Difference between LX90 and LX200?

Hi,
I was looking at the Meade LX90 and the LX200, both 8" diameter. The LX200 is about 1000 euro
more expensive, but apart from GPS, I can not explain the difference. In what way is the LX200
worth more money than the LX90?

thanks in advance

The LX90 and LX200 Share the same optical assay, the difference is in the
fork mounting, focus, Autostar as well as GPS and accessory port module

Cheers

Andy


"md" not given to avoid spam wrote in message
...
Hi,
I was looking at the Meade LX90 and the LX200, both 8" diameter. The LX200
is about 1000 euro
more expensive, but apart from GPS, I can not explain the difference. In
what way is the LX200
worth more money than the LX90?

thanks in advance

The LX90 and LX200 Share the same optical assay, the difference is in the
fork mounting, focus, Autostar as well as GPS and accessory port module

Cheers

Andy


"md" not given to avoid spam wrote in message
...
Hi,
I was looking at the Meade LX90 and the LX200, both 8" diameter. The LX200
is about 1000 euro
more expensive, but apart from GPS, I can not explain the difference. In
what way is the LX200
worth more money than the LX90?

thanks in advance

"md" not given to avoid spam wrote in message
...
Hi,
I was looking at the Meade LX90 and the LX200, both 8" diameter.
The LX200 is about 1000 euro more expensive, but apart from GPS,
I can not explain the difference. In what way is the LX200
worth more money than the LX90?

thanks in advance
The mount as a whole is more solid. The resolution on the encoders used on
the motors is higher. The LX200 has an autoguider input as standard (it is
an extra cost item on the LX90).
The LX90, is _very good value_, and performs better than might well be
expected. The LX200, is probably the better choice, if you intend to do
astrophotography (which requires more from the mount than purely visual
observing does). However that being said, many people have proved that the
LX90, is good enough to give suprisingly competent results.

Best Wishes

"md" not given to avoid spam wrote in message
...
Hi,
I was looking at the Meade LX90 and the LX200, both 8" diameter.
The LX200 is about 1000 euro more expensive, but apart from GPS,
I can not explain the difference. In what way is the LX200
worth more money than the LX90?

thanks in advance
The mount as a whole is more solid. The resolution on the encoders used on
the motors is higher. The LX200 has an autoguider input as standard (it is
an extra cost item on the LX90).
The LX90, is _very good value_, and performs better than might well be
expected. The LX200, is probably the better choice, if you intend to do
astrophotography (which requires more from the mount than purely visual
observing does). However that being said, many people have proved that the
LX90, is good enough to give suprisingly competent results.

Best Wishes