I bought the Astro-Tech 12in f4 with the dents that you saw at NEAF. I think I paid $400. Normally it was going for $750. I went to NEAF expecting to buy the scope at the regular price. When I went to their booth my friend noticed that it was on sale. I was able to knock out the dents and have been using it for about 10 years now. I also have three of the 10in LXD 75 F4'S. Bob M.
13:22 Hello Ed, love your videos! I own the 6” and 10” Schmidt-Newtonian OTA and replaced both focusers with the Moonlite brand, which was the first thing I did. I had some issues with pinched optics on the 6” SN and ended up removing the three clips and set the mirror in place using hot glue. I purchased the 10” SN from someone selling it on Craigs List in Atlanta, whereas I had a friend pick it up for me and shipped it to Loveland, CO where I live. I never did use the LXD55 Mount that came with the 10” (much too small of a mount), but I keep it for tracking with my DSLR cameras. Last, but not least, I also went through all the collimation practices and ended up with two nice OTAs.
Ed, thank you for the review. I have owned a LXD55 10 inch model since they were first released. Absolutely agree about the mount that it was not even close to being able to handle the weight of the OTA. Was ready to sell it at Okie-Tex until the chief observer of the Denver Astronomical Society helped me collimate the OTA. Needless to say it became a WOW factor. He even went as far as to say it had the richest and sharpest star field he had ever seen! He convinced me to keep it (much to my wife’s chagrin)! I ditched the mount and replaced it with a Celestron CGX and updated the focuser with one from Moonlight that was specifically designed for the LXD55. It is the best telescope of the three I own for deep sky! So glad that I kept it! Keep it collimated and you will not be disappointed.
After getting the 8" Schmidt Newtonian was very impressed by the widefield views using a 13mm Nagler. This was the first time I truly saw stars sharp to the edge of the field of view. The 8" is also surprisingly good on the moon and planets despite its 3" central obstruction (15% by area). A 9mm Nagler with a 2X barlow was used. The optics are superb - views are sharp and contrasty without diffraction spikes. The unit does have an upgraded focuser which is (as Ed stated in the video) a big improvement over the stock focuser. I was so impressed by the 8 that I landed the 10", which also is superb optically. The 10 is a bit of a brute in terms of size and weight but still much more compact than say an F/5 or F/6 Newtonian of equal aperture. The central obstruction is relatively smaller in the 10" (10% by area). They are great scopes and among the best I have used. Dan B., FL
I have been watching your video’s for about a month now and subscribed today. I’m a bit of a scope junkie but recently retired and needed to temper my buying, tinkering, tuning,selling cycle. I can now satisfy my curiosity through your excellent video’s at zero cost! Thanks Ed 😊
Hello Ed, I had this telescope on a fork mount about 30 years ago. It was one of my first scopes and I loved it. Mine had a helical focuser which you screwed in and out (it was pathetic, but I knew not better). I used it to explore the universe and saw great views of the Hale Bopp comet in it. I'm kind of sorry I sold it. Thanks for a fun video.
Back in the early 80s I was drooling over a Meade DS16 on an equatorial mount. Had visions of having a backyard observatory with dome and all. But at the time I was married and living in an apartment
Keep the scope, replace the focuser with a good Crawford unit, I used Moonlite with motorised unit. Throw away the mount but keep the tripod. I have 2 SN-10 scopes, one modified without the diagonal and focuser. My helical focuser is mounted in the corrector plate, and with various ZWO cameras. I also use it at f/2 with a good quality reducer. At such fast focal ratio’s, collimating is critical along with a perfectly centred corrector plate. My SN-10’s are on massive mount/s and I love them. I have three different Takahashi scopes, refractor, Mellon, & 180 f/2.8 astrograph, plus others various scopes. Like experimenting and making much of my own gear/observatories etc. all part of the fun. Clear skies, stay safe, Greetings from Tasmania Australia-Southern Cross Observatory 42 South.
I've got the 10" SN. Had it from new. Never had issues with the focuser but the spotting scope basically never worked and the mount is total junk. It made good images when new but slowly over time the optics have drifted and the mirror has fogged over. I've made the attempt to collimate but really I think I only made it worse. Meade says to "NEVER" remove the corrector plate so I've been far too anxious to do so but I suspect that may be required to correct some of the issues it has... The OTA for example makes a loud clunking noise when slewing across the sky... clunking noise... coming from the corrector. Ugh. Good video!
Love my 8", still going to this day. I installed a Moonlite focuser on it and love it paired with an Az-Eq6. The ES92 12 really shines with this scope.
Yeah, i have this scope too, i have replaced the focuser with a moonlite. Works awesome now. I use it with an explore scientific hr coma corrector. Definitely need a better mount for AP, so i put this on my AZ-EQ6-GT. Thank you for the great video.
You are great. I have a SN 10'' . first thing i did when i got it some 18 years ago was to buy a moonlite focuser. I love the scope and enjoyed your from bad to good review. thanks and take care.
Great review! My stars and planets definitely look like your before pictures. Going to buckle down on collimation before taking it out again. I did put a Moonlite on mine last fall and put the original one in the same place my st4 cables go, the trash!!
I've owned 2 of the LXD 10" f/4. The first one was on the mount supplied with the kit, but I did some improvements by installing a Moonlite focuser and mounting it on an Atlas mount. It was laser collimated my me, and the visual performance was excellent.
I have an 8 inch Meade LXD55 SN that was modified by a gentleman from CO into a oak Dobson mount on a short tripod. It’s almost a work of art, very stable, but fairly heavy (the tripod has a thick metal plate on top for the Dobson base). I like using it with a night vision monocular with a simple 1.25 adapter that slides into the focuser. And yes, the focuser was upgraded, although to a JMI. Nice scope in a simple setup for visual at the expense of imaging.
My SN8 is my primary scope, and agree with your points. The only additional con I would add is that it was mild 2" corrector/flattener away from a coma free, flat field astrograph.
It's a big man who admits his mistakes. I've always liked the looks of this setup. With a new focusser and accurate collimation it looks like a great scope! I wonder how many reflectors of one type or another have been ditched because they were badly out of collimation..
Drilling not necessary with dedicated Moonlight focuser. Focuser base has many holes to allow mounting into existing holes. I too replaced the plastic focuser. The rest of the OTA is quite good. With a Baader MPCC Mark 3 coma should be well under control even at the edges of the fov.
Had the 8” many years ago. Replaced the focuses with a Moonlite and tinkered with it a lot. Very pleased with its performance but let it go for something lighter. Now I have the Vixen R200SS - brilliant optics, but also needs a focuser change, imho.
Hi Ed, I’m enjoying your videos, having just discovered your channel. I recently bought a Neade SN10, and have been trying to get my head around the steps for collimating a SN. My before images look the same as yours, so I am keen to get mine setup correctly and get an after I made. Cheers Peter
@@thomasnevins5203 the SN-8 is about 19lbs, for comparison an Astro-tech 8" F/4 is 18# without rings. So only 1lb difference which I suspect is a combination of the corrector/secondary vs spider/secondary differences. One advantage of the SN8 Ed didn't mention is no spider spikes on bright stars if that has any bearing on personal imaging traits.
Hi Ed i did a review of the Celestron 8GN which is SN without a corrector plate BUT i see a skywatcher 6" SN im trying to get it to take a look at it. have you heard of this model?
Thanks Ed, I enjoyed your review. An LXD75 8” OTA has come up for sale in my area, so I was interested in your review. Like the 8” in your review, the stock focuser on my LXD75 10” is plastic and woeful.
Ed, you should do reviews for the different common mounts out there! Give it a shot. Why? It'll keep you coming back for us here. You'll also note that the LXD 55 was arguably the WORST mount ever made! I had one so I know what I'm talking about. Great vids, Ed! Keep it up!
I have the Meade 6" f/5 Schmidt Newtonian which I use for deepsky photography. The focuser needs to be replaced. The Schmidt Newton system does have residual coma, as the corrector plate is not in the correct 2F distance from the main mirror. I guess it is like an f/6 conventional Newtonian. Coma is completely eliminated a Baader Coma Corrector. The only complaint for deepsky photography is that there is a considerabe light dropoff at the edges.
I purchased one of these on the LX3 fork mount in when they were first introduced ('89 I think?). My biggest issue was also the focuser. The original models had an all plastic helical focuser that was really sloppy.
I had the 10" Meade SN with the improved mount. You are right, collimation is extremely critical and one must get the correcter and the primary absolutely square to the optical axis. You cannot do this easily with standard collimation tools and techniques - you MUST rely on the ghostly appearance of internal reflections from the back of the corrector plate (look online for "Complete Collimation of the Meade Schmidt Newtonian" by Peter Kennett and me). My main complaint was the same one I have against SCTs - the corrector plate fogs over, or requires an unwieldy dew shield. I eventually sold the OTA and replaced it with a standard f/4.5 10" Newtonian with custom optics and a Paracorr, which is a more tolerant optical system (although not by much! The coma-free sweet spot is about 2mm across). It can also easily be collimated with standard tools because there is only one optically active surface instead of three. Bottom line, a good scope, but too finicky! It needs very precise mechanics to work, even more precise than an SCT.
I’ve been fighting collimation on this scope, lxd55 sn8, for months. I hadn’t heard of the ghost shadow technique. Found the guide you mentioned. Going to start from ground zero with your guide. I put a Moonlite on it in sept and will double check it’s square too. Thanks!
Ian Morison: I have one of these and used it with some real success imaging galaxies using the Micro 4/3 sensor Altair Astro 294c ProTec . Without using a coma corrector I have good stars right across the field. The collimation must be spot on - but the focuser is terrible!
They call these the poor man's APO. Just wanted to add that the corrector plate is great for imagers who dislike diffraction spikes on bright stars. Collimation is tricky. There's also just a piece of cork padding shim holding the secondary against the glass. Dew issues do occur. I've upgraded the focuser on my SN6. The most underrated scope for 200 bucks. The focuser costs more than the scope! I've owned two at the same time. One for visual, one for imaging. Not so crazy. We can all relate.
I re-collimated mine. The secondary mirror was off by about 20 degrees. As I had never touched the secondary mirror before, this must be the way it came from Meade. Prior it showed a lot of coma. I haven't had a chance to retry it but I will. My focuser seems rock solid, but if I have issues I will get the MoonLite kit which is only $64.
I know this is well after the fact but in case you still need to know telescope warehouse probably has the screw in 2 inch eyepeice adapter you need for the focuser, if not I have a couple that would probably fit. Meade seemed to use the style of garbage focuser caps on alot of the DS series scopes and mount;)
I'm wondering if the 2" adapter for the Meade 826 will work, that way you can use a modern 1.25" adapter in it, and not worry about having to go between the adapters for different sized EP's
Won't work. The Meade Newts from the 1970s/80s used Unitron/Cave/etc parts sourced from Japan. The LXD55/75 era scopes were a mix of Chinese and Taiwanese parts and the focuser was a standard no one has seen before or since.
Hi, Ed, I watched this episode 2 weeks ago, went to eBay and won an 8" LXD 75 (with GSO 2" dual speed Crayford focuser). This is my first Newtonian-type OTA. Can anyone tell me the back focus length of this OTA? My current image train begins with an M48-M48 spacer and ends with a ZWO 294MC (back focus length is 55mm). I also need to figure out is it feasible to "thread" the GSO focuser side (it has a compression ring; no thread). The seller suggested a 2 inch Ultra Wide Prime Focus Adapter 54mm thread T-Ring for it. I think it'll work, but will a compression ring push the camera sensor off the center?
I have a 10 inch LXD55. I don't like the mount. Which mount(s) would you recommend? I built a fork type alt-az mount for it out of PVC (I don't currently plan on doing photos with it) and swapped out their viewfinder with a right angle one. I just went out to the garage and fiddled with focuser. It felt tight and I didn't detect any slop so maybe you just have a bad one. There was a lot of edge coma when I used it but it was before I knew much about collimation. Thanks for the collimation link
The LXD55 is one of the worst mounts ever made. Unfortunately, with an OTA this large, you're looking at spending some money. I wouldn't go less than an EQ6/CGEM/Atlas, or a G11 class mount.
@@edting I've watched multiple of your videos which are all good. Thanks for the reply. I also got a barely used 6 inch AR6 also on the LXD-55 mount from a friend who inherited it from his father for $500 which I thought was a bargain for a 6 inch refractor even if it is an acromatic. When I get the new mount I will just swap both scopes in and out on it. Both came with a full set of 1.25 inch Meade super plossl eyepieces both in a hard cases so I have 2 sets of them (16 total eyepieces, 1 2x-3x barlow and 1 diagonal) plus I got a 2 inch diagonal from the same friend for $5. I just ordered a 2 inch 26mm Q70 (on sale) from Orion to go with those scopes. I spread sheet the magnifications, eye relief, true field of view and exit pupil for both scopes and the 26mm seemed to be in the sweet spot. In addition, I traded a friend my Astroscan for an 115mm Orion dobsonian which was taking up space in his garage. I use the Orion the most as it is light and portable and provides surprisingly good views of the moon and planets. I have a light wooden box to set it on. I replaced the view finder on the 10 inch with one with a diagonal one as leaning over to look through a straight view finder was a pain in the back. The replaced viewfinder went on the Orion to replace the one that came with it which was junk.
I just laid it on my bed and did a collimation. I didn't do the full thing with taking off the corrector plate and the back mirror, but I am pretty sure I got it as straight as my bumbling hands can do. The secondary mirror was rotated about 20 degrees off. After I straightened that out, I collimated the primary mirror. Someday (not now) I will pull off the primary mirror and paint their collimation circle in a bright color vice a hard to see black circle. I believe it came from the factory in this way off condition because I can't see how the secondary could be rotated in shipping as it is under a cover and under the corrector plate cover. I only used it once before and it was pretty bad. Any ideas for a dew shield?
I replaced all the screws with steel ones. The ones that come with the corrector plate and secondary mirror are grossly substandard. Optics are very good...collimation is key!
I have this same telescope. Where can I get info on how to collumate or have someone do it for me. I get images like your before photos. I do collumate the scope, but never disassembled it.
There are several collimation tools for Cassegrain-derived telescopes new on the market, some of them should work well with Newtonians, too. It could be a good thing if Ed would make a video about them.
2002, I bought a LXD55 10" from an eBay warehouse supplier. Immediate disappointment! The tripod was shakily unsteady, and the drive too weak to effectively slew the scope (GoTo) or sometimes even simply track. The dovetail base on the mount was dangerously shallow -- the entire optic assembly can fall off if the user isn't careful. Meade received quite a few complaints from users (I spoke to one of their customer service reps). I still have the dang thing in a closet. It's practically unusable. What should I do with it? What CAN I do with it? Can you recommend other GoTo tripod/mounts? (My first scope was a Criterion RV-6 from Christmas 1975, and I used it quite a bit, including some astrophotography. So I can't say I'm a beginner.)
The 10" OTA is pretty big. For a mount, I'd get something in the Atlas/CGEM class, or, if you can swing it, a G11. You *could* make it work with a midsize mount like the AVX but it might not be totally happy. The original LXD55/75 mounts were not exactly known for their reliability.
The Meade use of proprietary dovetails and lousy big-little saddleplate screws exists even into the new LX85. Those dovetails are garbage and for a 10" I would want a Losmandy D dovetail anyways. The LXD55 are OK for small refractor work and you can upgrade the saddleplate if you look around enough. But realisticly most people relegate the LXD55 to visual with much lighter smaller equipment. The SN10 needs an Atlas/EQ6-r or equivalent for reliable carrying.
I was gifted an LXD55 EMC by my uncle with boxes of filters and lenses but I have no idea what to do with it. I would like to use it but I like it's over my head
Would you recommend an imaging Newtonian with 600 mm focal length (6" aperture) for a beginner? Or is something like a 250 mm refractor scope better in that case?
The f4 newt would be a better "telescope" brighter and closer but you would have to learn how to colimate and needs a field flatener to correct comma at the edges (stars look like cones). The f4.9 Apo would be easier to use and more portable but feels like a camera lens to me not a telescope. You could use it for wildlife photography, the Sony cameras even have an autofocus adapter availble I hear!
OK, I think you need to consider the telescope in respect to what you intend to image and the amount of detail you want in your images. Short refractors have tiny apertures limiting overall resolving of details. At 51mm the Redcat's 250mm gives a wide field but limits overall resolution significantly. If you are doing a sky survey the 51mm will show the 'big size' stuff, M31, big nebulas, etc. However you won't be able to capture lots of resolution on the targets below 1 degree. If you like landscape space shots then it's fine. Starting out it's a size you can later use for guiding once you want to zoom closer to targets. The 6" F/4 600mm on the other hand will place more targets in your sensor with good resolving power. You can dither and stitch panels together for the larger objects and show lots more detail than the 250mm. Dust lanes in M31, more core stars resolved in globular clusters, better overall detail in targets under 1 degree all are within reach. Long term 600mm with 6" is a telescope useable for years if you want portability and some aperture not available in a refractor. And you can get away with a 30# capacity mount where an 8" really needs a 40lb for best results when guider and other gear are added on. You'll see lots of people use a 120mm refractor at F/7 instead of the Newtonian but pay significantly more for what will be quite similar performance.
If you get that, get the 6" version. The 8" optical tube is too heavy for that mount. Neither optical tube is great, but if you are just getting started it will serve until you decide what you want for long term use.
First to comment!!! I have seen/read you reviewing all kind of scopes Except Binoscopes. Do a review of a binoscope as well please. Again it is a pleasure to see you speaking.
Yes, a corrector plate weighs a whole lot more than an eyepiece coma corrector, and it impedes cooling. BUT--no corrector plate can remove the diffraction spikes caused by a Newtonian's vanes. That's why a 1000 mm f/l Mak-Newt is my go-to scope for mid-sized astrophoto targets. Down with diffraction spikes!
An SN-8 has no spider, the corrector holds the secondary in place, no spikes. At 19# it's not significantly different than an F/4 imaging newtonian. The Mak-Newt has a much thicker meniscus vs the thin corrector plate, likely why cooldowns are tougher. A 12" deep dew shield and reflectix on the tube take care of temperature variations.
I had the 10-inch back in about 2003, and absolutely hated the mount; the 10-inch severely overloaded it. But the optics were pretty good; it was best on DSOs.
Ed any machine shop can make you that part-contact any machine shop and tell them what you need and they will tell you all you need to know. They have super strong plastic to mill to make you any part.
I have the scope, and another with similar vintage focuser of the era: Ed was correct in his original evaluation, It is hardly worth looking for or replacing the part. Using the original focuser is a lot like a game of lawn darts in a gale.
I have a LXD55 SN6 OTA. It rides on a Vixen GP-DX mount. I have been using the combination for deep-sky astrophotography since 2003. No complaints even regarding the focuser, which works acceptably for deep sky. I suspect there was a lot of manufacturing variation with the focuser, so perhaps I lucked out. I will note that once collimated, the OTA holds collimation quite well.
I recently bought a LXD75 secondhand for £500 I noticed A lot of mirror slop when focusing and the second mirror was loose on the correct plate literally moved on the corrector plate about 3mm had to tighten it up and Centre it up as best as I could my model was made and manufactured in California USA
Just a couple of things. The focuser on my Meade 8" dobsonion is just trash. Replacement in the post. Also can you talk about Bird-jones style scopes. I know they are on the lower end of the market but it is what some people have. Cheers
Would be interesting, but it might be difficult to distinguish between Bird-Jones correctors and the simple Barlow lenses often used instead when buying.
I have tried a Paracorr Type 2 on my SN6 and it overcorrected. I tried at various backfocus lengths and was unable to achieve a flat field. Do you know of a coma corrector configuration that works?
@@bouiglob I use the Baader coma corrector. Have replaced the focuser with a Moonlight and Bob's Knobs to collimate the secondary mirror. The finder scope bracket and shoe has been replaced with a Synta/Vixen and the OTA is mounted on a SW EQR-6 Pro mount.
Ed, thanks for your vids, but I can't help but stare at the huge newt in the background. Can you please talk us about that one or put a blanket over it so I don't obsess over that thing anymore? Thanks :-)
Hi Ed, that was a great video on the LXD55. I just recently acquired an LXD75 8" SN and mount and as Im not familiar with these models, would you know if its a newer model of the LXD55 you show and is the focuser the same as what is on the KXD55. I will check collimation and see what I can see in the next few days , weather permitting in Cleveland...LOL
@@edting Light is information. Information can be processed manually with lenses, or its capture digitally can be corrected in software. Much like the coma error of Hubble was corrected in software.
@@edting Coma correctors are not for any telescope. They have a specific designed f-stop range. The highest I see if f/6. Which means, yes, all telescopes have aberrations, but no, not all of them are important to correct.
@@donaldkasper8346 Hubble did not suffer from coma, but from severe spherical aberration, and software correction was a quick, but not a good solution. The first good effort was the correcting optics COSTAR, later all new instruments got their own corrector.
I bought the Astro-Tech 12in f4 with the dents that you saw at NEAF. I think I paid $400. Normally it was going for $750. I went to NEAF expecting to buy the scope at the regular price. When I went to their booth my friend noticed that it was on sale. I was able to knock out the dents and have been using it for about 10 years now. I also have three of the 10in LXD 75 F4'S. Bob M.
You forgot to mention 1 important greatness about this scope there no SPIKES around bright stars, great video kudos.
13:22 Hello Ed, love your videos! I own the 6” and 10” Schmidt-Newtonian OTA and replaced both focusers with the Moonlite brand, which was the first thing I did. I had some issues with pinched optics on the 6” SN and ended up removing the three clips and set the mirror in place using hot glue. I purchased the 10” SN from someone selling it on Craigs List in Atlanta, whereas I had a friend pick it up for me and shipped it to Loveland, CO where I live. I never did use the LXD55 Mount that came with the 10” (much too small of a mount), but I keep it for tracking with my DSLR cameras. Last, but not least, I also went through all the collimation practices and ended up with two nice OTAs.
Ed, thank you for the review. I have owned a LXD55 10 inch model since they were first released. Absolutely agree about the mount that it was not even close to being able to handle the weight of the OTA. Was ready to sell it at Okie-Tex until the chief observer of the Denver Astronomical Society helped me collimate the OTA. Needless to say it became a WOW factor. He even went as far as to say it had the richest and sharpest star field he had ever seen! He convinced me to keep it (much to my wife’s chagrin)! I ditched the mount and replaced it with a Celestron CGX and updated the focuser with one from Moonlight that was specifically designed for the LXD55. It is the best telescope of the three I own for deep sky! So glad that I kept it! Keep it collimated and you will not be disappointed.
After getting the 8" Schmidt Newtonian was very impressed by the widefield views using a 13mm Nagler. This was the first time I truly saw stars sharp to the edge of the field of view. The 8" is also surprisingly good on the moon and planets despite its 3" central obstruction (15% by area). A 9mm Nagler with a 2X barlow was used. The optics are superb - views are sharp and contrasty without diffraction spikes. The unit does have an upgraded focuser which is (as Ed stated in the video) a big improvement over the stock focuser. I was so impressed by the 8 that I landed the 10", which also is superb optically. The 10 is a bit of a brute in terms of size and weight but still much more compact than say an F/5 or F/6 Newtonian of equal aperture. The central obstruction is relatively smaller in the 10" (10% by area). They are great scopes and among the best I have used. Dan B., FL
I have been watching your video’s for about a month now and subscribed today. I’m a bit of a scope junkie but recently retired and needed to temper my buying, tinkering, tuning,selling cycle. I can now satisfy my curiosity through your excellent video’s at zero cost! Thanks Ed 😊
Hello Ed, I had this telescope on a fork mount about 30 years ago. It was one of my first scopes and I loved it. Mine had a helical focuser which you screwed in and out (it was pathetic, but I knew not better). I used it to explore the universe and saw great views of the Hale Bopp comet in it. I'm kind of sorry I sold it. Thanks for a fun video.
Back in the early 80s I was drooling over a Meade DS16 on an equatorial mount. Had visions of having a backyard observatory with dome and all. But at the time I was married and living in an apartment
This was reassuring to watch as I am considering picking up an LXD75 10 inch next week with its mount for $1000 USD...
Keep the scope, replace the focuser with a good Crawford unit, I used Moonlite with motorised unit. Throw away the mount but keep the tripod. I have 2 SN-10 scopes, one modified without the diagonal and focuser. My helical focuser is mounted in the corrector plate, and with various ZWO cameras. I also use it at f/2 with a good quality reducer. At such fast focal ratio’s, collimating is critical along with a perfectly centred corrector plate. My SN-10’s are on massive mount/s and I love them. I have three different Takahashi scopes, refractor, Mellon, & 180 f/2.8 astrograph, plus others various scopes. Like experimenting and making much of my own gear/observatories etc. all part of the fun. Clear skies, stay safe, Greetings from Tasmania Australia-Southern Cross Observatory 42 South.
I've got the 10" SN. Had it from new. Never had issues with the focuser but the spotting scope basically never worked and the mount is total junk. It made good images when new but slowly over time the optics have drifted and the mirror has fogged over. I've made the attempt to collimate but really I think I only made it worse. Meade says to "NEVER" remove the corrector plate so I've been far too anxious to do so but I suspect that may be required to correct some of the issues it has... The OTA for example makes a loud clunking noise when slewing across the sky... clunking noise... coming from the corrector. Ugh.
Good video!
Love my 8", still going to this day. I installed a Moonlite focuser on it and love it paired with an Az-Eq6. The ES92 12 really shines with this scope.
Yeah, i have this scope too, i have replaced the focuser with a moonlite. Works awesome now. I use it with an explore scientific hr coma corrector.
Definitely need a better mount for AP, so i put this on my AZ-EQ6-GT.
Thank you for the great video.
You are great. I have a SN 10'' . first thing i did when i got it some 18 years ago was to buy a moonlite focuser. I love the scope and enjoyed your from bad to good review. thanks and take care.
Great review! My stars and planets definitely look like your before pictures. Going to buckle down on collimation before taking it out again. I did put a Moonlite on mine last fall and put the original one in the same place my st4 cables go, the trash!!
I have the 8” and 10”, mine are very sharp. Great review !
I've owned 2 of the LXD 10" f/4. The first one was on the mount supplied with the kit, but I did some improvements by installing a Moonlite focuser and mounting it on an Atlas mount. It was laser collimated my me, and the visual performance was excellent.
I have an 8 inch Meade LXD55 SN that was modified by a gentleman from CO into a oak Dobson mount on a short tripod. It’s almost a work of art, very stable, but fairly heavy (the tripod has a thick metal plate on top for the Dobson base). I like using it with a night vision monocular with a simple 1.25 adapter that slides into the focuser. And yes, the focuser was upgraded, although to a JMI. Nice scope in a simple setup for visual at the expense of imaging.
I have one of these. I figured the focuser needed to be replaced. I am encouraged to proceed with the project.
just love that Meade scope, thanks
I have the 10". Sharp field. Replaced focuser with orion 2 speed crayford. I love it.
My SN8 is my primary scope, and agree with your points. The only additional con I would add is that it was mild 2" corrector/flattener away from a coma free, flat field astrograph.
It's a big man who admits his mistakes. I've always liked the looks of this setup. With a new focusser and accurate collimation it looks like a great scope! I wonder how many reflectors of one type or another have been ditched because they were badly out of collimation..
Drilling not necessary with dedicated Moonlight focuser. Focuser base has many holes to allow mounting into existing holes. I too replaced the plastic focuser. The rest of the OTA is quite good. With a Baader MPCC Mark 3 coma should be well under control even at the edges of the fov.
I have the 6 inch F5 . Excellent optics sharp even on planetary at high power. Deep sky views at low magnification are well corrected to the edge.
Had the 8” many years ago. Replaced the focuses with a Moonlite and tinkered with it a lot. Very pleased with its performance but let it go for something lighter. Now I have the Vixen R200SS - brilliant optics, but also needs a focuser change, imho.
I have a Meade 622 Cometracker that I'm gearing up for AP. This info helps. Thanks!
Hi Ed,
I’m enjoying your videos, having just discovered your channel.
I recently bought a Neade SN10, and have been trying to get my head around the steps for collimating a SN.
My before images look the same as yours, so I am keen to get mine setup correctly and get an after I made.
Cheers
Peter
There should be a link in the description on how to collimate an SN. Be warned, it is not easy.
@@edting Thanks 🤞
I’ll change out the standard focuser, then work through the steps in the article you linked.
Great review Ed! I was wondering why you don't see this design produced much anymore, your explanation makes sense.
One question, how much weight would you say the corrector adds to the scope?
@@thomasnevins5203 the SN-8 is about 19lbs, for comparison an Astro-tech 8" F/4 is 18# without rings. So only 1lb difference which I suspect is a combination of the corrector/secondary vs spider/secondary differences.
One advantage of the SN8 Ed didn't mention is no spider spikes on bright stars if that has any bearing on personal imaging traits.
Hi Ed i did a review of the Celestron 8GN which is SN without a corrector plate BUT i see a skywatcher 6" SN im trying to get it to take a look at it. have you heard of this model?
Thanks Ed, I enjoyed your review.
An LXD75 8” OTA has come up for sale in my area, so I was interested in your review.
Like the 8” in your review, the stock focuser on my LXD75 10” is plastic and woeful.
I bought the 6” S-N lxd55 with UHC and I loved it. I wish I still had it.
Thanks for creating such great videos!!!!!
Ed, you should do reviews for the different common mounts out there! Give it a shot. Why? It'll keep you coming back for us here. You'll also note that the LXD 55 was arguably the WORST mount ever made! I had one so I know what I'm talking about. Great vids, Ed! Keep it up!
Nice review. Any plans to possibly review a Maksutov-Newtonian?
How about it Ed? Intes MN61 the Russian Masterpiece.
I have the Meade 6" f/5 Schmidt Newtonian which I use for deepsky photography. The focuser needs to be replaced. The Schmidt Newton system does have residual coma, as the corrector plate is not in the correct 2F distance from the main mirror. I guess it is like an f/6 conventional Newtonian. Coma is completely eliminated a Baader Coma Corrector. The only complaint for deepsky photography is that there is a considerabe light dropoff at the edges.
Thank you for your reviews Ed!
So the corrector plate corrects most of the errors but not all. Would adding a corrector to the eyepiece deal with the rest of the errors?
I purchased one of these on the LX3 fork mount in when they were first introduced ('89 I think?). My biggest issue was also the focuser. The original models had an all plastic helical focuser that was really sloppy.
I had the 10" Meade SN with the improved mount. You are right, collimation is extremely critical and one must get the correcter and the primary absolutely square to the optical axis. You cannot do this easily with standard collimation tools and techniques - you MUST rely on the ghostly appearance of internal reflections from the back of the corrector plate (look online for "Complete Collimation of the Meade Schmidt Newtonian" by Peter Kennett and me). My main complaint was the same one I have against SCTs - the corrector plate fogs over, or requires an unwieldy dew shield. I eventually sold the OTA and replaced it with a standard f/4.5 10" Newtonian with custom optics and a Paracorr, which is a more tolerant optical system (although not by much! The coma-free sweet spot is about 2mm across). It can also easily be collimated with standard tools because there is only one optically active surface instead of three. Bottom line, a good scope, but too finicky! It needs very precise mechanics to work, even more precise than an SCT.
I’ve been fighting collimation on this scope, lxd55 sn8, for months. I hadn’t heard of the ghost shadow technique. Found the guide you mentioned. Going to start from ground zero with your guide. I put a Moonlite on it in sept and will double check it’s square too. Thanks!
That's a great guide.
Ian Morison: I have one of these and used it with some real success imaging galaxies using the Micro 4/3 sensor Altair Astro 294c ProTec . Without using a coma corrector I have good stars right across the field. The collimation must be spot on - but the focuser is terrible!
They call these the poor man's APO. Just wanted to add that the corrector plate is great for imagers who dislike diffraction spikes on bright stars. Collimation is tricky. There's also just a piece of cork padding shim holding the secondary against the glass. Dew issues do occur. I've upgraded the focuser on my SN6. The most underrated scope for 200 bucks. The focuser costs more than the scope! I've owned two at the same time. One for visual, one for imaging. Not so crazy. We can all relate.
I re-collimated mine. The secondary mirror was off by about 20 degrees. As I had never touched the secondary mirror before, this must be the way it came from Meade. Prior it showed a lot of coma. I haven't had a chance to retry it but I will. My focuser seems rock solid, but if I have issues I will get the MoonLite kit which is only $64.
i have the 10" and i use it for 10 years now. and it's Good! I have the moonlight focuser.
Thanks Mr. Ting! Good information and great images. Thanks for sharing.
I know this is well after the fact but in case you still need to know telescope warehouse probably has the screw in 2 inch eyepeice adapter you need for the focuser, if not I have a couple that would probably fit. Meade seemed to use the style of garbage focuser caps on alot of the DS series scopes and mount;)
Pentax or cooperating with Pentax factories might made adaptors for LXD55 8 focuser for Pentax K and Barlow 1.5
I'm wondering if the 2" adapter for the Meade 826 will work, that way you can use a modern 1.25" adapter in it, and not worry about having to go between the adapters for different sized EP's
Won't work. The Meade Newts from the 1970s/80s used Unitron/Cave/etc parts sourced from Japan. The LXD55/75 era scopes were a mix of Chinese and Taiwanese parts and the focuser was a standard no one has seen before or since.
Hi, Ed, I watched this episode 2 weeks ago, went to eBay and won an 8" LXD 75 (with GSO 2" dual speed Crayford focuser). This is my first Newtonian-type OTA. Can anyone tell me the back focus length of this OTA? My current image train begins with an M48-M48 spacer and ends with a ZWO 294MC (back focus length is 55mm). I also need to figure out is it feasible to "thread" the GSO focuser side (it has a compression ring; no thread). The seller suggested a 2 inch Ultra Wide Prime Focus Adapter 54mm thread T-Ring for it. I think it'll work, but will a compression ring push the camera sensor off the center?
Hi, all, No need to reply. I figured it out by trial and error.
I have a 10 inch LXD55. I don't like the mount. Which mount(s) would you recommend? I built a fork type alt-az mount for it out of PVC (I don't currently plan on doing photos with it) and swapped out their viewfinder with a right angle one. I just went out to the garage and fiddled with focuser. It felt tight and I didn't detect any slop so maybe you just have a bad one. There was a lot of edge coma when I used it but it was before I knew much about collimation. Thanks for the collimation link
The LXD55 is one of the worst mounts ever made. Unfortunately, with an OTA this large, you're looking at spending some money. I wouldn't go less than an EQ6/CGEM/Atlas, or a G11 class mount.
@@edting I've watched multiple of your videos which are all good. Thanks for the reply. I also got a barely used 6 inch AR6 also on the LXD-55 mount from a friend who inherited it from his father for $500 which I thought was a bargain for a 6 inch refractor even if it is an acromatic. When I get the new mount I will just swap both scopes in and out on it. Both came with a full set of 1.25 inch Meade super plossl eyepieces both in a hard cases so I have 2 sets of them (16 total eyepieces, 1 2x-3x barlow and 1 diagonal) plus I got a 2 inch diagonal from the same friend for $5. I just ordered a 2 inch 26mm Q70 (on sale) from Orion to go with those scopes. I spread sheet the magnifications, eye relief, true field of view and exit pupil for both scopes and the 26mm seemed to be in the sweet spot. In addition, I traded a friend my Astroscan for an 115mm Orion dobsonian which was taking up space in his garage. I use the Orion the most as it is light and portable and provides surprisingly good views of the moon and planets. I have a light wooden box to set it on. I replaced the view finder on the 10 inch with one with a diagonal one as leaning over to look through a straight view finder was a pain in the back. The replaced viewfinder went on the Orion to replace the one that came with it which was junk.
I just laid it on my bed and did a collimation. I didn't do the full thing with taking off the corrector plate and the back mirror, but I am pretty sure I got it as straight as my bumbling hands can do. The secondary mirror was rotated about 20 degrees off. After I straightened that out, I collimated the primary mirror. Someday (not now) I will pull off the primary mirror and paint their collimation circle in a bright color vice a hard to see black circle. I believe it came from the factory in this way off condition because I can't see how the secondary could be rotated in shipping as it is under a cover and under the corrector plate cover. I only used it once before and it was pretty bad. Any ideas for a dew shield?
I replaced all the screws with steel ones. The ones that come with the corrector plate and secondary mirror are grossly substandard. Optics are very good...collimation is key!
I have this same telescope. Where can I get info on how to collumate or have someone do it for me. I get images like your before photos. I do collumate the scope, but never disassembled it.
This is a nice Teleskop and a nice video.
I have the 10" and am having colimitation problems. Any ideas?
There are several collimation tools for Cassegrain-derived telescopes new on the market, some of them should work well with Newtonians, too. It could be a good thing if Ed would make a video about them.
2002, I bought a LXD55 10" from an eBay warehouse supplier. Immediate disappointment! The tripod was shakily unsteady, and the drive too weak to effectively slew the scope (GoTo) or sometimes even simply track. The dovetail base on the mount was dangerously shallow -- the entire optic assembly can fall off if the user isn't careful. Meade received quite a few complaints from users (I spoke to one of their customer service reps).
I still have the dang thing in a closet. It's practically unusable. What should I do with it? What CAN I do with it? Can you recommend other GoTo tripod/mounts?
(My first scope was a Criterion RV-6 from Christmas 1975, and I used it quite a bit, including some astrophotography. So I can't say I'm a beginner.)
The 10" OTA is pretty big. For a mount, I'd get something in the Atlas/CGEM class, or, if you can swing it, a G11. You *could* make it work with a midsize mount like the AVX but it might not be totally happy. The original LXD55/75 mounts were not exactly known for their reliability.
The Meade use of proprietary dovetails and lousy big-little saddleplate screws exists even into the new LX85. Those dovetails are garbage and for a 10" I would want a Losmandy D dovetail anyways. The LXD55 are OK for small refractor work and you can upgrade the saddleplate if you look around enough. But realisticly most people relegate the LXD55 to visual with much lighter smaller equipment.
The SN10 needs an Atlas/EQ6-r or equivalent for reliable carrying.
I was gifted an LXD55 EMC by my uncle with boxes of filters and lenses but I have no idea what to do with it. I would like to use it but I like it's over my head
Contact an astronomy club, the people there should be able to help.
Would you recommend an imaging Newtonian with 600 mm focal length (6" aperture) for a beginner? Or is something like a 250 mm refractor scope better in that case?
@Brian Coley 250 mm focal length, like a William Optics Redcat.
The f4 newt would be a better "telescope" brighter and closer but you would have to learn how to colimate and needs a field flatener to correct comma at the edges (stars look like cones). The f4.9 Apo would be easier to use and more portable but feels like a camera lens to me not a telescope. You could use it for wildlife photography, the Sony cameras even have an autofocus adapter availble I hear!
OK, I think you need to consider the telescope in respect to what you intend to image and the amount of detail you want in your images.
Short refractors have tiny apertures limiting overall resolving of details. At 51mm the Redcat's 250mm gives a wide field but limits overall resolution significantly. If you are doing a sky survey the 51mm will show the 'big size' stuff, M31, big nebulas, etc. However you won't be able to capture lots of resolution on the targets below 1 degree. If you like landscape space shots then it's fine. Starting out it's a size you can later use for guiding once you want to zoom closer to targets.
The 6" F/4 600mm on the other hand will place more targets in your sensor with good resolving power. You can dither and stitch panels together for the larger objects and show lots more detail than the 250mm. Dust lanes in M31, more core stars resolved in globular clusters, better overall detail in targets under 1 degree all are within reach. Long term 600mm with 6" is a telescope useable for years if you want portability and some aperture not available in a refractor. And you can get away with a 30# capacity mount where an 8" really needs a 40lb for best results when guider and other gear are added on.
You'll see lots of people use a 120mm refractor at F/7 instead of the Newtonian but pay significantly more for what will be quite similar performance.
Mine is still up and running. 20 year scope 8"SN
Same
can you do a review of the celestron advanced vx 8" newtonian
If you get that, get the 6" version. The 8" optical tube is too heavy for that mount. Neither optical tube is great, but if you are just getting started it will serve until you decide what you want for long term use.
@@edting thank for the tip Ed. I was also considering the advanced vx 8 sct
First to comment!!! I have seen/read you reviewing all kind of scopes Except Binoscopes. Do a review of a binoscope as well please. Again it is a pleasure to see you speaking.
Lol, very interesting review. I'm looking to pick one up very cheap with a bit of luck.
Yes, a corrector plate weighs a whole lot more than an eyepiece coma corrector, and it impedes cooling. BUT--no corrector plate can remove the diffraction spikes caused by a Newtonian's vanes. That's why a 1000 mm f/l Mak-Newt is my go-to scope for mid-sized astrophoto targets. Down with diffraction spikes!
An SN-8 has no spider, the corrector holds the secondary in place, no spikes. At 19# it's not significantly different than an F/4 imaging newtonian. The Mak-Newt has a much thicker meniscus vs the thin corrector plate, likely why cooldowns are tougher. A 12" deep dew shield and reflectix on the tube take care of temperature variations.
I had the 10-inch back in about 2003, and absolutely hated the mount; the 10-inch severely overloaded it. But the optics were pretty good; it was best on DSOs.
Ed would be great on tv.👌🇺🇸
How many fine telescopes have been denigrated by owners/users just because collimation was slightly off? I would wager it's a sizeable number.
Ed any machine shop can make you that part-contact any machine shop and tell them what you need and they will tell you all you need to know. They have super strong plastic to mill to make you any part.
I have the scope, and another with similar vintage focuser of the era: Ed was correct in his original evaluation, It is hardly worth looking for or replacing the part. Using the original focuser is a lot like a game of lawn darts in a gale.
8:50 Who's big Ned?
I have a LXD55 SN6 OTA. It rides on a Vixen GP-DX mount. I have been using the combination for deep-sky astrophotography since 2003. No complaints even regarding the focuser, which works acceptably for deep sky. I suspect there was a lot of manufacturing variation with the focuser, so perhaps I lucked out. I will note that once collimated, the OTA holds collimation quite well.
I recently bought a LXD75 secondhand for £500 I noticed A lot of mirror slop when focusing and the second mirror was loose on the correct plate literally moved on the corrector plate about 3mm had to tighten it up and Centre it up as best as I could my model was made and manufactured in California USA
I have the Meade reflector in the background.
I have been in this hobby too long... When did 2003 become vintage... lol
Hahahahah
Just a couple of things. The focuser on my Meade 8" dobsonion is just trash. Replacement in the post. Also can you talk about Bird-jones style scopes. I know they are on the lower end of the market but it is what some people have.
Cheers
Would be interesting, but it might be difficult to distinguish between Bird-Jones correctors and the simple Barlow lenses often used instead when buying.
Almost bought one long ago to image with slide film. Didn't work out eventually. Sounds like I missed a lot of work, thankfully.
My experience is very similar to yours..I have the 10" SN.
You can use a coma corrector on these SNs.
I have tried a Paracorr Type 2 on my SN6 and it overcorrected. I tried at various backfocus lengths and was unable to achieve a flat field. Do you know of a coma corrector configuration that works?
@@bouiglob I use the Baader coma corrector. Have replaced the focuser with a Moonlight and Bob's Knobs to collimate the secondary mirror. The finder scope bracket and shoe has been replaced with a Synta/Vixen and the OTA is mounted on a SW EQR-6 Pro mount.
Ed, thanks for your vids, but I can't help but stare at the huge newt in the background. Can you please talk us about that one or put a blanket over it so I don't obsess over that thing anymore? Thanks :-)
Hi Ed, that was a great video on the LXD55. I just recently acquired an LXD75 8" SN and mount and as Im not familiar with these models, would you know if its a newer model of the LXD55 you show and is the focuser the same as what is on the KXD55. I will check collimation and see what I can see in the next few days , weather permitting in Cleveland...LOL
Man that looks like a lot bigger than an 8 inch
Why spend $300 on a coma corrector for a $300 telescope OTA? Why not just get an f/5 and spend the coma money on something else?
If you are going to be doing any imaging the coma corrector is mandatory.
@@edting Light is information. Information can be processed manually with lenses, or its capture digitally can be corrected in software. Much like the coma error of Hubble was corrected in software.
@@edting Coma correctors are not for any telescope. They have a specific designed f-stop range. The highest I see if f/6. Which means, yes, all telescopes have aberrations, but no, not all of them are important to correct.
@@donaldkasper8346 Hubble did not suffer from coma, but from severe spherical aberration, and software correction was a quick, but not a good solution. The first good effort was the correcting optics COSTAR, later all new instruments got their own corrector.
Nice review! "I don't need the government upset witgh me. No Sir." Bahaha :}
I have that book. It gave me a headache.
@Mark Balderrama Sorry, I knew it was over my head when I bought the book. One of many...
I always wanted a Schmidt-Newtonian. By the time I could afford one they were discontinued by Meade.
Vintage? Haha
These were the worst of Meade
The images at the end of the video show you are wrong.