|Info||Votes||Messages||More Stats||Up One Level|
Subject: Moved Message
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.173.137)
Date: 02/19/2002 01:16:44 pm PDT
A word of caution about magazine equipment reviews: any magazine that accepts advertising from the manufacturers of the products they review cannot reasonably be considered unbiased. An honest review of a bad product can be easily punished by yanking ad volume that represent huge amounts of revenue for the magazine, so naturally the reviewers will be under pressure to keep the advertisers happy by "softening" anything negative. Read between the lines, folks... !
Subject: Words of Advice
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.48.83)
Date: 02/20/2002 05:44:16 pm PDT
I agree with the last post about the magazine article being biased but when your magazine article is so big if not the biggest magazine in Astronomy then those telescope companies cant afford to loose the magazine as a means of getting its products known. I mean what else is there besides the internet.. I could be totally wrong, but thats just my thoughts.
Subject: Re: Words of Advice
In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.48.83) (Original Message)
Date: 02/21/2002 12:52:06 am PDT
BUT, when you are one of the world's largest telescope makers (like Celestron or Meade) this isn't as much of an issue,
especially when there's a rival magazine. In the end, it's the people who are paying money that carry the weight.
For smaller telescope companies (who carry smaller ads), I agree that they probably can't do too much to bias reviews by threatening to pull ads....but if they were smart, they'd take the reviewer out to lunch :)
>I agree with the last post about the magazine article being biased but when your magazine article is so big if not the biggest magazine in Astronomy then those telescope companies cant afford to loose the magazine as a means of getting its products known. I mean what else is there besides the internet.. I could be totally wrong, but thats just my thoughts.
Subject: 11 gps
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.153.21)
Date: 03/10/2002 06:51:14 am PDT
well having owned meade and celestron i have to say the optics on my 11gps are with out a doubt supieriar i live in the uk and and are not as blessed as you americans with buying these scopes at reasonable prices a 10inch meade gps is nearly £4000.00 and a nextstar 11gps is only £2999.00 so judge for yourself is a meads gps really worth $1500+ more lets face it its a bit of a toy.i have been told by celestron that a fix for the gps is going to be available in the summer. once you align it its only a bit out it works perfect goto is spot on im well pleased and saved my self $1500+lets face it optics rule and this has certainly got that
Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.234.80
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.102.158)
In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.234.80) (Original Vote)
Date: 04/14/2002 07:45:47 am PDT
>I'm afraid you guys who are wrangling and bitching at each other over telescope brand loyalty sound about as intelligent and articulate as a group of hillbilly pickup truck owners debating Ford and Chevy. Truly unbelievable. ease up
Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.192.174
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.102.158)
In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.192.174) (Original Vote)
Date: 04/14/2002 07:52:27 am PDT
>Your the joke, your well thought out intelligent answer
>reflects your ingnorance and knowledge of telescopes....
>get a life loser!!!
I still would rather drink a lager over an ale any day of the week. I believe ales are just a little too fruity! What do you think, fruity?
Subject: Nexstar 11"
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.189.129)
Date: 10/04/2002 03:45:46 am PDT
I have owned three Nexstar 11" telescopes over the last year, sending two back for small mechanical/computer problems. The Nexstar replaced a 10" Meade LX-200, also a go-to scope. people ask if the Nexstar is better than the LX-200.
Certainly the Nexstar is more beautiful to look AT than the LX-200, better designed, quieter in operation and easier to carry about. The optics in the Nexstar are slightly better and it holds collimation better than an LX-200. The go-to capability of the Nexstar is good, but not as good as the LX-200. The GPS functions of both makes are about the same.
Nexstars have the f/2 fastar capability for imaging, far superior to an LV-200 with focal reducer. But the new Meades have mirror-lock and excellent microfocusing controlled by the Autostar; I had to pay hundreds of dollars extra for a JMI NGF-S for my Celestron to match the Meade's focus ability. Really, to capture the CCD imaging market, Celestron should have included a mirror-lock and an electronic focuser in its Nexstars... but it didn't.
The Meade Autostar controller can be upgraded conveniently through software downloads, while the Nexstar controller has to be returnrd to Celestron for a new chip, or replaced. The Nexstar has to have a complete replacement motor control board after a few months, to take advantage of the latest upgraded software, although there is no charge for the new board.
If I have a complaint about the Nexstar 11, it's the mount and the equatorial wedge. The mount is not nearly rigid enough to handle the Nexstar 11 in equatorial mode. The "heavy duty" wedge is a joke. It's the same wedge as for the 8" Celestron SCT, only twice as expensive. The wedge is very poorly designed. Since the Nexstar has no declination circle, you have to rely on software to achieve polar alignment. The least breeze disturbs the telescope when it's mounted on the wedge. Celestron could have done better in the mounting. The new GPS Meades align on true North while the Nexstars align on magnetic North, up to 15Â° off, and must correct using alignment stars.
Meade and Celestron each have special price reduction and bonus offers for their telescopes at the moment, and each has a good product. Ultimately one of these companies will succumb to the competition and it's likely to be Celestron, but you have to admire the way the little guy stands up to the giant!
Meade falls flat in customer service compared to Celestron. It's not just that you have to wait for months to hear from Meade (sometimes to get your telescope's special offer)... after purchase, you can pretty well forget Meade being helpful if you need service. Repairs require returning the scope to the factory at your expense, take months and cost a fortune. In contrast, Celestron has timely, superb customer service.
Royal Astronomical Society of Canada
Subject: celestron vs. meade
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.116.203)
Date: 09/16/2004 09:40:48 am PDT
Does anyone know anything about the new Power Tank power supply by Celestron? Other 12 volt batteries such as jump start batteries which have become popular according to Cloudy Nights telescope reviews because they are cheaper and fit most telescope users requirements. I am thinking about buying both the celestron Nextar CGE 8" and the Meade LX200 8" next month along with an STV video camera and a van. I'm going to Cherry Spring Pa., a place where amateurs go as a designated telescope area set aside by the town for amateur observers. We have special priveledges, passer bys even have to kill their headlights. I'm getting both telescopes because I don't want to get 6 hrs. from my home and there's a problem. Does anyone have any better advice as opposed to getting just one? A telescope that you can rely on that wiill work out of the box. Or shoud I keep both just in case something goes wrong with one and sell the lesser one at the Black Forest star party next year
Subject: Nexstar 11 GPS
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.10.183)
Date: 11/18/2005 08:41:08 pm PDT
I am thrilled with my Nexstar 11 GPS with XLT and carbon fibre tube. After being frustrated with several expensive GE mounts and software etc etc I found it refreshing to simply whack the Nexstar down, turn it on have it aligned in a few minutes and you are off.
Go-tos are good although not as simple to synch to update if it goes off a little. Still good. I have toured all night easily.
Optics are fantastic and give superb views. Takes about an hour and a half to cool off properly and as long as it is ell collimated (easy to do) the views are fantastic. 6 stars in the Trapezium of M42 and everything looks bright.
It is also "easily" transportable, "easy" to manage. For the price I am very happy with it and have had lots of good times from using it.
It has easily been one of my better purchases.
Page 1 of 1
©2009 by Excelsis Consulting. All Rights Reserved. E-mail webmaster to report abuse, problems, or comments.