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: << 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | >> (show all)
blueman
Photon Catcher
*****

Reged: 07/20/07

Loc: California
Re: Why me? new [Re: austin.grant]
      #5394882 - 08/30/12 12:46 PM

OK, I will bite. If the LX-800 or LX-80 have sucessfully taken good images with long exposures, can some one provide a link where they can be viewed?
Thanks,
Blueman


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

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: Why me? new [Re: blueman]
      #5395015 - 08/30/12 02:17 PM

AFAIK, there are no LX800s in use.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
biz
Vendor


Reged: 11/08/09

Loc: New Zealand
Re: Why me? new [Re: rmollise]
      #5395041 - 08/30/12 02:36 PM

Quote:

AFAIK, there are no LX800s in use.




I hope this particular company is paying interest on money they have from these particular owners while they finish building this particular mount. The owners of the returned units certainly should be compensated.
cheers.
Graham


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

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: Why me? new [Re: biz]
      #5395047 - 08/30/12 02:38 PM

Quote:

Quote:

AFAIK, there are no LX800s in use.




I hope this particular company is paying interest on money they have from these particular owners while they finish building this particular mount. The owners of the returned units certainly should be compensated.
cheers.
Graham




Sure they are. Just like every telescope company that's held onto my money for months and years since the 1960s.


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

Reged: 07/20/07

Loc: California
Re: Why me? new [Re: rmollise]
      #5395359 - 08/30/12 05:56 PM

Understood, so that means the mounts were sold and they did not work as advertised and have not worked for months now. This just makes my original point.
Now, any good images taken guided with longer exposures available from those using the LX-80 mounts?
Blueman
Quote:

AFAIK, there are no LX800s in use.




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

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: Why me? new [Re: blueman]
      #5395390 - 08/30/12 06:21 PM

Quote:

Understood, so that means the mounts were sold and they did not work as advertised and have not worked for months now. This just makes my original point.
Now, any good images taken guided with longer exposures available from those using the LX-80 mounts?
Blueman





Are we now talking LX80s or 800s? The 80s do work. The 800s were recalled due to (apparently) firmware problems with the StarLock widget. Not sure why you need to make a point. It's really simple: If you don't think either will work right or suit your needs, don't give Meade yo' money, honey.

I haven't seen any images other than the few here taken with the 80. Which could mean they can't take guided images, or it could mean that the people who've purchased them thus far are not imagers or at least experienced imagers, or it could mean there are not enough of 'em out there in the hands of CN readers yet.

My thoughts? From the beginning I've thought this mount would essentially be an alt-az rig capable of operating in polar mode, not unlike some of the iOptron towers. Did I think this would be an imaging workhorse with a payload of 40-pounds when that is really too much to ask of an EQ-6 and is approaching "over the top" even with a G11? Not really, and not sure why anyone would think a mount in this pricerange would be.

Ah...but hope, it seems, springs eternal. TANSTAAFL.


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

Reged: 05/03/09

Loc: Silsbee Texas
Re: Why me? new [Re: rmollise]
      #5395455 - 08/30/12 07:01 PM

Ahh Rod
we were hoping that lunch was at least getting cheaper! Meade is partly to blame for raising expectations a little too much. They should have been more realistic with specs and features. I hope they do well with this mount and it certainly will beat the pants off the mini towers in price, but many thought it would be competition for the CGEM, Atlas, and IEQ45 at AP.


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

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Why me? new [Re: rmollise]
      #5395473 - 08/30/12 07:13 PM

Quote:

My thoughts? From the beginning I've thought this mount would essentially be an alt-az rig capable of operating in polar mode, not unlike some of the iOptron towers. Did I think this would be an imaging workhorse with a payload of 40-pounds when that is really too much to ask of an EQ-6 and is approaching "over the top" even with a G11? Not really, and not sure why anyone would think a mount in this pricerange would be.




Bingo. Most mounts that are designed for AP aren't great for guided long-exposure AP at their maximum capacity. This is a convertible mount that doesn't even come with a guide port indicating that it isn't primarily designed for guided long exposure long focal length AP, especially at its maximum capacity, so why people expected it to be that way baffles me.

I still expect it to be decent with my dSLR and lenses (unguided, once they fix the PEC recording) and even fine with a big scope for planetary AP in polar, and I have yet to see any evidence that it won't be.

Maybe this will be a suitable alternative if it's ever released, but it's almost guaranteed to be quite a lot more expensive, and I still doubt it will be suitable at whatever its rated capacity will be.

Edited by Lee Jay (08/30/12 07:15 PM)


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


Reged: 12/16/09

Re: Why me? new [Re: blueman]
      #5395504 - 08/30/12 07:34 PM

Quote:

Understood, so that means the mounts were sold and they did not work as advertised and have not worked for months now.




You forgot one step... The 25% price increase!


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


Reged: 08/22/10

Re: Why me? new [Re: deepskyguy]
      #5395535 - 08/30/12 07:59 PM

Hi,
I really didn't think that price increase was warranted, especially with this big load capability decrease. I ordered my mount last year for $799. but paid the extra $200. to have one now. I would of liked to have known that its out of the box capability was only 20 to 25lbs in polar. before I paid that extra $200. and the extra for the 10" ota that it came with. Especially after this long wait.
neilson


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


Reged: 12/23/07

Loc: Tempe, AZ
Re: Why me? new [Re: neilson]
      #5395608 - 08/30/12 08:48 PM

Greetings all...

As Blueman is aware, i am curretnly "on the road", thus the long delay in answering. And as Rod sort of guessed, there does seem to be a "user" problem with guided images.

To my knowledge, only three (3) of us have posted images from the LX80. Keven and Dennis are guider equipped, but i believe weight limited. Neilson has posted unguided, and his guiding capability is unknown. Even if he is equipped, he will need to use a lighter OTA, which he does have.

In my case, I was two OTA configured, with guiding the idea, but that would be in Alt/AZ, and we all know that story by now.

I spent a week at the Oregon Star Party. Had lots of fun, but very little observing, and no imaging. It seems Oregon has LOTS and LOTS of fires. Which.... produce LOTS and LOTS of smoke. We had otherwise clear skies, but extremly poor seeing due to smoke. There were a few nights, i could not even find Polaris, or make out Ursa Major.

We moved on to just east of Redmond, and stayed there for a week or so. The smoke situation did not improve. HOWEVER, as readers may recall, the reason i did not have guided images was that i had no Guide OTA to mount to the 6". I ordered a Orion Mini 50mm Guide Scope from OPT, and had it shipped fast. It mounts very well on the 6", and the DSI-2 Pro focuses nicely. However, seeing was still horrible, and thus, no imageing.

We have moved on to Lakeview, OR, and then on to central northern Nevada, and it is worse here than in Oregon. YIKES !

Ahhhhh, but there is still hope. We are now just north of LAS VEGAS. No Smoke !!! Just clouds.

We should be home in a couple of days (Arizona). Hopefully the weather will clear up, and i will be able to get the equipment set up, and hopefully have something to show.

I just looked at the 10-day.... Hmmmmmm. Guess we will have to be patient for awhile.


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


Reged: 01/08/12

Re: Why me? new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5395765 - 08/30/12 10:12 PM

Quote:

Quote:

My thoughts? From the beginning I've thought this mount would essentially be an alt-az rig capable of operating in polar mode, not unlike some of the iOptron towers. Did I think this would be an imaging workhorse with a payload of 40-pounds when that is really too much to ask of an EQ-6 and is approaching "over the top" even with a G11? Not really, and not sure why anyone would think a mount in this pricerange would be.




Bingo. Most mounts that are designed for AP aren't great for guided long-exposure AP at their maximum capacity. This is a convertible mount that doesn't even come with a guide port indicating that it isn't primarily designed for guided long exposure long focal length AP, especially at its maximum capacity, so why people expected it to be that way baffles me.

I still expect it to be decent with my dSLR and lenses (unguided, once they fix the PEC recording) and even fine with a big scope for planetary AP in polar, and I have yet to see any evidence that it won't be.

Maybe this will be a suitable alternative if it's ever released, but it's almost guaranteed to be quite a lot more expensive, and I still doubt it will be suitable at whatever its rated capacity will be.




If you re read Nelsons posts he is more than clear that this mount is not suitable for visual use at 2/3rd of its weight limit either... AP would be outstanding at this price point. Visual would be OK at this price point. So far with a 30lb OTA, that the mount actually shipped with, it has been a heap-o-fail... With the owner taking the mount apart and self tuning it, with Meade's support and guidance no fewer than 10 times.

Simply Not acceptable...


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


Reged: 12/23/07

Loc: Tempe, AZ
Re: Why me? new [Re: ur7x]
      #5395781 - 08/30/12 10:24 PM

ur7x....

Can we assume from this post, and most of your prior posts, that you are not going to buy one?

And if that is the case, we got the message. Actually, a long time ago. You must simply enjoy telling us that.... over and over and over.


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


Reged: 01/08/12

Re: Order cancelled new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5395789 - 08/30/12 10:28 PM

Quote:

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?




If this thread is any indication, no one sells a working mount like this. Meade came close and then failed miserably.


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


Reged: 01/08/12

Re: Why me? new [Re: dmdouglass]
      #5395799 - 08/30/12 10:34 PM

Quote:

ur7x....

Can we assume from this post, and most of your prior posts, that you are not going to buy one?

And if that is the case, we got the message. Actually, a long time ago. You must simply enjoy telling us that.... over and over and over.




I actually came within a heart beat of buying one. As I have posted over and over, a Meade Dealer actually talked me out of it, that and some snarly posts from Meade faithful convinced me, that in spite of happily owning several other Meade optical products, "This mount ain't for you".

Oh and this thread is not 40 pages of nothing... it is 40 pages of consumer protection. If after reading all of this, you still choose one of these mounts, you are at least doing so with your eyes wide open.


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

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Why me? new [Re: ur7x]
      #5395875 - 08/30/12 11:49 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

My thoughts? From the beginning I've thought this mount would essentially be an alt-az rig capable of operating in polar mode, not unlike some of the iOptron towers. Did I think this would be an imaging workhorse with a payload of 40-pounds when that is really too much to ask of an EQ-6 and is approaching "over the top" even with a G11? Not really, and not sure why anyone would think a mount in this pricerange would be.




Bingo. Most mounts that are designed for AP aren't great for guided long-exposure AP at their maximum capacity. This is a convertible mount that doesn't even come with a guide port indicating that it isn't primarily designed for guided long exposure long focal length AP, especially at its maximum capacity, so why people expected it to be that way baffles me.

I still expect it to be decent with my dSLR and lenses (unguided, once they fix the PEC recording) and even fine with a big scope for planetary AP in polar, and I have yet to see any evidence that it won't be.

Maybe this will be a suitable alternative if it's ever released, but it's almost guaranteed to be quite a lot more expensive, and I still doubt it will be suitable at whatever its rated capacity will be.




If you re read Nelsons posts he is more than clear that this mount is not suitable for visual use at 2/3rd of its weight limit either...




Not true, since most, if not all visual use of this mount will be in alt-az mode.


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

Reged: 07/04/11

Loc: Southern California
Re: Why me? new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5395951 - 08/31/12 12:47 AM

I got the LX80 at the intro price of $799 because I needed a small mount for visual only. I figured I could also use it with a Mallincam or similiar camera once in a while too. Also was hoping that I could do short exposure dslr shots in polar mode when the mood strikes me. I haven't been able to use it at all yet but I am watching the weather map and keeping my fingers crossed.

So in short it is a cheap mount for visual that I'll have for many years. If I want to get into astrophotography with it I will buy a light weight short focal length refractor or perhaps a future 8" SCT with reducer.


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

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: Why me? new [Re: Whichwayisnorth]
      #5396000 - 08/31/12 01:50 AM

No, it really isn't. Alt-az mounts of similar capacity cost considerably less. Equatorial mounts with significantly greater accuracy cost considerably less.

Unfortunately, the LX80 is neither fish nor fowl. Technically, it costs a little less than buying a separate alt-az goto mount and a goto Equatorial mount. But in reality, it's a marketeer's story.

It's looking more like if we really want a combined Alt-az EQ mount, it's called a fork.

-Rich


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jmiele
Patron Saint?
*****

Reged: 12/04/10

Re: Why me? [Re: Starhawk]
      #5396227 - 08/31/12 08:25 AM

IMO Rich, folks that "think" they need this mount for the dual capabilities have manufactured the need based on the manufactures advertisements. In other words, necessity in this case was NOT the mother of invention, rather, the INVENTION was the mother of necessity. You can say you always wanted a mount like this, but IMO you all saw the docs and said - "wow, that's a great idea", "I want one", right?


Best,
Joe


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

Reged: 01/22/10

Loc: Sachse TX
Re: Why me? [Re: jmiele]
      #5396253 - 08/31/12 08:52 AM

Quote:

IMO Rich, folks that "think" they need this mount for the dual capabilities have manufactured the need based on the manufactures advertisements. In other words, necessity in this case was NOT the mother of invention, rather, the INVENTION was the mother of necessity. You can say you always wanted a mount like this, but IMO you all saw the docs and said - "wow, that's a great idea", "I want one", right?


Best,
Joe




The same could have been said about the Nagler.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: << 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | >> (show all)


Extra information
12 registered and 27 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Dave M, richard7, bilgebay, iceblaze 

Print Thread

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


Thread views: 67130

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics