I had both the DS16 and the DS10 at the same time. The 16 made the 10 look tiny,
How could anyone use it? Could not rotate it and the mount was 4 times too small.
Posted 16 January 2025 - 07:05 PM
I had both the DS16 and the DS10 at the same time. The 16 made the 10 look tiny,
How could anyone use it? Could not rotate it and the mount was 4 times too small.
Posted 16 January 2025 - 07:08 PM
Meade did not duplicate the design of the Naglers but they copied them and made that one small change. And they copied the Wide Fields as well. Without the Naglers and WideFields, the Meade UWAs and SWAs would not have existed. And of course it was Meade, they advertised an 84 degree field but when I measured the 14mm, it was ~79 degrees.
And it happened all over again with the Panotics, the Type 5 and Type 6 Naglers as well as the Ethos.. The Meade Series 5000 SWAs and UWAs are derivatives of the Naglers and Panoptics. Meade never developed 100 degree eyepieces but their primary supplier JOC did and sold them under their Explore Scientific label.
TeleVue did not invent the Wide field eyepiece but they did invent the ~82 degree AFoV eyepiece that was sharp to the edge in a fast scope. To say otherwise would be revisionist history.
Again, it is interesting that the one piece of optics that Meade did develop, the ACF, they didn't know how to market it.
Jon
They did a copy of the whole TV line like the Cricle NJ Plossls as well.
Edited by CHASLX200, 16 January 2025 - 07:11 PM.
Posted 16 January 2025 - 07:10 PM
From an eyepiece perspective, I like Meades. Their Plossls are fine, I have four SWA, and one UWA, several HD-60s, and a pair of Cemax.
Orion introduced me to Long Perng's LHD LER UWA eyepieces, and the Trimag 3x Barlow.
I loved the first gen 4000 plossl's and SWA's and UWA's.
Posted 16 January 2025 - 11:10 PM
How could anyone use it? Could not rotate it and the mount was 4 times too small.
You learned how to position it and you got comfy using a ladder. I never had any problem with the mount. I thought it was fine. It tracked and when the vibration went away it worked great. If you have a mount that tracks you don't need to bump it along and create vibration. The only time it would vibrate at high powers would be if you were focusing. But you get smart and get an electric focuser. That cures that problem. I never could understand why you buy a great eq mount and then push it along manually.
Posted 16 January 2025 - 11:28 PM
You learned how to position it and you got comfy using a ladder. I never had any problem with the mount. I thought it was fine. It tracked and when the vibration went away it worked great. If you have a mount that tracks you don't need to bump it along and create vibration. The only time it would vibrate at high powers would be if you were focusing. But you get smart and get an electric focuser. That cures that problem. I never could understand why you buy a great eq mount and then push it along manually.
I just bought OnStep kits for two orphans - an EXOS2-GT bought for the tripod - it's essentially a brand new LXD75 but for the ultra-crappy go-to, which is getting replaced - and my extremely fine Synta EQ3-2 in Orion Astroview incarnation - I recently had this mount out with my 6345 longfellow out to see the occultation of Mars - worked like a champ. There is NO backlash to speak of on either axis, and it is silky smooth and stable throughout.
My absolute first goals as a new telescope owner at the age of 10 - low power eyepiece, good finder scope, motor drives for both axes.
-drl
Posted 17 January 2025 - 12:13 AM
In the late 90s early 2000s I bought a couple of Meade scopes and they were both junk. An LXD-55 AR6 and an LX50 10 inch. It took them 3 tries to get me a diffration limited AR6, and the LX50 still has pinched optics despite my best efforts. So I'm glad they're gone.
Those fiascos drove me to Celestron. I own every non-Edge HD they make, and they are all 1/6 wave or better. Some are 1/8 and even 1/10th wave. Pretty excrellent in my opinion. So Meade won't be missed by me.
Posted 17 January 2025 - 05:29 AM
Edited by Victory Pete, 17 January 2025 - 06:15 AM.
Posted 17 January 2025 - 05:54 AM
You learned how to position it and you got comfy using a ladder. I never had any problem with the mount. I thought it was fine. It tracked and when the vibration went away it worked great. If you have a mount that tracks you don't need to bump it along and create vibration. The only time it would vibrate at high powers would be if you were focusing. But you get smart and get an electric focuser. That cures that problem. I never could understand why you buy a great eq mount and then push it along manually.
If it smooth as butter and silk on milk there is no need for drives since i take very fast looks and on to the next object. SLO- MO's can be hard to reach on some scopes- mounts. Now when i get that dead still seeing and i use 600x and up then drives are handy randy. A good Dob at 600x and below is easy to hand track. But things really speed up at 750x and up. Only 4 mounts passed my test when it came to hand centering planets at high pow wows. My old Edmund 1.5" mount a 60mm shaft optic craft mount the AP800 and 900.
AP sure got it right with mounts unlike Cave and Meade type mounts. Nothing worse than a sloppy Dob that sticks and shakes and jerks. The mount is the main key to a great scope that is fun to use as even the best optics are no good if you can't get a still image.
Edited by CHASLX200, 17 January 2025 - 05:55 AM.
Posted 17 January 2025 - 10:17 AM
If it smooth as butter and silk on milk there is no need for drives since i take very fast looks and on to the next object. SLO- MO's can be hard to reach on some scopes- mounts. Now when i get that dead still seeing and i use 600x and up then drives are handy randy. A good Dob at 600x and below is easy to hand track. But things really speed up at 750x and up. Only 4 mounts passed my test when it came to hand centering planets at high pow wows. My old Edmund 1.5" mount a 60mm shaft optic craft mount the AP800 and 900.
AP sure got it right with mounts unlike Cave and Meade type mounts. Nothing worse than a sloppy Dob that sticks and shakes and jerks. The mount is the main key to a great scope that is fun to use as even the best optics are no good if you can't get a still image.
that explains it all
Posted 17 January 2025 - 11:50 AM
When I worked at Meade the second time around in 1982, I worked on the 2080s. I created a jingle to describe the way we assembled those scope for sale. It's based on the Burger King jingle "Hold the Pickle" that was running at the time.
"Pound the bearings
File the clutches
Bend some parts
But not too much,
Then wipe them down
And box them up
And send them away!"
P.S. And before anybody criticizes our assembly process, I'll have you know that we had rawhide mallets on our work benches.
Edited by tim53, 17 January 2025 - 11:52 AM.
Posted 17 January 2025 - 11:53 AM
When I worked at Meade the second time around in 1982, I worked on the 2080s. I created a jingle to describe the way we assembled those scope for sale. It's based on the Burger King jingle "Hold the Pickle" that was running at the time.
"Pound the bearings
File the clutches
Bend some parts
But not too much,
Then wipe them down
And box them up
And send them away!"
P.S. And before anybody criticizes our assembly process, I'll have you know that we had rawhide mallets on our work benches.
Hi Tim,
How long did you work for Meade the second time? My 2080 is from 1985 - perhaps you helped make it?!?
Clear skies!
Rick
Posted 17 January 2025 - 11:56 AM
Except, punk is kinda over now too!
Not for me it isn't! I still listen to D.O.A. and The Misfits.
Posted 17 January 2025 - 11:57 AM
When I worked at Meade the second time around in 1982, I worked on the 2080s. I created a jingle to describe the way we assembled those scope for sale. It's based on the Burger King jingle "Hold the Pickle" that was running at the time.
"Pound the bearings
File the clutches
Bend some parts
But not too much,
Then wipe them down
And box them up
And send them away!"
P.S. And before anybody criticizes our assembly process, I'll have you know that we had rawhide mallets on our work benches.
Posted 17 January 2025 - 12:10 PM
Forging! I rarely do forging, but it's great fun like all metalworking.
Look at this Goto tripod spreader I made I was missing one. I would not have been able to form this without
heat and a hammer.
Robert
Top is Goto's, bottom is mine:
Edited by clamchip, 17 January 2025 - 12:11 PM.
Posted 17 January 2025 - 12:13 PM
I think it meant something like ‘back when telescopes were meant for men’ or ‘when men were men and women were women’, or some other such nonsense. Chas wants us all to go back to living like in Leave It To Beaver ie. The Good Ole’ Days, when the desire was to make women tranqed out Stepford Wives. Sorry Chas, June and Ward are dead! At any rate, its a tired, outmoded, and offensive euphuism. It’s akin to the counterpart ‘back when women were women.’
No nonsense about it as it has been a saying for years before i was around. A woman has nothing to do with what i typed. Back when scopes were scopes means nice and new Unitrons and Caves. Men before all the changes since around 1980 when a Tat was seen on a navy guy.
Posted 17 January 2025 - 12:16 PM
Well that’s a rather s e x i s t remark!
Lets go back to June 1977 when i went to my fist club meeting and saw my first SKY&TELE and got my first Meade Catalog. To me that was the Meade i loved as i knew nothing about scope comps or other peeps that liked scopes or ever saw a SKY-TELE. Those ads lit a fire.
Edited by CHASLX200, 17 January 2025 - 12:18 PM.
Posted 17 January 2025 - 12:22 PM
Hi Tim,
How long did you work for Meade the second time? My 2080 is from 1985 - perhaps you helped make it?!?
Clear skies!
Rick
The second time was from October 1981-April 1982.
Posted 17 January 2025 - 12:39 PM
Long live The Ramones!
Sometimes I feel like "I wanna be sedated" is becoming my life mantra.
Posted 17 January 2025 - 02:32 PM
Forging! I rarely do forging, but it's great fun like all metalworking.
Look at this Goto tripod spreader I made I was missing one. I would not have been able to form this without
heat and a hammer.
Robert
Top is Goto's, bottom is mine:
What is that exactly?
Posted 17 January 2025 - 03:02 PM
No nonsense about it as it has been a saying for years before i was around. A woman has nothing to do with what i typed. Back when scopes were scopes means nice and new Unitrons and Caves. Men before all the changes since around 1980 when a Tat was seen on a navy guy.
Would you really want to go back to that time?
Those Unitrons might have been beautiful instruments but they were staggeringly expensive, and for all that money you still only got an achromat that would be totally outclassed by the best apos on sale today.
Same with Cave. I'm sure they were superb scopes for their time, but would they be at all competitive now when you consider the optical and mechanical quality of a good modern Newt?
Similarly our thoughts about the demise of Meade should be formed in the context of the company and its products today, not what it was like 40+ years ago.
Edited by Lagrange, 17 January 2025 - 03:05 PM.
Posted 17 January 2025 - 03:21 PM
People should stop being so sensitive. We do have the First Amendment for crying out loud.
I would agree that society in general should be a bit more thick skinned. It's far too easy these days to offend people.
But that's not what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about racism, sexism, bigotry, etc. Please don't tell me you think those are values society should embrace?!
And you're "First Amendment" rights don't give you permission to say whatever you want whenever you want.
https://www.acludc.o...ays-it-does-not
Posted 17 January 2025 - 03:29 PM
Would you really want to go back to that time?
Those Unitrons might have been beautiful instruments but they were staggeringly expensive, and for all that money you still only got an achromat that would be totally outclassed by the best apos on sale today.
Same with Cave. I'm sure they were superb scopes for their time, but would they be at all competitive now when you consider the optical and mechanical quality of a good modern Newt?
Similarly our thoughts about the demise of Meade should be formed in the context of the company and its products today, not what it was like 40+ years ago.
you bring up a lot of good points that are hard to argue with. We are talking about times that were a lot different. Unitrons were very expensive in the 80's. Even early on who could spend close to a $1000 for a scope. And you are right, the Meade back in the 80's is not the same Meade that folded recently. Much different company. Time waits for no one. Things keep changing. To wish you could ho back to into the 80's might be a wish to go back to simpler times. Some have a hard time keeping up with the fast pace of today. There are times I wish cell phones never came on the market. I believe that life without cell phones might be less hectic
Edited by starman876, 17 January 2025 - 03:30 PM.
Posted 17 January 2025 - 03:29 PM
Would you really want to go back to that time?
Those Unitrons might have been beautiful instruments but they were staggeringly expensive, and for all that money you still only got an achromat that would be totally outclassed by the best apos on sale today.
Same with Cave. I'm sure they were superb scopes for their time, but would they be at all competitive now when you consider the optical and mechanical quality of a good modern Newt?
Similarly our thoughts about the demise of Meade should be formed in the context of the company and its products today, not what it was like 40+ years ago.
I would give anything to stay back in 1977 at age 14. It would all be new to me and not knowing much was most of the fun. I had more fun with my first scope a 40x40mm.
Posted 17 January 2025 - 03:30 PM
I would give anything to stay back in 1977 at age 14. It would all be new to me and not knowing much was most of the fun. I had more fun with my first scope a 40x40mm.
I think you might just be there Chas! 14 sounds about right!
![]() Cloudy Nights LLC Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics |