Meade's "Forgotten" 8 in. GoTo SCT
Written: Nov 04 '03 (Updated Nov 06 '03)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
|
Pros: Excellent optics and mount, Autostar controller
Cons: Poor customer support
The Bottom Line: For observers who want a larger telescope and do visual observing, the LX-90 is an excellent choice.
|
|
|
| rbemerson's Full Review: Meade LX90 (08109031) (500 x 203mm) Telescope |
In all of the hype about GPS-capable mounts, Meade's LX-90 seems to have been left behind by its glitzier SCT relatives. For most observers this telescope offers impressive capabilities at a reasonable price. What it does well is point in the right direction, gather light well, and let the observer see what there is to see. What it doesn't do well is lug tons of astro-toys or support extended imaging exposures.
If you know the ETX-90, 105, or 125, then you already know much of the LX-90. All of these scopes use the same Autostar controller to align and point the telescope. While advertisements suggest that "goto" telescopes can be set up and aligned by relying solely on the miracle of computer technology, the truth is some rudimentary knowledge of the sky is needed. Knowing where north is to verify the scope is correctly oriented before it's turned on is crucial. Once the telescope thinks it's pointed at a given star (as part of the alignment process), the user has to be able to either confirm the position or nudge the scope to the correct star. People who expect Autostar to do all of the work will be sorely disappointed. When Autostar knows where north is and has found its choice of two aligment stars (the choice varies with the seasons and time of day), the magic begins. Pick an object from the list of planets, stars, and deep sky objects (DSO's, or "faint fuzzies", include galaxies, nebulae, and star clusters), press GOTO, and the object will be in your field of view with the Meade-supplied eyepiece. Autostar will also allow the use of laptop or desktop computer (under MacOS, Windows, or Unix operating systems) control of the telescope. The advantages of this feature are outside of the scope of this review but it is useful to know the LX-90 will accept outside control.
All the computer technology in the world won't save a telescope if the optics are poor or the mount wobbles. The LX-90's optics are sharp and more than enough for the vast majority of observers. While no telescope within the budget of most observers will rival professional observatories or Hubble Space Telescope, the LX-90 will give results that are quite satisfying except when pushing things to extreme limits.
The LX-90 mount and tripod combination is steady and quite robust. Any telescope will wobble in a stiff breeze or when tapped but under most observing conditions, the LX-90 is rock solid. The mount does lack some features needed for astrophotography. Periodic Error Correction (PEC - periodic or repeating minute wobbles in the telescope caused by irregularities in the drive mechanisms can be counteracted by "PEC training") isn't offered and the mount doesn't handle the weight of cameras or large guide scopes well. It's possible to do use them but the LX-90 isn't designed for this sort of work. It's not a flaw, just a design choice on Meade's part. If astrophotgraphy is an important part of your observing, look at the LX-200 series of scopes.
In the past couple of years, web cams have been adapted for use in astro-imaging and the LX-90 can handle them well. It's the heavier CCD's and film cameras that strain the LX-90's capabilities.
If you have not done astrophotography and are new to observing, save your money and buy the LX-90 to build up experience first. Over-buying in a scope is a very expensive proposition.
For all of the good news about the LX-90, there is bad news, too. Meade customer support is, in my experience, uneven and ranges from near contempt and ineptitude to occasional flashes of concern and a solid effort at trying to help the customer. If a lot of hand-holding by the manufacturer is an important point in picking a telescope, Meade simply isn't your best choice. Dealers go a long way towards getting past this problem but even they find themselves confronting Meade's poor attitude about customer support. That said, most Meade products work as they should, work well, and continue to work for a long time; going back to Meade is not a common event. Further, there is an excellent network of Meade users in the MAPUG (Meade Advanced Products User Group) web site and e-mail list. Of course, advice obtained on the Internet is worth about what you pay for it (this review included [grin]) but Meade products have been in use for a long time and there is a large body of knowledge that's easy to find without having to rely on Meade's often disappointing customer support.
Summarizing, the LX-90 is an excellent scope for someone who wants a medium-sized SCT with computer control and who expects to spend most of their time in visual observations.
Foonote: about that SCT abbreviation... telescopes focus without mirrors or they focus light with mirrors. The SCT or Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope focuses light with mirrors and a lens. The idea is to get the optical benefits of both approaches to telescopes. Is a pure refractor (uses lenses) or reflector (uses mirrors) any better than an SCT? The answer is a resounding "it depends". There is no one best answer to this question. If you want to spend all your time looking at the planets or the Moon, a refractor may be a better choice. If you want a lot of telescope aperture and don't have a lot of money, a Newtonian or Dobsonian reflector may be a better choice. In the end, the best way to decide what's the best telescope for you is to make a list of each candidate's pluses and minuses. With any luck, your list should make the choice clear.
Recommended:
Yes
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
rbemerson
|
|
Location: Skippack,PA
Reviews written: 1
Trusted by: 0 members
About Me:
Sailor, diver, astronomer, former racer, sitting on 2 acres of lawn and woods.
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2010 Shopping.com, Inc.