[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
[APML]: ST-4 v. 201xt Saga
The Astro-Photography Mailing List
------------------------------------
Wil Milan wrote:
> The Astro-Photography Mailing List
> ------------------------------------
>
> Robert Hoyle wrote:
> >
> > And for some people it's just hard not to like a lot of things about these little
> > units that cost less than $400, fit easily in the palm of your hand, weigh less than
> > a reticle eyepiece, require no external control box, connector cords, or software,
> > and -- if one can get past the gremlins of inadequate polar alignment, wind, film
> > buckling, etc. -- provide perfectly round little star images, seemingly for as long
> > as you want to auto-guide.
>
> Most of those things are true of any autoguider.
Really? I was under the impression that the 201xt was the lightest weight unit on the
market (maybe including "cord wt./drag")? -- which may be an important factor, especially
on old 1994 vintage OAG systems like mine that could certainly be a little more "robust",
with less flex (and are, now with Taurus' new T-III Tracker).
And admittedly maybe the external control panel, cable, etc. are not that big of factors
(especially since they do give a lot more flexibility for the ST-4 to display corrections,
guide-star tracking, etc.). But to me, it's just one more thing to worry about. Me and
Waldo -- "simplify, simplify."
> And the biggest
> difference -- the differenc in price, which is what initially
> swayed me to go with the 201xt over an ST-4 -- is much less of a
> factor now that ST-4s are commonly available for $450 - $475.
> Adding in the often-required $100 relay interface (built into the
> ST-4 but an option for the 201xt) the difference in price becomes
> very small. Considering the multiple and very significant
> functional advantages of the ST-4, if I were shopping autoguiders
> today that would make the ST-4 a slam dunk. (I hope our
> non-American friends will forgive the colloquial Americanism
> :-).)
>
Wil, is that ST-4 price for a new unit? When I was looking at these back in '96(?) they
were around $900 new. And to hook this up to my "boat anchor" LX3 was another $100, or
so. As I recall, the total was around $1000. Just not feasible for my measly
"semi-retirement" income.
If this $500 range you're talking about on the ST-4 is indeed for a new unit today, then
maybe we already have all benefited by Meade's foray into the field -- maybe that's what
brought the ST-4 price down from around $900 to around $500? Excesses of the Free Market
and all that -- but it has its advantages. ;-)
> > Maybe this is somewhat of a non-sequitur, but my main point in all this is that I
> > think we as film astrophotographers should be more supportive of having Meade enter
> > into this field of auto-guiding, that up until now has had only one player -- SBIG --
> > and support their efforts *where we can*. The Meade auto-guiders have a place,
> > though they may not be for everyone. And with a little encouragement they might even
> > become better.
>
> I agree with that, that competitors should be encouraged. But an
> important component of that is pointing out that Meade has fallen
> very short of SBIG's standard in autoguiders, and that to be up
> to par they really need to try again.
>
I just gotta think they are trying -- both on product design and service.
For instance, on service, my dealings with them have been nothing but favorable -- on
*all*
my Meade equipment. For example, when I first got my 201xt, it had some small cosmetic
"imperfections." I called Meade and said that this just didn't fit my pictures of the
kind
of quality product I expected from them. I was nice about it, though. The guy (John
Piper?) sent me an entirely new unit -- in the box -- within 5 days. [What a fortuitous
set of circumstance for me. With this new unit came another AG-to-Drive Base connector
cord. And after cursing and hacking most of two nights about why the damned auto-guider
thing wouldn't work, I tried the new cord. Bingo. Has worked perfectly ever since.]
Could tell you at least a half-dozen other stories like this on my LX3's. Got two of
them;
paid $300 and $400 respectively (complete: tripods, wedges, everything) as demonstrators
from the Nature Co. in Berkeley, Ca. (their National "Outlet" Store) where I lived while I
was going to law school. You can imagine the shape they were in. But Meade covered
virtually *all* the problems I had *under warranty* -- because they were not used items.
Not bad.
These Meade guys are human too -- trying to make a go of it in a tuff world. You yell at
them; they yell at you. Treat 'em with a little "reasonableness" -- maybe things would be
different? Maybe.
> They also need to star telling the truth, I think. They claim
> that the 201xt can guide on 12th magnitude stars, which is wild
> fantasy on any typical scope. I think that nothing bothers me
> more about Meade's advertising than the wildly overstated
> performance claims (such as the claim that the ETX is a match for
> an Questar ever made -- I notice they finally stopped printing
> that in the ads).
>
Couldn't agree more. One of the "Excesses of the Free Market" I referred to above. Spent
20 years in the corporate business world dealing with some fairly high level people. It
is
*not* a very honest business world. Your competitor is beating the s--- out of you; to
survive you start fibbing a little about your product. The competitor follows suit.
Cycle-on.
> > BTW, maybe it is a laughing matter, but it is also an interesting point about Jason
> > Ware. Wonder if he's still using an SBIG auto-guider (or do you even need one for
> > his new toy, the Meade Schmidt-Camera)?
>
> You still need an autoguider for that, and fact probably more so.
> Scopes capable of very high resolution (Schmidt cameras,
> hyperbolic astrographs, etc.) require more accurate guiding to
> achieve optimum performance, and there's no denying that a good
> autoguider can guide better than a human under almost all
> circumstances. I'd bet nickels to donuts that Jason Ware does
> indeed use an autoguider with the Schmidt camera.
>
Yeah, but is it a *SBIG* auto-guider? :-))
Wil, it has been good "sparring" w/you. You're a really bright, articulate guy, and I
enjoy it. Can we call it quits here? You're right. If I had the money I'd buy an ST-4.
In fact I'm looking for a good used one now for my other LX3 -- and a 30" f/4.8
equatorially mounted Newtonian that I do photography on. Got any leads?
Rx