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

Mewlon 180c v Meade lx200 8 on Jupiter and Saturn from New Zealand

  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

#1 Stopforths

Stopforths

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 250
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2018

Posted 18 July 2021 - 10:24 AM

Finally got to compare the 2 telescopes on Jupiter and Saturn with twin brother Kevin.  We are both seasoned observing addicts smile.gif

 

Both given 30-40 minutes to reach ambient temperature in reasonable seeing.

 

The meade needed recollimating after employing the  mirror lock and using the moonlight focuser.  Used a 9mm Nagler to collimate and got it very close.

 

To cut to the chase the Meade 8 is a fine sct really shows a lot on Jupiter and the uhtc coatings and the extra inch of aperture show more colour and a brighter image than the 180mm mewlon.

 

The image was however a whisker sharper in the Mewlon and the detail was more etch like at around 200-216 x on Jupiter  than in the Meade.  The Meade was showing a fine image but the Mewlon clearly had an advantage.  One could speculate why smaller obstruction and less aperture in not quite perfect seeing or slightly better optics possible all of those things.  Both showed 2 ovals in particular and very similar detail in the bands. 

 

Saturn was superb in both telescopes and again the Meade was clearly brighter. We used a number of top notch eyepieces and went to and fro between the scopes for over an hour.

7mm Tak MC ortho .965

9mm Tak MC ortho .965

10mm Baader ortho

8mm Televue Plossl

7.5mm Tak LE Lots of detail visible in both scopes and the divisions in the ring showed up nicely.  Not perfect seeing but lovely image in both scopes.

 

 

All  performing as expected Saturn was virtually overhead we are 42 degrees south.  The fainter satellites were easily seen in both scopes.

 

Again the Mewlon was slightly sharper.  The best view of the night was in the 7.5mm LE in the Mewlon.  The meade was a lovely sharp contrasty image there wasn't much in it.

 

I should mention for a while we used a 9mm ortho in the Meade and a 10mm in the Mewlon to give 225 and 216 respectively on Jupiter.

 

Given the meade has good optics and cost 40% as much including the mount its a fine performer.   Just not quite as good as the wonderful Mewlon 180C which must be close to Cassegrain perfection.


Edited by Stopforths, 19 July 2021 - 12:03 AM.

  • Daniel Mounsey, turtle86, plyscope and 6 others like this

#2 Supernova74

Supernova74

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,760
  • Joined: 25 May 2020
  • Loc: Epsom surrey near (London)

Posted 18 July 2021 - 10:35 AM

Good little user experience thread in a comparison scenario should be more on CN


  • Stopforths likes this

#3 Kevin Barker

Kevin Barker

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 926
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2009
  • Loc: Auckland, NZ

Posted 18 July 2021 - 04:12 PM

I was the second observer using these two wonderful scopes. Here is what I wrote in another thread after observing.

"My brother and I have just spent a couple of hours observing with a Meade LX200 8 " and a Mewlon 180c set up side by side. Examining Saturn and Jupiter high in our 42 degree South skies using orthoscopics and plossl eyepieces in the 200X-280 X range. Seeing very good although the seeing waned as it became close to freezing.

The Meade showed similar detail on Jupiter with slightly warmer tones. The Mewlon was a little sharper making belts and zones a little easier to see. Not much in it both scopes were delivering similar detail perhaps the Mewlon was revealing a few extra features at times but it was close and with patience the Meade also revealed pleasing views. Sometimes I felt  zones and ovals which were a little harder to pick up in the Meade. But this could be a seeing phenomena as the seeing was fluctuating a little.

On Saturn the Mewlon did appear to have a slight edge as well. Although there were not really any features not visible in the Meade that I could see in the Mewlon.

An observer would be pretty happy with either scope as we both were.

The Meade was a little brighter, the coatings on the Mewlon 180c seem to deliver slightly cleaner whiter images. We had enough eyepieces to get similar magnifications and plenty of time to observe. It was a case of getting the ideal magnification in one scope and then the other and then swap observers. Seeing was very good but sometimes it fluctuated.

I have an good older 8 inch Meade and think Phil's LX 200 is a better sample than mine. It is improved by locking the mirror and using a Moonlite 10:1 CS focuser and it has very good UHTC coatings. Phil's LX200 was purchased new 14 years back but hardly used by the first owner.

The quality of the Tak Mewlon image is outstanding, great contrast but his Meade is also a very good one which approaches the Tak in terms of sharpness.

Yes the Meade is a little brighter with a warmer tone. The slight coffee coloured SEB and NEB stood out more but the Mewlon has less aperture. But the Mewlon seemed to show fine detail a little easier.

 

Off to bed, smiling as we had some great views."

 

I am visiting for a few more days and if we get the chance we may compare again. I think his 8" LX200 is a great scope, Phil recently picked it up at a bargain price. perhaps folks are a bit wary of their electronics etc or the age of the scope. It looks brand new.

I think the Meade will go a little deeper with DSO's but of course we now have a first quarter Moon.


  • paul m schofield and Stopforths like this

#4 Supernova74

Supernova74

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,760
  • Joined: 25 May 2020
  • Loc: Epsom surrey near (London)

Posted 18 July 2021 - 04:23 PM

I was the second observer using these two wonderful scopes. Here is what I wrote in another thread after observing.

"My brother and I have just spent a couple of hours observing with a Meade LX200 8 " and a Mewlon 180c set up side by side. Examining Saturn and Jupiter high in our 42 degree South skies using orthoscopics and plossl eyepieces in the 200X-280 X range. Seeing very good although the seeing waned as it became close to freezing.

The Meade showed similar detail on Jupiter with slightly warmer tones. The Mewlon was a little sharper making belts and zones a little easier to see. Not much in it both scopes were delivering similar detail perhaps the Mewlon was revealing a few extra features at times but it was close and with patience the Meade also revealed pleasing views. Sometimes I felt  zones and ovals which were a little harder to pick up in the Meade. But this could be a seeing phenomena as the seeing was fluctuating a little.

On Saturn the Mewlon did appear to have a slight edge as well. Although there were not really any features not visible in the Meade that I could see in the Mewlon.

An observer would be pretty happy with either scope as we both were.

The Meade was a little brighter, the coatings on the Mewlon 180c seem to deliver slightly cleaner whiter images. We had enough eyepieces to get similar magnifications and plenty of time to observe. It was a case of getting the ideal magnification in one scope and then the other and then swap observers. Seeing was very good but sometimes it fluctuated.

I have an good older 8 inch Meade and think Phil's LX 200 is a better sample than mine. It is improved by locking the mirror and using a Moonlite 10:1 CS focuser and it has very good UHTC coatings. Phil's LX200 was purchased new 14 years back but hardly used by the first owner.

The quality of the Tak Mewlon image is outstanding, great contrast but his Meade is also a very good one which approaches the Tak in terms of sharpness.

Yes the Meade is a little brighter with a warmer tone. The slight coffee coloured SEB and NEB stood out more but the Mewlon has less aperture. But the Mewlon seemed to show fine detail a little easier.

 

Off to bed, smiling as we had some great views."

 

I am visiting for a few more days and if we get the chance we may compare again. I think his 8" LX200 is a great scope, Phil recently picked it up at a bargain price. perhaps folks are a bit wary of their electronics etc or the age of the scope. It looks brand new.

I think the Meade will go a little deeper with DSO's but of course we now have a first quarter Moon.

It just shows really even more mass produced scopes can hold there own against the higher end premium brands. 

I own the 12” ACF (modern version) haven’t used it enough yet to come up with a prediction.the Meade scts have been a little bit hit and miss over the years in the image coming across soft at times however the ACF optics do seem to be very good for visual, of course tho conditions pending.so in a nut shell so to speak it seems anything optical when amateur astronomy is concerned you have to spend considerable more money for small increments in optical performance.maybe not feasible in the long run as it’s not like your getting x3 the optical gain in spending a whole lot more.


  • Kevin Barker and Phil Barker like this

#5 Kevin Barker

Kevin Barker

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 926
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2009
  • Loc: Auckland, NZ

Posted 18 July 2021 - 06:50 PM

It just shows really even more mass produced scopes can hold there own against the higher end premium brands. 

I own the 12” ACF (modern version) haven’t used it enough yet to come up with a prediction.the Meade scts have been a little bit hit and miss over the years in the image coming across soft at times however the ACF optics do seem to be very good for visual, of course tho conditions pending.so in a nut shell so to speak it seems anything optical when amateur astronomy is concerned you have to spend considerable more money for small increments in optical performance.maybe not feasible in the long run as it’s not like your getting x3 the optical gain in spending a whole lot more.

True re mass produced scopes although it can be a bit of a lottery with quality control. I have looked through a couple of 8 inch and larger SCT scopes which seemed to have satisfactory at best optics, even when collimated. Phil seems to have gotten lucky with this one. It snaps into focus and delivers impressive planetary views, better than I expected. Perhaps the UHTC coatings help. Phil had tweaked the scope to make sure it was well collimated and the scope was at ambient temperature.

 

With a Tak it seems you are more likely to get a high performing scope. I have only looked through a few samples but they have been consistently excellent.

Earlier in the night before we had a sleep we used Phil's 1990 fc-100 which delivered some exquisite images, the attachment to the dovetail had a wee issue which we have now fixed so we did not use it with his bigger apertures.

 

The fc-100 started off by splitting Antares effortlessly at 180 X and showing Alpha Centaurus perfectly split at a lower power. Really pretty high contrast views of the first quarter Moon and various clusters. I can see why the 100 mm Tak fluorite's are so popular.


Edited by Kevin Barker, 18 July 2021 - 06:51 PM.

  • plyscope, payner, paul m schofield and 1 other like this

#6 teashea

teashea

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,802
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2020
  • Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

Posted 18 July 2021 - 08:22 PM

Finally got to compare the 2 telescopes on Jupiter and Saturn with twin brother Kevin.  We are both seasoned observing addicts smile.gif

 

Both given 30-40 minutes to reach ambient temperature in reasonable seeing.

 

The meade needed recollimating after employing the  mirror lock and using the moonlight focuser.  Used a 9mm Nagler to collimate and got it very close.

 

To cut to the chase the Meade 8 is a fine sct really shows a lot on Jupiter and the uhtc coatings and the extra inch of aperture show more colour and a brighter image than the 180mm mewlon.

 

The image was however a whisker sharper in the Mewlon and the detail was more etch like at around 200-216 x on Jupiter  than in the Meade.  The Meade was showing a fine image but the Mewlon clearly had an advantage.  One could speculate why smaller obstruction and less aperture in not quite perfect seeing or slightly better optics possible all of those things.  Both showed 2 ovals in particular and very similar detail in the bands. 

 

Saturn was superb in both telescopes and again the Meade was clearly brighter. We used a number of top notch eyepieces and went to and fro between the scopes for over an hour.

7mm Tak MC ortho .965

9mm Tak MC ortho .965

10mm Baader ortho

8mm Televue Plossl

7.5mm Tak LE vbisible in both scopes and the divisions in the ring showed up nicely.  Not perfect seeing but lovely image in both scopes.

 

 

All  performing as expected Saturn was virtually overhead we are 42 degrees south.  The fainter satellites were easily seen in both scopes.

 

Again the Mewlon was slightly sharper.  The best view of the night was in the 7.5mm LE in the Mewlon.  The meade was a lovely sharp contrasty image there wasn't much in it.

 

I should mention for a while we used a 9mm ortho in the Meade and a 10mm in the Mewlon to give 225 and 216 respectively on Jupiter.

 

Given the meade has good optics and cost 40% as much including the mount its a fine performer.   Just not quite as good as the wonderful Mewlon 180C which must be close to Cassegrain perfection.

I have not used the Meade but I do like my 180C very much.  The quality is wonderful, optics and finish quality.

 

202462975_10222456328731395_1267816109289772361_n.jpg


  • Kevin Barker likes this

#7 payner

payner

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,702
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2007
  • Loc: Bluegrass & SW Appalachian Regions, Kentucky

Posted 18 July 2021 - 09:26 PM

Let's not forget the Mewlon is coming out of the gate handicapped in that comparison. The aperture is 7 inches vs 8 inches. I know there will be those that will respond it's just one inch; yes, but one inch makes a difference with high quality telescopes when low contrast features are observed on objects such as the planets.


  • turtle86, Nippon, Stopforths and 1 other like this

#8 Stopforths

Stopforths

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 250
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2018

Posted 18 July 2021 - 09:34 PM

Absolutely correct there.   It would be interesting up against a high end 5-6 inch apo on planets and is much more portable.  They focuser is a joy its lightweight looks beautiful and delivers very fine views.  Not much to not like about them.  That said the lx200 8 inch I have is a fine all round performer with the added focuser. Its very close in terms of planetary performance to a much more expensive OTA.

 

 

The Mewlon 210 would be a real weapon for fine viewing and only 8 kg in weight.  

 

Let's not forget the Mewlon is coming out of the gate handicapped in that comparison. The aperture is 7 inches vs 8 inches. I know there will be those that will respond it's just one inch; yes, but one inch makes a difference with high quality telescopes when low contrast features are observed on objects such as the planets.


  • teashea likes this

#9 turtle86

turtle86

    Mr. Coffee

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,169
  • Joined: 09 Oct 2006

Posted 18 July 2021 - 10:08 PM

Finally got to compare the 2 telescopes on Jupiter and Saturn with twin brother Kevin.  We are both seasoned observing addicts smile.gif

 

Both given 30-40 minutes to reach ambient temperature in reasonable seeing.

 

The meade needed recollimating after employing the  mirror lock and using the moonlight focuser.  Used a 9mm Nagler to collimate and got it very close.

 

To cut to the chase the Meade 8 is a fine sct really shows a lot on Jupiter and the uhtc coatings and the extra inch of aperture show more colour and a brighter image than the 180mm mewlon.

 

The image was however a whisker sharper in the Mewlon and the detail was more etch like at around 200-216 x on Jupiter  than in the Meade.  The Meade was showing a fine image but the Mewlon clearly had an advantage.  One could speculate why smaller obstruction and less aperture in not quite perfect seeing or slightly better optics possible all of those things.  Both showed 2 ovals in particular and very similar detail in the bands. 

 

Saturn was superb in both telescopes and again the Meade was clearly brighter. We used a number of top notch eyepieces and went to and fro between the scopes for over an hour.

7mm Tak MC ortho .965

9mm Tak MC ortho .965

10mm Baader ortho

8mm Televue Plossl

7.5mm Tak LE vbisible in both scopes and the divisions in the ring showed up nicely.  Not perfect seeing but lovely image in both scopes.

 

 

All  performing as expected Saturn was virtually overhead we are 42 degrees south.  The fainter satellites were easily seen in both scopes.

 

Again the Mewlon was slightly sharper.  The best view of the night was in the 7.5mm LE in the Mewlon.  The meade was a lovely sharp contrasty image there wasn't much in it.

 

I should mention for a while we used a 9mm ortho in the Meade and a 10mm in the Mewlon to give 225 and 216 respectively on Jupiter.

 

Given the meade has good optics and cost 40% as much including the mount its a fine performer.   Just not quite as good as the wonderful Mewlon 180C which must be close to Cassegrain perfection.

 

Excellent review!  My own experience with these scopes is much the same.  Until about 6 years ago, I had an 8" LX200 classic with excellent optics. I presently have a Mewlon 180c, and when the seeing is good, the planetary detail is exceptionally crisp, but only a shade better than what I remember viewing in my second LX200.  I'm very happy with my Mewlon 180c, but I agree that a good LX200 is a fine performer in its own right and a great value for the money.


  • payner, Kevin Barker and Stopforths like this

#10 Supernova74

Supernova74

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,760
  • Joined: 25 May 2020
  • Loc: Epsom surrey near (London)

Posted 19 July 2021 - 03:12 AM

Let's not forget the Mewlon is coming out of the gate handicapped in that comparison. The aperture is 7 inches vs 8 inches. I know there will be those that will respond it's just one inch; yes, but one inch makes a difference with high quality telescopes when low contrast features are observed on objects such as the planets.

Well even tho Meade oversizes there primary mirrors by 0.25” and to be perfectly honest the effective aperture is not even an inch due to the secondary obstruction so it’s not even 1”

exsample put two sports cars in a drag race one has been massively upgraded to the highest specification and components the best money can buy!?then the under dog car has more run of the mill components which you can puchase off the shelf not very expensive,the underdog car should be miles behind however it’s not it’s a lot closer call to the finish line.

same principle applies,there is hardly anything in it,and if it was my money i would feel very disheartened knowing that an item cost 6x the price didn’t perform as well as it should of done.

however that’s optics for you considerable more money for very small increments in performance!?


Edited by Supernova74, 19 July 2021 - 03:24 AM.

  • Phil Barker likes this

#11 payner

payner

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,702
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2007
  • Loc: Bluegrass & SW Appalachian Regions, Kentucky

Posted 19 July 2021 - 09:17 AM

Well, the Mewlon is not an unobstructed 7" either. So, the net effective aperture is about 1" difference. 

 

You related my point, an inch of increased effective aperture did not equate to an advantage because of the optical quality difference. But, on paper, and "out go the gate", the Mewlon was indeed handicapped.

Randy



#12 payner

payner

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,702
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2007
  • Loc: Bluegrass & SW Appalachian Regions, Kentucky

Posted 19 July 2021 - 09:26 AM

Also, the 0.25" increase (advertised 8.25") Meade applies to the primary mirrors in their SCT are to mask for aberrations such a turned edge. It is not, of course, an increase of 0.25" in effective aperture.



#13 Supernova74

Supernova74

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,760
  • Joined: 25 May 2020
  • Loc: Epsom surrey near (London)

Posted 19 July 2021 - 09:44 AM

No how can a scope costing £3647 uk pounds possibly be handicapped in any shape or form when comparing it with a run of the mill Meade 8” OTA not even ACF optics costing (around £1300) it’s almost you should feel sorry for the mewlon in costing an additional over £2300.1” aperture in astronomy means nothing in this day and age it’s the quality of the optics which shine through not always the aperture,this is another classic exsample you truly don’t always get what you pay for in life the photos prove otherwise.



#14 payner

payner

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,702
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2007
  • Loc: Bluegrass & SW Appalachian Regions, Kentucky

Posted 19 July 2021 - 10:29 AM

You are not taking in the full context of my statements. No, no reason to "feel sorry" (I don't feel sorry for any telescope!) for the Mewlon or any other. This is going nowhere, so I will leave it, but will say the last level of quality that sets a scope like the Mewlon apart from the Meade, for example, escalates the price. If one is happy with the Meade (and it is a fine scope), then save some $ with it over the other.

 

Randy


  • Nippon and teashea like this

#15 Nippon

Nippon

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,586
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2009
  • Loc: Central Florida

Posted 19 July 2021 - 02:27 PM

A guy in our club had a Questar 3.5 and we all marveled at it's optical and mechanical excellence. Then happily returned to our larger and far less expensive scopes.


  • Reid W, Stopforths and Stevencbradley like this

#16 Kevin Barker

Kevin Barker

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 926
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2009
  • Loc: Auckland, NZ

Posted 19 July 2021 - 03:03 PM

Some pertinent points made.

Yes the 23 mm of extra aperture is significant over 180 mm.

And the slightly larger central obstruction of the Meade  will play out too. 37 % v 33 %

 

I think the Meade must be well baffled for stray light (as the Mewlon appears to be) and it must also have well corrected mirrors with very good coatings.

 

There really was'nt much in it, the Mewlon seemed to show detail a little easier and images were a tad sharper. Both scopes revealed similar detail. 

 

It was cloudy last evening alas.

Re cost, here in NZ the complete LX200 new would have been a similar cost to the Mewlon ota.

 

I can understand why folks would purchase the Mewlon, especially if they have more than one telescope. The mechanics, fit and finish are on another level.


  • Nippon likes this

#17 Nippon

Nippon

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,586
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2009
  • Loc: Central Florida

Posted 19 July 2021 - 03:15 PM

Observing with a couple of friends the other night who both had C8s and me with a Mewlon 180 we had the same impression.



#18 Supernova74

Supernova74

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,760
  • Joined: 25 May 2020
  • Loc: Epsom surrey near (London)

Posted 19 July 2021 - 03:18 PM

Some pertinent points made.

Yes the 23 mm of extra aperture is significant over 180 mm.

And the slightly larger central obstruction of the Meade  will play out too. 37 % v 33 %

 

I think the Meade must be well baffled for stray light (as the Mewlon appears to be) and it must also have well corrected mirrors with very good coatings.

 

There really was'nt much in it, the Mewlon seemed to show detail a little easier and images were a tad sharper. Both scopes revealed similar detail. 

 

It was cloudy last evening alas.

Re cost, here in NZ the complete LX200 new would have been a similar cost to the Mewlon ota.

 

I can understand why folks would purchase the Mewlon, especially if they have more than one telescope. The mechanics, fit and finish are on another level.

Yes i must admit the tak mewlons do have this kind of retro space age look about them,or is it just me with my vivid imagination!? all most if thay was manufactured in NASA laboratorys or something!?

each to there own i suppose.


  • teashea likes this

#19 Stopforths

Stopforths

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 250
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2018

Posted 19 July 2021 - 03:39 PM

The OTA is a work of art lightweight surprisingly so.

The quality of the fit and finish is excellent.

I love the way the tube  curves in at the end to 180mm and the quality of the paintwork etc .  

The baffles seem to be very good certainly better than the GSO8 I had which was also an excellent telescope.

The focuser is a joy to use its as smooth as the moonlight to use hard to believe really easy to fine focus and it snaps into focus.  You do not need a moonlight or any other focuser for this telescope it works as you want it to work  You just don't get that with sct telescopes.

The finder is another work of fine art sharp and the way it can be used as a carry handle I really rate that.  I almost stop myself doing that you think it might affect alignment but it doesn't.

 

One minor thing I don't like those takahashi helical 1.25 inch adaptors but hey I usually  use a 2 inch so it doesn't matter.

 

Its a longish tube and the primary is around f 3.5 much longer than the f2 primary in a sct.

 

It looks great I have mine in a lovely box I acquired many years ago made of superb Rimu wood.  Rimu is a big very slow growing New Zealand conifer with beautiful  reddish wood..

 

Even the 2 inch performance is OK visually.   The coma is about the same as the Meade 8 non ACF and only noticeable in the longest focal length eyepieces near the edges.  

 

There is a lot of stuff about the affects of obstruction etc I still believe this telescope will pretty much match a 120-130 Apo of the highest quality in contrast but easily beat it in resolution as it should.   I noticed in the Mewlon the moons of Jupiter were easy to discern there sizes and respective colours etc seemed to stand out.  

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

Yes i must admit the tak mewlons do have this kind of retro space age look about them,or is it just me with my vivid imagination!? all most if thay was manufactured in NASA laboratorys or something!?

each to there own i suppose.


  • payner and teashea like this

#20 Supernova74

Supernova74

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,760
  • Joined: 25 May 2020
  • Loc: Epsom surrey near (London)

Posted 19 July 2021 - 04:01 PM

The OTA is a work of art lightweight surprisingly so.

The quality of the fit and finish is excellent.

I love the way the tube  curves in at the end to 180mm and the quality of the paintwork etc .  

The baffles seem to be very good certainly better than the GSO8 I had which was also an excellent telescope.

The focuser is a joy to use its as smooth as the moonlight to use hard to believe really easy to fine focus and it snaps into focus.  You do not need a moonlight or any other focuser for this telescope it works as you want it to work  You just don't get that with sct telescopes.

The finder is another work of fine art sharp and the way it can be used as a carry handle I really rate that.  I almost stop myself doing that you think it might affect alignment but it doesn't.

 

One minor thing I don't like those takahashi helical 1.25 inch adaptors but hey I usually  use a 2 inch so it doesn't matter.

 

Its a longish tube and the primary is around f 3.5 much longer than the f2 primary in a sct.

 

It looks great I have mine in a lovely box I acquired many years ago made of superb Rimu wood.  Rimu is a big very slow growing New Zealand conifer with beautiful  reddish wood..

 

Even the 2 inch performance is OK visually.   The coma is about the same as the Meade 8 non ACF and only noticeable in the longest focal length eyepieces near the edges.  

 

There is a lot of stuff about the affects of obstruction etc I still believe this telescope will pretty much match a 120-130 Apo of the highest quality in contrast but easily beat it in resolution as it should.   I noticed in the Mewlon the moons of Jupiter were easy to discern there sizes and respective colours etc seemed to stand out.  

Well they are lookers!?even optically it seems how about the FOV compared to a sct cassagrain.


  • teashea likes this

#21 teashea

teashea

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,802
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2020
  • Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

Posted 19 July 2021 - 07:51 PM

Absolutely correct there.   It would be interesting up against a high end 5-6 inch apo on planets and is much more portable.  They focuser is a joy its lightweight looks beautiful and delivers very fine views.  Not much to not like about them.  That said the lx200 8 inch I have is a fine all round performer with the added focuser. Its very close in terms of planetary performance to a much more expensive OTA.

 

 

The Mewlon 210 would be a real weapon for fine viewing and only 8 kg in weight.  

I believe that there has been discussion here on CN on that issue, but I cannot remember where.  As I recall, in comparison to a Takahashi five or six inch, it is pretty close but a refractor has a touch more clarity.  I have not done a side by side comparison with my TSA120 but I believe that the TSA120 has an advantage in clarity.  I cannot judge the brightness issue without a side by side.


  • Stopforths likes this

#22 teashea

teashea

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,802
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2020
  • Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

Posted 19 July 2021 - 07:53 PM

Yes i must admit the tak mewlons do have this kind of retro space age look about them,or is it just me with my vivid imagination!? all most if thay was manufactured in NASA laboratorys or something!?

each to there own i suppose.

.... or by elves.


  • Cpk133 likes this

#23 teashea

teashea

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,802
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2020
  • Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

Posted 19 July 2021 - 07:57 PM

The OTA is a work of art lightweight surprisingly so.

The quality of the fit and finish is excellent.

I love the way the tube  curves in at the end to 180mm and the quality of the paintwork etc .  

The baffles seem to be very good certainly better than the GSO8 I had which was also an excellent telescope.

The focuser is a joy to use its as smooth as the moonlight to use hard to believe really easy to fine focus and it snaps into focus.  You do not need a moonlight or any other focuser for this telescope it works as you want it to work  You just don't get that with sct telescopes.

The finder is another work of fine art sharp and the way it can be used as a carry handle I really rate that.  I almost stop myself doing that you think it might affect alignment but it doesn't.

 

One minor thing I don't like those takahashi helical 1.25 inch adaptors but hey I usually  use a 2 inch so it doesn't matter.

 

Its a longish tube and the primary is around f 3.5 much longer than the f2 primary in a sct.

 

It looks great I have mine in a lovely box I acquired many years ago made of superb Rimu wood.  Rimu is a big very slow growing New Zealand conifer with beautiful  reddish wood..

 

Even the 2 inch performance is OK visually.   The coma is about the same as the Meade 8 non ACF and only noticeable in the longest focal length eyepieces near the edges.  

 

There is a lot of stuff about the affects of obstruction etc I still believe this telescope will pretty much match a 120-130 Apo of the highest quality in contrast but easily beat it in resolution as it should.   I noticed in the Mewlon the moons of Jupiter were easy to discern there sizes and respective colours etc seemed to stand out.  

Yes, the effect of the secondary mirror does not seem to be a great issue.  And, with regard to the the moons and their relative sizes, that is an issue I had not considered.


  • Stopforths likes this

#24 Stopforths

Stopforths

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 250
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2018

Posted 19 July 2021 - 09:47 PM

I am seeing similar coma or field curvature to a standard 8 inch sct not a problem with 1.25 inch eyepieces and only near the edge.

Well they are lookers!?even optically it seems how about the FOV compared to a sct cassagrain.



#25 Stopforths

Stopforths

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 250
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2018

Posted 22 July 2021 - 08:19 AM

Just having a wee session with the fc100 f8 versus the lx200.  Seeing not the best and the fc100 is showing a sharper view of Jupiter and Saturn.    To be expected in this seeing the refractor is superb  but even it at times is struggling with unstable air. GRS shows more colour  in the lx200 but the image is sharper in the refractor.   Inch for inch the florite f8 is on another page but gives up a lot of aperture.  It won't keep up in better seeing but will still throw out a fine planetary image.  The fine detail in the bands is extraordinary in this 1990 vintage apo. 


  • Kevin Barker, jeffmac and teashea like this


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