Quality of imaging via Meade LX90 and Equatorial Wedge
Hello all,
My wife recently purchased a Meade Lx90 8" scope for my birthday. A very very generous gift (and a surpise).
Prior to purchasing, my wife carried out some research among various shops. She knew that my interest would be in imaging. Unfortunately, the shop through which she purchased the scope provided poor basic advice given the main the criteria was imaging. The result being that I have an LX90 with a standard mount AND NOT A SCOPE WITH AN EQUATORIAL MOUNT.
My camera is a DSLR (Cannon 7D).
The question is a) do I sell the scope (3 weeks old), make a loss and buy an equatorial mount and new (probably smaller scope). b) purcahse an equatorial wedge and an optical tube, auto guider, mount ect (another $2k) c) purchase a wedge, autogider and a focal reducer ($1K).
I am new to astro imaging but it is becoming obvious that without very deep pockets, there are many compromises which need to be made.
I would prefer to go with the cheaper option C but I do not know if I will end up with satisfactory results.
Has anyone purchased a similar scope and then upgraded with wedge ect for astro imaging? Are you happy with the results or would you advise that I cut my loses and start afresh building up from the equatorial wedge?
One place you will be able to research this is on astrobin. Www.astrobin.com
On here you will be able to search on Lx90, DSLR, wedge and all the hardware to find out if anyone is producing good images with the setup you're considering. One of the problems with a wedge is the relative complexity of polar alignment - but if you have a semi-permanent setup it's fine. Also - you probably want to work out what kind of imaging you are going to do. The setup you have would be fine for planetary imaging using a video camera.
Cheers,
Andrew.
Can't the shop just do an exchange, especially since their advice was suspect?
That said, there's no reason why a Meade equatorial wedge won't work as well as a Meade equatorial mount.
Geoff
My first inclination would be to say, "Get only a f/7 flat-field focal reducer and T-ring for the DSLR."
With 30 second subs, you can get away with imaging on an Alt-az. Field rotation will be bearable. I routinely use 30 sec subs on an alt-az LX90 with an FR.
You will lose some subs due to mount inaccuracies, although my LX90 ACF is a real performer in this area and tracks unguided quite well.
You will gain by having 3 minute GOTO alignments rather than multi-hour drift alignments.
You will pick up good objects, and stacking will get you a long way down the trail.
Once you have worked out the limits of your setup, then it's time to do more shopping. But don't sell the LX90 - it will work for you when that shiny EQ fails to align or goto properly, or does meridian flips ... believe me, plenty of people have gotten into astro by steps, but very few can put down the required cash in one huge spend and then get what they really want.
I would say go with option C. I know many who have started this way and produced great results. Even Mr Sidonio started similarly with an LX200 on a wedge not that many years ago.
I agree with the comments so far.
One thing to watch for....the newer Meade x0.63 reducers have a shorter focal length (110mm v's 240mm) than the original and may not be suitable for DSLR spacing....(the better, longer focal length versions seem to be marked "Japan") - The Celestron version is OK.
The ideal would be that the shop takes back the scope. From my dialogue with the shop, I cannot see that happening.
I know this is a good scope, so I am reluctant to be rid of it. I am wondering about cost implications for replacing the forks with equatorial forks - perhaps unfeasible from a cost/practicality angle but I will make some calls today.
I am happy to hear some reports of good results using an equatorial wedge with an LX90, although it is making my decision process more difficult.
I met with a very knowledgeable and helpful amateur astromer last week who had owned an LX90 with an equatorial wedge. Although he was very keen on the scope, from an astro imaging stand point, he had found the set up frustrating. His advice was to start with a good equatorial mount - a mount that is strong enough to take a variety of scopes, start off with a refractor scope and build up as/when I have built up my imaging knowledge and skills. Seems like good advice, a shame the shop was not so helpful.
Simon, many people do get good results with an Lx and wedge, there are a couple of wedges available, the standard (and cheapest) is a little flexy despite looking like it would hold the Titanic. There are wedges that come up for sale in the Icetrade area, I seem to remember one member has an Lx200 on a wedge and intends selling the wedge seperately.
Ken, I hadn't ever considered that. You're half right, I just checked the Meade site, looks like the standard wedge is for the Lx90 and Lx200 7 & 8 inch, the superwedge is for the LX200 10 & 12 inch models.
I have decided to put the scope up for sale with a view to purchasing a EQ6 mount and an ED80 scope. Although, according to the shop where my wife purchsed the LX90 setup, the EQ6 mount lacks accuracy and can only be lifted by 2 people (I am now taking their advice with a pinch of salt).
Unfortunately, being new to the site, I will have to wait a few weeks before I can post the scope for sale (30 days after becoming a member) after which time the scope will be 7 weeks old rather than 3. I can fully appreciate this policy with all the online scam artists out there.
Hows about keeping the lovely Meade LX90 , use it as a visual scope with a few lunar shots taken here and there and enjoy , but learning along the way while saving up for a nice HEQ5/EQ6 type mount and 60-80mm APO that can be used for AP easily ? .
There is no hurry , the sky aint going nowhere .
That sort of set up can be found here at IIS classifieds for a song , if you are patient and quick enough , just a thought .
Brian
My first scope (about 7 years ago) was an 8" LX90. I used it mainly for visual work but attached a DSLR on it numerous times. The main issue that I found was lack of space between the camera and the forks / mount base. Other than that, it worked okay, but I did need to take care with the scope's balance; this was probably the least satisfactory part of the exercise for me.
I built a solid wedge for it when I built the observatory (see post #12 for pics of the scope / wedge setup): http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...t=36222&page=4 The wedge was made from 25 & 12 mm aluminium plate and did not flex at all. It cost me $176 in material, and I got it welded by a friend. I don't use it anymore, but it's made for 38 degrees latitude so gather that it wouldn't be the right angle for you.
I eventually upgraded to an equatorial mount and a larger SCT, but kept the LX90 for portable visual use.
Another local amateur also has an LX90. He does astro photography almost exclusively, but usually uses a small refractor (66 or 80 mm) mounted on the 8"LX90, for imaging, and uses the LX90 for guiding. He prefers wide field views.
Did your wife purchase the scope by credit card, within the last 3 months and definitely state the purpose was for astro-imaging?
If so then this look like a clear case for repudiation of the sale re goods not fit for the stated purpose under the Australian Credit code act - in which case the dispute gets settled between your Credit card provider and the Merchant. You can talk to your credit card provider on the process to issue a chargeback - the first step is to request rectification from the merchant as goods not fit for purpose. Once / if they refuse you apply to the Credit Card provider to start chargeback proceedings.
Know your rights - if you have used an Australian Credit card you have a lot of protections against faulty goods, goods not matching your selection, and goods not fit for purpose!
Simon, did your wife specifically tell the salespeople at the store that you would want a scope for DSO imaging, i.e. an EQ mount was clearly warranted? If so, the goods that were sold were clearly not fit for purpose, and you're entitled to a remedy (exchange or refund being most likely here):
However, as you point out - some businesses can be a bit dodgy in following the law. Purchasing via credit card gives you another avenue to address the situation, but the consumer law still applies regardless of how your wife paid.
If the business is particularly annoying about it, your only real remedy to is file a legal claim with your state's small claims tribunal. It's cheap and efficient (no lawyers involved), but may not be worth the opportunity cost of your time.
Perhaps you could use this to negotiate a positive outcome to the situation? For example, maybe negotiate for a reasonable discount on your Option C?
There is the option of a carrying out a credit card charge back.
The issue is that I did not have the conversation with the sales person myself. If I had the conversation, I would not think twice about requesting a cc charge back. Although I fully trust my wife, there is the possibility that the sales person mentioned something pertinent regarding imaging and the setup which my wife does not remember (not wanting to put my wife down as she is very intelligent and articulate). The précis of the conversation was that I was starting out in astronomy, my interest would be mainly in imaging - specifically deep sky imaging and that I am reasonably technologically minded and pick things up quickly and therefore require equipment that we set me up for some time.
Given the above basic outline of requirements, I would say that we were sold the wrong equipment. Although I will not mention the company name, I will say that another company - Bintel provided the correct advise to my wife when shopping around. I believe that the reason my wife did not purchase through Bintel was that although their recommendations were sound, the equipment list was longer and probably to someone with absolutely no knowledge of astroimaging (my wife), the advice was more difficult to absorb and process.
In hindsight, the purchase should have been delayed and I should have been involved in the research process. All the same, it was a very thoughtful gift.
On Friday, I had decided to sell the scope. After haveing captured some reasonble shots last night, I am thinking that perhaps I should go down the wedge/basic guidance scope set up. Round and round in circles.
There is a celestron CGEM equatorial mount in the IIS classifieds that would be suitable for carrying your scope for AP, and at a significant discount to retail....just mention it as another option that you might not have considered
I tried imaging with an LX-90. Some people manage to image with them, but they must have far more patience than me!
If you can negotiate a return and move to a German equatorial mount you will have more success, with less frustration and more support from others who have used similar equipment. I only know of one person who regularly images using a fork mounted, but many who use GEMs.
Problem with a credit card charge back may be that it is POSSIBLE to image with an LX-90.
Hows about keeping the lovely Meade LX90 , use it as a visual scope with a few lunar shots taken here and there and enjoy , but learning along the way while saving up for a nice HEQ5/EQ6 type mount and 60-80mm APO that can be used for AP easily ? 
.
, just a thought .
