Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home page


Telescope Specific Forums >> Meade Computerized Telescopes

Pages: 1
Hazel
member


Reged: 10/29/12

Meade Advanced Coma Free (ACF) question new
      #5509364 - 11/08/12 03:40 AM

Hi -- does anyone have experience with Advanced Coma Free w/UHTC optics that are available for an additional cost on the Meade LX scopes? On the Meade website the 12" LX90-ACF (f/10) Advanced Coma-Free w/UHTC is $3200 and the 12" LX90-SC (f/10) Schmidt-Cassegrain w/UHTC is $2900. Is the quality of the image noticably better with the ACF? Are there any negatives about ACF that I should be aware of? I am most interested in lunar and planetary observing but will probablay also use it for deep sky. Thanks.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Bob Griffiths
Getting Grouchy
*****

Reged: 10/10/05

Loc: Frederick Maryland
Re: Meade Advanced Coma Free (ACF) question new [Re: Hazel]
      #5509660 - 11/08/12 10:21 AM

Oh boy...
a simple answer is YES the AFC optics are simply better then the standard optics.. no question about that fact at all..
The question you have to ask yourself is the AFC optics worth the extra money because on axis there is no difference.. the AFC opticx only do there thing at the edges of the FOV and I personally do not spend much time looking at the edges...

I own a CPC1100 .. mainly because I found the Lx90 12 inch scopes to be way-way under mounted IF I wanted to buy a 12 it would have to have been the Lx200 .. MONEY then became a big factor

The lx90 is fine with the 10 inch OTA BUT NOT with the 12..

Just my opinion

Bob G.


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


Reged: 04/01/05

Re: Meade Advanced Coma Free (ACF) question new [Re: Bob Griffiths]
      #5509811 - 11/08/12 11:39 AM

The other big question is if you ever plan on getting into astrophotography - then the ACF would be a worthwhile option. I would also think resale value would be better on the ACF option - in case you ever sell and upgrade.

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

Reged: 12/31/08

Loc: Western New York
Re: Meade Advanced Coma Free (ACF) question new [Re: faltered]
      #5509990 - 11/08/12 01:41 PM

The ACF optics were really designed for the astrophotographer. The major difference is the AFC will correct for coma along the edge of the image. The LX90 mount with the heavy 12" OTA is best suited for visual use and really demands the heavy duty LX200 mount if you are interested in imaging. Since both optical designs will ... essentially ...produce the same visual experience at the eyepiece, I would purchase the standard 12" SCT with the LX90 mount. I own the standard 12" SCT on a LX200 mount and the optics provide excellent views .... some of the best I've ever had ... of the moon and planets.

BTW, before you make the commitment to buy your scope ... read the recent CN posts on the quality control issues that have plagued Meade since the move to their new Mexican factory:

http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/5493670/page...



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


Reged: 10/29/12

Re: Meade Advanced Coma Free (ACF) question new [Re: *skyguy*]
      #5513048 - 11/10/12 11:26 AM

If the ACF is better than the SC (even if just a little better), I do wonder why Meade still offers traditional SC optics after 7 years on the market with the ACF technology? Is there anything about the traditional SC that makes it actually preferable to the ACF other than a slightly lower price? Other than saving $300 (which is only a 10% difference with the 12" LX90 ACF vs. SC) is there any reason at all why I should buy the traditional SC version?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rcdk
super member


Reged: 11/13/10

Re: Meade Advanced Coma Free (ACF) question new [Re: Hazel]
      #5513198 - 11/10/12 01:23 PM

I am bothered by edge of field defects so it was definitely worth it for me.

The 12" LX90 is not for everyone. I would be happy to have the LX200, but couldn't afford the extra $$$. I find the 12" LX90 to be...adequate...as far as the mount goes. You do need to make sure you don't hang on the focuser or bump the eyepiece when observing which is a good idea with any scope.


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

Reged: 12/31/08

Loc: Western New York
Re: Meade Advanced Coma Free (ACF) question new [Re: Hazel]
      #5515709 - 11/12/12 10:14 AM

Quote:

Is there anything about the traditional SC that makes it actually preferable to the ACF other than a slightly lower price?




The standard SCT has a 4" secondary mirror (33.3% central obstruction), while the ACF has a larger 4.6" secondary mirror (38.6% central obstruction)... (obstructions expressed as a percentage of the aperture's diameter, not area). This could be a factor when observing low contrast planetary features, however any differences would be very subtle ... but, that is what planetary observing is all about! It would be equivalent to the views between unobstructed telescopes of 7.9" (for the SCT) and 7.4" (for the ACF).


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

Reged: 12/03/07

Loc: Overland Park KS
Re: Meade Advanced Coma Free (ACF) question new [Re: *skyguy*]
      #5516325 - 11/12/12 04:55 PM

My Meade 12" ACF secondary diameter/obstruction is exactly 4". But the clear aperture is 11.8"/300mm (distance from where the corrector glass first touches the corrector retaining ring on both sides). So the central obstruction by diameter is a little larger than 33%. Where did you get 4.6"?

Bill


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

Reged: 11/18/10

Loc: Canada
Re: Meade Advanced Coma Free (ACF) question new [Re: Bill Barlow]
      #5516545 - 11/12/12 07:13 PM

The LX200R 12" is a full 12" aperature... Never measured the secondary housing though.

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

Reged: 12/03/07

Loc: Overland Park KS
Re: Meade Advanced Coma Free (ACF) question new [Re: neotesla]
      #5516710 - 11/12/12 08:43 PM

The older "R" versions must have a slightly thinner corrector retaining ring than the newer "ACF" M12's.

Bill


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


Reged: 10/29/12

Re: Meade Advanced Coma Free (ACF) question new [Re: Bill Barlow]
      #5519022 - 11/14/12 02:43 AM

So does the newer 12" LX90 SCT also have an 11.8 inch aperture like the newer 12" LX90 ACF? Thanks.

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


Reged: 10/29/12

Re: Meade Advanced Coma Free (ACF) question [Re: *skyguy*]
      #5539522 - 11/25/12 10:26 PM

Skyguy -- I appreciate this information about the size of the secondary mirror obstruction in the ACF vs. the SCG. Can you please tell me your reference for this information? I checked with Meade and could not find it in their spec sheets (on line at least). Thank you very much.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1


Extra information
7 registered and 10 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Starman27, Christopher Erickson, Starman81 

Print Thread

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


Thread views: 2189

Jump to

CN Forums Home




Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics