Rod-

Several thoughts on the slightly serious side. MAPUG has over 1,000
members--wonder how many have had serious problems with their LX's?? I have
had mine for four years with no problems. The only real precaution I take is
with balancing and I don't load it up with heavy add ons. If you want to do
astrophotography, there are a number of compromises with LX's. Over the last
few years, I've watched folks such as Bobby Middleton, Phil Perkins, Chris
Vedelar and others do very good photo work with their LX's and then
"graduate" to more sophisticated rigs, usually high-end refractors or custom
built Newtonians on GEM's. One problem with their photo new rigs however--be
prepared to pay at least three times what a 10" LX-200 costs--$10,000 plus
(and this is without go-to). You will indeed then have a better--and just
maybe more reliable--photo rig.

Andy

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2000 12:07 AM
Subject: Re: [M]: The Fragile LX-200 - A Fearful Rant


>
>
> writes:
> > I am having the same experience! Except my LX200 is still on order
> > and I am
> > begining to think I should cancel the order.
> >
> > Rod Cook

View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous message: [M]: Re: Alignment for Pointing Accuracy, Email address hidden
Next message: [M]: R.A. drive lx200, Nanz Family
Next message in thread: RE: [M]: The Fragile LX-200 - A Fearful Rant, Steve Glazener
Previous message in thread: RE: [M]: The Fragile LX-200 - A Fearful Rant, Email address hidden