Toa130 or mewlon 250

[Poita (Peter)]

Well, in that vein I finally got to put my Lomo side by side with the TOA and there was nothing at all in it. Haven't looked through a Mewlon.

[beren]

Tough choice went through the same dilemma not long ago Went with the M250, the introduction of the new {baffle}corrector swayed it for the imaging angle. I brought mine second hand and arrived with the collimation out a fraction. Collimating at first seems daunting on the mewlon going by the instructions found in the manual but it's not to bad {and seems to hold well moving the scope from storage to backyard}, wish Tak could centre spot the secondary so you can utilise their collimating scope. Unfortunately the few nights I've done visual with the scope I have not taken notes but from memory I couldn't be happier with it's performance {taking into account seeing conditions, cool down etc etc}. Pleased to find off axis views through the eyepieces I use display negligible coma {24pan,16mm/9mm nagler,12mm radian}. Different story for imaging though even the older reducer/corrector doesn't eliminate it, yet to purchase the new corrector.The M250 motorized focuser works fine and easy to access the primary for cleaning, and the back of the scope can be taken off for cooling. Overall no regrets on the purchase, the more all round function of the M250 won it for me but i'd love the privilege of owning a TOA-130 just have to win lotto first.

The Mewlons are (again, IMHO) a waste of money. They are difficult to collimate and go "off-song" very quickly.
Also, the spikey artifacts are very noticeable in visual use and the wave front error is nowhere near as good as claimed.
Virtually any Celestron or Meade SCT is a match for a Mewlon I think and there are quite a few refractors in the 120-140mm range that will out-perform the TOA visually.
But: YMMV!

G'Luck!
Peter

Agree with you Peter with the spider vane affects, quite noticeable after using SCT's and refractors. Curious why your opion of the mewlons deteriorated after a earlier posting on the 20/2/10 where it was more positive....

I, unfortunately have also spent a night with a Mewlon. Its pretty easy to get spoiled for anything else.

A few years ago I was at the Texas Star Party, and had some time with an Intes 8" Mak. It was pretty speccy, but from memory, not quite up there with the M210. The only scope that I remember as matching or even exceeding it was an 8" Portaball with Zambuto optics.
But they're about twice the price of a Mewlon.
There are certainly no massed-produced cats/reflectors that compare.

If I was going to start again. I'd go with an M210 and an NP101 or LOMO/LZOS 4-4.5"

[alocky (Andrew lockwood)]

Originally Posted by HCR32

A bigger scope isnt the answer for me. Im not after the resolving power of a big scope im after that sharp crisp view only quality refractors can give and many people out there will know what Im talking about. I once and still till today have and had big scopes but refractors just do something the other designs cant, why I put the mewlon in the mix is because its know to give refractor like quality visual image at the ep. Sharpness is the name Im not after somthing that give soft detailed views where your forever focusing thinking is this better or is it the atmoshpere. I dont want to stir up a war here but Im only asking about two scopes that I have in mind and was hoping people with experience with them could help me out.

Funny thing is, that advice came from someone who has owned one of the most 'revered' APOs of all time, and who can be counted amongst the most experienced observers in the country. A longer f ratio newt will easily give 'APO' like perfomance if you put a bit of effort into eliminating any stray light via baffling. Still it's your money, and you need to buy what makes you happy, however you rationalise it. Owners of Italian cars and motorcycles are especially good at it!
cheers,
Andrew.

[HCR32 (Peter)]

Guys read the title "TOA 130 or Mewlon 250"! Im not interested in SDM, cars or motorcycles, thou Im sure there are great things to say about all of them.
Input on the particulars will answer future questions on the matter and Im proud an Australian forum can supply that!

Originally Posted by alocky

Funny thing is, that advice came from someone who has owned one of the most 'revered' APOs of all time, and who can be counted amongst the most experienced observers in the country. A longer f ratio newt will easily give 'APO' like perfomance if you put a bit of effort into eliminating any stray light via baffling. Still it's your money, and you need to buy what makes you happy, however you rationalise it. Owners of Italian cars and motorcycles are especially good at it!
cheers,
Andrew.

Originally Posted by clive milne

For visual use, neither of these scopes would be on my list.

A fast 20" SDM (with good optics) would eat their lunch in pretty much any context you could come up with by a very big margin.

[UniPol]

I went through this exercise around five years ago wanting a quality 5" refractor and an 8" to 10" cassegrain. I settled for a like new second hand TOA-130 and still marvel at its sharpness and contrast, a real keeper. I very nearly bought a Mewlon 210 to complement the TOA however, at the time, a new CN-212 was on offer so I decided to go with it instead. The CN-212 has an 8 1/4" parabolic mirror and in newtonian mode is f3.9 and cassegrain mode f12.4. As in the case of the Mewlons, you can't escape the little spikes on star images owing to Taks' rather thick spider vanes however you do gain much greater brightness on DSO's.

[Richard Kinsey (Richard)]

For imaging/planetary observing, go for the TOA
For deep sky observing, go for the Mewlon

I have had both and I don't think that you will be disappointed with either.

Richard

[alocky (Andrew lockwood)]

Originally Posted by HCR32

Guys read the title "TOA 130 or Mewlon 250"! Im not interested in SDM, cars or motorcycles, thou Im sure there are great things to say about all of them.
Input on the particulars will answer future questions on the matter and Im proud an Australian forum can supply that!

In that case, the consensus has it. The Mewlon's superior light gathering will definitely be an advantage, and I suspect you will prefer the extremely narrow field of view offered by the longer f ratio.
Or, get both.
Regards,
Andrew.

[Waxing_Gibbous (Peter)]

Originally Posted by beren

Agree with you Peter with the spider vane affects, quite noticeable after using SCT's and refractors. Curious why your opion of the mewlons deteriorated after a earlier posting on the 20/2/10 where it was more positive....

It took a little while to sink-in. If I had perservered with it, I might have come to fancy the Mewlon, but I'm dead tired of equipment that needs a lot of fussing and the Mewlon needed fussin' with (collimating) all the time.
Another issue was the collimation screws (self-tappers ?!?!) actually SQUEEKED!!!! and the focuser was quite 'grindy'.
Optically. no complaints.
Just not noticably superior to a good SCT.

[HCR32 (Peter)]

Thats what I thought to. I was told m250 hold collimation very well and really only go out when handled poorly!

Originally Posted by Hans Tucker

Clearly you had an M210...for some odd reason I thought you said you had a M250. There was a few reports from M210 owners that complained of collimation and focuser issues. The M250 & M300 are in a different league.

[UniPol]

Originally Posted by Hans Tucker

Well the move to the M815D makes sense now.

What is an M815D? I'm trying to ween myself off Google.

[issdaol (Phil)]

Originally Posted by Waxing_Gibbous

the Mewlon needed fussin' with (collimating) all the time.

This must not be a M300 or M250 as you can cart these around easy with little need of collimation. My M300 has been moved in the back of my 4WD to dark sites many times and collimated once.

Originally Posted by Waxing_Gibbous

Optically. no complaints.
Just not noticably superior to a good SCT.

Interesting comment on the optics, maybe you somehow got a bad or damaged sample.

In my experience using both SCT's (good examples of both Meade and Celestron) compared to the M250 and M300, the Mewlons beat them by a significant margin for sharpness and contrast at the eyepiece . Other Mewlon 250 and 300 owners I know in Australia and overseas say exactly the same.

[Logieberra (Logan)]

M210 owner here, it holds collimation well! If you want to pay 2.5x more $$$ for collimation that never moves, go the 250. For any more M210 bashing, let's start a new thread and discuss. HCR23 is not interested in this model... Logie.