|
I have an ACF LX-90. The difference is easily noticible, even to a beginner. There is significantly less distorsion around the edge of the field - "coma".
The price difference between the 8 inch LX-90 SCT and ACF models is about $200. Definitely worth it.
However, you need to consider the mount on which the scope is riding. I bought an LX-90, which I now realise it is inadequate for serious imaging. It's "OK" if you just want to piggyback a 400mm focal length refractor on top of the scope, but forget any attempts at long focal length imaging.
The minimum would be an LX-200 mount - much stronger and larger gears, "permanently" trainable periodic error correction (the LX-90 forgets every time you switch it off), longer forks to allow a camera to swing through the forks (an LX-90 is limited to restricted to <70 degrees declination - ie. you can't image around the polar regions).
I have never seen an LightSwitch mount, but cannot see how only half a fork would be superior to a full fork.
You could buy an older LX-200 and use a focal reducer/field flattener to overcome some of the coma problems of the SCT design - but I'd talk to others about this before you commit your money. Unfortunately you can't use the standard Meade Focal Reducer/Flattener on the ACF scopes so it is difficult to improve their field of view to image larger objects - still looking for an option there.
A 10 or 12 inch LX-200 will also need an ultrawedge for equatorial mounting - about $1000...
Happy to talk to you further if I can help - pm me.
Ta
David T
|