On 10 Jan 2005 09:09:12 -0800, "Vader"
wrote:

We can easily remember, that "Supermonocentric" eyepieces are not
monocentrics and of course, they are not supermonocentrics.


They appear to be closer to Hastings Triplets.

The same was with "ED-Star" name of objectives from the same
source, where no any trace of ED glasses, just flint with ubnormal
dispersion.


Now I know why the one I had wasn't spectacular.

I think, that Meade decided to take their experience and apply it to
their re-optimized SCT.
These so called RCX scopes are nothing more, than optimized SCTs
(corrected for coma with little (excentricity) hyperboloid on
secondary
mirror).

You've probably had the opportunity to actually find out
first-hand about the Supermonocentrics and the ED-Stars,
but you haven't yet seen the Meades or their true specs.
If they've optimized the SCTs in some way, it could be
a very good thing. Short of an achromatic corrector,
it could be the best thing to happen to SCTs since the
inception of the mass-produced scopes that Celestron
introduced long ago.
Years ago on this group, we discussed the idea of manufacturers
offering "higher quality" scopes for an increase in price.
Much like how you can buy a better diamond for more money.
This was rejected by most who thought it would stigmatize
the "lesser" product and leave a bad taste in the owner's
mouth. If this is Meade deciding to do it, I'm all for it.
The Russians have offered better quality Maks for some time,
for a price.
-Rich