I Love Meade !!!

[ΛLIEN]

Everyone prob already knows this...but,,

In my opinon...

I think Meade makes absolute total junk.. and I have had the pleasure to be honored and blessed by the great god of junk (Meade Instruments) in the last few years.

It just blows my mind... How a company could design telescopes so cheap.

It could be because the Meade god of junk thinks everything in the world has to be made out of microscopic super thin cast aluminum with parts so damn china cheap that if you dare even think, of modifying it, it will totally self destruct into a trillion million little small piles of junk that eventualy get reincarnated into the meteorites that Meade sells on ebay.

I have been blessed to own Meade quality lenses, lenses so cheap that 99% pure high grade lab optical cleaner used on mega buck multi coated laser mirrors and lenses, instantly strips off all the thin film crap that Meade calls "Multi Coated" that are on their lenses. Wow - the Edmunds Sci lenses didn't even do that... hell the wall mart bushnell didn't even do that.

And I want to meet that Meade engineer that designed the 2" Meade star diagonal... now thats cheap! cheaper than the 2" focuser on a DS series reflector (chrome colored paper sticker wrapped around plastic, .. thats funny.), and you gotta love the Meade quality tripods.,,, I really love that trusting meade focuser draw tube wobble and the High quality plastic they use for bearings and gears!. wow! I have higher quality DC drive motors in my
stupid fax machine then the ones meade puts in some of their mounts.

Thats just my opinon, I could be wrong.

oh well..... after 1000's spent, I think I should saved for one of those fat Astro Physics APO's.

[jt-3d]

Uh, I disagree.

[naios]

I think you'll just have to send me all your equipment and I'll judge for myself.

[paul f. campbell]

I hate to put you on the offensive but maybe you should have bought a fat Physics apo in the first place. Meade makes their products for the masses not the few. I have owned several scopes in the last 40 years, and I will say that Meade does not make the best scope out there, but it is the best scope you can buy for your money, unless you are rolling in dough.

I won't say that meade's scopes will perform out of the box as they claim because as I can tell, most of the lower end meades will not. They need some tweeking. With a litte work they function just fine.

I plan on buying a lx200r 10 " and sending it off to Dr. Sherrod to super charge. He worked on my etx 125 and it works great. It's too bad that the meade scopes are not up to your standards. If you want perfection, spend the big bucks.

[Bojan]

I had a bad experience with Meade Plossl eyepieces (20mm in particular, made for ETX).
If focused in centre, the edges were totally blurred... and vice versa.
My old Huygens 20mm (from Zeiss binocular) performed better and does not show this problem at all.
Other, higher power Plossls from the same series (and 2x Barlow) are reasonably OK (for the money).

[Galactic2000]

Hi Alien,

I must say that I believe you posted your comments to the wrong forum! Can one of the Moderators please move this thread to were it belongs?

Everyone is entitled to their opinion about equipment,..............but they should post them in the equipment discussion forums.....not here in the astrophotography forum...........Thank You!!!!

[ToSeek]

Thread moved from Astrophotography.

[Kaptain K]

Don't get me wrong. I am not a big fan of Meade. That said, Meade makes a wide range of products from "Walmart specials" to the LX-200 and RCX 400 lines. To paint them all with the same broad brush, is totally unfair and uncalled for!

[redshifter]

Alien, perhaps you could document your issues with the specific Mead equipment you had a bad experience with? What equipment did you buy? From where? How did you use it? What were your expectations? Did you attempt to resolve your issues with the equipment through the manufacturer or business from which you purchased? Give us the details!

[rockinreel]

I think he has a right to be ticked off after spending $1000. Those cheap scopes are a rip off. I've used 2 of my friends Meade scopes (borrow them) and it's impossible to zero the rickety finders scope to the telescope IN THE DAY TIME! Turning 6 screws, 3 in back and 3 in front to align it. If you ever get it close to zero'd, don't touch it any further. One more attempt to get it closer will have it way off center again. Takes about 30 minutes to align the finder's scope in the day time(well almost aligned). If I had bought those scopes, I'd be ticked off too.

Meade Polaris 114EQ
Meade small ATX model (old)

[jt-3d]

Turning 6 screws, 3 in back and 3 in front to align it. If you ever get it close to zero'd, don't touch it any further. One more attempt to get it closer will have it way off center again.

If it's the same way as the LX200 scope, I don't have much trouble aligning it. I align the scope first and then the spotter.

Other than it weighing 100lbs, I think the LX200 is a great telescope...once it's set up. Well the motors are way too noisy and the tracking isn't very smooth. Other than that though it's, well, a pretty good scope anyway.

[AGN Fuel]

I agree with jt-3d. I have owned and used an LX200 for about 5 years and am perfectly happy with its performance to date (and the work out I get lugging the damn thing around saves me $$$$ in gym membership fees!! :) )

Spending a little extra for quality lenses makes a big diff.

[Dragon Star]

Everyone prob already knows this...but,,

In my opinon...

I think Meade makes absolute total junk.. and I have had the pleasure to be honored and blessed by the great god of junk (Meade Instruments) in the last few years.

It just blows my mind... How a company could design telescopes so cheap.

It could be because the Meade god of junk thinks everything in the world has to be made out of microscopic super thin cast aluminum with parts so damn china cheap that if you dare even think, of modifying it, it will totally self destruct into a trillion million little small piles of junk that eventualy get reincarnated into the meteorites that Meade sells on ebay.

I have been blessed to own Meade quality lenses, lenses so cheap that 99% pure high grade lab optical cleaner used on mega buck multi coated laser mirrors and lenses, instantly strips off all the thin film crap that Meade calls "Multi Coated" that are on their lenses. Wow - the Edmunds Sci lenses didn't even do that... hell the wall mart bushnell didn't even do that.

And I want to meet that Meade engineer that designed the 2" Meade star diagonal... now thats cheap! cheaper than the 2" focuser on a DS series reflector (chrome colored paper sticker wrapped around plastic, .. thats funny.), and you gotta love the Meade quality tripods.,,, I really love that trusting meade focuser draw tube wobble and the High quality plastic they use for bearings and gears!. wow! I have higher quality DC drive motors in my
stupid fax machine then the ones meade puts in some of their mounts.

Thats just my opinon, I could be wrong.

oh well..... after 1000's spent, I think I should saved for one of those fat Astro Physics APO's.

Well why would a scope need to be made of super expensive material that is indestructible? Plan on rolling it off a cliff or something? I mean seriously it's made thin so it's affordable, and you spent $$$$ on this? And your complaining? Give me a break...it's your fault you spent you money again and again on this "jank" equipment.

Deal with it!

[rockinreel]

I think you all are being a little too hard on the guy for venting from frustration. I'm not sure where the LX200 applies either. That scope costs $2000 more than el-cheapo meade models we are talking about. How many people are experts on buying scopes? One reason why people buy scopes and never use them is because of the frustrations with cheap scopes.

I mentioned two scopes in my earlier reply. I didn't mention a neighboorhood kid that received a scope and wants me to show him how to use it. It is unfair to say it's a Meade, because there are plenty of cheap scopes marketed to the unwary buyer, but actually, it is a Meade, and it's cheap.

He'll struggle to align the finder's scope. The tiny thumb screws on the finders scope is almost mechanically impossible to align, and specifically stay aligned. It's like a chrismas tree stand on each end of the finders scope. You have to loosen one screw to tighten the other. Consequently, the telescope moves off target while wrenching the finderscope's TINY screws. The moment you touch it, it moves off the alignment target (cheap tripod). Now you don't even know which way to move the finderscope. You have to stop, realign the telescope, attempt to move the finderscope to the alignment target again. Ooops, torquing the screws move the scope again. Punt again. Understand the difficulty? That's why that scope will end up in the closet or be someone's Halloween costume. It's also why dobs are the most recommended scopes to beginners.

[Kaptain K]

Why single out Meade? What you say is true of all "cheapo" scopes (or worse*). Consumer scopes are built to price points. It's a fact of capitalist life.

*I tried to help some poor guy once. His scope had a finder that had a single ring mount. Yeah the ring had three scews, but without a frame of reference, it was useless. Loosen one screw and the finder fell out of the mount.

[rockinreel]

I made an attempt to avoid singling out Meade too much! I mentioned other scopes are cheap too. It's just my experiences have all been with $400 Meade scopes. (And they weren't mine). ..but it surely helped me know what not to get on any brand scope.

[orangeSCT]

I think we need a little bit of perspective. Just look at what it would cost to get a decent scope just 20 years ago. We are really living in the golden age of telescope buying. Those "cheap $400" scopes are every bit as good optically as some pretty pricey scopes in the past. Grant it the tripods could be more stable and some of the pieces are pretty cheaply made plastic. But overall you can get a lot of scope for the money, especially considering that a lot of these scopes are computerized and can introduce people to a larger number of objects than what they might be able to find initially on their own. This is a feature that could not be had at ANY price point even 15 years ago.

That said, my next scope will be a med/large Dob (12.5"-16") of good quality ie starmaster or obsession. When I got started I thought I absolutely had to have a clock drive and figured I would get into astro-photography. Like 99.9% of observers, I have found that I am perfectly happy observing without a drive. I leave my extension cord and adapter at home and don't even bother to plug it in. As far as astro-photo goes the tech has improved to the point with stacking software and digital eyepieces don't even require accurate tracking. The images possible with todays equiptment can better photos taken 20 years ago on equiptment costing 10x as much.

I applaud mead for continuing to provide equiptment and making it affordable to "the masses". Honestly, all of this equiptment can be made to work well with a little tinkering by someone who has BTDT. That is where amatuer astronomy forums and clubs are priceless. So, instead of just venting, ask some specific questions and maybe some of your problems can be fixed.

[randb]

Why do I get the feeling that ALIEN is from California??? Could someone confirm by doing a WHOIS query.

[Trantor]

I own a Meade 4" SCT. I purchased this scope in the late 80's and have never had any problems with it. I've taken this scope all over the place, even to the top of mountains.

I've used used all kinds of scopes over the years and by comparison, I think Meade makes an excellent product for the price. Meade does have a greater range of products than they ever offered in the past.

Meade has diversified into the low end scope business lately. I remember when I purchased my scope, Meade did not make any low end scopes at all. At that time, they offered a pretty decent quality 60mm and 80mm refractor with decent equatorial mounts as their entery level scopes. Now you can get a $100 Meade 60mm refractor at Wal-Mart, that looks as bad as any Tasco I've ever seen. But, that is not to say that their higher end scopes are bad quality.

Yes, you can get better quality than Meade, but at a much higher cost.

[Skyywatcher]

Meade's idea was to make it affordable. They do have some issues granted. I don't think they are as bad as you state. I've had a 12 inch LX 200 for a lot of years and I've not had any real major problems. As a matter of truthfulness I only had problems when I got sloppy. So it ain't Astro Physics or a years pay to own. For the money paid I'm satisfied. Their product is not as cheap as you state. I know because I and thousands of others also use Meade products with good results. I'm not giving them a promo just that I believe for the prices they sell products at it's a great deal. AKA a lot of scope for us non milllionaires.

[personman906]

So, I think this is an OK place to post this...
I have a Celestron PowerSeeker 60EQ right now, and I'm thinking of getting a Meade 114EQ ASTR reflector. It's on sale for $106 from $180 at FadFusion.com. i'm wondering what the relationship between the two is and if I should get the Meade or just buy a drum kit...

Please reply!!!

[skintigh]

I bought a used 12" LX200GPS and it's been good. The plastic gears (how many thousands do these scope cost new, and they use plastic gears?!?!) were mangled and Meade would not help me replace them so I got a set of Buck's Gears and tracking has improved immensely. It also seemed that they didn't really try to align the gears, or maybe they just got that loose over the years. The tripod seems sturdy to me, especially compared to the wood one on my 1986 8" Celestron scope. Though the Celestron didn't have plastic gears...

Other than the gear issue and some mirror slop I've been very pleased.

[Timothy Reed]

I bought a used 12" LX200GPS and it's been good. The plastic gears (how many thousands do these scope cost new, and they use plastic gears?!?!) were mangled and Meade would not help me replace them so I got a set of Buck's Gears and tracking has improved immensely. It also seemed that they didn't really try to align the gears, or maybe they just got that loose over the years. The tripod seems sturdy to me, especially compared to the wood one on my 1986 8" Celestron scope. Though the Celestron didn't have plastic gears...

Other than the gear issue and some mirror slop I've been very pleased.

Skintigh, you may be just the person to answer the question I posed the other day in http://www.bautforum.com/space-astronomy-questions-answers/98974-artifacts-ground-based-asteroid-animations.html

[RickJ]

Fake is my opinion. See my post under your thread.

Rick

[markyg]

first off... lol that you own a fax machine still..

I was looking at buy a 10" lx200 ACF (or 12" if my wife lets me :)) i'm a little worried about your posts. I'm still a little new to all of this.. but it seems you're talking about the smaller cheaper scopes..

do you think i'll have the same problem with the lx200 series?

[personman906]

How do I create a new forum? PLEASE SOMEONE HELP ME!!!:sad: