Telescope question

[Sorarse]

Just wondered if anyone has experience of the 8" Meade LX90 scope, and it's suitability for astrophotography?

[Nighthound]

Derek, I've only viewed through one but I have imaged with a 10" LX200 quite a bit(no longer own it) and they're very close to being the same aside from the aperture, focal length and weight. It's very capable for astrophotography but it'll help us if you give us a bit more info.

Are you interested in deep sky object imaging, planetary/Lunar all of the above?
Which camera are you planning to use?
Will you be shooting from fairly dark skies?

[Sorarse]

Skies are not the darkest, but I have the opportunity to shoot from dark areas once in a while.

I'm hoping to use my Canon 40D.

Having done a bit more research, I am now leaning towards the 8" LX200, as I understand it has a much sturdier/better engineered mount.

Finally, I intend to start with lunar shots, but also would like to try wide s ky by piggy backing the camera.

I think I would like to progress on to DSOs once I've read more about multiple exposures and stacking, and get an understanding of what all that entails.

[Adrena1in]

Having done a bit more research, I am now leaning towards the 8" LX200, as I understand it has a much sturdier/better engineered mount.
I may be wrong, but I thought the mount and scope were completely separate, meaning you can get whichever scope you want and whichever mount you want. Of course, best to go to a reputable dealer and they might only sell the items as packages, but worth looking into really if the scope you really want doesn't come with the best mount, and vice versa.

[Sorarse]

All change (again).

Similar design, but seems to get better reviews, and I have found it at lower prices than the Meade, I'm now looking at the Celestron CPC 800.

Adrena1in, you are right to say that generally scopes and mounts can be purchased separately, but these particular models are integral.

I know it means the upgrade path will be more expensive, as if I do upgrade I will have to buy a new mount as well as a new tube, but funds at the moment don't allow me the luxury of purchasing the tube and mount I would ideally like.

[Nighthound]

If you do move to deep sky later on you'll want to change from the CPC fork mount to a German equatorial design. The fork mounts are limiting because they track in alt-azimuth so field rotation becomes evident quickly in long exposures. Also the scope is an f/10 and can be reduced to f/6.3 but at close to 2000mm there's no room for inaccuracies in tracking and there will be some in part because of the reasons fore mentioned.

The CPC would be a great planetary and Lunar scope however especially if equipped with a web cam for multiple exposures and stacking. It's hard to not go for more aperture and focal length but truth is the CPC won't be a do-all for you. Unfortunately there are no such set ups. It takes a well stocked tool box to shoot all that is out there. The nice thing about starting with a German equatorial is that you can switch out telescopes and switch from widefield (i.e 80mm refractor) to longer focal lengths easily. Of course you can piggy back lenses on top of the CPC but you'll still be battling rotation.

Don't get me wrong, the fork mount is fine for getting started, it's how I began. But I just wanted you to be aware that their limitations will make deep sky work a big challenge. You can look into a wedge which will allow you to switch it to sidereal mode but that will be another expense and I found a wedge to be tricky at best for consistency and accuracy.

200-500mm is a great focal length to aim for when getting started shooting deep sky. Most GEMs in your range are capable of shooting fairly long exposures at these lengths.

[Sorarse]

I've recently become aware of the imaging limitations of the alt/azi fork mount compared to the equitorial, so was planning to buy a wedge at the same time to give me an interim solution to the problem.

Having looked at some of the pukka equitorial mounts available, and having a penchant to buy the best I can afford (even if I can't afford very much) I have a feeling if I went for the separate mount/tube option, most of my budget would go on the mount, leaving me disappointed with the optics.

The other thing I failed to mention is that my OH wants to use the scope for 'normal' astronomical viewing, and wants something that is fairly straightforward to set up and use.

She currently has a small 4" reflector on a manual equitorial mount, but she never uses it unless I am there to set it up and make the initial alignments.

Thanks for all your help and suggestions Steve.

[Nighthound]

I've recently become aware of the imaging limitations of the alt/azi fork mount compared to the equitorial, so was planning to buy a wedge at the same time to give me an interim solution to the problem.

Having looked at some of the pukka equitorial mounts available, and having a penchant to buy the best I can afford (even if I can't afford very much) I have a feeling if I went for the separate mount/tube option, most of my budget would go on the mount, leaving me disappointed with the optics.

The other thing I failed to mention is that my OH wants to use the scope for 'normal' astronomical viewing, and wants something that is fairly straightforward to set up and use.

She currently has a small 4" reflector on a manual equitorial mount, but she never uses it unless I am there to set it up and make the initial alignments.

Thanks for all your help and suggestions Steve.

You're welcome. Ahh, well that make it a no brainer then. The added aperture and focal length will proved you and your OH with some awesome views. I'm looking forward to seeing pics of the new rig and the pics you get with it. Always glad to help.