Meade ED refractors

[raymo]

It just occurred to me that many people on this forum that image with
refractors, either use The Skywatcher 80ED/ 100ED, or the much more expensive brands like Tak, Teleview, etc: I rarely see the Meade EDs
mentioned. Are they unpopular? and if so why?
raymo

[cometcatcher (Kevin)]

Good question. I don't often see them in the classifieds either.

[Larryp (Laurie)]

The Meade refractors are, I believe, a rebadged North Group. Quite a few of those used for imageing, and cheaper to buy direct from China than buying the Meade version.

[dannat (Daniel)]

meade refractor's are more popular is the US because it used to be a home grown company -their scopes are similar to ES..unlike their SCT's their is more to choose form in the refractor market

[brian nordstrom (As avatar)]

There are also 2 totally different Meade APO,s the older , made in the USA ED doublets working at f9 that were a very well made scope and the newer Triplet APO,s of today that are made in Taiwan I think? and these work at f7.5 .
Totally different scopes .

One more thing is that the original ED,s went from 102mm all the way up to monster 178 mm giants .
Also , both model,s are sexy refractors.

Brian.

[glend (Glen)]

Raymo, it may well come down to people buying what they can afford at the low end of the market - and that tends to be the Skywatcher models. Bearing in mind that ED APOs are very expensive aperture in comparison with newts. At the high end of the market, where the 'brand name' is more important, then the TAKs and Televues reign. Is a TAK better than a Skywatcher, well I'll let the proponents of both argue that. Neither is cost effective compared to a good newt or even a nice truss RC, but to the 'fans' that doesn't matter.
As an example: OPT Corp has the Meade 130mm ED APO on sale for $3000 USD (and they may not be allowed to ship that to Australia) but if you could get it at that price, and ignoring the exchange rate, GST, and shipping, you would still be way ahead if you bought a 10" RC for $2700 AUD from Andrews or the Bintel equivalent. Have a look at what Bintel is asking for the Orion 130mm ED APO ($4300 AUD).

Your present plaform is the most cost effective aperture .- if you assume that your newt has 30% obstruction by the secondary you would need a refractor of more than 140mm to get the same effective aperture.

[peter_4059 (Peter)]

There are a number of us with the Meade ED80 APO triplet f6.

[raymo]

Thanks for the info guys, very informative.
Glend, regarding your statement that one would need a refractor of more
than 140mm to equal my 200mm Newt's effective aperture; I am aware that the obstruction causes a small loss of contrast etc: but the light
gathering area of my 200mm mirror is 314 sq. cm minus 19 sq. cm
for the secondary holder, leaving 295 sq. cm. A 140mm ref has only
154 sq. cm. You would need a ref of 193.8mm [7.63 ins.] diameter.
My secondary is approx. 26% of the scope's diameter, but only 6.25%
of it's area.
raymo

[glend (Glen)]

Raymo I based that comment on plugging assumed 8" newt figures into "Newt for the Web" design software:

http://stellafane.org/tm/newt-web/newt-web.html

I don't know which 8" newt you have so I can't comment on the secondary size exactly. Contrast is (relatively) affected more than light gathering is according to the performance notes on Newt Design.

[Camelopardalis (Dunk)]

Back in the olde worlde, the SW ED80 is considered the de facto starter scope as they're easy to get hold of and relatively inexpensive (under $700). They're a bit slow for my liking though. The Meade is a triplet IIRC, more pricey for sure.

Since I've been here I've seen all kinds of imaging scopes big and small, folk seem to be much more adventurous, almost got me wanting a f/4 imaging newt

[cometcatcher (Kevin)]

Newts bounce light twice, each time incurring a loss and the mirrors pass less light than a good ED lens. In the end there's not much difference between a good 5 or 6 inch refractor and an 8 inch reflector.

[raymo]

Thank you all.
raymo