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: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | (show all)
moynihan
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 07/22/03

Loc: Lake Michigan Watershed
Question about Celestron/Meade posts
      #5725363 - 03/11/13 08:32 AM

My interaction on CN kind of pulses, increasing when looking for new equipment, then dropping, etc. I check this CAT forum primarily MAK related info. But in the past i was a SCT user for awhile.
But, i have noticed of late the the majority of posts here are re Celestron SCT's rather than MEADE SCT's. Are folks with the Meades just so busy using them, they do not have time to post?
Kidding
Why the preponderance of Celestron posts?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
George Methvin
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 01/30/06

Loc: Central Texas
Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts new [Re: moynihan]
      #5725546 - 03/11/13 10:37 AM

Not sure I have owend both Meade and Celestron SCT and they are fine scopes. For the last year or so the Celestron HD has been the big thing. Maybe Meade needs to do like every one else and jump on the ( HD ) band wagon. HD tv, HD sound, HD sunglasses and HD vision. LOL. You might try the Meade forum, lots of things there about Meade SCT there. I have a Meade 10 LX200 classic and I use it often and it is a very good scope. I don't write about it because it always works and gives very good images, I don.t spend my time trying to compaire it to othere scopes no reason to so theres nothing to really talk about.

Edited by George Methvin (03/11/13 11:30 AM)


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


Reged: 12/30/10

Loc: Puerto Rico, US
Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts new [Re: George Methvin]
      #5725733 - 03/11/13 12:22 PM

Quote:

Not sure I have owend both Meade and Celestron SCT and they are fine scopes. For the last year or so the Celestron HD has been the big thing. Maybe Meade needs to do like every one else and jump on the ( HD ) band wagon. HD tv, HD sound, HD sunglasses and HD vision. LOL. You might try the Meade forum, lots of things there about Meade SCT there. I have a Meade 10 LX200 classic and I use it often and it is a very good scope. I don't write about it because it always works and gives very good images, I don.t spend my time trying to compaire it to othere scopes no reason to so theres nothing to really talk about.




Meade has the ACF Optics that are comparable to the Celestron Edge HD. In my opinion, Meade SCT telescopes are better than Celestron's, but they are more expensive. But that's just my opinion, of course. Both brands are excellent in any case.


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


Reged: 07/22/03

Loc: Lake Michigan Watershed
Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts new [Re: George Methvin]
      #5725890 - 03/11/13 01:44 PM

Quote:

You might try the Meade forum, lots of things there about Meade SCT there.



Wow, never noticed that forum. So, different SCT types/brands can get their own forum, but Maks cannot? As Spock used to say, fascinating.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrcrillyAdministrator
Refractor wienie no more
*****

Reged: 04/30/03

Loc: NE Ohio
Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts new [Re: moynihan]
      #5725936 - 03/11/13 02:04 PM

Quote:

So, different SCT types/brands can get their own forum, but Maks cannot? As Spock used to say, fascinating.




The various SCT optical tube variants, as well as MCT and variants and Cassegrain reflectors and variants are generally discussed here. The brand-specific fora are primarily for discussions of mount-related issues, due to the great variance in mounts and controllers between the major vendors.


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

Reged: 02/06/13

Loc: La Crescenta, CA
Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts new [Re: George Methvin]
      #5746166 - 03/20/13 08:23 PM

As soon as Meade gets on the "HD" bandwagon, Celestron will have moved on to the "3D" bandwagon and Meade will be behind again!

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

Reged: 02/01/06

Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts new [Re: moynihan]
      #5747220 - 03/21/13 09:51 AM

My opinion and my opinion only.

First, I prefer Celestron because over the years, I think their quality has been more consistent.

Meade has put some real barkers on the shelf. Astro-Foren tested one Meade that was worse than department store scopes.

But that was a while ago, and I think they have stepped up.

Now, it appears that Meade is trying to differentiate itself by biasing their newest (and most expensive) designs a bit more toward imaging. This is a good strategy because of Celestron's dominance in the general purpose market.

But here is where I think Meade really falls behind. For years, they remained married to the fork mounted SCT for most of its larger offerings, and the Meade fork mounted scopes are really stinking heavy.

As an example, Celestron abandoned the fork mounting for the C14 maybe 20 years ago, and when they did, I think C14 sales improved, and in the last decade, have exploded. C14s used to be rare, but now they are extremely common with a large percentage of CN forum members owning them and many more considering purchasing them.
The comparable Meade takes two people to get on to the wedge.

Celstron moved quickly to offer a choice of mounts starting with the SPs a very long time ago, and has since continued to improve its mounts.

Meade never really stepped up after the LXDs (though I have one and like it well enough and to be fair, it was super-advanced when it first came out, and is easily the biggest payload carrier I have, being better at my 6" APO than my CGE).

As a result, Meade simply could not sell to people that were looking for a scope package with GEM mounting.

And while Meade sold OTAs, many had a counterweigt in the rear that was just dead weight for GEM usage.

This is a marketing failure. Meade sould have judged from the market that a GEM mount was an important option for their larger scopes and they failed to follow up with larger mounts.
So, a lot of reasons I think, but mostly a marketing mess-up.

You have to be watching trends carefully and responding aggressivly.

I think Celstron did this with the EdgeHDs. They could see that their 40 year old designs were not up to the challange of modern wide field eyepieces and the growing trend to large chip imaging, and while Meade came out with the ACF first, they missed on field curvature.

I think that was a critical miss for them.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrcrillyAdministrator
Refractor wienie no more
*****

Reged: 04/30/03

Loc: NE Ohio
Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts new [Re: Eddgie]
      #5747237 - 03/21/13 10:00 AM

Quote:

But here is where I think Meade really falls behind. For years, they remained married to the fork mounted SCT for most of its larger offerings, and the Meade fork mounted scopes are really stinking heavy.




The LX600 addresses that by adapting the split forks scheme from their 16" LX200 to the new line.


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

Reged: 02/01/06

Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts new [Re: jrcrilly]
      #5747271 - 03/21/13 10:24 AM

Now...

But for 15 years, Meade left the big GEM packeging market to Celestron.

I believe it cost them momemtum in the marketplace.

Just my opinion, but after 31 years doing business around the globe, I think I have a pretty good eye for market goofs. I think they missed the trend to GEMs in large SCTs and that hurt them.

After all, we had Celestron and Losmandy both selling large GEMS, and my bet is that 80% of the telescopes riding on those GEMS are Celstron SCTs.

Until a few years ago, Meade would not even offer OTA only sales. Only complete units.

Edited by Eddgie (03/21/13 10:29 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrcrillyAdministrator
Refractor wienie no more
*****

Reged: 04/30/03

Loc: NE Ohio
Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts new [Re: Eddgie]
      #5747289 - 03/21/13 10:33 AM

Quote:

Now...

But for 15 years, Meade left the big GEM packging market to Celestron.




Yes, the CGE was a big win for Celestron; it and the followup CGE Pro and CGEM went too long without a response from Meade. Now that they are making a GEM effort, they are trying some cool new things with forkmounts as well.

I don't get out for outreach as frequently as I once did, but when I dragged a 10" LX200 and/or an 11" Nexstar GPS around I'd have been pretty excited about a removable rig like the LX600.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Greg Boynton
member


Reged: 05/29/09

Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts new [Re: jrcrilly]
      #5747410 - 03/21/13 11:38 AM

I hope Meade has great success with their new products. Yes, they made some bad mistakes in the market, but losing Meade would be a disaster. Meade is why Celestron has made the effort to bring good new products to market. Also, one of the things I miss in Celestron's lineup is larger heavy duty fork mounts. Yes, forks are a drag to transport and set up for imaging. On the other hand, I really like a fork on a pier for visual. My old C-14 fork (with Byers mod) is so comfortable to sit under for anything near zenith. There is a larger range of view from a single seated position, covering more of the most desirable part of the sky. I love the quality of my C14, but I'm sure there are M14s out there that are just as good and for my particular preferences, the Meade forks are a plus.

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

Reged: 12/02/04

Loc: Miami Valley Astronomical Soci...
Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts new [Re: Greg Boynton]
      #5747486 - 03/21/13 12:20 PM

It ebbs and flows. A few years ago it was the other way around.

Variety is the spice of life!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Robo-bob
sage


Reged: 05/02/05

Loc: Central Alberta
Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts new [Re: Greg Boynton]
      #5747754 - 03/21/13 02:41 PM

Quote:

I hope Meade has great success with their new products. Yes, they made some bad mistakes in the market, but losing Meade would be a disaster. Meade is why Celestron has made the effort to bring good new products to market.




I do not understand this logic. This implies that if Meade tanks, Celestron will respond by ceasing innovation and turning out *BLEEP*. This is absurd. If Celestron took this approach they would also wither and die and some other innovator would begin manufacturing SCTs.
If Meade cacks, they have no one to blame but themselves. We would miss them initially but eventually the "free market" cream would rise to the top and the void would be filled. In any market where there is money to be made, it indeed will be made.
If someone had told me even 10 years ago that offshore manufacturers would be cranking out decent quality 5" apos for under $2K, I would have laughed. The SCT void of a Meadeless market place would be short lived.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Greg Boynton
member


Reged: 05/29/09

Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts new [Re: Robo-bob]
      #5747861 - 03/21/13 03:35 PM

The logic is that Meade is already here, providing competition in developing mass market scopes of good quality and it has whole lot of product out in the market that would be orphaned. The Meade & Celestron competition has given us the ACF and Edge optics most recently. I think it would take a lot longer to get more major innovations from Celestron if they didn't have a similar large scale manufacturer nipping as their heals. Heck, I'll bet Tom Johnson and Co could have introduced the Edge design in 1970 if there had been market pressure.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
LivingNDixie
TSP Chowhound
*****

Reged: 04/23/03

Loc: Trussville, AL
Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts new [Re: Eddgie]
      #5748041 - 03/21/13 05:07 PM

Quote:

My opinion and my opinion only.

First, I prefer Celestron because over the years, I think their quality has been more consistent.

Meade has put some real barkers on the shelf. Astro-Foren tested one Meade that was worse than department store scopes.

But that was a while ago, and I think they have stepped up.

Now, it appears that Meade is trying to differentiate itself by biasing their newest (and most expensive) designs a bit more toward imaging. This is a good strategy because of Celestron's dominance in the general purpose market.

But here is where I think Meade really falls behind. For years, they remained married to the fork mounted SCT for most of its larger offerings, and the Meade fork mounted scopes are really stinking heavy.

As an example, Celestron abandoned the fork mounting for the C14 maybe 20 years ago, and when they did, I think C14 sales improved, and in the last decade, have exploded. C14s used to be rare, but now they are extremely common with a large percentage of CN forum members owning them and many more considering purchasing them.
The comparable Meade takes two people to get on to the wedge.

Celstron moved quickly to offer a choice of mounts starting with the SPs a very long time ago, and has since continued to improve its mounts.

Meade never really stepped up after the LXDs (though I have one and like it well enough and to be fair, it was super-advanced when it first came out, and is easily the biggest payload carrier I have, being better at my 6" APO than my CGE).

As a result, Meade simply could not sell to people that were looking for a scope package with GEM mounting.

And while Meade sold OTAs, many had a counterweigt in the rear that was just dead weight for GEM usage.

This is a marketing failure. Meade sould have judged from the market that a GEM mount was an important option for their larger scopes and they failed to follow up with larger mounts.
So, a lot of reasons I think, but mostly a marketing mess-up.

You have to be watching trends carefully and responding aggressivly.

I think Celstron did this with the EdgeHDs. They could see that their 40 year old designs were not up to the challange of modern wide field eyepieces and the growing trend to large chip imaging, and while Meade came out with the ACF first, they missed on field curvature.

I think that was a critical miss for them.




I have had good results with both companies and I have heard horror stories about both companies. I know that website where people post tests of their optics. I generally don't use it to judge a scope or company.

I personally think that Celestron is where Meade was in the 1990s. To me Meade is truly the innovator of the two, they made the goto SCT a market success with the LX200. Celestron has just made it a little better with SkyAlign. I do agree about the C14s being on a GEM. Meade dropped the ball tying the scope to the LX200 forks.

Right now Celestron is doing well leading, but these two companies are always challenging each other.


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


Reged: 11/13/10

Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts new [Re: moynihan]
      #5748307 - 03/21/13 07:02 PM

I am not trying to be argumentative, and I know I will be blasted for saying this, but peruse the forum and judge for yourself: Celestron owners are more vocal in general and more negative about Meade. I would even go so far as to say that it seems more Celestron owners have a bit of an inferiority complex regarding Meade than Meade owners do concerning Celestron.

I really have no idea why that should be the case, since Celestron products are every bit as good as Meade, and Celestron has some great strong points. I don't own a Meade because I feel it is better, but because it fit my requirements better. Maybe more Celestron owners truly feel their product is superior, and that is great, but it can mean it is harder for them to be objective.


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

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts [Re: rcdk]
      #5748326 - 03/21/13 07:12 PM

Quote:

I am not trying to be argumentative, and I know I will be blasted for saying this, but peruse the forum and judge for yourself: Celestron owners are more vocal in general and more negative about Meade. I would even go so far as to say that it seems more Celestron owners have a bit of an inferiority complex regarding Meade




Even if this were true, which in my opinion it is most assuredly NOT, what possible good could come from saying it do ya think?!

Edited by rmollise (03/21/13 07:13 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rick Woods
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 01/27/05

Loc: Inner Solar System
Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts [Re: rmollise]
      #5748380 - 03/21/13 07:35 PM

Quote:

Quote:

I am not trying to be argumentative, and I know I will be blasted for saying this, but peruse the forum and judge for yourself: Celestron owners are more vocal in general and more negative about Meade. I would even go so far as to say that it seems more Celestron owners have a bit of an inferiority complex regarding Meade




Even if this were true, which in my opinion it is most assuredly NOT, what possible good could come from saying it do ya think?!




Hey! Who are you, and what have you done with Rod?!?


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


Reged: 11/13/10

Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts [Re: rmollise]
      #5748839 - 03/22/13 12:06 AM

Quote:



Even if this were true, which in my opinion it is most assuredly NOT, what possible good could come from saying it do ya think?!




I am just trying to satisfy my curiosity. If no one else has observed this, then there isn't anything to discuss.

But I have been of this opinion since I did my research to make my own purchase decision. When I went through as many posts in Cats & Casses as I could four years ago, I came away with an overwhelmingly negative view of Meade. A fellow astronomer challenged that view and pointed out a majority of our club are Meade owners who are happy with their scopes.

Nothing I have seen in the four years I have been following this forum has done anything but confirm my original observation.

I should qualify that by saying that I have only observed the different Meade/Celestron owner perceptions of competing products here (CN) -- but the sample size is a lot bigger here as well. Lopsided rivalries exist in a lot of markets. Usually there is some disparity driving it, such as market share (PC vs Mac) or just a different class of user (Windows vs Unix).


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

Reged: 03/03/12

Loc: Ann Arbor, MI
Re: Question about Celestron/Meade posts [Re: Robo-bob]
      #5749106 - 03/22/13 06:40 AM

Quote:

Quote:

I hope Meade has great success with their new products. Yes, they made some bad mistakes in the market, but losing Meade would be a disaster. Meade is why Celestron has made the effort to bring good new products to market.




I do not understand this logic. This implies that if Meade tanks, Celestron will respond by ceasing innovation and turning out *BLEEP*. This is absurd. If Celestron took this approach they would also wither and die and some other innovator would begin manufacturing SCTs.
If Meade cacks, they have no one to blame but themselves. We would miss them initially but eventually the "free market" cream would rise to the top and the void would be filled. In any market where there is money to be made, it indeed will be made.
If someone had told me even 10 years ago that offshore manufacturers would be cranking out decent quality 5" apos for under $2K, I would have laughed. The SCT void of a Meadeless market place would be short lived.





It is not "absurd" it is just that you are reading to much into Greg's post. Have you never heard that competition is good for the consumer? If Meade folded, Celestron's incentive to bring their prices down, improve quality and new products would naturally be affected. To what degree is always dependant on what the marketplace lets them "get away with"


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | (show all)


Extra information
3 registered and 20 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Starman27, kkokkolis 

Print Thread

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


Thread views: 5512

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics