Dray and all,

It may well come down to this; if you can afford the extra $, and can live
with a smaller FOV, go with the bigger scope. This is a bigger problem for
those who plan on imaging than for those who'll use it visually. Remember,
that no scope does everything well. And really, what this does is create an
excuse to buy another, shorter focal length scope in the future. :-))

I bought a used TV-85 last month, and I already see a need for another scope
in the 1000-1500mm range. That would be a nice fit between the TV's 600mm
and the 12"s 3000+ focal length. However, what I am currently aspiring to is
one of those fancy Ritchey Chretion (sp?) telescopes. I guess this means
that I need a much bigger observatory too. Hey, maybe we could all chip in
and buy the Hubble. You know, this REALLY is an expensive hobby.

Alan

>>>is asking which to get either the 10" or the 12" they are looking for a
reason to spend the extra money.<<<
>>>very glad we bought the 12 inch LX200. We never have to wonder what if.
I do note that many who have replied here also have at one time or
another bought the 12 inch as well as the 10". No matter how many people
tell you that the 10 inch is as good or better.<<<


______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup

View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous message: RE: [M]: Re: Re: auto focuser, Bill D
Next message: RE: [M]: Re: Re: auto focuser, Alan Voetsch
Next message in thread: Re: [M]: Re: Comparison request - LX200 10" vs. 12", Gene Horr
Previous message in thread: Re: [M]: Re: Comparison request - LX200 10" vs. 12", D. Ray East