| |
[index]
[month]
[prev]
[next]
[thead-prev]
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_002E_01C0AF5E.9EDDDA60
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Man this is strange... or is it typical Meade. We have alot =
similarities!!! The middle baffle in my ota is broken loose also. It's =
wierd that it only slides around when the ota clamp is tightened!!=20
I have read in the Meade catalog that the apo's have a series of 10 =
field stops located throughout the ota. I can only see 3 in mine. I have =
noted there are better than 10 baffles in the focuser( I don't have my =
ota to actually count). Where is Meade getting this number? =20
I have a question to all. What is the latest version of the 1697 =
computer control for the 650/750 mounts?
Also Carl, how old is your rig? Mine is around 5 years according to =
the guy I bought it from. And, curiously, have you tried any imaging( =
mainly ccd) through the Intes? I have heard of focus problems regarding =
imaging through these scopes. Is there any truth to this?
----- Original Message -----=20
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2001 9:35 PM
Subject: Re: [M]: Re: One more Question
In a message dated 3/17/2001 8:08:26 PM Eastern Standard Time,=20
This worries me about a compound scope of 1 inch less aperature =
beating out=20
a larger refractor. Is collimation the reason, or is it because it's =
a=20
Meade? I have viewed the planets through my 7". Because of the =
unknown=20
problem( whether it be collimation or bad optics) they are not =
sharp, but=20
it still seems to be just as good as what I've seen through my 10" =
LX200.=20
Like I said, just not as sharp. Hopefully, when it arrives back from =
Meade,=20
that will no longer be a problem!!!=20
=20
A 7" refractor should blow away a 10" SCT just for the fact it does =
not have=20
a central obstruction. Also there should not be as much light =
scattered in a=20
refractor. Loosening a retightening the screws holding the cell in =
place=20
could effect the centering of the lens on the OTA. The reason I wanted =
to=20
remove the cell was two fold.=20
#1 the baffles were lost in the tube. It turns out they were laying =
stacked=20
in the focuser end of the tube and to place them correctly I need to =
remove=20
the objective lens.=20
#2 The inside of the lens was dirty so it needed a cleaning.=20
The other problem I have read about with the Meade APO is the ED glass =
needs=20
to be centered as well. This all is supposed to be done at Meade, but =
the=20
rule seems to be letting these scopes go without properly aligning the =
optics.=20
Clear and Dark Skies,=20
Carl Veit=20
The Sky Tour Observatory=20
------=_NextPart_000_002E_01C0AF5E.9EDDDA60
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> Man this is strange... or =
is it=20
typical Meade. We have alot similarities!!! The middle baffle in my ota =
is=20
broken loose also. It's wierd that it only slides around when the ota =
clamp is=20
tightened!! </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> I have read in the Meade =
catalog that=20
the apo's have a series of 10 field stops located throughout the =
ota. I can=20
only see 3 in mine. I have noted there are better than 10 baffles =
in the=20
focuser( I don't have my ota to actually count). Where is Meade getting =
this=20
number? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> I have a question to all. =
What is the=20
latest version of the 1697 computer control for the 650/750 =
mounts?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> Also Carl,</FONT><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2> how old is your rig? Mine is around 5 years according to the =
guy I=20
bought it from. And, curiously, have you tried any imaging( mainly =
ccd)=20
through the Intes? I have heard of focus problems regarding imaging =
through=20
these scopes. Is there any truth to this?</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, March 17, 2001 =
9:35=20
PM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [M]: Re: One more=20
Question</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>In a =
message dated=20
3/17/2001 8:08:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, <BR><A=20
writes:=20
<BR><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"=20
TYPE=3D"CITE">This worries me about a compound scope of 1 inch less =
aperature=20
beating out <BR>a larger refractor. Is collimation the reason, or is =
it=20
because it's a <BR>Meade? I have viewed the planets through my 7". =
Because=20
of the unknown <BR>problem( whether it be collimation or bad optics) =
they=20
are not sharp, but <BR>it still seems to be just as good as what =
I've seen=20
through my 10" LX200. <BR>Like I said, just not as sharp. Hopefully, =
when it=20
arrives back from Meade, <BR>that will no longer be a problem!!!=20
</FONT><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial lang=3D0 size=3D3=20
FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"><BR></FONT><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial =
lang=3D0 size=3D2=20
FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"> </FONT><FONT color=3D#000000 =
face=3DArial=20
lang=3D0 size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"> =
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR></FONT><FONT=20
color=3D#000000 face=3DArial lang=3D0 size=3D2 =
FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"><BR>A 7" refractor=20
should blow away a 10" SCT just for the fact it does not have <BR>a =
central=20
obstruction. Also there should not be as much light scattered in a=20
<BR>refractor. Loosening a retightening the screws holding the cell in =
place=20
<BR>could effect the centering of the lens on the OTA. The reason I =
wanted to=20
<BR>remove the cell was two fold. <BR>#1 the baffles were lost in the =
tube. It=20
turns out they were laying stacked <BR>in the focuser end of the tube =
and to=20
place them correctly I need to remove <BR>the objective lens. <BR>#2 =
The=20
inside of the lens was dirty so it needed a cleaning. <BR>The other =
problem I=20
have read about with the Meade APO is the ED glass needs <BR>to be =
centered as=20
well. This all is supposed to be done at Meade, but the <BR>rule seems =
to be=20
letting these scopes go without properly aligning the optics. =
<BR><BR>Clear=20
and Dark Skies, <BR>Carl Veit <BR>The Sky Tour Observatory=20
<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></FONT></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_002E_01C0AF5E.9EDDDA60--
View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous message: Re: [M]: LX200 Tube alignment, Gene
Next message: Re: [M]: Re: Dec Mod Dilemma, R. A. Greiner
Previous message in thread: Re: [M]: Re: One more Question, Email address hidden
|
|