What makes Celestron better than Meade?

[Hypnotist]

Hi,

I've looked up which of the two telescope makers is better and have generally found that Celestron is the people's choice (that's also why I'm getting a CGE 1400 Pro EdgeHD). But I never found out exactly why Celestron is better. Maybe you guys have an answer for me.

Thanks!

Bart

[DavidTrap]

Open can of worms now!

DT

[Alchemy]

Both make some good scopes, and some at the budget end. There are imagers producing good results with both.... So that I wouldn't say one was better than the other.

[Lester]

It's a bit like trying to convince a Holden fanatic that Ford is the best, or vice versa. When I was looking for a 14" SCT it was the fact that the Meade LX200 was about half the price of the Celestron equivalent.

[Kevnool]

Meade = :thumbsup: said in one word.

Cheers Kev

[multiweb]

I don't think there's one better than the other but it is my understanding that Meade and Celestron do things a little differently when putting together their SCTs. Meade seems to have slightly better tolerances in manufacturing their optics which allows them to mix and match mirrors and correctors until they find the best match. On the other end Celestron will refigure their optics during matching if need be on a scope per scope basis. In the end you still get a top product. Different approach. This is one of the reason you might have heard people breaking a corrector on a Meade scope getting another one as opposed to a Celestron SCT which has Primary/Secondary and Corrector tied up together because of figuring. Damage any of the three and it's a show stopper. Especially the corrector.

[BlackWidow]

I agree with all that has been said with one addition. I think that the company that makes the best product is the one that supports you at after sales. It shows they have pride in the product they sell and place a value on the customer that chose them.. I have own both
Celestron and Meade products and have had problems with them both.. However the effort required to get assistance with Meade products is like winning the x lotto. Celestron has a really great support network and one that is based here in Australia. Meade however is Very Very poor indeed. No local distributor here in Australia only dealers. Some should not be in the Telescope game at all. Phone two interstate last week for the purchase of an item, and never got a call back.. I have been trying for 5 months to get an RA number for a warranty repair from Meade USA that came 4 days ago.. When I had a problem with my Skyscout from Celestron, I was able to contact the Distributor in NSW who was most helpfull. Took less than a week to sort out...

I own a 10 LX200 and am happy with it. I would not Not purchase a Meade untill they improve their International support.. Both great product Brands, but one is purly better Value for money and value your money..


Time to take a breath. Venting



Cheers
Mardy

[supernova1965]

Very off topic but I actually had a hand in converting a FORD Maniac to a HOLDEN Maniac my finest acheivement to date:P:poke::bowdown:

[BlackWidow]

Acheivement??? :lol: Once I purchased this holden and I had troubles..... Naaaa Only kidding! Well Done!

Hope he buys a Celestron if he gets into astronomy.. If anything goes wrong that is... Thats it! Meade must have never thought they needed to provided support co's thier telescopes would never fail :rofl:


Cheers
Mardy

[OICURMT]

No point in debating.

Personal choice. Research and decide for yourself. Suggest you get time on both at a star party, it'll help in your decision.

OIC!

[Hypnotist]

Hey guys,

This is what convinced me that Celestron is better than Meade!
http://www.universetoday.com/34925/a-high-definition-telescope-yeah-the-celestron-edgehd/
What do you think about it?

Clear skies
Bart

[multiweb]

Bit of unfair/unjustified Meade bashing in the review. Regardless of what you get SCTs need to be collimated extremely well to perform.

[AstralTraveller]

In some product lines both company's offerings are rebadged Syntas.

[Hypnotist]

Marc,

I sort of disagree with you on that point. The quality of my Meade ETX-70 is miserable. Just recently the mirror became unglued:mad2:. Bad quality control; should never had happened. Also, a friend of mine had a MySky from Meade that only lasted four uses before never working again (the batteries were replaced). However, I can't speak for Celestron, the CGE 1400 EdgeHD will be my first scope from that brand.

Thanks for your input,

Bart

[Ric]

I have a scope from both Celestron and Meade and reckon they are both great scopes.

[casstony]

Celestron has one clear advantage over Meade at the moment - cooling vents in the SCT ota. Users have been asking for those for decades, but scientists only recently developed the technology necessary to add holes to the tube :rolleyes:.

[mozzie]

im in the process of ordering a lx20014" acf ive had a lx90 12"for 4 years and the service from the dealer i bought it from has been second to none nothings ever a problem:thumbsup:
i rang again to verify some little issues this morning and once again they explained the differences and why!!!
you cant complain with that....they are both good companies for there price of there scopes as they say you pay for what you get..and thank goodness celestrons prices are coming down.competition is always good

[asimov]

I've seen bad optics in both Meade & Celestron, & also good optics in both so as far as I'm concerned, it comes down to how many drinks the dudes at the factories assembling them have had the night before..

Both have QC 'issues' right now.

[Matt Wastell]

I have never used a Celestron scope so my views are based on the Meade LX90 I have had for 7 years - it has been fantastic and the only issue I had (my fault) was the power cable broke.
Buy what you are happy with and never look back!

[marki]

They are not better than each other, both have good and bad points. Meade tend to over engineer their tubes which is why they are much heavier. I have read reports bagging both celestron and meade for different reasons and it really is a pointless pursuit. As for aftersales service whenever I have had a fault with my meade scopes Bintel have always responded immeadiately to my queries and I have had no problem getting things fixed. All three of the meade scopes I own (etx 125pe, Lx200R and series 5000 ED 80 apo) have excellent optics and I have no concerns at all. It may seem that celstron scopes are more popular but if you look at the sales figures you will find meade out sold celestron by about 10:1 in the last ten years. Both manufacturers make average scopes for a reasonable price, neither are in the big league as they both built to a budget.


Mark

[Outbackmanyep]

In my opinion YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR!

Pay peanuts and you get monkeys.
I think if you buy a telescope thats made in the country of origin then you're onto a good start. Ie: Vixen from Japan, Celestron U.S.A. or Meade U.S.A.

Mind you my dob is a chinese GSO and performs extremely well for my pursuits.

From my experience with Tasco riflescopes the ones made in Japan last longer and perform better than Tasco Taiwan, Tasco China, Tasco Hungary, Tasco Czechoslovakia

[Hypnotist]

Mark,
You've got to admit that Celestron has a better quality control than Meade. In addition to that the Celestron CGE Pro 1400 EdgeHD isn't just average but way better than average 14" scopes!

Bart

[PeterM]

Bart, interesting threads you have started recently about Celestron HD edge. Sorry if I am off the mark but reading more like some promo ad to me.
PeterM.

[Kal]

Celestron is only better than Meade because you want to believe that.

I've owned both (currently own product from both companies). I'd rate them as pretty much the same, and agree with that you get what you pay for.

[Jen]

Well i would have either ;) they are both much better than my scope :)

[BlackWidow]

Well still sticking to my guns... I agree you get what you pay for, unless its stolen or a gift :rofl:.. However we all expect the item will work, and competition forces manufactures to compete on equal ground for the better share of the market.. It's fair to assume when it comes to Meade and Celestron this situation is fierce, and like products are pretty much the same. I think they both make great products and no matter what you have, you have got some good gear. In fact better than most pro's had only a few birthdays back. We live in a great time!

But once they have got your money the measure is at what level that your purchse was appreciated. Having had problems with products from both Celestron and Meade the proof for me was simple.. Celestron has a distributor here in Australia. They have many parts and can repair onsite. However Meade does not. Parts are hard to get and need to be shipped from the USA. Been waiting 7 months for a part for my hand controller (still waiting). Meade use dealers to give us the support and some are next to useless (not all). The dealer here in my state know less than I do and i'm new to the game. He is a Camera Dealer and that's what I think he's best at, but Meade are happy with him. You are not even able to get past the dealers with Meade and contact them as they have NO E-Mail contact, co's talking with your Customers is just to hard and Expensive. Total loss of of contact with the most important part of your business and market research tool.

I don't get newsletters or product updates from Meade, but I do from Celestron. It seems one company values their customer base better than another, and that alone leads me to a no 1 rating for Celestron.

Just remember I own mainly Meade products, but would think twice about it if I was to spend my money today. I don't want to be waiting months to get my scope up and running. I have been waiting 5 months for my 1220 Field De-Rotator to be replaced under warranty back from Meade, and they still don't have any stock to replace it.. Sigh!

Best Price?
Best Features? (Hmmm sometimes)
Best overall value for my money? (Wins Every Time)

We Meade to see better customer support here in Australia!


You have made me vent again :eyepop:

Mardy

[TrevorW]

Bit of a mute point considering both are probably now made in China

In early 2003 Celestron's rival, Meade Instruments (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meade_Instruments), attempted a takeover but a bankruptcy court allowed the sale of the company back to its original owners. The company (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_%28law%29) had been U.S. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States) owned until April 2005 when it was acquired by SW Technology Corporation, a Delaware (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delaware) company and affiliate of Synta Technology Corporation (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Synta_Technology_Co rporation&action=edit&redlink=1) in China (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China). Synta is a leading manufacturer of astronomy equipment and related components.

Meade at one stage nearly went bankrupt as well, and was quoted as having parts made in Japan, Taiwan, Mexico etc no longer in the US

[marki]

No not really, I have owned both brands and their quality control is neither here nor there. The edge scopes are just a SCT with a field flattener thats all, nothing special. The meade ACF just uses a hyperbolic secondary to do the same thing. You have obviously had a bad experience with meade products (abait very cheap ones) and thus have a wheel barrow to push. From your other posts on the 14" edge I am guessing you really want one so get it already. When you get the chance put it up against a RCOS,Tak or AP scope so you are better able to judge the difference between average and top shelf scopes, there is a reason why they are far more expensive. Fact is meade and celestron produce a budget scope that is usually good value for the price. The rest of it is just marketing hype dream't up by the spin doctors in either company. Celestron do not have the worlds best optical systems but then neither does meade.

Mark

[asimov]

Here's a classic example of 'QC'....It ain't funny for the owner but I'm sure he saw the funny side :lol:

http://tinyurl.com/2acn2gt

[Octane]

Trevor, "moot" point, not "mute"! ; )

H

[multiweb]

As in 'shoot up?' Dislexic are teople poo... :P

[marki]

Mardy have you tried Bintel???

Mark

[TrevorW]

In part H, mute because I didn't want to hear or talk about this Meade V Celestron rubbish

IMHO they are, have, and always will be overpriced for what you get

[Max Vondel]

not much of a comparison Bart
your crapy 70mm vs 350mm...!!!!!!
I'm sure the celestron 70mm are just as poor.
You get what you pay for.
Get a Takahashi instead!
:D

[Hypnotist]

Not at all Peter, I just want to know as much about my new Cge EdgeHD before I get it, so I'm prepared. It really is my first "real" scope.

Bart;)

[Hypnotist]

Hi Mark,
I get your point, however please tell me why a Celestron Cge 1400 HD is 10,000 bucks and a Meade 14" LX200ACF is only $7,000? I think it's either (probably) the quality of the OTA or the missing German equatorial mount . (Check out this article I posted earlier and tell me what you think of it: http://www.universetoday.com/34925/a-high-definition-telescope-yeah-the-celestron-edgehd/)

All the best

Bart:D

[Merlin66]

Are you buying the OTA or the mounting?
I honestly don't think there is much to choose between the OTA's.
remember the HD and the new Meade both have problems with the existing reducers... other than Optec no one seems to have come up with a reducer for the new optical systems....

[Octane]

Easy.

The Meade ACF's have been around for a few years, hence, not fetching the PREMIUM you're paying for a NEWER telescope. The Edge HD's were only released in the last year or so.

Give it two years, and, the same thing will happen to the Edge HD series of scopes -- they'll fall in price.

H

[BlackWidow]

Thanks Mark for your advice about Bintel. I will give them a try in the future. I have at last been able to get onto a contact in the USA from Meade. He is the Service Manager and has agreed to assist me with my problems. I have been able to send my item directly to Meade for replacement. So now I am just waiting in the hope all will go well. As a business owner myself I value my customers. Backup service to me is always the best measure of a product I purchase. Somtimes I get it wrong as I may have this time. To fight over slight differences in image vision thats so close is not the main issue for me. In most cases the difference is only 1 - 2 Glasses of scotch. That seems to effect my vison alot more.. :eyepop:

Cheers
Mardy

[sejanus]

Hypnotist, whats with the flood of cge14 threads all over the place?

You say it is your first real scope and have mentioned you want portability which is not what a 14" will give.

I'd take a punt and say you've never seen or used a cge14 or probably any 14" sct - really I think you are going to a world of hurt buying a 14" sct as a first real scope.

[TheDecepticon]

As a couple have suggested, try Bintel. Although they are a lot further away than the dealer in Adelaide, who, by the way, IS useless, you will get much better service. I order all my stuff from the eastern states now because of this problem. Even the dealer on Henley Beach Rd, who is knowledgable, has never got anything in stock and is way too dear.

[marki]

Hi Bart. The person who wrote the article has a definate celestron bias (thats not to say they are bad). I think H answered your question in one go. They will fall in price as the "new factor" wears off. The tube will not be of a better quality but the EQ mount is a definate bonus but only if it is capable of carrying the tube for AP (if visual use only then alt/az mount is better for both comfort and ease of setup). Now EQ mounts that can carry that size tube (F11 @3910mm focal length :scared:) with the precision needed for AP usually have names like Paramount ME, or Tak EM500 or 10 micron or Astro physics GTO900/1200 .......... These mounts alone cost more then the whole celestron package. Go figure.

Mark

[mozzie]

theres one thing thats missing in this thread the weight of these scopes as im about to order a 14"acf its going to be perminately piered and if your going to set it up each night your in for a shock there heavy 14"scopes are big ive a mate with one and it takes two to lift onto tripod!!!!!! best of luck on your own

[marki]

Peter I could not find a weight listed for the 14"HD on celestrons site so I assume it must be a heavy bugger.

Mark

[asimov]

20.41KG or thereabouts.

[mozzie]

no i dont know there weight either but 14"sct,s are still big and heavy,trying to balance them and put them on a tripod it aint easy

[DavidTrap]

Agreed - not sure if Bart is really listening to the high quality advice being offered. I wish I'd sought the wise counsel on offer on ISS before I bought my first scope.

DT

[Hypnotist]

Gavin,

I want to know as much as possible about this rather big scope before I get it on my 16th birthday, so I know what to expect form it. I'm sorry not to have told that I've had a small (and bad) Meade ETX 70:screwy: for about eight years now. I know how to work with a scope. And even if it's a 14" OTA there won't be much of a difference. You ought to take a look at this youtube movie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBawz69qo_A and this one too: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwVg1M6bURI&feature=related (tell me what you think of them).

Bart

[sejanus]

dude, you are 15? You have next to no hope of handling a 14" SCT unless it is permanently mounted - you are really underestimating the weight and size. For gods sake go look at one in person before you buy it.

It's cool that you have money & all, but biggest is not necessarily best.

[Omaroo]

LOL! This is one of the funniest threads I've read in a while. How to tell someone to doesn't want to hear... that's 15 for you I guess. ;)

Hoiking a 14" SCT onto a mount (albeit eqatorial, so without the weight of the fork arms) is still not like tossing a 20kg sack of beans onto your shoulder. You have to lift it to well beyond the full height of the dovetail in order to slide it on. It's a delicate instrument that cannot be jarred, bumped or dropped. By yourself? Don't think so. The reason you don't see many 14's in the field (can't remember the last time I have) is because in my opinion it's completely impractical. I base this on having insisted that my "little" 12" SCT was a field scope for 6 months. Never again. It's amazing how quickly your enthusiasm drops when you have to lug it out into your back yard again and again. It becomes a chore, not a pleasure. Put it on a pier in an observatory? Brilliant. Different story - it's what they're built for.

On the quality front, I've had both high-end Celestron and Meade SCT's (not ETX-70 class, these are low-cost "family" consumer models, & basing your judgement on Meade as a whole because of this single experience is downright silly), and I'd say that the Meade mechanics slightly overshadowed the Celestron's in each case (eg. aluminium corrector plate flange washer ring on the Meade vs. flimsy plastic on the Celestron, geartrain quality, etc), and the optics were much of a muchness. I don't lend much credibility to most comparisons I find on the net because you're guaranteed to encounter bias and agenda-pushing. Go physically look at a 14" Meade ACF - they are somewhat different to your little ETX, and there will be very little difference in quality compared to your Celestron, if any. Compare both of these to the high-end scopes such as the AP's, Taks, RCOS, PlaneWave et al., and you'll see just how close the Meade and Celestrons are to each other. They are both great value scopes and are both well built for the money. They are still both mass-produced, and as such you will encounter one every so often that is problematic - and be sure to read all about it in some rant posted on a forum.

You're in the States, so service on either should not be a problem for you.

[astroron]

I hate to sound cynical, but is this guy for real or is he having everyone on:question:
The stuff being presented by this guy gets more Bizzare by the day:screwy:

[issdaol]

I wish I had been able to afford somthing like a Edge1400 and astrophotography setup when I was 15 :(

[DavidTrap]

Very well put Chris,

DT

[gregbradley]

I had a Meade LX90 8inch SCT as my first scope - it was great, loved it.

I later I had a Celestron Nexstar 11GPS carbon fibre - it was great - I loved it.

Both were great. Obviously aperture rules there.
Both had their pluses. Both performed flawlessly.

I got the Meade through Bintel. Fabulous support and service.
The Celestron was 2nd hand through Astromart and the US.

Greg.,

[Paul Haese]

Real men can lift a C14 endlessly! :P

Love my C14 and yes while it is heavy if you are a big lad you can lift it easily over your head.

[sejanus]

This is a picture of Paul ;

http://www.famous-people-search.com/arnold_schwarzenegger/arnold_schwarzenegger_picture/arnold_schwarzenegger_002.jpg

[AstralTraveller]

In his observing gear????

Something else to consider about a 14" SCT. The focal length of this scope is about 3500mm which makes it really comfortable for medium to high power viewing. However wide-field viewing is not possible. Even with a 31mm Nagler, which has the widest field of view possible in a 2" eyepiece, the magnification is about 113x and the true fov is 0.74 degrees. This is wide enough for most objects but some celestial show-stoppers like M42. etc carina, NGC3532, M7, M13 etc will not fit in the fov and so cannot be seen at thier best. One thing I like about my 6" refractor is that I can get a 2 degree fov and this nicely frames this class of object. This won't be possible with my new 16" Lightbridge. With my eps the max fov is about 1.2 degrees - still respectable - but of course it goes deeper and has better resolution.

[asimov]

I'd have to agree with Paul here to an extent. Sure, if your sitting in an office all day lifting no more than a pen for years & you don't work out in your spare time, then a C14 ain't for you.

I know plenty of 15 yr olds capable of lifting a lot more than a mere 20 kilos above their heads, & keeping it there.

Weather or not the OP is capable of this or not, no idea.

[mozzie]

holly smokes!!!! some of the iis people here know me through star parties on the east coast im a strong person also i brickie and there is no way id lift a 14"sct on and of tripods that while im permanetly pier!!!
and at 16 mate im going to sell my 12"lx90 and youd still struggle tripoding it there bloody heavy

[Hypnotist]

Hey guys,

yeah I'm 15, so what? Aren't 15 yr olds allowed to be interested in astronomy? What makes me incapable of lifting a 14" OTA? I'm 6 ft! That's probably taller than a number of you!
Enough of that! How would y'all transport a 1400 HD and the rest of the mount?

Bart



Ron,
I'm completely for real man! I'm getting this scope to my b-day! What makes the stuff I present so bizzare?

Bart:mad2:

[DavidTrap]

No one is saying a 15 yo can't be interested in astronomy. However, you are being offered a lot of sound advice,

Your upgrade path is not the norm (70mm - 350mm aperture)

The scope is not really portable - it is possible to transport it, but most would say this scope needs a home and a permanent pier.

You imply you are a beginner in astrophotography - such a scope is definitely not for a beginner at astrophotography - extremely high magnification requires impeccable guiding and atmospheric conditions.

To say that what you are wanting to do is impossible is wrong, but NASA didn't fire their first Rocket at the moon, they launched a few into orbit first.

I speak from experience. I bought an LX-90 8 inch when I got back into Astronomy. I thought I knew what I was doing, and that autoguiding would make it easy to image at long focal lengths (2000mm) on a low quality mount - I WAS WRONG! I have since bought a high quality mount and have started imaging at 600mm focal length (your scope is 3500mm) - much more successful. If I hadn't taken a major step back in focal length, I am sure I would have been frustrated to the point of giving the hobby away.

You seem to have enthuasium and the funds to buy good gear. You need to work out what your goals are - visual or astrophotography. I think a lot of us have assumed you want to get into astrophotography from your comments in this and other threads. Visually, you would have an awesome setup. It would not be awesome for a beginner at astrophotography. If you want to do imaging, why not use your money to buy something more appropriate. Friends and family are often not impressed by faint fuzzies seen visually, but they do go wow at impressive colour photos. Join a club and see what others are using.

On the transport of a large scope - search the web for some images of a fellow who transports a similarly sized Meade scope in a custom built trailer. I think he also uses a small crane to manoeuvre it onto a tripod.

DT

[Octane]

You will need a 16803-based sensor for best astrophotography results and a semi-trailer to transport the scope.

H

[Paul Haese]

I transport my C14 in the back of a Ute (a small pickup truck). It goes into 1 pelican case for the mount and 1 scope case for the scope.

I reckon personally you are making the right decision. Most of us have wasted more money on the supposed upgrade path. You have obvious come to the decision what you want and that is great. You will save yourself a lot of money in the end. Don't be deterred. Nice scope and great choice. For astrophotography you will need a great OAG and a nice sized sensor and you will be grinding out images like the rest of us.

[taxman]

So do I - the amount I have blown by buying something lesser "that's almost as good" and then selling at a loss to get the thing I really wanted in the first place - hoo boy...

Just get the 14"er - you'll work out a system for transport, photography etc.

:thumbsup:

[sejanus]

We are just trying to help, it's also not about outright physical strength but the challenge of the extremely long focal length as well as well as other factors of running a big tube.

I think it's great you are into astronomy at 15, at 15 I was just into girls :thumbsup: but I do think you are biting off more than you can chew.

I'm not sure how much $$ a c14 is - I'm sure it's not cheap. I think you'd get more enjoyment out of a twin setup with say a 11" celestron SCT with a really nice fast refractor as a piggyback (or side by side) scope for astrophotography on a equatorial mount. Prob end up similar $$.

Whatever you choose, good luck.

Don't forget you'll also want some good eyepieces as well.

[renormalised]

It's not just the weight and the height of the tripod, either. A C14 will be very awkward to handle....it's a big tube and you really need to get a good hold on it to make sure it's safe when you mount it. That means you'll have to have your tripod at the lowest practicable height so that you don't overdo it when trying to put it on.

For some here who have said "Oh he's a big lad, he'll manage"... Yeah, that might be the case. However, try holding 20-22kgs at head height for any longer than a minute or more. And hold it rock steady. It's not that he can't lift it, it's the possibility that holding such a heavy weight, trying to balance it and mount it at the same time, he could do himself some damage if it slips or whatever. If his Dad is going to be there to help him, or one of his mates, that's fine. But by himself will be risky. It's all too easy to rip shoulder and back muscles and damage ligaments/tendons trying to handle heavy weights. He would be much better off to buy it and mount it permanently. He'll get a lot more use out of it if he does.

But, if he wants to get it, then good on him. It'll be a fabulous scope. Lucky for him he doesn't have to buy it over here though!!!!. You'd be saving up for a month of Sundays to afford one!!!!.

[Steffen]

For that sort of money I know I'd be having a lot more fun with a nice 5" refractor (like, say, a WO FLT132) on a CGEM or EQ6 mount. There's still going to be enough left to buy a 14" or 16" Dob for the aperture fever ;)

User-friendliness in setup and handling has a huge impact on the net use and enjoyment one gets out of a scope. Even though a 14" SCT could show you heaps it won't if you can only be bothered to set it up three times a year. It takes a lot of commitment to set up a scope as big as this whenever there promises to be a clear night.

Cheers
Steffen

[Paul Haese]

You guys are making out like a C14 is a monster of a scope. It takes just seconds to lift and slip the scope on the saddle. One does not have to lift it straight up over ones head and hold it there like a weight lifter in the olympic final. It just needs to be at shoulder height initially, which is quite frankly a pretty easy lift, then you can rest it on your shoulder before sliding into position. I own one of these tubes and I can tell you from direct experience this is not as hard as you think. If you own a 14" Meade then that is considerably heavier than the C14 and comparing the weight of the Meade unit to the Celestron unit is not possible. Even comparing a Meade fork with a Celestron Tube is ridiculous. Give the lad a break and some credit for thinking this through.

Besides a C14 can be left setup outside in the back yard if the yard is secure. I do this and I know Damian Peach does it. Not many people are going to try to knock it off because of the shear size.

I just read a lot of negativity about what this lad has got in mind.

[Paul Haese]

BTW, I love the youtube videos. That just goes to show how easy it is to mount a C14. It is really funny too. Well done to the author of those videos.

[Outbackmanyep]

Go for it!
If i had my way, i'd get a 14" Celestron at the drop of a hat!

What you do with it is all part of the learning curve of amateur astronomy!

[BlackWidow]

Wasn't this forum Subject about a Question that was asked??

What makes Celestron better than Meade?

Now it's about who has the biggest.
Who is the STRONG MAN
Who is the Child that dosn't know enough
Let me tell you what I have got at home!
I know you want advice, but let me tell you I know it all. FIGJAM


That poor Guy that just wanted our thoughts on a brand name purchase, and has now been shown that some Astronomers on this forum are just in this to compeate with each other. This is the reason that I tend to keep away from clubs and groups. You can get some good information, opinions and meet some great people. However you can get alot more than you ever asked for or wanted to know.. We seem to have alot of Forum Highjackers on this site and original topics are often lost. :shrug:



That's my thoughs. I was interested originaly in what others thought about the brand question. Wow lost intrest now. :screwy:


Cheers
Mardy

[DavidTrap]

Yes Mardy,

The thread has gone somewhat off topic, but there have been follow-up posts by the original poster, and reference made to other threads started by the original poster.

DT

[Steffen]

Warnings tend to be negative, by their very nature. It's just that a number of people feel some degree of warning is in order here. Nobody it demonising the C14 or your choice of owning one. However, size shock and big scopes lingering unused in garages is rather common. I think the best advice given in this thread is "see and try for yourself before buying".

Cheers
Steffen.

[taxman]

Anyone else see the irony of posting this?

:lol::lol::lol:

[mozzie]

yep a bit of advise and it ends up getting heated :(:( i love astronomy and so does bart if hes after a c-14 good on him go for it.i would have loved a 14"scope at the age of 16

[PeterM]

Bart Ok, I think you are for real and not just trying to promo Celestron.
You are excited just as I was your age. But your Question is double edged making a statement of fact that simply isn't correct and completely debatable to the point where nobody wins. "What makes Celestron better than Meade" - nothing, just as if it were "What make Meade better than Celestron" again nothing. 14inch in either is an absolutely FAB scope period and that is a fact. Horses for courses, a lot of jealous people out there, including me (and this will get a response I bet) and yes a lot of good advice also. But Haesey has hit it on the head (yet again) full stop in my opinion. Get the 14inch, great for you if you have the bucks. You will not regret it and all the negatives are very, very easily overcome.... with more $$$$$ (not an issue by the sound of it).
Good luck, you have it all ahead of you and you are light years ahead of where I was 37 years ago. Don't discount a supernova search programme, you will have the goods to make your mark here with the right imager and I would be very happy to assist you in anyway.

PeterM.

[Hypnotist]

Paul,

Thanks so much for being so supportive and so very helpful. It's great to see that at least one person can give me useful and good tips out here in comparison to others who are just, how should I put it,...envious. Thanks again Paul!

It's great to see so many different opinions, but aren't we in the first place supposed to be a group of guys (and girls) who share the same interest in astronomy, everyone in their very own way?! I don't think we should come here to express prejudice or envy:screwy: and gripe about other peoples' decisions. We're here to be constructive and to share the joy of astronomy!!!

Clear skies
Bart:)

[Hypnotist]

Peter
Thank you too. I wish others could be just as encouraging as you've turned out to be!;)

Regards
Bart

[Omaroo]

What??? You come on here and post (amongst many similar statements in other threads) a blanket rhetorical "question" that essentially states "Celestron are better than Meade, now why?". I sense troll here, and I'm sorry if I'm wrong, but your language doesn't suggest to me a modern 15-year old's writing style. Were you expecting or hoping that everyone was going to agree?



How do you think that owners of large Meade SCT's, and there are many of them here who are incredibly happy to have one, feel about that being said? Your statement flies directly in their faces and you'd be right in feeling a little of their heat. Your "research" has uncovered a couple of Meade-o-philes and you're happy as Larry to believe it all and post in agreeance. I'd like to know why you posted this question in the first place. If it wasn't to provoke reaction, you're having yourself on.

Jealous? You've been given advice by people who have all been posting on here for years. I've not seen anything to suggest that anyone is "envious" of you and trying to tear you down. Everyone has given you their reason for their advice and you're not happy to take it at face value and label it "jealousy". Golly, most of us have been there done that with large SCT's and for our own various reasons decided that it was a wrong move. That's pretty presumptuous don't you think? Paul and others have these scopes and we're all proud of what they accomplish with them. This doesn't for a second mean that the rest of us want to go down the same road as they. Plenty are taking other, equally expensive routes with high-end refractors for the reasons they've given. You're in the USA, so the 14" EdgeHD and mount package retails for around $10k. That isn't exactly an expensive scope. On top of that, at least you don't have to pay for international freight like we Australians do.



No-one here wants anything more than for you to be happy with your new aquisition - but please don't go telling others, by inference or otherwise, that their choice of scope is inferior because you choose to say so. If you truly are 15, you really can't have the experience to say that. If you want encouragement, then maybe try not offending those you ask a question of. By inferring that some of us are "jealous" of you, I suspect that you'll be taken less seriously that you'd otherwise hoped.

[Alchemy]

The original question was somewhat provocative.

Here's my opinion.

You're buying a telescope based on advertising hype. You want the biggest and by some flashy advertising is the best ( let me assure you it's not and neither is meade)

You haven't to my small revision stated your desired use. Imaging, visual, scientific.

Your scope scope should be tailored to your needs, your situation and with a potential to the future.

None of hese have been stated.

I can say as an imager it would not be my first imaging scope.

If you want a 14 inch scope and someone will buy it for you half your luck..... But I can't say it's going to be the best buy for you.

[DavidTrap]

Thought I'd post one more time before the inevitable happens and this thread is locked.

I agree with Chris' sentiments. You only want the advice that matches what you want have already planned to do - that suggests insecurity.

I can't really see how my previous posts in this and your other thread, convey envy - I certainly don't want what you have or intend to buy. I'm proud of where I am in life. Really I was just hoping to redirect your funds towards something that I firmly believe would suit you better. You haven't made any statements to offer a counter argument to any of that advice, so I can only assume you either don't have anything to counter it or have ignored it.

As to your original question about Meade vs Celestron - they're both like a good quality mass produced car - there's very little between them. I'm very happy with the image quality of my Meade ACF scope, and many other experienced observers have commented favourably when looking through my scope. Neither of these manufacturers produce the best available scopes in the world.

Maybe one day, you'll prove yourself and someone will name a space telescope after you.

This thread will self destruct in five seconds.

DT

[CraigS]

…and 'The Hynotist' will disavow any knowledge of his actions …

;)

[Kal]

This thread reminds me of a funny cartoon that goes like this, the only difference is that the people that are offering valid advice contary to what the OP wants to hear are starting to get flamed:

What a woman says:
This place is a mess! C'mon,you and i need to clean up, your stuff is lying on the floor and you'll have no clothes to wear, if we don't do laundry right now!

What a Man Hears:

blah,blah,blah,blah,C'MON
blah,blah,blah,blah,YOU AND I
blah,blah,blah,blah,ON THE FLOOR
blah,blah,blah,blah,NO CLOTHES
blah,blah,blah,blah,RIGHT NOW!

[CraigS]

Ahhh … the mighty powerful Selective Hearing Centre ... located deep within the male left brain hemisphere passing the messages via the lust lobe !!

.. I can see that, now …

:)

Cheers

[marki]

Haha you are a very funny person Bart. Like I said about 100 posts ago you have already made up your mind so buy it already and feel comfortable within yourself that you have the best telescope in the whole wide world. It is not good form to waste everybodies time then insult them when you dont get the answers you want. I like Chris have my doubts as to the validity of any of this post. Do me a favour will you and please post 2 vids on youtube for my entertainment.

1. The first time you set it up.
2. Your first night imaging at 3900mm focal length (ps I will not need to see the pics the results are a given, bit like slamming your head in a door it's going to hurt).


Mark

[OICURMT]

QFT! :fight:

[mozzie]

yep well said the last dozen posts !!!!give a bit of advise and if its not what they want to here they get real diffencive.my only advise was be careful with the weight of the scope but they know everything and when it hits the deck and smashes the corrector plate,they will still know everything.......... im finished with this thread!!!

[Hypnotist]

Come on Chris,

Believe it or not, I'm 15. Writing-style improves when studying Latin and Ancient Greek at school in addition to fluently speaking German and some French. I agree being interested in astronomy, playing the didgeridoo, hypnotizing others and baking in your free time is quite "quirky" for a 15yr old to do, but that's just me, man. Just because 15yr olds around you don't use a more sophisticated way of expressing themselves, doesn't mean I not capable of doing so. Since when are "jealousy" and "envy" the same in meaning?
The reason for posting this "Celestron is better than Meade" stuff comes from information people have given on the web. Generally you'll find people to prefer Celestron over Meade. I wanted to hear what you guys think of that!
If you think you can question me and my age, why can't I question you; how do I know you're actually as wise as you say you are? So don't come and do that again!:sadeyes:

Bart

[Alchemy]

Yep just baiting. I'm afraid you've lost me on this thread or any other threads you post or comment on. Goodbye

[Omaroo]

Bart, I'm comfortable that don't need to answer your inane attempt to question my wisdom. On reflection, and thinking back to when I was 15, I remember already constructing well-formed and articulate high school essays for English, economics and other language-driven courses. I spoke English, Russian, Japanese, some German and French too. My apologies if you assume that I was inferring that you shouldn't be capable of the same.

There's a great book written by some American called Dale Carnegie. Do yourself a service and give reading it a go. I believe that it's available in English, Latin and probably ancient Greek, French and German so you shouldn't have trouble with it.

[marki]

Perhaps a new thread giving ten reasons on why celestron and meade for that matter suck may be in order here.

1.Their marketing crews fail to draw a line between pure fabrication and reality.
2.Their marketing crews fail to draw a line between pure fabrication and reality.
3.Their marketing crews fail to draw a line between pure fabrication and reality.
4.Their marketing crews fail to draw a line between pure fabrication and reality.
5.Their marketing crews fail to draw a line between pure fabrication and reality.
6.Their marketing crews fail to draw a line between pure fabrication and reality.
7.Their marketing crews fail to draw a line between pure fabrication and reality.
8.Their marketing crews fail to draw a line between pure fabrication and reality.
9.Their marketing crews fail to draw a line between pure fabrication and reality.
10.Their marketing crews fail to draw a line between pure fabrication and reality.

Yep that sums it up for me alright :P:lol:

Mark

[Hypnotist]

Chris
The languages of ancient Greek and Latin are the ones that really make you sharp minded in comparison to Russian and Japanese. Also, both ancient Greek and Latin help understand the ancient (astronomical) world too. Neither Russian nor Japanese do this.

Bart

[taxman]

To the tune of (Everybody Loves) String:

♫ Troll, troll, troll, troll, ♫
♫ Troll-troll-troll troll troll! ♫

:lol::lol::lol:

[Omaroo]

LOL! Oh man, how incredible are you? :lol: Go away sonny - you're boring! I suspect that your grasp of ancient Greek and Latin are shoolboy-standard at best, much like we all had back in junior high. You wont last long, so I needn't become worked up. An elitist little snob at 15. Too funny....man! :rofl: Oh dear, we get 'em here.

I see that you've started to seed similar threads over on CN:

http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthreads/showthreaded.php/Number/4071940

Let's see how long you last there as well.

Would a mod please do us all a favour and lock this thread?

[OICURMT]

Locking this thread would be HIGHLY advisable.