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

IS LX200-ACF 12" IS RIGHT FOR ME? PLEASE HELP

This topic has been archived.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

#26 Muffin Research

Muffin Research

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,625
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2007

Posted 15 October 2010 - 12:36 PM

A friend of mine bought an 12"LX200 and yes it's capable of seriously harming someone, it's a pretty big scope.
I was amazed at what that scope will show and very impressed with the GoTo system, I think I never saw that many galaxies in one night.
The views of certain nebula were also pretty astonishing.
But there's one thing that really bugs me it's the mirror shift when focussing with the focus knob, they have been upgraded I think but it's still really horrible, I'm a SCT user myself 'orange C8' '81 so I know about the shift but mine is minute compared to this well it's minute compared to many sct's I've come across so maybe I'm just spoiled. also what I've noticed in other LX200's is that the image is kind of soft if I compare it with my views. Still a pretty impressive setup which allows for quick object viewing and with focal reducers is able to deliver some nice images...
I don't think I will personally buy one having experienced a few of them but they remain a very attractive platform.
 

#27 payner

payner

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,753
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2007

Posted 15 October 2010 - 12:38 PM

Given your desire for aperture (which is understandable) I'd recommend a C11 or C14 on a GEM. I am 50 and can mount the C14 on a GEM without issue. Given you're interested in visual and AP the Edge HD OTA would be my recommendation. As has been stated, you don't want to be lifting the 12" Meade onto the fork given its weight and awkwardness (center of gravity away from you) as the OTA does not swing through the forks. Just my opinion and best advice.

Regards,
Randy
 

#28 thesubwaypusher

thesubwaypusher

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,054
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2004

Posted 15 October 2010 - 02:39 PM

But there's one thing that really bugs me it's the mirror shift when focussing with the focus knob, they have been upgraded I think but it's still really horrible, I'm a SCT user myself 'orange C8' '81 so I know about the shift but mine is minute compared to this well it's minute compared to many sct's I've come across so maybe I'm just spoiled.


One of the things I love about my 7" LX200 is that it has very tight focus control with zero image shift or backlash because the mirror is basically just a bit larger than that of an ETX. Your 8" has about the same size mirror, so you should probably have zero or a bit also. But once the mirror starts to grow so to speak, the weight seems to see-saw on the baffle tube. One day maybe they will invent roller bearings or some other way to keep the play out of this area. And the soft images you speak of are probably a shift in collimation as the big mirror minutely sways.

I hope your C8 is in good shape because it is really a great investment to your enjoyment in the future, which is how I feel about my 7.

Thanks, Chris
 

#29 Jay Wise

Jay Wise

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 392
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2008

Posted 15 October 2010 - 03:17 PM

A 7" LX200??????????

A P.S. If you do decide to get the Meade you won't be disappointed with the ACF optics.

JayW
 

#30 Lane

Lane

    Soyuz

  • -----
  • Posts: 3,604
  • Joined: 19 Nov 2007

Posted 15 October 2010 - 03:28 PM

I got rid of an LX200 and switched to GEM mounts just because I was hurting my back all the time. Especially packing up and putting the scope back in the car at night.

A 12" Meade OTA alone weighs almost 60% more than a C11 and it isn't going to see anything the C11 can't see just as well. Having a C11 on a CGEM mount, your heaviest component is the mount head at 40lbs, and it is an easy article to carry, because all the weight can be pulled close to your body.

Even if the weight is not a problem now, guess what, you are going to get older.
 

#31 GeneT

GeneT

    Ely Kid

  • *****
  • Posts: 15,524
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008

Posted 15 October 2010 - 03:33 PM

You have carefully thought everything through. A little more than a year ago, I also carefully thought through some Dob types and decided that an 18 inch UC was the way to go. I already had a 12.5 inch Portaball. The mirror box/lower telescope weight was only about 62 pounds. I thought I could easily heft it into my SUV using the handles. I could not because the center of gravity is directly on the floor. The movement to bend over and lift up the telescope into the SUV and from the SUV was too much. I was afraid that something would snap. So I used the wheel barrow handles. If I was going to have to use wheel barrow handles, then an 18 inch traditional Obsession Dob would have been a better choice for me. Another thing I did not factor in was that I am 67. Even the 18 UC was too much for me. So, I used it about a year then sold it. I did have one year with a large mirror telescope. The 12.5 inch Portaball is now my main telescope. I mention all this because it seems to me that you are leaning to the 12 inch. I really recommend a dry run of loading it in your vehicle, setting it up, and taking it down. As to whether or not Meade is in serious financial trouble, probably only an insider would know. We just don't know the financial condition of any of the businesses who supply the astronomical community. One last point--if you buy the 12 and decide it is too much telescope, and the 10 would be more suitable, you will probably have to sell it somewhere in the range of 40 to 60 percent of what you paid. You might be able to trade straight across for a 10. At any rate, you are clearly thinking through all the variables, and will make an informed decision.
Gene
 

#32 gillmj24

gillmj24

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,182
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2005

Posted 15 October 2010 - 05:58 PM

Yes a 12" Meade is deadly but a C14 (they used to make them with fork mounts you know) is a marvel to behold. Anything else would be vendor bashing!

To the original poster I stand by my statement that you're more likely to get a biased opinion against the brand you are looking at. You'll have to make your own decision hopefully after seei a few scopes at a star party for example.

I recommend looking at both Meade and celestron scopes and seeing what you can handle. It's not a dumbbell that you can just throw to the ground if your grip slips. You'll have to bear hug it and heft it up there. And don't think of doing it yourself onto an angled wedge, in the dark. In altaz mode putting the scope onto a flat tripod you'll be okay. But then you'll be limited to very short exposures (plenty fine for starting out with the moon and planets for photo targets).

The hand controllers have largely the same functions (though my opinion is the Meade handcontroller has more nice nifty little features) but compare those as well to make your personal decision. Not based on my biased opinion nor anyone else's.
 

#33 Marwatso

Marwatso

    Messenger

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 456
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2010

Posted 17 October 2010 - 12:45 PM

Bump
 

#34 jacktechie

jacktechie

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 116
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2008

Posted 17 October 2010 - 02:37 PM

If you want to consider imaging at f/2, Hyperstar/Fastar is not available for the Meade 12, but available for M10, M14, C6, C8/HD, C11/HD, and C14/HD.
Jack
 

#35 Marwatso

Marwatso

    Messenger

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 456
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2010

Posted 17 October 2010 - 10:05 PM

Thanks again to everyone. I am hearing the chorus of "watch out for the weight."

thesubwaypusher - you sound like a pansy. ;) I'm joking of course :) - I do appreciate your input about the weight and reminders about the dangers of lifting heavy things. I will try to remember to lift with my legs. I wonder if there is any benefit for someone (say like my petite 5'2" wife) to help balance the scope without supporting any weight. I am pretty sure my son (see avatar) won't be any help for a few years yet. :)

Thanks for the support GeneT! I am not sure how to predict what will happen when I get the 12", but I am hoping that with everyone's help I will be purchasing my last telescope. Sounds a little depressing, but it's really exciting. :)

It would really help my predictive abilities to know the transport dimensions and weight for the various pieces of the LX200-ACF 12". Anyone have this information?

Muffin Research - Meade might have to give you commission if I end up going with them. "I was amazed at what that scope will show and very impressed with the GoTo system, I think I never saw that many galaxies in one night. The views of certain nebula were also pretty astonishing."

You couldn't have delivered a better sales line for me. :)

Do you know if the mirror shift issue you speak of is still present in the model I will be purchasing?

Ok, GEM vs. Fork. Here's the thing... I am leaning towards the Meade. There hasn't been an overwhelmingly convincing argument to prefer the CGEM 1100. It looks to me that they sell the LX200 with the fork mount exclusively. I know I could get the OTA separately, but my instinct says to get what they have configured to work best with the scope. I realize that many of you prefer the GEM, but with my preference to keep the Meade "as designed" would you say that I am making a grave error with my AP ambitions in mind? Or is it just that I am making things more difficult?

Weight. Ok, let's forget about this, because it is making it harder for me to clearly see your points about scope. Let's assume that, for me, the awkwardness and weight of the scope will not be a problem. Also, I plan to be mobile with this scope for about 5-10 years. Then I hope to build a permanent roll-top observatory. We just need a house of our own first. But first things first, telescope, then home. :)

Finally, I am constructing the "dream" list. Here it is so far... please let me know what you think.

- Meade LX200-ACF 12"
- Meade Ultra Wedge
- Meade 12" Dew Shield
- Meade Zero Image Shift Electronic Micro-Focuser
- Meade F/6.3 Focal Reducer/Field Flattener
- Meade Telescope #895 Vibration Isolation Pads
- Meade Series 5000 Ultra Wide Angle Eyepiece - 30mm
- Televue Ethos Eyepieces - 21mm, 13mm, 6mm
- SBIG CCD - ST-8300C
- Meade 80mm ED APO Triplet Refractor

I don't know how I will use the 80mm as a guide-scope (if I need more equipment). Probably a question for the imaging forum though.

Again, I can't say thanks enough. I have no Astronomy buddies and the people I try to talk to about this (including my wife) look at me like I am reading a dictionary aloud. It's a lonely endeavor, and you guys are really coming through for me.
 

#36 gillmj24

gillmj24

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,182
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2005

Posted 17 October 2010 - 10:47 PM

You can always defork it and get a german equatorial mount (gem) later.

Oh you won't want to use the F/6.3 reducer as this was meant for use with the original sct which had a more highly curved focal plane.

Also unless you are getting a big discount for a package deal I would definitely suggest taking it easy with accessories. The only ones you really need to start out are the dew shield and some eyepieces. If your heart is set on the ethos eyepieces I would get the 13 first. The 6 will give too much magnification to give a sharp view on all but the best handful of nights a year (well maybe your seeing conditions are better than mine).

I would definitely get used to the telescope in alt az mode and enjoy the views before jumping into photography with a wedge.

Also if you are going for a good quality sbig camera there is a bit of an art/science of matching the pixel sizes (quoted in micrometers) to the focal length of the scope you are using. I'm no expert in that so I would ask on the beginning imaging forum.
 

#37 gillmj24

gillmj24

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,182
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2005

Posted 17 October 2010 - 11:12 PM

Didn't see all your questions before I hit reply.

I recommend an ADM rail for the 12" scope (or for any scope, I think they have all Meade and celestron models covered) and then rings that attach to the dovetail on this bar to hold your guidescope. With a fork mount you will also need another rail for the bottom of the scope so that you can have a counterweight system.

Again I recommend not worrying about lots and lots of extras aside from the "essentials" I mentioned until you are comfortable with the main scope.

If you search the archives I made some measurements but going from memory I would say the forks are about 24" long and the handles are probably 16" apart for the Meade 12. The tube doesnt "stow" with the corrector near the base like the smaller scopes do as others have mentioned so the corrector points up when stowed or when transporting - this is what makes the big boys a little harder to move in addition to being heavy. I would say the flat top of the corrector is about 40-44 inches from the base. Tube and forks are about 72lb.

I think the giant tripod is shorter than it used to be so that when extended the base is about 3' high if you don't extend the tripod legs. When the legs are folded for transport it is much longer probably 4.5' or more in length. They shortened the tripod but gave it a wider minimum footprint for stability sake, so the legs are still long. It weighs 50lb. It's not as fun to take down after a long winter observing session. Oh that brings me to another needed accy not on your list. If you ever vbture from your yard you MUST get a good deep cycle battery. They say you can run 20 hrs on C batteries but they don't power the scope reliably for that long ESPECIALLY in the cold!
 

#38 patrickkm

patrickkm

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 82
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2010

Posted 18 October 2010 - 12:31 AM

Agree with everything Joseph said. Can't conment on the photo stuff, as I am visual only, and he's probably right about that. I can say that it is difficult to conceive that you will have gotten such a handle on your new scope, and everything it can see and do in the first 9-12 months that you will feel compelled to dive into AP. At least that has been my experience.

I would add a 2x Barlow and thus effectively double your money on eyepieces. Most viewing for me has been at 32 and then 22 with an occasional Barlow for higher, even though I have higher powered EPs. On outstanding nights, I swap the 22 for a 15.

I am in Chicago, so YMMV.

I have 9.25, and a buddy has a C11 which is dubbed The Beast. A 12" would definitely exceed my definition of portability. If you will really be mobile, you will likely wish to add sturdy cases for your scope, mount, and expensive eye pieces. Filters are cool too, and good ones not cheap. Lumicons ND50, UHC, and OIII all run about $200.

How bout a finder scope quick release bracket? Vibration pads? A collapsable cart? A laser finder? All this stuff adds up quickly! This is your dream list, right!?

Whatever you decide, you should have a great time!
pkm
 

#39 Muffin Research

Muffin Research

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,625
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2007

Posted 18 October 2010 - 04:07 AM

Muffin Research - Meade might have to give you commission if I end up going with them. "I was amazed at what that scope will show and very impressed with the GoTo system, I think I never saw that many galaxies in one night. The views of certain nebula were also pretty astonishing."

You couldn't have delivered a better sales line for me. :)


Really? I was going for the oposite actually without really shooting down Meade as I was Impressed with my friends scope views (I'm C8 non goto so the extra 4" is pretty obvious and the Goto makes it easy to find things in light polluted skies) except for the items I mentioned.
Mirror shift will still be present, to what degree I don't know it's probably varies a bit from sample to sample.

My buddy was going to set it up in a an observatory but he did not get the permit to put it on his garage now it's in the backyard and he packs it up real good as it's just to heavy and too much hassle to put inside really the weight warnings are in this thread for a reason.

For a permanent setup 12"/14" is superb but to move around, hmmm I'd say no but you are always free to try and enjoy yourself with that :grin:

I see you have the Meade refractor on your list, good, is it for mounting on top? as the finderscope is rubbish and with the SCT even with focal reducer wide field is not an option, so that would be nice if you could switch from one to the other.

And I see you selected the 21/13/6 ethos on your dream list, is that for viewing with the Focal reducer?? I wonder how the 21 will react to the focal reducer and the 6mm might work at 320x with the FR but without at 508x it might be a bit too much? they all are a bit much without FR unless you are blessed with super steady skies.
Although I like to stick around the 2 & 1.1(2-3) mm exit pupils as well in any given scope they really work for me I'd just wonder if it's good to spend all that money on glass like that in that focal length of a scope.
(I'm actually returning to less widefield eyepieces in the SCT as it's much better to have another scope to get the widefield view to the universe.
I like Panoptics & TMB Paragons for the low end & medium field of view with SCT & Plossl & Ortho's for the planetary work)
I'm planning as well and I'm going to go get me the 2" 2x&4x Powermates and the 30mm Paragon 69° with that I can do 40/30/20/15/10,5/8mm and have a set of Baader Genuine Ortho's present for the Planets.
In the end I don't think pricewise that would differ much from the three Ethoses but I get all possible magnifications at normal focal length. with the focal reducer you might experience problems in focussing and vignetting with eyepiece greater than 20mm. but I really use the focal reducer only for photography visual use is much more pleasant without.

If the setup is for on the move to dark skies I'd really consider the 10" and an Astro-Tech ED 66 as guidescope, finder, widefield imaging lens.
And if you have dark skies at home I'd also consider the 10" that package is just way more manageable will perform great under dark skies, cools just a tad quicker, but yes the 12" will have 2 inches more aperture :grin:

Also consider that imaging with a 3 meter focal length scope is hmm how to say very hard so you'll certainly want the reducers for imaging even the F3.3.
 

#40 Muffin Research

Muffin Research

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,625
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2007

Posted 18 October 2010 - 04:28 AM

If you really want the Televue wide field glass I think the 41Panoptic and the Nagler T4 line is very suited
41Pan lowest magnification & largest field out of the scope 74x 0,9°
22T4 0,6° at 138x and 2.2 mm exit pupil.
17T4 0,5° at 179x
12T4 0,3° at 254x and 1.2 mm exit pupil, this is going to be excellent on Jupiter & Saturn I found the T4's to be very nice for planets being widefield, very sharp and well controlled I had my most detailed views through those.
For shorter fl's & larger magnifications I'd buy a simpler & cheaper design (although not too cheap if you want good planetary results) as those magnifications only come up on good nights with a well collimated scope at the right temperature so you won't use those as often as the other eyepieces.

OR maybe just skip all that and invest in a binoviewer system, Denkmeier with FilterSwitch & PowerSwitch diagonal and choose a right FL eyepiece set so you can have low power viewing, medium power viewing & high power viewing all with the flick of a switch with two eyes!! I think it's the best invention for a SCT ever!
With 24 panoptics that would give you the same magnification and exit pupils as with the 40mm Panoptic, 22T4 & 12T4 minus 0,2 degree's of field.
I just think that's an incredible deal have the comfort of 2 eyes viewing and three very useful magnifications and exit pupil marks.
with the ease of turning a knob and even have the possibility to slide filters in and out of view.

Sorry for me shooting all these things around, it's just I'm helping my friend out getting accustomed to this focal length scope and 12" of light grasp is great but again 3 meters of focal length and below 1° field is a bit of a nip in the butt.
And it's also nice to find the spot and tools that give the maximum amount of pleasure and viewtime versus the least amount of adjustments you have to make.

and it's just since I see 3 Ethos on your dreamlist the budget of those alone give thought for a completely different approach, on my 8" I think the bino's are a bit much, but on a larger system I would definitely go for it.
 

#41 mayidunk

mayidunk

    Don't Ask...

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,620
  • Joined: 17 Feb 2010

Posted 18 October 2010 - 08:07 AM

...So, after reading this wealth of information, here are my thoughts:


Weight does not seem like an issue to me.

You may feel that the weight is not an issue, but please consider that it is more than weight, it's also the bulk of that weight (the 12" is a large tube/fork assembly!), mounting that bulk onto a wedge isn't just a matter of clean and jerk it, you have to hold it in mid air and align the first bolt into the slot on the wedge as well. Also, once mounted, the wedge, and the forks, do not do the best job of holding that OTA steady. It's real shaky, especially at f/10.

Now comes the real fun part about the weight. With age, our backs tend to develop problems out of the blue. One minute you're hefting bags of cement, the next, it's all you can do to just get up off the couch! Also, as we get older, these things don't want to heal as quickly as they used to, either. I'm 54. I had tendinitis about 25 years ago that took around a year to finally stop being an issue. I haven't had an issue with it until earlier this year. Now, it just wants to hang on and hang on, and I am not experiencing the same healing progress with it that I did the last time. Getting old is a... well, you know. Especially when it prevents you from using your dream rig!

However, what's most important to me is the suggestion you make that Meade is giving away Coronados because their quality is terrible.

Would anyone out there disagree/agree with that assertion?


This, to me, is a very big red flag!

- 12" Weight - I'm ready, bring it on.

Perhaps for the next few years. However, age and gravity always win in the end. Go for a lighter AP rig, with a good, sturdy mount. For most AP, aperture isn't as much of a factor because, using a CCD imager, you'll be collecting, and stacking many, many frames over time. The resulting image will provide excellent results, transcending the need for a larger aperture! However, you'll want the aperture for visual, so get a large Dob as well. You can't have both because you're not made of money, right? Well, I got the Sky-Watcher 12" collapsible Dob. The OTA and rocker box are only about 40 lbs. a piece, they fit into my Honda Civic real nice, the optics are really good, and it cost under $1,000 shipped from Astronomics! However, if unlike me, you have dark skies at home, and don't need to schlep your scope 40 miles like I do, then get a cheaper 12", and keep in in the garage. You can use a hand truck to wheel it out into the yard when you want to use it. That's what I do, when I don't feel like schlepping the 12" to my dark sky site.

- MEADE - uh oh, has the brand outlived it's reputation? Is Celestron still the only alternate? Are they really better scopes or do they just have different problems?

More and more, these days, it's becoming a question of whether GSO is better than Synta, because for the most part, they're the ones making them! But that's just an aside. In this case, I believe that Meade and Celestron are still designing, and producing, their flagship lines. However, I believe GSO and Synta may be making all of the optics. If I'm mistaken in that assertion, I'm sure someone will correct me. As to who's better? I can't say.

- Meade Ultra Wedge? Is it good enough for my humble aims? Should I wait and buy later?

A year after buying it, you'll wistfully look upon these days and wish you had never bought it, as you then seek to sell it, and save up for the sturdy mount you wish you had gotten in the first place!

Also, think about the sanity of buying the 12" LX-200, only to defork the OTA and mount it on a GEM! The majority of the price you're paying for the LX-200 is for the mount. To defork it, means you'll have bought an OTA for close to $2,000, and be saddled with a mount you cannot use.

- To Fork or to GEM? Seems like people love and hate both. Can we take a vote? Remember, I want the best of both worlds (observation & photography).

GEM, because it will prove to be the sturdier of the two for AP. However, it's not the best for visual! So, fork mount it. However, the 12" OTA on that wedge/fork mount is just too shaky for either visual or AP!

SCTs are jacks of all trades, yet they are masters of none. That's their appeal over other designs, as you well know. Everything about your setup will be a compromise in one way or another. Whether you want your "bucket list" scope, the one scope to end all scopes, for the rest of your life... whether you want that to be a mash-up of compromises is purely up to you.

Experience is always the best teacher, except that once the lesson is learned, the damage is already done!

The above is purely and entirely my opinion based upon things I've read, and experiences I've had. In the end, as always, your mileage may vary. With that, I do wish you the very best of luck, and hope that you end up with a scope that, every time you look at it, makes you say to yourself, "Boy! I'm sure glad I got that scope!!" Because, if you can say that every time, then you'll know you done good.
 

#42 Starhawk

Starhawk

    Space Ranger

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,506
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2008

Posted 18 October 2010 - 08:36 AM

For the money, you can get a Nexstar 11 GPS, and that can be moved pretty easily since Celestron thought through where to put the handles. Celestron DOES support them, including the electronics, optics, and motors. It is silent while tracking, and it is compatible with hyperstar.

Correction to a previous post- hyperstar had support for pre-ACF M10 and M14 scopes. Meade's "improvement" came with a strange optical design at the front of the tube, and they couldn't agree to let Starizona have the data needed to make a hyperstar version for the new ones.

The real question is what is a compelling reason to go with the Meade package when this is available?

-Rich
 

#43 gillmj24

gillmj24

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,182
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2005

Posted 18 October 2010 - 08:46 AM

The real question is what is a compelling reason to go with the Meade package when this is available?

-Rich


"I prefer Celestron therefore EVERYONE ELSE should too" :roflmao:

It's funny when someone says should I get this Celestron everyone here says OH YEAH go for it :jump:

"Should I get Meade?" Oh no, I have second through fourth hand information that Meade isn't very good at all! They obviously stink when they are giving away $1700 solar scopes. I think the real reason for this is that Meade's Coronado division has come out with a new less expensive line of Solar scopes and so they are clearing out old inventory of the original Solarmax 40.

Meade owners (me anyway) say you should try both and see what you like. Way back when I just preferred the meade hand controller to the nexstar, personal preference and bought an ETX 5" instead of a Nexstar 5. I don't bash others for even considering the dark side, but maybe that's just me.

(Some) Celestron owners say you're silly for even considering a Meade.... :graduate:

Is it just all the political "I know what's best for you and the other guy doesn't" TV ads rubbing off?? I could understand that! :grin:
 

#44 thesubwaypusher

thesubwaypusher

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,054
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2004

Posted 18 October 2010 - 10:35 AM

I will try to remember to lift with my legs.


You won't be able to. The 12" is too heavy to safely lift with that method.
 

#45 gillmj24

gillmj24

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,182
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2005

Posted 18 October 2010 - 11:03 AM

Just don't hunch over with your back curved and deadlift it.

Squatting with the legs and keeping your back vertical, I think that is the correct method. That's what I have done with the RCX 12, a little heavier than the LX200. The original poster sounds like he is in better shape than I am!
 

#46 thesubwaypusher

thesubwaypusher

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,054
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2004

Posted 18 October 2010 - 01:09 PM

keeping your back vertical


Sorry Joseph. I had a 12", and I just don't see that happening.

Chris
 

#47 gillmj24

gillmj24

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,182
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2005

Posted 18 October 2010 - 01:42 PM

http://www.discountm...safelifting.htm

As soon as I get off the ground, I stay as vertical as possible.
 

#48 GeneT

GeneT

    Ely Kid

  • *****
  • Posts: 15,524
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008

Posted 18 October 2010 - 04:15 PM

Again, I can't say thanks enough. I have no Astronomy buddies and the people I try to talk to about this (including my wife) look at me like I am reading a dictionary aloud. It's a lonely endeavor, and you guys are really coming through for me.

This is the most important statement in this thread. My wife gives me the same look. 'You saw Jupiter last night, why again tonight?' Most of my friends don't have a clue. A few have hinted that they would like to join me on an outing. My concern is that they would be bored after an hour or so and expect me to bring them home. I don't understand how people can see a dark star filled sky and not be in awe. I don't understand how a person can see the moon close up, or Jupiter or Saturn, or M13 and not have their understanding of the universe and their place in it forever changed.
 

#49 thesubwaypusher

thesubwaypusher

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,054
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2004

Posted 19 October 2010 - 11:18 AM

http://www.discountm...safelifting.htm

As soon as I get off the ground, I stay as vertical as possible.


Thanks for the link wise guy. :grin:

When you bend down to get your arms around this VERY BULKY MASS of telescope, you need to bend your back and pull it to you. And then you need to keep your back bent as you lift because your arms are still around it. It is impossible to lift safely. The picture of the little animated person with the 3 pound cardboard box isn't really indicative of reality.
 

#50 thesubwaypusher

thesubwaypusher

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,054
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2004

Posted 19 October 2010 - 11:21 AM

[quote)I don't understand how people can see a dark star filled sky and not be in awe. I don't understand how a person can see the moon close up, or Jupiter or Saturn, or M13 and not have their understanding of the universe and their place in it forever changed. [/quote]

I agree Gene.
 


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