This is a long and much sortied dicussion.Right now, some are already
skipping
several steps in advising you on your decision process. They would have
you
jump to Z before you go thru A to Y.
Here are some basic questions to ask yourself before asking others:

1. What do I want to use this scope for, both initially and in the long
run?
Visual Only?
Visual primarily with some Astrophoto work?
Some Visual with a lot of Astrophoto?
CCD work?
Deep Sky and some planetary?
Planetary and some Deep sky?
2. Where will I do most (I repeat, MOST) of my observing.
Will I have to travel to get there?
What are the normal or average skies like (darkness, weather,
etc.)
3. How much time do I normally have to observe?
How much time to set up and look for things?
4. How serious am I about this undertaking?
5. How much money do I want to budget on this (see number 1 above).
Money for scope?
Money for everything else?(double the scope price, at least)
6. Do I like to tinker?
7. Are you good with electronics?

IMHO what you need to decide first is the type and size of scope that
would be
right for you, and consider getting something you won't grow out of
right
away, especially at these price ranges.

After answering all the above and more you might find out you really
would be
better of with a Newtonian reflector, or a Dob, or a Mak. After you have
reached this point, then you can consider brands and sizes.

BTW, no disrespect for other comments and opinions, I have the 127ED,
and it
is a great photo scope, even for deep sky objects. My answers to above
lead me
into a compromise between visual, photo and eventual CCD desires. The
127 met
the bill, however, only for me, not necessarily for you. And since I am
a
perfectionist and do long exposure work, any problems I have had may
never
have been an issue for somone else with the same scope. Like I have
said
before, these are scientific instruments, and are prone to finicky
problems,
not of the faint of heart. Also, an electric focuser was my first
option, it takes
all the focusing vibration issues and eliminates them, don't leave home
without
it!

m.

LKJ1999 wrote:

> In a message dated 98-04-05 21:29:43 EDT, you write:
>
>
> I hate to write and bother you again but I just like the advice,
> especially from someone who has owned one. Since you don't like the
> 127ed, for obvious reasons, would you recommend a lx200 8 or 10 inch?
> The 10 inch is heavy and I being only 15 and under 110 pounds it is
> impossible even though I die for that extra room for the off-axis
> guider. I guess I could get a 8 inch? Could I put the 10 on a
> losmandy gm-8? Have you heard or seen it? Do you have a F/6.3 or 10?
> Which do you prefer?
>
>
> Thanks for your time
>
>
> Chris Kline
> >>
> ********************************************************
> I have the 10" LX-200 F/10. The optics are excellent in this scope!
> The GM-8 may not handle a 10" SCT-OTA Very well. It should handle a 8" SCT
> OTA pretty good.
> If You want GO-TO, the 8" LX-200 Maybe the way to go.
>
> My buddy bought the 5" ED from me, He has a C-8 he put on the LXD-600
> Mount. It works very well. It also might handle a 10" SCT-OTA as well!
>
> BTW. I prefer f/10 over f/6.3 any day.
>
> Charles Peterson. LKJ1999

View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous message: Re: [M]: More lx200 software posted, David Dixon
Next message: Re: [M]: Artificial Stars -Reply, CLIFFORD PETERSON
Previous message in thread: Re: [M]: 127ED APO, LKJ1999