Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Hmmm...what is Meade up to?

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
80 replies to this topic

#51 JSnuff1

JSnuff1

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 292
  • Joined: 29 Dec 2004

Posted 03 January 2005 - 11:17 PM

YES i can finally buy the lx200, thank god these are out of my price range

#52 mtnmedic

mtnmedic

    Late for dinner

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,620
  • Joined: 09 Nov 2004

Posted 03 January 2005 - 11:23 PM

LOL JSnuff! Yeah, who has $5000 to plunk down so quickly? It's kind of sad that they missed the boat on making something really nice, simple, easy-to-setup/use and affordable by the general public.

#53 mtnmedic

mtnmedic

    Late for dinner

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,620
  • Joined: 09 Nov 2004

Posted 03 January 2005 - 11:29 PM

Ya know, after reading the features on this new scope of theirs, a few things really do stand out:

1) Collimation done completely from the Autostar controller
2) Built-in dew zapper
3) Built-in computer controlled front focus
4) USB 2.0 ports

Hmmmm....interesting.

#54 yg1968

yg1968

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,979
  • Joined: 26 Jan 2004

Posted 03 January 2005 - 11:31 PM

Or maybe a self launched "Mini Hubble" that explodes at liftoff, but Meade says a firmware update will correct that problem and offers insurance for to those who have not exploded yet :grin:


Grizz,

Hubble is a Ritchey-Chrétien. So your guess about a mini-Hubble was not that far off! ;)

#55 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----

Posted 03 January 2005 - 11:36 PM

Boy the RCX sounds like the next generation, mostly due to its computer control, included accessories and contemporary ports. I was very surprised when I first saw the LX200 and it was still using serial ports. So the question is now as someone who is getting back into astronomy and is about to buy an LX200 10" am I buying the last hurrah of yesterday's technology. I'm in no hurry and could easily wait for the new scopes, RCX's and the money is more but I guess doable. So, what do I do?

#56 jrcrilly

jrcrilly

    Refractor wienie no more

  • *****
  • Posts: 35,957
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2003

Posted 03 January 2005 - 11:39 PM

I'm in no hurry and could easily wait for the new scopes, RCX's and the money is more but I guess doable. So, what do I do?


I'd expect at least a year of lead time; you may be in more of a hurry than that. I wouldn't wait unless I already had something else to use.

#57 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----

Posted 03 January 2005 - 11:43 PM

Sorry for novice question but with the RCX and their "smart" correction does this mean that derotation is no longer necessary? Maybe I'm confusing technologies here. Also the mount looks so different (angled?). How easy/hard is this to take on and off (do you believe) and lastly, how does this mount compare to GEM mounts and their advantages specifically in respect to photography and long exposures? Thanks everyone:)

#58 jrcrilly

jrcrilly

    Refractor wienie no more

  • *****
  • Posts: 35,957
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2003

Posted 03 January 2005 - 11:49 PM

Sorry for novice question but with the RCX and their "smart" correction does this mean that derotation is no longer necessary? Maybe I'm confusing technologies here. Also the mount looks so different (angled?). How easy/hard is this to take on and off (do you believe) and lastly, how does this mount compare to GEM mounts and their advantages specifically in respect to photography and long exposures? Thanks everyone:)


It looks angled because they are picturing it on a wedge; the LX200's can also be mounted that way. It's a little awkward to assemble because of the additional height but not too bad.

Unless wedge-mounted, derotation would still be necessary. I'm guessing they show it on the wedge because it's such an imaging-oriented instrument. I'd presume that it can also be used in alt/az mode for portable, visual sessions.

#59 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----

Posted 04 January 2005 - 02:17 AM

WOW! Impressive new scope range - RCX400! And what they have packed it with - Ritchey-Chrétien optics, Carbon/Kevlar tube, integrated anti dew heater, computer-controlled collimation, USB 2.0, etc etc - WOW! Price? Havent found any indications of that yet... I'm eager to find out more!

...Eirik

#60 jrcrilly

jrcrilly

    Refractor wienie no more

  • *****
  • Posts: 35,957
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2003

Posted 04 January 2005 - 02:20 AM

Price?


The 10" is around $5000, the 12" about $6500. The prices are on Meade's website.

#61 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----

Posted 04 January 2005 - 02:31 AM

Sorry - I just woke up, and I didn't see the page 3 of this thread! You've discovered everything already :-). Impressive, that's for sure! And I think that the price is reasonable for such a scope.
...Eirik

#62 Strgazr27

Strgazr27

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • ****-
  • Posts: 7,104
  • Joined: 04 Oct 2004

Posted 04 January 2005 - 07:25 AM

WOW! Impressive new scope range - RCX400! And what they have packed it with - Ritchey-Chrétien optics, Carbon/Kevlar tube, integrated anti dew heater, computer-controlled collimation, USB 2.0, etc etc - WOW! Price? Havent found any indications of that yet... I'm eager to find out more!

...Eirik


$5000 for the 10" and it's still mated to a fork mount that uses the same wedge setup as the others before it :foreheadslap: If it's such an imaging based, high tech scope why not offer it on a decent HQ GEM? Geuss they couldn't get everything right Lol.

And here I was getting ready to sell the house/wife/and dog.....

If you ask me, they are only changing the face of astronomy for those with deep pockets. To me, as significant a change as they were hinting at should have been aimed at a larger segment of the community.

CS's

Bobby

#63 imjeffp

imjeffp

    Aluminum Falcon

  • ***--
  • Posts: 6,103
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2003

Posted 04 January 2005 - 10:09 AM

I predict an upgraded LX200 is coming with the CF tube and new electronics from the RCX.

#64 Benjamin B

Benjamin B

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,225
  • Joined: 21 Jun 2004

Posted 04 January 2005 - 10:14 AM

I want that scope if its good, but just the OTA.

#65 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----

Posted 04 January 2005 - 04:42 PM

I had a budget for a 10" that after I did the upgrades I wanted, binoviewer, ccd imaging, etc, I reached 8 grand. I did a list for this new RCX and since I didn't need to upgradr a lot of stuff like the LX, I came out in the 8 grand range again. The scope is one thing but by the time you upgrade the thing you got a lot more cost wrapped up into the thing so if you are out for a given image quality, it seems this would be a better buy over time. Hence I'm putting my name on an order for there is one thing I know about myself. I always want more power be in my computers, more pixels in my camera, faster lenses, and it will probably be the same in scopes. But in studying scopes and sizes, this may be my one and only and take me anywhere I want to go.

#66 JerryWise

JerryWise

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,764
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2003

Posted 04 January 2005 - 06:07 PM

Here is what I got from a dealer I buy from:

Hello Jerry, we do not have firm dates yet, rumor has it that the 12" will be available around the end of Feb. and the 14" would follow shortly behind (March/April?) but we do not have anything guaranteed yet from Meade. I can keep you posted on updates if you would like.

#67 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----

Posted 04 January 2005 - 07:01 PM

I don't understand why not use the GEM if its a scope geared towards photogrpahy. I'm just a novice, but my understanding is that a serious phogorapher want the GEM to avoid need to derotate, etc. Correct? If so, why not a GEM? Confused.

#68 jrcrilly

jrcrilly

    Refractor wienie no more

  • *****
  • Posts: 35,957
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2003

Posted 04 January 2005 - 07:10 PM

I don't understand why not use the GEM if its a scope geared towards photogrpahy. I'm just a novice, but my understanding is that a serious phogorapher want the GEM to avoid need to derotate, etc. Correct? If so, why not a GEM? Confused.


The German EQ mount isn't the only equatorial mounting. The telescope in the photos is on an optional wedge, which makes the mount equatorial.

#69 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----

Posted 04 January 2005 - 07:26 PM

thank you for clarifying. That is what I thought, but then I don't understand the comment about Meade not "utilizing a HQ GEM". Is not the RCX400 with a wedge high quality enough for even the most serious amateur? It seems to be more than enough for me, but I'm still a newbie... :)

#70 jrcrilly

jrcrilly

    Refractor wienie no more

  • *****
  • Posts: 35,957
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2003

Posted 04 January 2005 - 08:35 PM

thank you for clarifying. That is what I thought, but then I don't understand the comment about Meade not "utilizing a HQ GEM". Is not the RCX400 with a wedge high quality enough for even the most serious amateur?


There are far better equatorial mounts available. The problem is that they cost $6000 and up. It's unreasonable to expect a package including a telescope as elaborate as a Ritchey-Chretien costing $5000 total to be of equal quality. Meade built this unit to a price point at which they feel there is a market; I suspect they are quite correct. The forkmounted LX200 series on a wedge does a fine job for me. I expect no less from the RCX400. Those demanding more performance will prefer more exotic (and expensive) mounts.

#71 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----

Posted 04 January 2005 - 08:44 PM

Hi MBM,

The issue with past Meade fork mount scopes has been that for serious astrophotography, their mounts just don't track accurately enough for long exposures, even when mounted on a wedge to prevent field rotation. Especially at f/10.

The jury is still out on weather the RCX400 series will be able to approah the tracking accuracy of the high quality GEMs, or even a middle of the road GEM such as the Losmandy G11.

There is no technical reason why a fork mount can't track accurately, its just that such a setup typically cost a lot more than their GEM counter part.

Apparently Meade is claiming PE of less than 5 arc secs for the new scope. We'll see...

#72 Strgazr27

Strgazr27

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • ****-
  • Posts: 7,104
  • Joined: 04 Oct 2004

Posted 04 January 2005 - 08:50 PM

John,

Just a question. You know I trust your information so here goes. Which do you think would perform better. The RCX400 on the stock mount it comes with or the 400 on something along the lines of a let's say CGE type mount. Even if Meade had to raide the price to $6000 for the 10" do you really think it would make or break the pricing point? I ask this becuase you seem to have "Lucked" out with your classic. it's tracking seems to be better than average and your experience helps also. If the Meade wedge/fork mount combo is good enough for an RC style scope why soooo many posts about there downfalls and why such a greater use of GEM's by serious imagers?

I ask this as I would seriously consider selling my Classic and using some "Available" funds if you were to say that this would be that much better a setup than my current one. (12" Classic 4.32/Shortened GFT/Super wedge/90mm f/11 GS/ ST4 coming soon.)

Again, you know I value your experience and info.

CS's

Bobby

#73 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----

Posted 04 January 2005 - 08:57 PM

Hi Starhopper,

Thank you. I understand. I'm a curious fellow so...

Field rotation is caused by?

And can this not be somewhat (or more than somewhat) aleviated by derotation software?

Thanks so much. All of you folks are very gracious with your information. I'm learning a lot Hope to give back some day :)

#74 jrcrilly

jrcrilly

    Refractor wienie no more

  • *****
  • Posts: 35,957
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2003

Posted 04 January 2005 - 09:11 PM

Which do you think would perform better. The RCX400 on the stock mount it comes with or the 400 on something along the lines of a let's say CGE type mount.


Hi, Bobby.

I'm sure that the 12" and larger optical tubes would be way more than a CGE or G11 could handle for serious imaging. The 10" might be OK. Remember that Meade builds 'em heavy! Remember, too, that none of the mounts in this price class offer the performance the serious guys demand.

The question is whether the RCX400 mount can handle it well enough. I feel that my Classic does OK with the 12" SCT but remember "real" imagers shoot for hours at a time at very high resolutions. Those guys sneer at the LX200's and they are gonna keep on sneering when the RCX400 comes out for the same reason. They are comparing it to mounts in the $6000 and up class. I don't demand that from my unit and don't expect to need more until I run out of easy targets.

Of course, I'm going through the same analysis that you are: would I benefit from a switch to the new scope? The RC optical tube SHOULD be superior for imaging if the quality is there. The new mount offers sophistication I would really enjoy having. Would I take better pictures? Probably. How much better? Wish I knew!

#75 Strgazr27

Strgazr27

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • ****-
  • Posts: 7,104
  • Joined: 04 Oct 2004

Posted 04 January 2005 - 09:22 PM

John,

As usual thanks :) I mentioned the CGE due to it's ability to succesfully carry the C14.

I'm really torn here. Is collimation really that important an issue? Especially if the scope is used in an Obs.? I love the new focus method so that, along with the new drive style is really what is swaying me. The electronics are also very tempting but being a computer guy I also realize the pitfalls of that road.

I think I'm going to sit tight. I'll wait till there are some reviews and make up my mind than. I HAVE made up my mind that if I do it will be the 12". The wife also gave the thums up :).

Thanks again John,

CS's

Bobby

P.S. Boy it didn't take long to rename this forum huh? Lol


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics