No, there are dealers out there that will give you immediate credit for the
eyepieces. The LX-50 is virtually useless for astrophotography. That is not
true of the LX-90--see the article in the new July Sky and Telescope. The
NexStar 11GPS is vaporware but is currently hurting LX-200 sales and thus
the current eyepiece promotion which will not last. As to the NexStar 11
ever being viable, remember the Ultima 11?

Andy

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 12:12 PM
Subject: Re: [M]: LX50 or LX90?


>
> With that rational I would suspect the LX-90 is the one not in this
league?
> With the 8" LX-200 the same price as the LX-90 after the EP offer, then
the
> basic question is GOTO or not, with only marginal cost savings in
selecting
> no GOTO. I myself would opt for the LX-200.
>
> Except, of course, that while the $600 EP offer makes the LX-200 an
> outstanding value, it is NOT an immediate cost savings, you still must lay
> the cash out in a lump. For some this is just a tad to much, and although
> they may pay more in the long run they may be able to better afford to add
> EPs one at a time later and select the "lower value" scope now. Not that
I
> would call the LX-50, or the LX-90, a "lower value" scope, they just fill
> different needs.
>
> Darrell
>
> >This is not really the right debate. With the Meade $600 eyepiece deal
when
> >you buy an LX-200, you can get an LX-200 8" for the same price as an
LX-90.
> >That should be a no brainer. The LX-50 is not in this league.
> >
> >Andy
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>
>

View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous message: Re: [M]: the BAK-7 corrector, John Teel
Next message: Re: [M]: the BAK-7 corrector, Email address hidden
Next message in thread: Re: [M]: LX50 or LX90?, Triumph Driver
Previous message in thread: Re: [M]: LX50 or LX90?, Triumph Driver