LX90 or NexStar GPS?

Ok, ignoring the cost, which would you pick, Meade 8" LX90 or
Celestron NexStar GPS (not the 8i) and why? Thanks!
Dave

I picked the LX90.

My reasons where...

1. The Mount. The NexStar mount didn't look like it was up to the job. The
Single arm from the top of the tripod holding up the OTA looked too flimsey.
The Meade Mount looked like a really sturdy affair, and has proven to be
very stably in Alt-Az mode. Although adding a wedge does compromise this a
bit.

2. Support. The Meade website shows clearly that the AutoStar GOTO
controler software is still being developed and new features added. This
also give the possibility of adding to the Object database. The RS-232 port
on the Autostar also allows the scope to be controled from remote devices.
The Nexstar ad's never mentioned an equivilant, and I don't know is it's
possible on their scope.

3. Mike Weasners web site. Although it's dedicated to the ETX range, alot
of the information is still relevant to the LX90. This gives lots of hints
and tips for mods that can be made to the scope to get the most out of it.
I've not looked recently, but didn't see anthing like that for the Nexstar.


These are of course my own personal views, I'm sure that others will take
provide reasons in favour of the Nextstar scope. Optically, (and yes I've
observed through both) they are very similar; so much so that I couldn't
tell the difference. But I still think that the LX90 mount is much better
than the Nextstar.

Regards

Colin Dawson
www.cjdawson.com

"Colin Dawson" wrote in message
...
I picked the LX90.

My reasons where...

1. The Mount. The NexStar mount didn't look like it was up to the job.
The
Single arm from the top of the tripod holding up the OTA looked too
flimsey.

The GPS isn't the same thing. It has the "true" fork (two arms that is).

But, I have no idea which is more robust, or which actually works better.

"david" wrote in message
om...
Ok, ignoring the cost, which would you pick, Meade 8" LX90 or
Celestron NexStar GPS (not the 8i) and why? Thanks!
Dave
The Celestron.
I slightly prefer their optics (have had better experiences with the
Celestron scopes than the Meade's), and consider the structure, and drives
on the Celestron to be much better made (my NS11GPS, is close to the PE
values I get from my Losmandy G11 mount, where the LX200, is much worse).
Mechanically, the Celestron is much better made. Meade manage to make the
knobs and screws look better finished on the outside, but internally, the
quality is not so good. The 'downside' of the Celestron though, is that
the Meade handcontroller is somewhat nicer, and upgradeable, without
replacement. The Celestron supports autoguider inputs directly, while the
LX90 requires an accessory.
However I do feel that the LX90, is great value for money. It competes
well with the LX200, and is a lot cheaper. Given the price difference, for
somebody on a budget, the LX90 would win.

Best Wishes

1. The Mount. The NexStar mount didn't look like it was up to the job. The
Single arm from the top of the

Hi:

He's asking about the Nexstar GPS which does _not_ have a single arm mount.

Peace,
Rod Mollise
Author of _Choosing and Using a Schmidt Cassegrain Telescope_
Like SCTs and MCTs?
Check-out sct-user, the mailing list for CAT fanciers!
Goto http://members.aol.com/RMOLLISE/index.html

"Colin Dawson" wrote in message
...
I picked the LX90.

My reasons where...

1. The Mount. The NexStar mount didn't look like it was up to the job.
The
Single arm from the top of the tripod holding up the OTA looked too
flimsey.
The Meade Mount looked like a really sturdy affair, and has proven to be
very stably in Alt-Az mode. Although adding a wedge does compromise
this a
bit.
Wrong scope. The NS8GPS, has a normal fork. The single arm system actually
isn't bad (remember when you run any fork mounted scope on a wedge, the
bottom bearing has far more leverage that the one in the arm
experiences)...

2. Support. The Meade website shows clearly that the AutoStar GOTO
controler software is still being developed and new features added.
This
also give the possibility of adding to the Object database. The RS-232
port
on the Autostar also allows the scope to be controled from remote
devices.
The Nexstar ad's never mentioned an equivilant, and I don't know is it's
possible on their scope.
Look at NexRemote. This allows you to have a complete 'handset', on a PC.
Better in some ways, since you don't even need the normal handset. However
the upgrades are less easy.

3. Mike Weasners web site. Although it's dedicated to the ETX range,
alot
of the information is still relevant to the LX90. This gives lots of
hints
and tips for mods that can be made to the scope to get the most out of
it.
I've not looked recently, but didn't see anthing like that for the
Nexstar.
There are a couple of sites for the Nexstar, and the contents are growing.

These are of course my own personal views, I'm sure that others will
take
provide reasons in favour of the Nextstar scope. Optically, (and yes
I've
observed through both) they are very similar; so much so that I couldn't
tell the difference. But I still think that the LX90 mount is much
better
than the Nextstar.
Except you are looking at the wrong scope... :-)

Best Wishes

"Colin Dawson" wrote in message ...
I picked the LX90.

My reasons where...

1. The Mount. The NexStar mount didn't look like it was up to the job. The
Single arm from the top of the tripod holding up the OTA looked too flimsey.
The Meade Mount looked like a really sturdy affair, and has proven to be
very stably in Alt-Az mode. Although adding a wedge does compromise this a
bit.



He said NOT the 8i. The 8 GPS has full forks.

david wrote:

Ok, ignoring the cost, which would you pick, Meade 8" LX90 or
Celestron NexStar GPS (not the 8i) and why? Thanks!
Dave

LX90, because it's cheaper and autostar has more features. The LX90
also comes with the LPI and autostar suite + $150 rebate. I had fun
last night controlling the scope and grabbing images from my LX90 over
the internet. How neat

The Celestron is mechanically better finished, but the LX90 is still a
fine scope. GPS isn't something I need.

david wrote:

Ok, ignoring the cost, which would you pick, Meade 8" LX90 or
Celestron NexStar GPS (not the 8i) and why? Thanks!
Dave

It's all well and good asking us to ignore the cost, but the price
difference here is rather significant (at least, here in Europe it is).
I have an LX90 and I'm very happy with it, but if cost truely wasn't an
issue, I think *anyone* would go for the Celestron. The LX90 is a great
scope for the money and has similar features, but it's hardly fair to
compare it to something costing almost half as much again.

If I was looking at scopes in the NexStar GPS's price range, I'd be more
likely to consider the more comparable LX200 GPS than the LX90. Either
that, or take an LX90 and splash out on plenty of lovely accessories!


Clear skies,

Steve

"Steve Maddison" wrote in message
...
If I was looking at scopes in the NexStar GPS's price range, I'd be more
likely to consider the more comparable LX200 GPS than the LX90. Either
that, or take an LX90 and splash out on plenty of lovely accessories!


Clear skies,

Steve

I've had my LX90 for several years and absolutely love it. The optics match
any SCT I've ever seen from either Celestron or Meade. I also prefer the
Meade mechanics and the Autostar over the Celestron controller. I would
only replace my LX90 if I decided to go to a 10 or 12" scope. Having said
all that, I'm sure the Nextstar GPS is a great scope but it would be fairer
to compare it to the LX200 instead of the LX90. If you really want GPS,
save some money and get the LX90 and add StarGPS.

Ray