Maksutov Cassegrain question

wrote in message
...
I am just getting into astronomy and have already obtained a pair of
binoculars and am learning about getting around in the night sky. I
am also interested in obtaining a telescope at some point and have
become interested in Maksutov Cassegrains. I have seen some
conflicting infromation about collimation. Do these ever need to be
collimated? What would be a good choice for a beginner?
Yes, they do need collimation.
The point is that most of the smaller examples (scopes like the ETX90), have
the assembly so well stuck together, that changes in collimation are rare,
hence it is made a 'factory' adjustment. However larger versions, will have
collimation systems of some sort.
Depends what you want to do.
For instance, _for it's size_, scopes like the ETX90, are nice little units,
especially for the price. However for the same sort of money, a
significantly larger Newtonian, can be bought, and this will outperform the
smaller Mak for just about everything. Most 'rules', about 'which scope is
best for what', end up having lots of exceptions. So the 'best' small scope,
is probably an APO refractor, _but_ the cost is such, that for the same
money, a much larger scope using simpler technology (like a Newtonian), will
be available, which will see more. Maksutov models, generally, have quite
high focal ratios, which can be considered to make them relatively 'good'
for planetary observations, but conversely, limits the field of view for
deep space objects.
There are a series of 'rules', which might be worth bearing in mind beyond
these comments:
1) Aperture rules.
2) Better a small scope that is used, than a large scope, that is stuck
indoors...
The Mak tends to 'win' over most other designs, on it's 'useability', but
you should have a look at something like a larger Dobsonian mounted
Newtonian, as the best 'value for money' larger scope design around, to see
if you could cope with something like this. You will see more.

Best Wishes