Re: meade 4.5 newt for $75 - worth it?

My first scope was a gift so I didn't chose it. It was an ETX-60. Those are
decent quality, 60mm refractors---f/5. I had a lot of frustration with it as
I tried to learn what I could see and what to expect---I never used the goto
and still haven't. The first sope I bought was an 8" reflector on a CG-5
mount and a 12mm Radian EP and a Telrad. That setup outperforms most scopes
I see at star parties. I have a box of 4.5" mirrors and misc parts from
reflectors I've been given as "it's supposed to be a really good scope but I
never could use it". I bought 6" Dobs for our club for those who couldn't
afford equipment---club loaners. The views are quite nice and as dobs, no
shakey mounts. I paid $99 when Hardin ran a sale so I bought a few and
donated them. (I told the club that Hardin donated them to me) So would I
pay $75 for a 4.5" reflector? The answer is still no.

But on a lighter side---there's a star blast type thing on Astromart
now---it's adapted to a UA tripod and has a Rigel finder! The ad includes
an eyepiece---probably a Nagler! Talk about going in backwards....

Doink
"Martin R. Howell" <martinhowell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:xte92ufew4y0.eax4lbfeh05n.dlg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 11:19:45 -0700, Doink wrote:

I suppose Mr. Howell, if you get your beef free you can apply it to a
4.5"
reflector. But I have yet to see one of those worth a damn. It seems to
me,
the 4.5" is where the manufacturers cut the most corners---I believe
there
is a point, a bottom point, to all this astronomy stuff. If the equipment
is
too crappy, you might as well save a while longer and get something good.
I
have been GIVEN several of the 4.5" reflectors---including Meade and
Orions
as well the typical Tasco---ok, if you want to play Galileo and try and
see
targets with junk, go for it. But I think if someone truly only has $75
they
could spend it more wisely on a book or two and do their observing naked
eye. I wouldn't waste money on anything less than 6" (reflector) and I
would
recommend a good mount. This hobby requires some money---sorry. I want
to
take up flying but I only have $200 to buy the airplane. Which one should
I
buy? Doh!

Doink


"Martin R. Howell" <martinhowell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:e0eed$44918cac$4f24b28$8310@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Doink wrote:
NO.


"Martin R. Howell" <martinhowell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:8qfx6s7o275a$.5hykmt9476cl$.dlg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 09:10:51 -0300, jtaylor wrote:


Local ad says "Sargent-Welch 3745A" but I think it's the Meade that SW
sells.

Should I drop $75?


I have a Meade 4500 and it has brought me far more than $75 in pleasure
and
still does what I want it to do when using it. But I know and accept
the
limitations of a 4 1/2 scope which I suppose is the main ingredient to
happiness with one.

I leave you with this: DO WHAT IS NECESSARY TO BEEF UP THE TRIPOD AND
MOUNT. . .IT DOESN'T TAKE A ROCKET SCIENTIST TO MAKE A FEW SIMPLE
ADJUSTMENTS OR MODIFICATIONS.


And why would it not be, Mr. Doink. Do you have one? Have you ever
used
one? Have you ever been in the position of only having $75 to spend on
a
scope? Do you simply have something against smaller aperture? What did
you start with? If it was a smaller scope, are you any worse for the
experience? Do you feel there is nothing to be pleasurably experienced
or
enjoyed with the scope? Did you not have enough time to make the
standard
s.a.a. suggestion of binoculars instead? I did not because the fellow
wants a scope so I say, hell, let him get this one. Mine works just
fine.
Seen most all of the planets with it, lots of faint fuzzies (including
the
dust lane on the Sombrero, too many open clusters to remember them all,
and a comet or two. I say this is well wrth $75. The mount ain't
great,
but I beefed up mine considerably as he can his.

This is certainly a much better response than your original one, which was
simply, "NO." One does not have to agree with you or I, yet it is much
better to give something to disagree with other than a one word postive or
negative.

You still have not stated what your first scope was. Was it a 60mm? A
four and half inch newt? What? If it was one of these two smaller sizes,
are you any worse off now for having owned them?


--
Martin R. Howell


.

Relevant Pages

  • RAT NOTES - TEC 200 F9 Triplet Apochromat - 09/01/04
    ... I first inquired about this scope with TEC 23 months ago. ... I received the mount; ... it is a most imposing instrument sitting up on top of the ... so this explains why, for my purposes, I decided to go with a refractor. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: RAT NOTES - TEC 200 F9 Triplet Apochromat - 09/01/04
    ... ,they are fast becoming the place to go for that very fine instrument ... > I first inquired about this scope with TEC 23 months ago. ... I received the mount; ... > become well acquainted with 2-3 EQ mounted refractors. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Film SLR or Digital Camera?
    ... with imaging, there is NO better solution out there to get you started. ... mirror lockup delay to let the scope settle. ... time, the number of frames, the time between frames, and an initial delay ... about the mount. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Tal 2m or Explorer 150/200?
    ... I am interested in a telescope that will enable me to view planets ... >scope for photography via digicam. ... built in drives and is a steadier mount. ...
    (uk.sci.astronomy)
  • Re: What got you started in astronomy?
    ... There it was, a fine, fine refractor on a silky smooth mount with a selection ... of finely crafted eyepieces. ... mount but the scope still would not stay still or stay in place... ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)