How can you possibly make a judgemet on a telescope that nobody but
Meade employees has seen? Making blanket statement about its performance
without an unbiased technical evaluation with actual hardware is nothing
better than Meade-bashing.

Matthew Ota
not a Meade employee

Vader wrote:
Nothing common between Meade RCX and true Ritchey-Chretien.
The only common is aplanatism - coma-free.

Calling these new scopes as Ritchey-Chretien is nothing, but
marketing hype to catch public attention. Peoples heard, that
Ritchey-Chretien are the best two mirror telescope systems.
But most of them don't know exactly what is what.

For CCD photography these new scopes will be not better, than
traditional SCT with focal reducer-comacorrector. Field is quite
enough, it is flat and coma-free.

New telescopes will have huge field curvature and will be
worser for visual observing - because of higher aspherics (less
smooth optics) and larger central obstruction.

If one will ask which scope I will use personally new RCX or
same size SCT, I will choose a SCT.


VD