[VoiceOfReason]

I have a line on a Meade LX 200 EMC 12 inch with the standard accessories and tripod for less than 2k, possibly as low as 1500-1600. Supposedly everything works. Is it worth it or should I got for a 14 inch dobsononian Orion SkyQuest intelliscope for a little under 2k, or the LX90-ACF 12 inch for 2400. Both of the latter 2 would come with a warranty, and the last has GPS integration, but all would be a huge upgrade from what I have. I'm asking for advice here. Which would you get?

[Nakedgun]

Will it be set up in a permanent location? Consider portability issues. Although each of these will probably need comparable set-up times. How cumbersome is each model's heaviest component?

Will it be used for visual only? If so, I like the wider fields provided by the dob. The two more inches of aperture at this size range will hardly be noticeable unless your skies are very dark.

I do no astrophotography.

Good luck!

[VoiceOfReason]

I will likely either piggyback a DSLR or do direct imaging with one in addition to visual use.

[Ex Finn.]

I believe that in order to do any longer exposure "prime focus" imaging a "German Equatorial Mount" is the preferred choice. All of your choices would be great for visual observation. (This coming from a novice so YMMW)

---

Last edited by Ex Finn.; 12-30-2014 at 05:07 PM.

[Tom S.]

One other piece of advise: keep the scope turned away from the window of the blonde across the road, at least if your better half or girl friend is around.

[Obin Robinson]

I will likely either piggyback a DSLR or do direct imaging with one in addition to visual use.

I have seven different astronomical telescopes all for different uses. I think I can offer some help to you. What kinds of objects do you see yourself mostly trying to view? If you want to do direct imaging then a refractor is your best bet as they offer the quickest setup with the least amount of hassle. How much are you trying to spend? Does this setup need to be portable? I can help but I just need more input on your parameters.


obin

[VoiceOfReason]

I have seven different astronomical telescopes all for different uses. I think I can offer some help to you. What kinds of objects do you see yourself mostly trying to view? If you want to do direct imaging then a refractor is your best bet as they offer the quickest setup with the least amount of hassle. How much are you trying to spend? Does this setup need to be portable? I can help but I just need more input on your parameters.


obin

Right now I have a 130mm Newtonian with go to controls, a Meade DS2130 I bought 12 or 13 years ago, and an 8 inch Dobsonian, an Orion xt8 that I bought 5 years ago. I want bigger. I did know I can get something like the Meade LX90 ACF 12 inch for 2500 or so new, and the Meade field derotator for around 500 which should allow me to get some DSO photography in. I am also tempted to get one of the iOptron mounts for use as a dedicated mount, but I want one with autoguiding capabilities so I don't have too much drift. I suppose I can still stack though. The ones I've looked at are the 3100, 3200, and ZEQ25.

I want to see what I can get at the 1k price point and the 2000-2500 dollar price points. Depending on how things go I may be able to go higher.

[Obin Robinson]

I have a saying which is in my signature over on the cloudynights forum:


"The rule of telescope features: aperture; equatorial tracking; or low cost. Pick any two."

Basically you have to figure out which feature is worth the most to you. If you want to do any serious imaging then you NEED equatorial tracking. There is no such thing as a cheap field derotator that is good and there's no such thing as a good field derotator that is cheap. So the next question is if you want low cost or aperture?


I modified my Skyview Pro to autoguide and I have used it for the majority of my deep sky photos. Autoguiding is necessary for the really deep sky stuff. Instead of that Meade take a look at this Celestron CGEM/Edge setup:


Shop at OPT - Celestron CGEM 800 EdgeHD Telescope - OPT Telescopes


obin

[VoiceOfReason]

I have a saying which is in my signature over on the cloudynights forum:


"The rule of telescope features: aperture; equatorial tracking; or low cost. Pick any two."

Basically you have to figure out which feature is worth the most to you. If you want to do any serious imaging then you NEED equatorial tracking. There is no such thing as a cheap field derotator that is good and there's no such thing as a good field derotator that is cheap. So the next question is if you want low cost or aperture?


I modified my Skyview Pro to autoguide and I have used it for the majority of my deep sky photos. Autoguiding is necessary for the really deep sky stuff. Instead of that Meade take a look at this Celestron CGEM/Edge setup:


Shop at OPT - Celestron CGEM 800 EdgeHD Telescope - OPT Telescopes


obin

My big thing is... I want bigger. I could like bump my budget a bit, especially if I wait till yearly bonus time in March.

This actually looks tempting: Celestron Adv VX 11 SCT | Telescope.com: Celestron with an autoguiding setup and a field flattener to go along with it.

[Obin Robinson]

My big thing is... I want bigger. I could like bump my budget a bit, especially if I wait till yearly bonus time in March.

This actually looks tempting: Celestron Adv VX 11 SCT | Telescope.com: Celestron with an autoguiding setup and a field flattener to go along with it.

That's a really nice setup. For autoguiding I would recommend an off axis guider. I have a Lumicon one which works well but Orion makes one as well:
Orion Deluxe Off-Axis Guider for Astrophotography | Orion Telescopes axis guider


For a guide camera I have an old Meade DSI which works very well and is easy to set up. The only thing I would recommend adding is GoldFocus collimation masks. I've tried many different devices and GoldFocus is BY FAR the best and the most accurate.


GoldAstro.com Home


obin

[VoiceOfReason]

I couldn't pass this up for 650 dollars, so I bought a 10 inch schmidt newtonian that came with the lxd55 package which the original owner found the mount was weak so replaced it with the lxd75 mount. It came with a Tucsen IS500 camera and has all the software, the Meade Autostar 497 controller and battery pack are in great shape, and it has a Hyperion 10mm modular eyepiece, Nikon camera adapter (which I will need to get a Pentax one), 3 stabilization pads, Meade 2x-3x variable telenegative barlow, another 2x barlow, a Celestron K 25mm eyepiece, Celestron K 40mm eyepiece, Celestron 96-0.6, 15A, 21, and 80A filters. The 7-21 zoom eyepiece from the ad is missing from the case and so they are looking for it for me. It also came with a heavy duty stainless steel cart to haul it all on.

[Obin Robinson]

WOW! That is an awesome deal for $650! The Schmidt-Newt is a fantastic scope for visual or imaging. The LXD75 mount can be tweaked and adapted easily for astrophotography as well. You got a good deal. Congatulations!


obin

[VoiceOfReason]

Now my question is, for visual use how much better would an 11 or 12 inch f/10 SCT be than this one? Am I correct in assuming that the magnification on even a 10 inch f/10 OTA would be far better than the 10 inch f/4 OTA I bought? If so I may still get one of the ones I named above for visual use later on and keep this setup for my astrophotography.

[Obin Robinson]

For visual usage going from a 10" to an 11" isn't going to be that noticeable. The 10" or 12" SCT would be better for planets though. You will get a narrower field of view with an SCT compared to the Schmidt-Newt you purchased. The Schmidt-Newt will be better for comets, galaxies, and wide field viewing. Honestly that scope you have is a great one and you scored a great deal on the setup. I would collimate it perfectly and then you'll be able to get excellent images and visual usage from it.


obin

[SKYGZR]

The 10" SN is going to overwhelm the LXD75 for astrophoto duty. Will be fine for visual, yet it's gonna be a struggle doing astrophoto...yet, you can "get your feet wet"...and upgrade the mount down the road.