Re: [APML]: Magazine reviews (was: Anyone Autoguiding a G-11 with a Pictor XT?

[RMOLLISE@aol.com]

The Astro-Photography Mailing List
------------------------------------

In a message dated 98-07-14 09:49:27 EDT, wmilan@airdigital.com writes:

<< 
 There's another thing to consider about major product reviews in
 magazines such as S&T. I just re-read the review of the Meade
 LX200 that ran recently in S&T. That's a $3000 product, which is
 a big chunk of change for any specialty magazine. Did you ever
 wonder where that telescope came from? S&T didn't say so, but
 it's almost a dead-bang certainty that telescope was supplied by
 Meade specifically for this test review. And when the head of
 marketing at Meade agreed to send S&T an LX200 to review, do you
 think he sent them just any scope off the assembly line, or did
 he make sure they got the finest sample they could turn out? You
 can bet that test unit was selected and inspected with far more
 care than the typical production scope, and is therefore probably
 not representative of what the average LX200 buyer will get.  >>

Hi Wil:

Well, I have to agree that the magazines' (Astronomy as well as S&T) have not
been known, in recent times for hardhitting product reviews (with some of
Astronomy's recent 'reviews' being little more than lists of a product's
features), and this seems to have gotten worse over the last 5 years or so.
BUT, while I don't have the LX-200 issue of Sky and 'Scope at hand,
HISTORICALLY S&T has been pretty good about 'anonymously' buying production
scopes. 

Peace,
Rod Mollise
Mobile Astronomical Society
http://members.aol.com/RMOLLISE/index.html
(The Home of _From City Lights to Deep Space_:
The Urban Observer's Guide to the Deep Sky)