Re: RCX400 review ?


Thierry wrote:
> "RMOLLISE" <rmollise@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1133366464.642392.235150@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >.
> There's a fairly in-depth review at <cloudynights.com>.
>
> ----
> my >> do no more works !!Grr.
> Fine Rod. Indeed, I thought about it just after have sent this mail !
> Comments are rather positive, a good begin (confirming in fact my first
> feeling of last year).
> Remain to see how it will be appreciated by all kind of users ("novice",
> casual, visual, CCD, and first of all by all advanced amateurs requesting
> the most of their scope). Will be convinced when a (fortunate) university
> will buy one for their students in astronomy or NOAO.
>
>

HI Thierry:

Let me make two comments concerning the (anecdotal) knowledge of the
RCX 400 I have. I've heard two main complaints:

1. The tube is not completely closed. There's a substantial gap between
corrector and tube assembly that allows dust (and even insects!) to
enter. And, unfortunately, there's no easy way, apparently to remove
the corrector assembly to clean the optics.

2. Meade has had some problems with the focus and collimation motors.
Focusing has changed collimation on some scopes. Some instruments have
had "runaway" conditions with focus motors, or dead focus motors.

Both these problems _sound_ easy enough for Meade to fix.

Peace,
Rod Mollise
Author of _Choosing and Using a Schmidt Cassegrain Telescope_
<http://skywatch.brainiac.com/astroland/index.htm>

Like SCTs and MCTs?
Check-out sct-user, the mailing list for CAT fanciers:
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sct-user>

See: <http://journals.aol.com/rmollise/UncleRodsAstroBlog/>
For Uncle Rod's Astro Blog.

.