New or used
Posted 11 July 2005 - 09:03 AM
quick question for you:
would you get a scope NEW or used from Astromart? I'm finalizing my decision on the STF Mirage 7" for $2400, although I 've seen a couple on astromart, and some good deals on other scopes too.
Question is if it is more convenient getting it used or new...
Tomorrow Stellar Optical will be ordering the scopes, so I will have to give him an answer...
Posted 11 July 2005 - 11:01 AM
bought from astromart, cloudynights and ebay.
all have been great. Saved me boat loads of cash.
LX200 8 f10
Orion 90mm Mak
LX200 8" 6.3
and a used nexstar 5 I bought used from a Hands on optics.
Posted 11 July 2005 - 11:09 AM
Posted 11 July 2005 - 12:20 PM
only matter is that the scope would be perfectly as stated in the ad.
Posted 11 July 2005 - 01:53 PM
There is a difference , but to me it wasn't a 1400$ difference. That was the difference between a lx200 10" classic vs a new one. if i was buying new I would of had to get a lxd55 8"....big difference.
I tend to look here and on astromart first...ebay is ok but , the people run more scams there or are selling dad's old scope etc and no nothing about them... vs the astronomy sites are more of I, want a bigger scope so this has to go.
I find that they take great care of. their equipment in general....some exception of course
Posted 11 July 2005 - 02:58 PM
are there any other scope with the same quality?
Posted 11 July 2005 - 03:18 PM
Posted 11 July 2005 - 03:58 PM
the c 9.25 has a very loyal following some say it is the perfect balance. another one to look at is the vixen 200 series...in doing some reading it looks very interesting for photo work...nice flat images, low cool down time built in dew shield. etc there are a few posters in cloudynights with them.
Posted 11 July 2005 - 04:03 PM
The c9.25 is only $1200, although it does not have a built in fan, nor the zero image shift focuser...
Never looked on the Vixen series though...
Posted 11 July 2005 - 08:32 PM
Posted 11 July 2005 - 10:38 PM
Posted 11 July 2005 - 10:43 PM
Question is now: would a C9.25 be better than those high quality SCT like ITE's or STF's?
Posted 11 July 2005 - 10:55 PM
On Ed Ting's site Scopereviews.com, only the TakSCT225, the AP Mak, the Questar and the Cervalo rate higher (in his big picture of things).
Let's just say that it is darn sharp and anyway you slice it, it is a DEAL for the money.
IF the Meade RCX, Mewlon, Mirage ect ARE better - you pay a lot of money for a relatively small gain in sharpness of view. But hey, many of us would gladly pay thousands for a slight edge in performance!
Posted 11 July 2005 - 11:52 PM
can the 9.25 be used for imaging a well. i have seen its planetary work, but what about widefields or deep sky?
I will be using it for visual as well, but would like to be more focused on imaging
Posted 12 July 2005 - 12:09 AM
It can be used for imaging. Get the Carbon Fiber one for that.
It makes a great combo with a widefield refractor like the Megrez.
Posted 12 July 2005 - 12:14 AM
I've read somewhere that the carbon fiber ones are not that good though...trying to remember where. I think was something like the internal currents were not dissipating quikcly enough with the carbon fiber...
Posted 12 July 2005 - 09:30 AM
like i said many of the 9 owners feel it has some of the best glass around. in fact those that get bigger scopes , will keepe that 9.25 around.
Posted 12 July 2005 - 09:32 AM
will research a bit around...there's one up on Amart right now but is AL...