Oops... finger trouble.

As I was saying, a 10" f/10 LX50 would seem to be the best option here -
good performance on both planets and DSO, a marked visual improvement
over the 8". You would need to check the additional weight was not too
much though.

I guess the Mak provides the typical high magnification, dark field
performance typical of these optics, and it should be very good on
planets and star clusters. Nevertheless, it's still 3" less aperture
than the 10" and because of that it's second best IMHO.

Chris

Frank Loch wrote:
>
> Hi All -- Need you opinnions on this tough (maybe) question.
>
> My son is considering each of the 4 scopes above. His usage will be
> almost entirely "visual" with no imaging, from a relatively fixed
> location in average S.E. PA light polution (maybe mag 4 -5) on good
> nights. His interest is 30 % planetary/70% DSO.
>
> He leaning toward the 8" (pricewise) but can affoed the 7" Mak. Then
> the cunundrum arrises -- why not the 10" -- still less money than the
> Mak.
>
> So I guess the question is where does the Mak fit in to the scheme of
> things, and would it's higher price be of any benifit to him (with
> his interests and location).
> Best regards,
>
> Frank Loch
>
> Try Deep Space 99 at http://www.early.com/~floch/index.html
>
> For Astro Art try: http://www.early.com/~floch/astrob.htm
>
> For Gemstone information try: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/FLoch/
>
> For exquisite Jewelry try http://www.lochsjewelers.com

--
*Model Engineer Support Page*
Engineering: http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~chrish/homepage.htm
Astro Stuff: http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~chrish/lx200.htm

View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous message: Re: [M]: [M] Choose which?(lx200) 8", 10", or 7" Mak???, Chris Heapy
Next message: [M]: MAPUG-Digest [M] subject, Shay Walters
Next message in thread: Re: [M]: [M] Choose which?(lx200) 8", 10", or 7" Mak???, Dan Dickerson
Previous message in thread: Re: [M]: [M] Choose which?(lx200) 8", 10", or 7" Mak???, Chris Heapy