View Single Post
  #24  
Old 12-05-2009, 10:18 PM
dpastern (Dave Pastern)
PI cult member

dpastern is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 2,874
Oh well, I must have a good nose for seeing when companies go bust. I've already noted 2 companies that use our ISP as going to go bust several months before they actually had liquidators appointed and told us. I saw the writing on the wall and didn't rely on wishful thinking. Sure, the Meade trademark will be sold, as well as IP etc, that happens when any business selling products goes bust. It's a way of getting money to pay your major creditors.

I've heard enough horror stories about Meade optical quality and service to know well enough to stay away.

My comments about refractors weren't trying to say that a 4" refractor is better than a 10" reflector, etc. Re-read my original post. Per inch, refractors are better quality instruments optically - generally flatter fields, better contrast, etc. Obviously, large aperture refractors are outrageously expensive and beyond the ability of mere mortals to own.

A larger f ratio will always give higher magnifications, and that is handy when imaging planets I suspect ;-) Of course, said images will be fainter. Since a lot of better quality astrographs seem to be trying to get f6 etc, they're more suited to wide area DSOs imho, than imaging objects that require high magnification. There's no reasons why refractors cannot image just as good as RCs etc, the main problem will be that subs need to be longer due to less light gathering ability. Optical issues might be very much different ;-)

Out of the scopes that you've mentioned, I'd be inclined to go with the Vixen, although I haven't used it. Followed by the Celestron. I'm surprised at Pauls' negative comment about the c9.25, since I'm yet to see a bad review of one of these in a fair bit of reading over the years. I've seen far more negative stories/reviews of Meade gear than Celestron gear, considerably more and that is why I have placed Celestron above Meade.

I guess each to their own. I know several amateurs who've been around for a while who have privately warned me to stay away from Meade for exactly the same reasons as I've read, and they've previously owned Meade gear I might add. *shrugs*, it's your money Troy, do as you please with it (well, as s.w.m.b.o lets you do).

Dave
Reply With Quote