lb limit using it that way. I learned long ago that spec's were approx. in nature for many things. And if you read back about the LX200, CGEM launches they were anything but smooth.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ur7x
sage


Reged: 01/08/12

Re: Order cancelled new [Re: blueman]
      #5394077 - 08/29/12 10:39 PM

Quote:

Hi Rod,
Have you read or heard of anyone that has received a new LX-80 or LX-800 that worked well out of the box?
Blueman





They all seem to work great right up until you stick an ota that weights more than 30 lbs on it in polar mode.

If it is (as it now appears ) just another 25-30lb mount then it is way over priced. If it was a 40lb mount then it would be a great deal... It clearly isn't.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ur7x
sage


Reged: 01/08/12

Re: Order cancelled new [Re: blueman]
      #5394087 - 08/29/12 10:44 PM

Quote:

Hi Rod,
Have you read or heard of anyone that has received a new LX-80 or LX-800 that worked well out of the box?
Blueman
Quote:



They all seem to work great right up until you stick an ota that weights more than 30 lbs on it in polar mode.

If it is (as it now appears ) just another 25-30lb mount then it is way over priced. If it was a 40lb mount then it would be a great deal... It clearly isn't.

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

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Order cancelled new [Re: ur7x]
      #5394096 - 08/29/12 10:47 PM

Quote:

If it is (as it now appears ) just another 25-30lb mount then it is way over priced.




Okay, where can I get an convertible alt-az/gem mount that can carry 25-30 pounds in gem mode and 60+ pounds in dual-OTA alt-az mode for a lower price?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dmdouglass
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/23/07

Loc: Tempe, AZ
Re: Order cancelled new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5394132 - 08/29/12 11:10 PM

I'll go you one further. I bought mine as a portable mount (for travel). I was starting to have some difficulty handleing an LX200 (8") with the motorhome.

So i have an 10-15 lb 6" SC (10 lb OTA + 1 lb guider OTA plus 3-4 lbs of camersa [1 DSI-2Pro for guiding and 1 SBIG for imaging]), which works well in Polar.

I can re-configure for dual OTA (Alt/AZ), and include my 80mm EDAPO. Great for visual use! Hopefully, that will guide someday.

The mount breaks down into 2-3 30-35 lb pieces (Tripod, Mount, counterweights), which i can handle with no problem, and they store well, and travel well in the motorhome.

Did I mention that i really like this mount ??
Where can i duplicate that ??


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Bill Dean
member


Reged: 09/05/05

Loc: Encinitas, CA
Re: Order cancelled new [Re: rmollise]
      #5394205 - 08/30/12 12:19 AM

Mine has worked just fine (polar) for mostly solar with the Coronado 90 including the transit of Venus when it was shipped over to HI and banged around quite a bit by bellhops. It was aligned and tracked just fine for three pretty much full days and two nights. Worked when it got home too. Hasn't seen much use since the Paramount MX "arrived" though.

I did a run with PEMPro a while back and posted on the yahoo group but have since removed myself from that group due to yahoos. Sorry, can't remember the results but I believe it was a workable mount as far as guiding goes but that was using an APM-909 and the 6" SCT. Not so sure about too much more payload than an 8" SCT or perhaps a Newt but my well-loaded 9 1/4" was handled just fine for visual and pointing was actually quite good. Again, all EQ.

I figure it's a keeper but I'll probably donate it, too many mounts at this point and the 75s are far easier to ship for the smaller solar scopes.

Clear skies,
Bill


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

Reged: 01/13/12

Loc: USA
Re: Why me? new [Re: niteman1946]
      #5394358 - 08/30/12 04:43 AM

Quote:

Reading this thread is like watching a train wreck.




40 pages of nothing (Douglass-fest followed by Neilson-fest); it would be safe to presume LX80 is a colossal failure when it comes to GUIDED astrophotography in EQ mode with advertised payload, and for that matter any payload. I was hoping to see EQ guided images by now but no one seems to have stepped up to the plate; while Nielson’s efforts are commendable, whatever he (and others) tested was UNGUIDED (with 20+ overhauls of the mount in between). I know Kevin was going to take some GUIDED images but now it looks like he may have to send his LX80 back. In short, there is nothing to show for when it comes to GUIDED imaging with LX80. I am looking for some serious high res. EQ guided DSO images if there are any takers? If not, then it let's just say we have beaten this horse to death. And please no more UNGUIDED stuff…we have had enough.

Keep in mind, it has been almost two months since this thread started...

And what became of the following by Meade:

- PEC Training update?
- Guiding with Envisage Software update?
- Plug-in ST-4 port for guiding?

Any word on LX800? Last time I heard was that it was being tested in the desert somewhere for imaging.


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

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: Order cancelled new [Re: JimMo]
      #5394510 - 08/30/12 08:57 AM

Quote:



BTW- I asked this in the Meade forum but you guys might know this. Can you use the iterative method of polar alignment with Audiostar, like I used to do with my wedge equiped LX200 classic?




Yes. All you need to be able to do is go-to and sync.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dmdouglass
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/23/07

Loc: Tempe, AZ
Re: Order cancelled new [Re: rmollise]
      #5394671 - 08/30/12 10:38 AM

Dear Mr. Mallik...

I hear your flustration. Apparently, you cannot read.
I do agree that YOU have beaten this horse to death.

I have a simple fix for your flustration, and NEED to see some specific results. OPT would be very happy to sell you an LX80 mount, with your choice of OTA. Then YOU can take all the images you want, and YOU can post YOUR results for all to see.

We are not here to serve YOU. And we will post all the unguided results we wish, especially when they are illustrating points that we are trying to make.

Oh yeah.... I put you on ignore before. Guess I will have to do that again!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Stew57
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 05/03/09

Loc: Silsbee Texas
Re: Order cancelled [Re: dmdouglass]
      #5394761 - 08/30/12 11:24 AM

david

I understand your frustration. You want confirmation that you spent your money in a wise manner. only you cananswer if you are happy with your purchase. As for myself I was looking for a mount that would be portable to take on trips. I don't care about alt/az at all, 0, nada, ziltch. Would be a bonus but not used much at all. I wanted something that would work in EQ with good guiding. Not looking for pristine tight perfectly round stars but what has been shown so far would not be acceptable to me. I keep hearing that the mount is better than the few "problem" mounts we hear of. I too would like to see some photos and PE graphs corraborating the Meade ads. Usually beta testers will have some photos taken with a new mount out somewhere but I can't find them.

If you are happy with your mount I am happy for you. It just would not be what some of us are looking for, so be careful recommending it those of us looking for something different. It certainly does not live up to Meade's hype so we need to put the mount's performance into perspective.

When the LX80 competes with mounts of it's true capabilities it is not the bargain that Meade first expressed. While the price is certainly much better than the Atlas IEQ45 and CGEM class mounts it's true performance so far leaves a lot to be desired.

While it will not stisfy my requirements at all I can see how someone who is looking for a visual alt/az mount that can change otas would want one. There really is nothing else available. Just not for all of us.


BTW I have been checking Meade's LX80 Photography page regularly. So far no photos.

http://www.meade4m.com/index.php?/gallery/album/8-lx80-photography/

Edited by Stew57 (08/30/12 11:45 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
austin.grant
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 10/18/10

Loc: Shreveport, LA
Re: Why me? [Re: mmalik]
      #5394793 - 08/30/12 11:41 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Reading this thread is like watching a train wreck.




40 pages of nothing (Douglass-fest followed by Neilson-fest); it would be safe to presume LX80 is a colossal failure when it comes to GUIDED astrophotography in EQ mode with advertised payload, and for that matter any payload. I was hoping to see EQ guided images by now but no one seems to have stepped up to the plate; while Nielson’s efforts are commendable, whatever he (and others) tested was UNGUIDED (with 20+ overhauls of the mount in between). I know Kevin was going to take some GUIDED images but now it looks like he may have to send his LX80 back. In short, there is nothing to show for when it comes to GUIDED imaging with LX80. I am looking for some serious high res. EQ guided DSO images if there are any takers? If not, then it let's just say we have beaten this horse to death. And please no more UNGUIDED stuff…we have had enough.

Keep in mind, it has been almost two months since this thread started...

And what became of the following by Meade?

- PEC Training update
- Guiding with Envisage Software update
- Plug-in ST-4 port for guiding

Any word on LX800? Last time I heard was that it was being tested in the desert somewhere for imaging.




So you respond to "40 pages of nothing" with more nothing? And you certainly aren't the first person to come to this conclusion, so you are just echoing the nothing about the nothing. Now here I am, saying nothing about your nothing that was really about nothing. Hmm...isn't that something?

(Was I supposed to make some parts of my comment bold, so you guys would know I meant business?)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: << 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | >> (show all)


Extra information
31 registered and 31 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Dave M, richard7, bilgebay 

Print Thread

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


Thread views: 67897

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics