| Info | Votes | Messages | More Stats |
 Up One Level
|
 | ||||
Subject: didn't like it By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.101.102) Date: 10/29/2005 04:24:18 pm PST I boiught a NGC-60 as my first telescope. I am not new to the field of optics... I have spent the last 5 years of my life looking into microscopes, so it's not like i do not understand how optics work or even how to focus on something. I couldn't get my telescope to focus on a damn thing...and i know it could be broken...but even still...and the " computer guidence" they call it...if the thing gets tapped a touch it gets thrown off....I wasn't even expecting to be able to see really into deep space or anything...i just really wanted to have a starting point so that I didn't spend 5 or $700 on a telescope to return it...and I know meade is a good enough name...i have used their parts for optics in chemisitry machienes...I was hoping for more i guess Subject: I like it! By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.4.123) Date: 11/28/2005 12:29:21 pm PST When I was given the NGC-60 as a gift,I had already cleaned out my expecations as I was told by several popular astronomy magazines.I read the manual,set it up,and now I know the tripod is quite fragile: BE CAREFUL WITH THIS TELESCOPE.The optics are good for a telescope of this size:The Moons and Cloud Belts of Jupiter are easy,Saturn's rings are great at 80x,and Mars shows some surface features when you get used to it(maybye even a few dust storms).For bright stars,planets,and stuff,the NGC-60 is a good deal. The GOTO is OK,if aligined properly.It is sometimes a bit off and you have to look around(horrible if you are looking for a dim object),but I have had several nights where the telescope cooperated and I could observe several fainter objects.Several of the night sky's best open clusters look stunning in the NGC-60,like the Double Cluster and Pleadies.Both showed well over 100 stars,the Double Cluster probably showed at least 300,even from my Limiting Magnitude 3.5 backyard.Deep-Sky objects are quite dim and I would only try them from a true dark sky site with this telescope.The finder is also cheap.But other than these minor flaws(and the tripod problems)the NGC-60 is worth $200...or $100 used. Score:8/10 Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.99.39 By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.4.123) In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.99.39) (Original Vote) Date: 12/12/2005 07:12:16 am PST >Purchased NG-60 as a novice, based on Meade's reputation, for about $75. I'd say it was about what you'd expect in this price range, but overall a big disappointment. First, the Finderscope was impossible to keep aligned properly, and the Barlow was useless w/ all 3 eyepieces. The 4 mm eyepiece (175X) was obviously extremely poor quality and is a total mismatch. At 175x objects are very difficult to acquire and impossible to track- the view vibrates for a few seconds and objects are only in view for about 10 fuzzy seconds. Viewing at 78x was pretty good. Changing eyepieces was annoying because the scope would often fall due to the imbalance. Not impressed at all with the mount. I returned it for a refund! I agree. I got this telescope as a gift. I didn't get the 4mm eyepiece but I got the Barlow and using this telescope at 156x is useless. And my tripod has broken in 2 places due to cheap aluminum & plastic. But I like the 25mm and 9mm eyepieces and the telescope itself and besides I got it free. Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.4.123 By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.4.123) In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.4.123) (Original Vote) Date: 12/20/2005 06:40:10 am PST >The Meade NGC-60 is a solid telescope with a few problems. > >#1-The Mount is EASY to break,but stable under 100x. >#2-The Finderscope is CHEAP Plastic. >#3-The GOTO is nowhere near as good as the ETX or LX GOTOs are. > >Still,the NGC-60 is a fine telescope.With mine,I can see many objects.Saturn's rings are stunning at 78x,Jupiter shows 2 cloud belts,the great red spot(sometimes,difficult),and 4 moons,Venus goes through phases,when Mars is near the ice caps and dark regions are visible,and even greenish color on Uranus is noticable.For deep-sky objects,this telescope does fine despite the light pollution in my backyard(my LM is 3.5)as I can see The Pleadies,Double Cluster,Alberio,Sirius,Orion Nebula,Andromeda Galaxy,M15,and much much more fairly easily now that I'm used to it(note:some objects are super-easy).It came with 2 of Meade's MA eyepieces(they good!)and a 2x Barlow(it bad).A very solid buy. Update: I recentley noticed a "star-test" web site and realized that at 80x in my telescope, the stars look a wee bit fuzzy, and at 156x they are blobs. So the optics are not as good as I originally thought, but they still get the job done(I can split several double stars cleanly and see detail on the planets).Or is it the 9mm eyepiece and Barlow I'm using? PS:I am still happy with my telescope. Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.4.123 By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.4.123) In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.4.123) (Original Message) Date: 01/20/2006 06:29:39 am PST >>The Meade NGC-60 is a solid telescope with a few problems. >> >>#1-The Mount is EASY to break,but stable under 100x. >>#2-The Finderscope is CHEAP Plastic. >>#3-The GOTO is nowhere near as good as the ETX or LX GOTOs are. >> >>Still,the NGC-60 is a fine telescope.With mine,I can see many objects.Saturn's rings are stunning at 78x,Jupiter shows 2 cloud belts,the great red spot(sometimes,difficult),and 4 moons,Venus goes through phases,when Mars is near the ice caps and dark regions are visible,and even greenish color on Uranus is noticable.For deep-sky objects,this telescope does fine despite the light pollution in my backyard(my LM is 3.5)as I can see The Pleadies,Double Cluster,Alberio,Sirius,Orion Nebula,Andromeda Galaxy,M15,and much much more fairly easily now that I'm used to it(note:some objects are super-easy).It came with 2 of Meade's MA eyepieces(they good!)and a 2x Barlow(it bad).A very solid buy. > >Update: >I recentley noticed a "star-test" web site and realized that at 80x in my telescope, the stars look a wee bit fuzzy, and at 156x they are blobs. So the optics are not as good as I originally thought, but they still get the job done(I can split several double stars cleanly and see detail on the planets).Or is it the 9mm eyepiece and Barlow I'm using? > >PS:I am still happy with my telescope. 2nd Update: I realized there are 2 NGC-60s, the NGC-60A and the Telestar NGC-60.I happen to have the Telestar Model.Also, I only rated the tripod at a 6 because it is easy to break, not because it is unstable(it holds up fairly well against wind,but not too much wind).Also,this telescope seems almost IMMUNE to bad seeing...at least according to a account I had.One day I went to a local university which had a massive 38" SCT. I was expecting to see lots of detail on Mars, which was close to Earth at the time. I was tempted even more by the planetarium show, and then I gazed at Mars at 200x. WHAT!?!? I couldn't even see the Polar Caps! I went home and in rage, got out my NGC-60 and looked at Mars. What did I know, at 78x I saw features in the NGC-60 and yet that monster SCT didn't. Size does matter, but sometimes it's good to be small. Subject: Rescore Mount By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.4.123) In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.4.123) (Original Vote) Date: 01/20/2006 06:32:40 am PST Oh! I rescore the tripod up from a 6 to a 7. Sorry. Page 1 of 1 | ||||||||
