Meade versus Celestron?

I know that is a familiar "discussion" on various astronomy forums but I'd like an Irish view on this for a change...

I'm planning to eventually get a Schmitt-Cass 8 or 10 inch OTA to mount on an EQ mount.

Apart from a slight difference in prices, is there any really difference between the two leading brands? What are the pros and cons of the Celestrons and Meades?

Oh boy, this is like the Canon/Nikon debate, there will be some who will swear by Meade and another group who use nothing but Celestron.

To the best of my knowledge, both Meade and Celestron are manufactured in the same Chinese factory, and therefore should be subject to the same quality controls.

As to the pros and cons, are there any? When you say an EQ mount, are you talking about a fork mount or the German EQ mount? Both companies manufacture both. They both offer features such as enhanced mirror coatings and other bells and whistles.

The best advice I can give is have a go at both, if you can, you may find that one or other brand appeals to you, I have seen through both Meade and Celestron SCTs and both looked pretty good to me.

The bottom line is, I guess, there is no right answer, the OTA or either company should perform the same, the performance of the mount depends on how much you are prepared to pay, the mount is also crucial if you are planning astrophotography, the sturdier the mount the better the performance.

Confusing, isn't it?

Paul

Yes Paul, I know I'm opening a can of worms with this one!

Anyway, the main reason I ask is that there is definitely a price difference between the two brands (several hundred euros for the OTAs if I'm not mistaken) with the Celestrons the cheaper option. Just curious to know why if they basically do the same thing?

My plan is to get an EQ6 and buy a SCT separately to put on it. I read that the Meade fork isn't great - but then again I could be wrong?

Dominic

An EQ6 should be able to hold a 10" SCT no problem, the load capacity is approximately 18kgs.

As I said, the OTAs themselves are basically the same, I had a couple of SCTs in my time, both Meade BTW, that is not an endorsement for Meade, and one thing I, personally, don't like about SCTs is the focusser, I find the image shift annoying because the focusser shifts the mirror to achieve focus, but, as I say, that's a personal thing.

Paul

Well, at the moment I have an 8 inch Dob but am eyeing a short tube scope like a SCT. Something that looks good as well as being easy to store/transport etc.

Would you recommend them as a good "all-rounder" telescope for visual and maybe starting out on astro-photography or are there other options such as the SCT, NM or RC?

One of the main attractions is the short tube - something that is also on the Ritchey Chretien scope.

Also, what's an f10 like to use?

Dominic

Hi,
I own a 12" meade sct and I'm trying to avoid sounding like
"its a fab scope just cos I own one",
Ive also used other scts, both meade and celestron and Ive seen both have image shift in their focusers and some that are unable to hold collimation of its secondary mirror. It's more of a "was the scope assembled on a friday evening"

The newer meades are not quiet scts optic wise these days, they have the acf optics while celestron have the HD optics, I really dont know if there is much between them I do remember hearing that the meade ota's are a little heavier.

TBH, until recently this was more a question about the mount, if you want a fork mount , then its a meade. If you want an eq mount then its a celestron. but now meade have the new LX850 self guiding eq mount, then again the celestron has a proven reliable eq mount already out there.

so, so many options.