Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [sct-user] Re: Meade's January 3rd Announcement

Expand Messages
  • Chris Rowland
    ... I can t stand it any more :-) What are you talking about? Chris
    Message 1 of 76 , Jan 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Ken Hutchinson wrote:
      >
      > --- In sct-user@yahoogroups.com, RMOLLISE@a... wrote:
      >
      >>In a message dated 12/31/04 9:07:50 AM Central Standard Time,
      >>gstrumol@c... writes:
      >>Maybe they will come out with a clear aperture Newtonian that
      >>eliminates the effect of CO, ... wait a minute ...
      >>
      >>Hi Gary:
      >>
      >>And has a 3 inch aperture and sells for a 1000 smackers on an EQ4 mount?
      >>Seems to me somebody just tried that and it is going straight into the toilet. ;-)
      >>
      >
      >
      > Come now guys, it's not that bad. You get a 91mm "APO" for $150
      > more than the 80ED and $350 less than the 100ED. The ED's have
      > nicer mechanicals and their focal ratios are better for wide views.
      > I think the worst part about the off axis reflector is that for $300
      > more you could have the 10" on the Atlas mount and make your
      > own (if you wanted to) with an aperture mask. I think you can get
      > the 10" OTA for the same or less than the off axis reflector too.
      > The mounted version comes on the SVP though. Isn't that more
      > like an EQ5?

      I can't stand it any more :-)

      What are you talking about?

      Chris
    • Chris Curran
      And Meade has never been guilty of overstating it s position ? cheers, Chris
      Message 76 of 76 , Jan 3, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        And Meade has never been guilty of overstating it's position<g>?

        cheers,
        Chris

        --- In sct-user@yahoogroups.com, "John Mahony" <jmmahony@y...> wrote:
        >
        > 6 am (UT-5) on the 3rd and the secret's not out yet, but it just
        > occurred to me that putting an SCT on a GEM would hardly "change the
        > face of astronomy", since C's been doing it for years and Meade even
        > did it itself at least once several years ago.
        > -John
        >
        > --- In sct-user@yahoogroups.com, John Mahony <jmmahony@y...> wrote:
        > > That sounds most likely. Personally, I'm partial to forks and would
        > > prefer that they introduce a higher quality fork mount, but to do
        > that
        > > would be to admit that their current fork mounts leave a lot to be
        > > desired in terms of mechanical quality. So mkaing it a GEM gives
        > them
        > > a way around that.
        > > -John
        > >
        > > --- Edward Roach <elancer65@y...> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Chris Curran <ccurran@p...> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Meade needs to start shipping G11 class
        > > > mounts... not exclusively, but they need to offer a better mount
        > for
        > > > imaging purposes.
        > > >
        > > > cs,
        > > > Chris
        > > >
        > > > Hi all,
        > > >
        > > > I bet Chris is right, maybe Meade will be putting their SCT OTA's
        > on
        > > > mounts that compete with Celestron's CGE's.
        > > >
        > > > Clear skies,
        > > >
        > > > Ed Roach
        > > >
        > >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.