Jump to content


Photo

Meade Accessories w/ Scope


  • Please log in to reply
No replies to this topic

#1 RickScofield

RickScofield

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 324 posts
  • LocationBellevue,Nebraska

Posted 28 November 2018 - 11:07 AM

I am not complaining but I do believe Meade is making a bad choice for the diagnal and eyepiece they provide with most of their telescopes, 1.25 in. diagnal and series 4000 26mm 1.25 eyepiece. I can’t imagine using this combination on any of the high end ACF telescopes when Meade offers a 2.50 in. enhanced dielectric diagnal, which by the way is one of the best available and the higher quality series 5000 eyepieces and wide angle 1.25 and 2 in. eyepieces.
I would think Meade would want to impress their customers first experience with their new telescope and I don’t believe the accessories that come standard with the new telescopes do that.

This is just my opinion.
Rick

#2 MistrBadgr

MistrBadgr

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 2956 posts
  • LocationBroken Arrow, Oklahoma

Posted 28 November 2018 - 03:09 PM

I think it is the price competition aspect that causes them to put the lesser items with the scope.  I tend to agree with your idea, but the marketing people tend to go for price points.

 

Bill


Bill Steen, Sky Hunters' Haven Observatory, Broken Arrow, Oklahoma

#3 RickScofield

RickScofield

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 324 posts
  • LocationBellevue,Nebraska

Posted 28 November 2018 - 06:30 PM

Thanks Bill,
I suspect your correct about the motive however perception is worth a lot, I wonder if they thought about a new customer first experience using a Meade telescope and setup using the diagnal and eyepiece provided, the image that they are going to observe is going to far less than what it could be and there may be some disappointment with their purchase.
I know I am preaching to the choir......

Thank you,
Rick

#4 Ilyass

Ilyass

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • LocationCasablanca Morocco

Posted 02 December 2018 - 01:06 PM

Hi,
I' m newbie in astronomy, I purchased Polaris 130 a couple months ago, and I was able to see Saturn, the Pleiades as well as the moon, using the eyepieces provided with the scope, the images was very good especially for Saturn and the moon, although the sighting was in the city night.
But for Mars the images was very fuzzy with the three eyepieces provided.
It is normal to have fuzzy images with Mars? Should I have to improve my eyepieces to get better images? Do you have any feedbacks on the 4000 series eyepieces?
I read in some forums that the lightbridge mini 130 provides better images then the Polaris 130, do you have any feedbacks on lightbridge mini 130 in terms of image quality?

Thank you very much.

#5 RickScofield

RickScofield

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 324 posts
  • LocationBellevue,Nebraska

Posted 03 December 2018 - 06:07 AM

Hello,
I am sorry but I can’t speak to your question regarding Mars and your scope, I am not familiar with the Meade Polaris however I believe you would see an improvement in image quality by using a series 5000 eyepiece. Meade sells a very nice set of 6 eyepieces that come in their own case, This is the HD-60 set that I am referring to the optics are an improvement over the series 4000 and the fov is 60 degrees with a 17mm eye relief which is very comfortable for viewing. The sizes included in this set are 4.5mm, 6.5mm, 9mm, 12mm, 18mm, 25mm. I have this set myself and they are very good.You may also purchase these individualy from Meade or a reseller as well.

Good luck and enjoy your telescope.

RickScofield

#6 MistrBadgr

MistrBadgr

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 2956 posts
  • LocationBroken Arrow, Oklahoma

Posted 03 December 2018 - 09:59 AM

Hi Ilyass,

 

I have had trouble with Mars, myself, as a general statement.  It has to be in a really good position.  With reflectors such as the Polaris 130, I have had trouble with glare making it just as you describe, a red blob.  Using entry level scopes, I found a long refractor worked the best.  Using an orange filter on a 70mm f/10 scope allowed the darker mottling in places show up.  A light blue filter helped make polar ice caps show up better.

 

The Series 4000 Plossl eyepieces are better than the MA eyepieces that come with your scope.  The current version of the 4000 Plossl seems to be very sharp toward the middle and draws your eye there.  I have not tried them on Mars, but have had good results with them on the moon in terms of both middle sharpness and contrast.  The do, however, have some field curvature (a problem with all four element Plossl eyepieces) which makes the outer part of the image a bit out of focus when the middle is sharp.  As Rick suggests, I have found the Series 5000 HD 60 eyepieces to be the best planetary eyepieces that Meade offers and are the eyepieces I go to the most in difficult situations.  I am currently using my set of that series for some comparisons between my Polaris 130 and a Polaris 127.  Both scopes have been modified to eliminate all the reflections that I can to diminish the effects of light pollution as much as possible.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Bill Steen

 

The best view I have had of Mars was on the last close pass, a couple years ago, using my LX 70 six inch Maksutov Cassigrain scope (not cheap) with the HD 60 eyepieces.  With the 12mm, which gave me 150x, I was able to make out all but one of the major volcanoes as low contrast circles.

 

With the Polaris 130, I suspect that Mars will be a difficult object to see much.  With significant modification to reduce reflections, using flocking, the image can be improved.  However, contrast is the challenge with Mars and I believe a long refractor, such as the Polaris 90 would do better than the Polaris 130.  I have the Eclipse version of the Lightbridge Mini 114.  I had to spray paint the inside of the yellow end ring with flat black paint on the open end to get rid of enough yellow reflections to make it useful for planets.  Once that was done, it was very sharp, but still had relatively low contrast on planets.  I have not used the Lightbrfidge Mini 130, but judging by my experience with the 114, I suspect it may  be the best of the entry level reflector scopes.


Bill Steen, Sky Hunters' Haven Observatory, Broken Arrow, Oklahoma

#7 Ilyass

Ilyass

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • LocationCasablanca Morocco

Posted 03 December 2018 - 10:50 AM

Hi,

Thanks guys for your clear replies.
I think I will consider to buy new set of eyepieces to improve the quality of images the scope provides.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users