Sky & Tel (May) reviews a $5000 Meade LX600ACF scope and barelymentions the optics

WTF has happened to these magazines? NEUTERED!!! Also, Gary Seronik, the "Tyrion Lannister" of Sky & Telescope has resigned, or whatever.

On Friday, April 8, 2016 at 12:07:48 AM UTC-6, RichA wrote:
WTF has happened to these magazines? NEUTERED!!! Also, Gary Seronik, the
"Tyrion Lannister" of Sky & Telescope has resigned, or whatever.

Maybe the optics are exactly the same as those of the last Meade ACF scope they
reviewed in that aperture? Then there wouldn't be that much to say.

Or they don't bother because too many people have shipped them review samples
with better optics than what they actually sell?

John Savard

On Friday, April 8, 2016 at 2:07:48 AM UTC-4, RichA wrote:
WTF has happened to these magazines? NEUTERED!!! Also, Gary Seronik, the "Tyrion Lannister" of Sky & Telescope has resigned, or whatever.

Given the large central obstruction of the scope, it is for astrophotography, especially deep-sky.

On Friday, 8 April 2016 10:52:54 UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
On Friday, April 8, 2016 at 12:07:48 AM UTC-6, RichA wrote:
WTF has happened to these magazines? NEUTERED!!! Also, Gary Seronik, the
"Tyrion Lannister" of Sky & Telescope has resigned, or whatever.

Maybe the optics are exactly the same as those of the last Meade ACF scope they
reviewed in that aperture? Then there wouldn't be that much to say.

Or they don't bother because too many people have shipped them review samples
with better optics than what they actually sell?

John Savard

With the way they make SCT's, is it even possible to make them with better optics than they have? It's no longer hands-on work. But if there is enough variation in the normal production process, the could just pick the ones that tested better I guess.