![]() |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Opinions invited,
Those of you who have been able to compare, given the choice between a little Meade ( ETX variety ) and a Celestron Nextar 5" , who thinks which is the best buy, and why. Replies very welcome -- Graham W. Shepherd Home phone: 0115 955 9398 ICQ: 71681809 ================================================== =================== Observatory email: Observatory web site: http://sherwood-observatory.org.uk/ Mansfield and Sutton Astronomical Society distribution list mail is now through: ================================================== =================== Astronomy classes for the School of Continuing Education, Univ. of Nottm are held at: Sherwood Observatory, Coxmoor Road Sutton-in-Ashfield, Notts. NG17 5LF, England Telephone 01623 552276 Lat.: 53o 06' 50" Long.:01o 13' 20.7" Altitude above sea Level 187.9 m ================================================== =================== |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Graham Shepherd" wrote in message ... Opinions invited, Those of you who have been able to compare, given the choice between a little Meade ( ETX variety ) and a Celestron Nextar 5" , who thinks which is the best buy, and why. Replies very welcome For a review of the original units when they first appeared, have a look at: http://www.weasner.com/etx/etx-nexstar-2.html Most of the faults mentioned have been fixed (motors on the latter Celestron models are a lot quieter). The latter '5i' model was a vast improvement, and the tracking on this beats the Meade (it is smooth, quiet, and very accurate). The early Meades proved to be very weak, and latter units now have the tube pivot rebuilt in aluminium, improving the accuracy, and ruggedness of the assembly. The Celestron 'feels' more solid. Assuming then, that you compare the 5i, with the ETX125 (the smaller units, will not match the performance of either of these). There is a significant difference in the nature of the optics. Both are good. The Meade is based on a Maksutov design, giving it a slightly smaller central obstruction, and longer focal length. This helps it's performance on planetary objects, but the resulting FOV, is a little smaller than on the Celestron. The Celestron is more like a 'baby' version of a normal SCT. Both are fabulous 'grab and go' scopes. The built in 'flip mirror' on the ETX, is potentially a useful way of using the scope for photography, but unfortunately, the fork mount is so small, that very little of the sky can then be used. On the Celestron, you have to attach the camera as on a normal SCT, and this does allow the clearance to operate over more of the sky, but leaves you with the problem of how to aim the unit. The tripods on both original units, were crap. The tubular tripod with the 5i, is a much better unit. The Meade 'deluxe field tripod', is the equivalent. The Meade handcontroller, is easier to use, and the software in this is updateable from the web. The Celestron has a guide port, without needing any other components. Realistically, there is not much in it. The Celestron, has a fraction more space, when attaching accessories, and will give slightly wider views on deep sky objects. The Meade is slightly better for planetary objects. The 5i, probably just has the edge in terms of tracking accuracy. Given you compare a complete 'package', with the heavier tripod, and scope, you really might as well chose the cheaper.... Best Wishes |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'd like to ad that Celestron typically has better optics and you can TELL.
I've seen Meade with AWFUL optics. Rare to see a poor Celestron. Meade continues to ship units that are DOA or mechanically defective. Go Celestron. Meade is the Kia of telescopes or perhaps the Yugo! RB |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I have an ETX-125, and I have an observing buddy who has a Nexstar 5, and I
have a couple of observations: 1. The optics are pretty close to equal. 2. Her tracking is whisper quiet, while my Meade sounds like it is attempting to signal the mother ship. 3. I can loosen the clutches and move my scope manually... she can't. "Graham Shepherd" wrote in message ... Opinions invited, Those of you who have been able to compare, given the choice between a little Meade ( ETX variety ) and a Celestron Nextar 5" , who thinks which is the best buy, and why. Replies very welcome -- Graham W. Shepherd Home phone: 0115 955 9398 ICQ: 71681809 ================================================== =================== Observatory email: Observatory web site: http://sherwood-observatory.org.uk/ Mansfield and Sutton Astronomical Society distribution list mail is now through: ================================================== =================== Astronomy classes for the School of Continuing Education, Univ. of Nottm are held at: Sherwood Observatory, Coxmoor Road Sutton-in-Ashfield, Notts. NG17 5LF, England Telephone 01623 552276 Lat.: 53o 06' 50" Long.:01o 13' 20.7" Altitude above sea Level 187.9 m ================================================== =================== |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I've used the Meade LX200 12", Meade LXD55 mount with a Celestron 9.25 on it,
and a Celestron 9.25 on a Celestron CG-5 mount, and I would totally go Celestron all the way. Meade is notorious for mechanical failures and horrible tech support/customer service. Meade does produce good products (eye pieces and other accessories), but for a full package deal I don't recommend them. As for the motor drive noise - hailing the mother ship is a good one! LOL. Before my LXD55 mount fell apart (literally), I had the loudest motors at star parties.. quite embarrassing at times. Kilolani wrote: I have an ETX-125, and I have an observing buddy who has a Nexstar 5, and I have a couple of observations: 1. The optics are pretty close to equal. 2. Her tracking is whisper quiet, while my Meade sounds like it is attempting to signal the mother ship. 3. I can loosen the clutches and move my scope manually... she can't. "Graham Shepherd" wrote in message ... Opinions invited, Those of you who have been able to compare, given the choice between a little Meade ( ETX variety ) and a Celestron Nextar 5" , who thinks which is the best buy, and why. Replies very welcome -- Graham W. Shepherd Home phone: 0115 955 9398 ICQ: 71681809 ================================================== =================== Observatory email: Observatory web site: http://sherwood-observatory.org.uk/ Mansfield and Sutton Astronomical Society distribution list mail is now through: ================================================== =================== Astronomy classes for the School of Continuing Education, Univ. of Nottm are held at: Sherwood Observatory, Coxmoor Road Sutton-in-Ashfield, Notts. NG17 5LF, England Telephone 01623 552276 Lat.: 53o 06' 50" Long.:01o 13' 20.7" Altitude above sea Level 187.9 m ================================================== =================== |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Celestron settles with Meade | Edward | Amateur Astronomy | 24 | July 14th 04 08:48 PM |
Ver. 4 of RTGUI - New Features for Celestron and Meade Scopes | Robert Sheaffer | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | March 1st 04 07:15 PM |
RTGUI Rel. 4 - New Features for Celestron & Meade Scopes | Robert Sheaffer | Astronomy Misc | 0 | March 1st 04 07:13 PM |
Has anyone done a comparison of the Photon Instruments 127mm refractor with the Celestron and Meade 6" refractors? | Bob Midiri | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | December 6th 03 06:13 PM |