Buying an RCX400 [Archive]

rumples riot

22-09-2005, 03:11 PM

Hi all,

just recently been going through the motions of doing some research into this scope. I want one for a number of reasons, mainly getting perfect collimation so that I can image the planets and for its flat field (DSO work), incorporated dew heater and all the new connections in the rear of the telescope.

I enquired with Bintel and they say they will not have the scope until later in the year, reason being there has been some problems with the model and Meade want to sort it out before sending anymore to Australia. As I understand it the scope might be back in Australia by November.

In doing this I will obviously be selling the LX200 10", Weight sets, dew shield, dew heater and other odds and sods. The price will be very competitive for anyone interested.

Does anyone else have one of these scopes? What if any are your comments on the scope? Should I just stick with the current scope (bear in mind that I want to do hi resolution planetary imaging), even though I am so sick of collimating the scope.

Comment away.

Starkler

22-09-2005, 03:18 PM

For hi res planetary, another cheaper possibly better option is a good quality newt on an eq mount.

rumples riot

22-09-2005, 03:37 PM

Yeah, I had thought of this option and once upon a time I had a good 8" Newt on a purpose built mount, but found that you need a really long scope (physically) to get the focal length needed for hi res planetary work. I just don't have that sort of room in my little back yard. I know Anthony has this configuration but even swinging something this size is an issue. So I will have to go with a folding design and I have spoken to Don from Bintel and he was very impressed with the performace of the star tests and the scope in general. So it looks like it will either be a RCX or a 9.25 Celestron if I go through with this at all.

JohnH

22-09-2005, 03:58 PM

No (or very little) collimation required and longer focal length than the SCT and still compact?

or

Vixen VC200L

Just a thought!

h0ughy

22-09-2005, 04:00 PM

dare I say it have you thought of a HQ Mak 8"(saxon) or 7"(Intes) on a second hand GPDX mount (from here)

rumples riot

22-09-2005, 06:39 PM

A Mak, ohh how I would love one of those. Gary sent me a link a while ago of a firm that makes beautiful Maks, costly too. But alas even a Mak will be a bit long to swing.

The vixen sounds alright, but would prefer not to go down this path again.

However, I really like the features on the RCX and it has had some great reviews.

Keep the suggestions coming, there might be something I have not looked at. I would still like some feed back from those that have an RCX though. I know that people own them in Australia, so let me know.

netwolf

22-09-2005, 06:54 PM

Mak-Newt or Schmid-Newt perhaps, i think gbeal has taken some great planetary shots with his Make-Newt. http://www.2fdesign.co.nz/zeissnut/equipment.htm Gary has indicated that if he could only own one scope it would be the MN76, i think thats a good tip from an expert.

davidpretorius

22-09-2005, 07:03 PM

http://www.astro-optical.com.au/images/rcx40012lrg.jpg
lovely bit of gear, i am just dreaming! Have fun deciding though!

rumples riot

22-09-2005, 07:10 PM

Netwolf when I said Gary that is who I meant, BTW here is one of my images from this year with my LX200.

While the Mn76 is a lovely scope I have had good success from a folded design like the RCX. Thanks anyway for your imput.

Thanks David, yeah it is a great piece of work.

davidpretorius

22-09-2005, 07:13 PM

awesome!!! anyone know how to get drool out of my keyboard!!!! phew!!!

now back to looking at that picture!!!

acropolite

22-09-2005, 07:15 PM

If I had the cash I wouldn't hesitate. As you say Paul they're getting great reviews and the added bonus of electric collimation and dew heater inbuilt are icing on the cake.

beren

22-09-2005, 07:26 PM

What about the LX200 7 "Mak , if there was ever a sleeper scope that warrants more attention its this one , i havent looked through one but trust me ive been thoroughly tempted by it . Costs the same as the ten , a lymax cat cooler might be a necessity though

rumples riot

22-09-2005, 07:49 PM

Hmm Yeah that might be a go'er there Stuart, although this scope is very limiting in what you can do with it. And; it costs the same as my Lx200.

Nah still not convinced, an RCX would be good, although 7"Mak does not need collimation. However, it does not have a dew heater.

You guys are coming up with some good alternatives, I'll give you that.

mick pinner

22-09-2005, 07:58 PM

hi Paul, just a couple of thoughts, the new RCX was of course designed to be a dedicated astrophotography scope hence the automatic collimation, there is no improvement in visual performance ( my brother who lives in America has a look through quite a few ), my main point being that once the collimation on your scope is correct and the fact that it is permanently on a pier it should stay that way more or less would you not be better of to invest in some really high end photo gear and motor drive focuser attached to your existing scope and avoid any problems that might pop up on a new scope, the RCX is relatively new and a long way from being proven in the field, they've been building LX 200's for a long time and still having problems.

beren

22-09-2005, 08:00 PM

Theres the superseded LX50 series Paul , ive seen some good prices on astromart for the Mak version {plus the classic LX200 version}.....Dew heater ! more electronics to stuff up down the line

h0ughy

22-09-2005, 08:02 PM

:thumbsup: It has a Strehl of .985, and a cost of $4150 US
and that is without a mount :poke: ................

http://www.astromart.com/classifieds/details.asp?classified_id=378062

rumples riot

22-09-2005, 08:10 PM

Yeah your right Mick, thing is I have my collimation pretty good now, but it just always needs that little tweek, ask EXFSO, he thinks that my collimation is very good but the perfectionist in me says it just needs a 128 of a turn tweek.

I know that the RCX was designed for Astrophotography and that is one of my other interests as you know, but I have heard from many others in the US that the scope is excellent for planetary work also. Since I do this the most and DSO secondary I wanted a scope that has the collimation issue put aside with a longish focal length and with aperture and not cost the entire earth.

However, like you say the RCX is new and prone to problems and this has been largely on my mind from the moment I considered this two months ago. I have had very good success so far with the LX200 and maybe if I bought a camera like Birds new one I would save myself a grand overall. It is just that the RCX has so many other features. Yes many things can go wrong, and would most like knowing my luck. But you know how it is.

josh

23-09-2005, 12:13 PM

Youre right, Id wait for a bit. Ive noticed Meade products are very nice. But they all seem to have quite few bugs in them for some time. Id wait until they have been tested in the real world for some time so everyone is aware of the bugs and perhaps Meade takes another look at them. That way you will have a tighter product in the end.
Ive just got aan lx90 lnt and im glad i waited for awhile to scope out all the little probs that i would have. Saved me alot of grief as i was expecting them and knew what to do.
See ya

square_peg114GT

23-09-2005, 12:26 PM

I think that 'Gearhead' JRCrilly is in the process of writing a review of the RCX for Cloudynights. I and many others have alot of respect for his opinion. If I were in the market, I'd wait to hear what John has to say.

ausastronomer

23-09-2005, 08:23 PM

Sorry to spoil the party guys. One of my extremely learned colleagues in the USA told me last week that Meade have halted production on this scope because of several known issues with it. They have basically put the brakes on production until the issues are resolved. A couple are apparently not of a minor nature. One for instance I think is collimation changing or something similar when you refocus due to an electronic fault. The sad thing is Meade are not going to correct existing issues with scopes that have already been sold. Anything your likely to buy at the moment could have issues.

I can find out what the issues are if you like and get back to you.

CS-John B

rumples riot

23-09-2005, 09:10 PM

I all ready stated that Meade have stopped exporting to Australia John.

Pegster I think I read JRCrilly's review at cloudy nights (I think there is at least one review there) and several others around and all have come up trumps. This scope is showing all the hall marks of a classic scope.

My policy is that while waiting is one option, or you may be lucky enough to score a great scope and be enjoying it while everyone is being cautious.

Josh, with a complex scope such that Meade make; things sometimes don't work as they should, for instance my GPS would not work when I bought my LX200 10". It took six weeks for it to find the satellites. Since then there has never been a problem. It is a good scope.

Stuart sorry dude but not interested in superceded models, just want the inbuilt dew heater, collimation adjustment and many other new features.

ausastronomer

23-09-2005, 09:21 PM

Sorry Paul, I should have taken the time to read your entire post. I was just browsing and saw the thread header and thought "oops, better warn him". The guys at BINTEL would certainly see you right if you got a lemon, but unfortunately not all dealers think the way Mike, Don and the boys at BINTEL do. There are still US dealers trying to move existing stock that they may well be stuck with, sad really, someone other than big blue gets burned there.

Good luck with it when you go ahead, it may well be a super scope when the issues are sorted out.

CS-John B

gaa_ian

23-09-2005, 11:28 PM

What about the Russian TAL scopes ?
I dont think they require collumation ?
http://www.telescopes.ru/product.html?cat=1&prod=62

square_peg114GT

01-10-2005, 04:40 PM

Part 2 of JRCrilly's RCX review is out on cloudynights.

http://cloudynights.com/documents/MEADES12part2.pdf

avandonk

01-10-2005, 07:47 PM

They are better than a SC but not as good as an RC.I have got a TAL 200K
which I have not used properly yet.The collimation is factory set and short of dropping from a great height they don't need adjustment.They are a bit primitive in the back end ie focuser etc. but the optics are fine.No chromatic abberation
and pin point star images over the entire field.When I get a clear night will take some test pics.
I think he is after perfection and he is headed in the correct direction.

Bert

Striker

01-10-2005, 09:40 PM

I had a look at a RCX 10" at Star Opitics early in the week....

Have you seen the size of the tripod for the RCX 10".....its huge....it would be twice the size of the 2" stainless steel legs you get with all other 10" SCT's....

Its one solid looking unit.

Didn't Eddie test this scope at the Astrofest???????????