Meade LX90GPS 8 Telescope

I picked up my LX90GPS about 6 months ago. To give you a sense of my experience, this is my second "real" telescope. Previously I had a Neutonian Reflector that was solid, but I was looking for something more.

Why Did I choose this Telescope?

For me I ended up getting this telescope because of the balance I was looking for between performance and price. While I was making my choice, I was also thinking about the 10" LX90, or the 8" LX200.

Beyond saving a few bucks, I went with the 8" LX90 because it had what I needed with a reasonable weight. Both the 10" LX90 and the 8" LX200 seemed to be heavier and bulkier than I knew I was going to want to deal with on a day to day basis. The big rule in backyard astronomy is that if the telescope is too much of a hassle - you won't use it.

Beyond that, the other telescopes didn't give enough extra value for me personally to justify the money and weight. The 10" has value (obviously) in the fact that it's bigger. It's basically the same telescope with more light gathering power. Given that I pretty much look at objects that are reasonably accessible I didn't feel I needed to pay the money and weight price for the extra light gathering power (You don't need 10" if you are going to look at Messier objects for example. It never hurts, but you don't NEED it). Others may disagree with me but that's where I netted out.

The LX200 is very similar to the LX90 except that the mount and motors are far more robust. That's not to say that the mount and motors on the LX90 are a problem - they are very solid. The basic difference is that the Lx200 is designed to carry around a whole pile of astro toys (cameras, bigger finder scopes, etc). The LX90 can handle a bit, but if you pile on too much you will overwhelm the mount.

I knew that I was less interested in astrophotography so paying both in terms of weight and money for the LX200 didn't make sense.

So there you go. I was someone interested in having a high quality look at planets, messier objects and perhaps other more interesting "common objects". If I wanted to look mostly at planets I probably would have gone with a Refractor Telescope (the long, thing traditional "tube" type telescopes). They are great for planets, but can be expensive and big if you want larger aparatures. If I was only interested in really dark hard to find fuzzys, I would have gone for a Dobsonian Reflector. They are basically huge tubes sitting on the ground that provide maximum apparature for minimum cost. Because of this, they are GREAT if you are dedicated to really faint objects.

But for me, I was looking for some variability in the targets and portability. The Schmidt Cassegrain design allows for a nice balance between length, aparture and performance. And as I said, I went for the LX90 itself for the reasons I have already described.

The telescope itself

The telescope itself really delivered on my expectations. It was very easy to assemble and it does a nice job of orienting itself to the heavens. This is true because the telescope has enough technology in it to know which way north is, whether it is level or not, and (because it has a GPS unit) where it is.

Bottom line is, all you need to do is assemble it (easy) turn it on, and then center two different "alignment" stars in the center of your view. The telescope will point very close to those stars, you then have to get them right in the middle of your view, and then tell the telescope that you've done it.

Once you do that, pretty much any object you would want to see (if you are a backyard Astronomer like myself) will be accessible to you on the computer. You dial it up, and the telescope will go to that object. Bottom line is finding stuff is as easy as it will ever get.

In terms of the telescope itself, I found the performace to be amazing. Now, I should mention that I did make a couple of upgrades. I upgraded the prism (the 90 degree "bend" tube that lets you look into the eyepieces at a comfortable angle). Its easy to replace (it just screws in and out) and its important to replace it. There are far better prisms on the market. With an improvement here, the light transmission is boosted further.

I also upgraded my eye-pieces. The ones I use the most are 8mm and 18mm ultra wide angle Meades (I got the 18mm for free as a promotion with my telescope). I also use a 2" Swan 40mm for a really wide field of view.

These upgrades (which will set you back another $500 or so) take what is a really nice telescope, and up the performance substantially.

With this all done I can pull up Messier objects with incredible clarity. Planets are crisp and clear. If you take the time to get yourself to a truly dark space (luckily for me, my backyard is pretty darn good as I am far from any major city or bright local lights) and you take the time to dark adjust your eyes, you will find incredible clarity. For me, the clarity is just about the best I have ever seen.

As I mentioned before, if I was looking for really really faint objects I would probably want more aparture. But then again, if I ever find myself thinking that, I would probably just pick up a Dobsonian to have for those nights. But I fully expect this will be my main telescope for years and years to come.