Thanks, Doug. I have an SUV and hadn't considered the size. Now that you
mentioned it, I looked up the overall dimensions of the scope (actually, the
dimension of the scope inside it's foam) and it is pretty substantial. I'd
either build a case for it or get some cheap luggage (if I can find it at
WalMart) that would accomodate its bulk. I'm more likely to move it around
if it's on wheels, which is how I look at making it accessible. Also a lot
less likely to get damaged that way from my butter fingers.

Mike


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2001 11:04 PM
Subject: RE: [M]: Fw: LX 200 purchase advice (Long)


> I too struggled with the 8" vs 10" issue. Money wasn't a factor since
there
> is only $400 difference in the price. The determining factor for me in
> choosing the 8" over the 10", was the physical size difference, not so
much
> the weight. The 10" OTA and fork assembly is considerably larger than the
> 8". I take this scope everywhere. It fits in my car's trunk easily while
in
> it's case. I also have a Blazer and with all my camping gear, my wife and
2
> kids, the 10" was just too big.
>
> So thats what decided it for me. I had aperture fever when I was making my
> decision though. I drove 45 miles to the telescope store to see the 10". I
> spent over an hour in the store looking at both scopes. The salesman took
> the 10" down and let me lift it onto the tripod. Ten minutes later I was
> leaving with my 8" :)
>
> A good scope for you, is one that you will use a lot. I do a fair amount
of
> backyard viewing from a very light-polluted town outside of Chicago. I
also
> take my scope out to a couple dark sites quite often. If I had the 10", I
> might be more reluctant to go out on marginal nights, where as now I just
> toss it in the car and go.
>
> You may be different. You will surely not regret either purchase. I love
my
> 8" LX200. I will probably outgrow it someday, but that won't be until I
> retire out to a dark part of the country, and put up an observatory with a
> permanently-mounted 12" LX200.
>
> Just my 2cents....
>
> Doug
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Nanz Family
> Sent: Monday, May 07, 2001 7:50 PM
> Subject: Re: [M]: Fw: LX 200 purchase advice (Long)
>
>
> Wow I thought I was the only one with a BA in Astronomy.
> I also dropped out of Astronomy for almost 20 years. Last year I got a 12"
> lx200
> and have no problem lugging it around and setting it up by myself ( I do
not
> mind help however).
> Unless your primary interest is photography I can think of no advantage a
8"
> has
> over a 10". They both have the same tripod & mount. The forks are slightly
> bigger on a 10" and so is the OTA. but unless you have a health problem
the
> difference is not a problem. Every thing you look at through a 10" will be
> better than a 8" under any sky conditions (except big open clusters and a
> few
> large objects). Also consider getting a Scope Saver base and you will not
> dread
> hunting for the central hole when you set up in Alt/Az mode.
> Bob
>
> Michael De Santis wrote:
>
> > I've been lurking here for some time, and have found the level of
> > discussion
> > to be thoughtful and considerate. I'd like to a few questions as it
looks
> > like I've gotten the wife's permission to get an LX-200 this summer.
> >
> > Astronomy has been a love of mine since I was small, and I earned my BA
> in
> > Astrophysics with the goal of being an astronomer. During high school I
> > even
> > saved enough to get an early Dynamax SCT (since sold). Of course, the
> late
> > 70's weren't great for people wanting to get a PhD in astronomy, so I
got
> > my
> > MBA instead and have moved around in various businesses (always in
major
> > light-polluted locations). I now live in the suburbs of Cincinnati
> > (limiting
> > magnitude at my house is around 3.5, although I have dark sky sites
> > available to me about 1 hour away), and my son is now old enough to be
> > pretty excited about the stars. We've gone to star parties ("wow, dad")
> and
> > I want to get a telescope that I/we will not outgrow anytime soon
> > (actually,
> > I'd like it to be a scope I'd probably never outgrow).
> >
> > I'm leaning towards the 10" f/10 (I expect mostly visual use for DSO's,
> but
> > from time to time I'd like to try my hand with my trusty OM-1),
although
> > the
> > weight puts me off a bit. At 60lbs, I'm sure it's a conscious effort to
> > haul
> > it out of the case and up to the tripod. The last thing I want to do is
> > have
> > to explain to my wife about the big (expensive) pile of glass sitting in
> the
> > driveway.
> >
> > So my main question is - for those who have wrestled with 8" vs 10",
what
> > swayed you in one direction vs the other? Is 10" too big for the light
> > polluted area in which I live? Do some of you 10" owners find the
weight
> to
> > be more than you bargained for (after purchase, of course - all
> telescopes
> > are light as a feather before you buy them)?
> >
> > A second, less important question concerns photography with the fork
> mount.
> > With the size of off-axis guiders plus camera bodies, how do you take
> > photos
> > of objects near the celestial pole?
> >
> > Any advice/information you share would be greatly appreciated.
> >
> > Mike
>
>
>
>
>
>

View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous message: Re: [M]: LX200 help...Please!, DARREN CARLISLE
Next message: Re: [M]: Fw: LX 200 purchase advice (Long), Marv De Beque
Next message in thread: Re: [M]: Fw: LX 200 purchase advice (Long), Marv De Beque
Previous message in thread: Re: [M]: Fw: LX 200 purchase advice (Long), Alan Voetsch