Meade vs Celestron Aluminium Optical tube quality and longevity
Hi all,
Keen to hear your thoughts on the longevity of the paint and finish of the aluminium optical tubes between Celestron and Meade SCT's? I have seen many photos online of Meade optical tubes where they have major fading streaks etc... Do Celestron's wear better and last longer?
Hard to tell, but I’d image there’d be no difference, they’re both painted aluminium tubes. I’ve seen (first hand) Celestron tubes from the 70s and 80s, but only because I’d recognise them. Meade tubes have been blue for a long time, so how to tell?
Mark you really need to learn rational decision making using the Analytical Hierachy Process (AHP) or Multi- Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT) in order to understand what matters, and what doesn’t.
You remind me of kids who squandered money on poor choices - cars and houses - with no idea why.
Google is your friend.
If the optics are good and it works well the rest is very much in third place.
Just because I ask about a telescope issue (in this thread) that is not optics or mount related, does not mean that I have been absent minded over those more crucial topics. I have and continue to give much thought to them! (even in some other places on this site). And of course optical and mount quality take precedence over the optical tube finish. I have never disputed this.
HOWEVER, at least for me, when I plan to spend a good 10 grand on my next telescope to last me the next decade, all else being the same I don't think it is too much to ask for the optical tube finish to remain in good condition and maintain a nice finish when taken care of. I do not think that when you are considering a 10 grand investment, that such a consideration is 'irrational' (see meade image below).
As for your comments implying that I am an "irrational kid", firstly you should know that I live at university (USQ Astronomy is not the only program I am enrolled for) and I choose not to drive, so I do not "squander money" on what you perceive to be poor choices, rather I use my money to support my studies towards becoming a professional astronomer and saving for my next telescope as my interests cover both professional astronomy and recreational stargazing.
It would be nice if you could reply to posts in a non-condescending manner.
Good evening to you.
Regards,
Mark
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavytone
Mark you really need to learn rational decision making using the Analytical Hierachy Process (AHP) or Multi- Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT) in order to understand what matters, and what doesn’t.
You remind me of kids who squandered money on poor choices - cars and houses - with no idea why.
Google is your friend.
If the optics are good and it works well the rest is very much in third place.
Keen to hear your thoughts on the longevity of the paint and finish of the aluminium optical tubes between Celestron and Meade SCT's? I have seen many photos online of Meade optical tubes where they have major fading streaks etc... Do Celestron's wear better and last longer?
Cheers all,
Mark
Hi Mark,
I have a Meade LX200GPS and the quality of the paint is excellent. I know of about 6 other Meade scopes that friends have and also the paint work is excellent and does not chip off easily. You would have to do some extreme force on these scopes to actually damage the paint as it does not come off by itself. Year of manufacturer is about 2003-6 and no scratched as yet! I look after it.
Can't comment on Celestron as I don't have one or know anyone that does. A Meade in good condition is definitely a great scope.
2. I have an LX-200 myself. The ACF edition.
2a. The finish on mine is very different to yours. Mine is a rough-coat, and very matte in texture. I guess it is easier to handle, and maybe it draws heat out better. I don't know.
2b. I am guessing that yours is either a little older or a little younger than mine, which is 2010 vintage.
3. What caused all of the scratches on the one in the image? Is the OTA transported with no protective case, or even the original, monstrous carton? This was what I used up until last year. Having housed in (almost literally) cotton wool, it doesn't have a mark on it. I think to answer your primary question, a dominant factor will be how it is stored, and how it is transported.
4. I think Wavytone's comment about the optics is very important. In the dark, you don't see the scuffs, scrapes and scratches. You see just how good (or not) the optics are. I love my LX. I think optically, you couldn't split it and the equivalent Celestron scope. At the end of the day, that's what counts, unless you are whale watching...
I don't have a SCT yet, I am considering a few different possibilities.
The other image of the meade is a public domain image, not my telescope.
Yes the current range has the matte texture... from what I have seen, I like the new look. I imagine the textured finish reduces the condensation on the tube also compared to the older flat shiny finish.
For visual, a Schmidt-Cassegrain is a great scope to get into. They can be reduced or extended visually, so you have a bit to work with on them.
Photographically, they are little more work, but I have seen some exceptional images taken through them.
Honestly, on your original question, it will all come down to how you treat the scope. Accidents happen, but large scratches like on your image, are typically the result of having a communal scope. To owners, these scopes are like our kids.
I would not be particularly concerned about the tubes from a longevity perspective, the tubes themselves I would expect to stand up well. The paint I would consider a little more secondary, but I would expect both to be similar from a chipping and scratching perspective. As to paint fading I would think that the blue tubes being a brighter colour would likely be more prone to fading, same for an orange tube Celestrons I suppose (Seen a Kubota tractor that is more than a couple of years old? You make them shiny again by painting them!)
How much the possibility of the paint fading bothers you I would say is up to you. I would not put it as far down the list as Wavytone seems to, nor knock you for making it a serious consideration, it is your money! For me it would be a second order issue after optical and mechanical quality, not a primary concern but certainly something I would think about. Kept under cover in daylight you would expect fading not to me a huge issue.
Last edited by The_bluester; 03-10-2017 at 02:12 PM.
I have a Celestron CPC800, about 10 years old. The finish is as good as new. I have also used/seen older Meade's, and likewise there seems to be no problem with the paintwork. I am guessing that unless they are left in the sun all the time or hit with a hammer or a sander they will pretty much last forever. I have certainly never seen one in the flesh that looks like the image you posted. I suspect major neglect was the cause.
I must admit though I am not a fan of the new Meade paintwork. It reminds me of fingernails on a blackboard (shudder!). I like my scopes shiny!
All the best, and good luck with the decision making.
Here is one from the left field ,, dont forget Carbon Fibre , I have the C9.25 in CF and its still like new after many years , also its fine in all ways so dont take to much notice of the nay-sayers out there about expansion this and that , Aussie dont get cold enough for it to even be a consideration .
Cheers mate, yeah I absolutely love carbon fibre tubes too! The weight savings are great and yes they look amazing! Would you mind sharing a pic of your C9.25 in carbon fibre so we can admire? haha
Cheers,
Mark
Quote:
Originally Posted by brian nordstrom
Here is one from the left field ,, dont forget Carbon Fibre , I have the C9.25 in CF and its still like new after many years , also its fine in all ways so dont take to much notice of the nay-sayers out there about expansion this and that , Aussie dont get cold enough for it to even be a consideration .
Mark (Another Dean here!)
I don't think there is much difference between Meade & Celestron OTA paint jobs - they're both good.
I have a C6 and a C11 - the best advice I could give is to regularly use a good automotive wax polish on the mount, tripod & OTA (but keep it well clear of the optics!).
My kit looks as good as the day I bought it!
Dean
Mark (Another Dean here!)
I don't think there is much difference between Meade & Celestron OTA paint jobs - they're both good.
I have a C6 and a C11 - the best advice I could give is to regularly use a good automotive wax polish on the mount, tripod & OTA (but keep it well clear of the optics!).
My kit looks as good as the day I bought it!
Dean
Here is one from the left field ,, dont forget Carbon Fibre , I have the C9.25 in CF and its still like new after many years , also its fine in all ways so dont take to much notice of the nay-sayers out there about expansion this and that , Aussie dont get cold enough for it to even be a consideration .
