G,day.. Owners of Meade LX200R 10"_14" & Celestron CPC 9" _14", I,m seeking any opinion on both of these telescopes for use in astro-photography. Any other advice would be greatly appreaciated, thanks. Neil
Do you have a $20 000 mount to put them on? Because the majority opinion is that you will need one to get good pics out of the big scts (11+ inches) Unless you use focal reducers, which defeats the purpose of a big sct.
Start simple - a ED80 apo refractor on a HEQ5 mount - so $2K of scope and mount gear + $1K camera and add $2K imaging software - before you seriously target long focal lenght, heavy SCTs with mirror shift challenges - which pushes you into about a $12K spend for the majoirty of gear you need! The mount's you'd need to carry and point such a OTA - starts at the high $5,000 range (say a G11).
there is a certain difficulty in imaging at long focal lengths, and as others have said you ned to work up to it, become proficient a shorter focal lenths, then apply your knowledge and skills further up. long length imaging is VERY unforgiving, if you can do the short(600mm) well then think of mid range 1000-1500 then when you have mastered that move on to 2000+ lengths.
Theres nothing stopping you jumping in at the deep end but that is expensive and if you get it wrong wooops.
i currently shoot at 1500mm, that is my 4th imaging scope, im in no hurry to go longer. to image at that length has cost me in the order of 10,000+ dollars
g 11 mount, 12 inch f5 scope, 80mm guidescope, cameras x 2, 2 guide cameras, lots of software, custom made gear mounting plates and rings, cables cables and cables, dew heaters, observatory... the list goes on
Phew – thanks guys! I thought it was just me being an incompetent buffoon for struggling to auto guide with consistent quality at focal lengths of 1500mm plus! I’m so glad to be in the company of others who have had similar experiences; I feel so much better now.
Imaging at 920mm with a Vixen ED102 F9 refractor on the Vixen GPDX mount almost seems a walk in the park now!
However, I’ll keep plugging away – I like a challenge.
If you want to do astrophotography a good quality fluorite refractor is going to be the best selection that you can get, and will provide sharp images on visual work as well which a SCT is incapable of achieving. Plus a good mount (such as Vixen Sphinx at minimum) will provide acurate tracking which the selections you are loooking at will not.
[quote=Astromelb;311244]If you want to do astrophotography a good quality fluorite refractor is going to be the best selection that you can get, and will provide sharp images on visual work as well which a SCT is incapable of achieving.
Bash the SCT again, my LX200R 12 inch would has some of the nicest views, sharp, pin point stars all the way out tothe edge of view, planet killer and compared to my mates 12 inch dob there is nothing like standing confortable behind it or sitting in a chair having a beer while it tracks the object for hours if you want. No coma and almost like looking through a nice 12 inch refractor, I have 8 inch Dob, and like it but love my big Cat. Especially now that my Mallincam hyper colour video camera has just arrived in customs today. Time to blow those deep sky objects out of the sky.
My 2 cents worth .
Thanks for the encouragement matt.I,ve appreciated all the comments, but would like to hear from all the other owners of SCT, especially the LX200R and celestron owners, how about it.
I've used an LX200R 10" once for a few days with a 20Da last year. This was with a 6.3 FR and autoguided with my ED80 refractor and barlow. We got a few ok shots out of it but I was glad to go back to imaging through my ED80 for my sanities sake.
BTW what are you going to image with? If you are using a smallish chip CCD then you could get away with using the 3.3 FR which will make it a much easier deal to image with. Especially if the CCD Camera has a built in autoguide chip
Neil,
Paul is right and alot of people would agree that imaging through a long focul length scope such as Lx200 or cpc is alot harder than with shorter focul lengths. I have had mixed results using mine and a DSI but I was never really intrested or have the time to take up conventional imaging. I got my LX200R for using both visual which it is great for and to use with a specialised astro video camera called a Mallincam which provides spectacular results in an instant. I seen one in action and let me say that your jaw drops when it fires up. Astro video cameras do not have the same resolution as conventional CCD camera's but my main intrest is visual and using my gear with family, lots of little excited kids , and very eager friends. I use an optec .7 telecompressor which is excellent for the corrected optics of the LX200R as it reduces the focul length without flatening the field which has already been done with the 200R, and works well for both visual and imaging. If you go for the CPC scopes then a standard focul reducer would be OK but with the already corrected optics of the Meade scope some focul reducers don't perform so well from what I have been told.
I got a special custom made reducer to use with my Mallincam to get my scope down under F3 which is where the Mallincam works best on extended objects such as Neb's. But if I want to crank up the power I just take the reducer out. I mainly observe from suburban Brisbane so even if I invested in a big Dob over 16 inches the light pollution would not do it justice, but with my video system I will be able to chase down Galaxies that I would never see from a dark sky using a scope 16inch or bigger. This is where my intrest lies in astronomy but if you have no experience in imaging and want to give it a try maybe look at something easier like what Paul sujested and try using an ED80 and DSLR.
If you want to do visual and have great goto and resonable portability and maybe try imaging on the side here and there then the LX or CPC scopes would be good. I went for the Meade as I felt they offered more in the accessories for imaging. We have some guys in our club that are producing spectacular results using LX200 scopes but they are experienced and I am sure they have had lots of bad shots as well. The LX200 and CPC scopes are great all rounders if you like visual and are prepared to put up with the learning curve of imaging. One of the best planetary imagers in the world Damian Peach uses big Cat's for spectacular results and I have seen some images of some one here in Aust. using a cooled Cat. and the image quality is almost like hi-def so don't let people tell you these type's of scopes can't produce good images. Look at what some of the guys in the states are producing.
I don't have anymore experience to offer you but I am sure there are many more people with load's more experience with these types of scopes and others and hopefully will provide the answers you are looking for.Maybe try and post some more specific questions on what each type of scope you are intrested in or what type of imaging you want to try and do and I sure you will get great specific responses back. Me, I am happy with what I am doing in this great hobby of ours, thats the beauty there is many differerent avenues to pursue and it would be a bit boring if every one did they same thing .
Both companies are very fine firms. They both offer life-time warranties. As a former dealer I can tell you they always treated customers very well. Both are located here in S. California where I live but my choice in terms of optics is Celestron SCT. My choice in terms of advanced electronics would be Meade.
I love the optics of my C9.25 - and being carbon fibre means I almost never have to refocus due to temperature changes each night. Week after week it retains perfect focus.
Where I believe it is weaker is mirror flop - which makes it hard to track stars accurately unless you have a self guiding imaging camera (S-Big) or do off axis guiding (which seems to work a treat from my first experience). Putting in a focal reducer (within the Lumicon Off Axis Guider) made imaging alot faster and easier to - but now my software post processing now has to be a bit smarter to account for effects of the imager.
I wish the C9.25 had a mirror lock like Meade SCTs do - but I query Meade owners - does this actually work well? Since adding a feather touch micro focuser mirror flop is 2x - 3x better - but I spent maybe 8 months trying to perfect tracking using two different guide scopes until I sussed out if was likely mirror flop - not differential flexure - giving me tracking problems.
I think both SCT tubes are probably very good - and would be interested in what people say about Meade's mirror lock before making a final decision. Also the C9.25 has a lovely flat field - but I ponder is Meade's now just as good or even better?
My mount cost me double my OTA, Losmandy bars to replace the flimsy Celestron ones was another $1,000, motor focus and feathertouch and OAG probably cost another $1,000 as well - so it all adds up!
PS
Attached is a reduced quality - 4 minute shot of Eta Carina through the C9.25 -> normal Canon 400D , level curves and red-balance in Photoshop CS2, - no flats or darks applied, and where I spent maybe one minute checking focus (and it shows) and haven't yet expertly colliminated my SCT.
Still I am pleased and if I can do it with only a bit of practice - in a year or two and alot more smarts around flats, darks etc I think I will be delighted and maybe ready to move up to a S-BIG or FLI camera.
Re. the Meade LXD75 SN-10AT, a few brief comments are as follows:
- looks like a good introductory all round scope with plenty of arperture
- mount looks like it'd made by Bird-Dog (cheap-cheap, rough-rough)
- f/4 focal ratio of OTA will likely give lots of distortions (mainly coma) for optical viewing with most eyepieces, causing stars to look like comets or seagulls ... especially towards edges of view
- having a big tube will also catch the wind
- also check the reviews/ratings that come with the ad http://www.telescopes.com/telescopes...MyReviewAnchor
All in all, looks like a good scope for doing some low cost photography of the moon and planets (bright objects with short exposures ... not needing long accurate exposures with guide scopes, autoguiders, etc.).
I'm also very interested in the "Celestron V Meade" discussion. Currently developing some basic technique with a 6" Newt, EQ5, and DSI colour. If I can learn the basics and catch the astrophotography bug (disease!), then I will be looking to get a modest SCT OTA not too far down the track (eg. Celestron C8 or Meade LX90 8").
![[1ponders]'s Avatar](../vbiis/customavatars/avatar45_9.gif){kind=avatar}
