Last updated: 25 May 2003
Subject: ETX tripod Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 18:42:10 From: C.Fry@BTinternet.com (Chris Fry) Mike, great web-site - I dip in every week or so since getting my ETX105EC I purchased my ETX and autostar last November, and waited until Februray to get the standard tripod. Imagine my irritation on discivering that I could have purchased the whole package for the price I paid for the ETX alone by March!! Anyway, at least I have had the use of the ETX during the depths of Winter, and I have to say, I have found it extremely easy to use once I got the hang of finding the home position. Nearly everyone I have given the chance to use the telescope has been impressed. Just to see Saturn and its rings, and Jupiter with its bands and moons really seems to thrill. In fact I was amazed to see the 4 Galilean moons all nicely in line the first time I found Jupiter, and thought they must be some fluke stars! I took the ETX in to work a couple of weeks ago, having made a solar filter with Baader film and some cardboard packaging. I set up early on 7th May so that my work collegues could all get a look at the mercury transit as they filtered in to work. Reactions varied from "taking an interest" to "taking the p*ss", with comments such as "wow-thats amazing" to "is that it?". Well it takes all sorts. One guy has a 6-inch Newtonian reflector, but was really impessed with the ETX. We are planning to get together to do a side-by-side comparison sometime. One bugbear, the tripod is really annoying to set up. I can't count the number of times I have dropped the washers and spring whilst trying to erect the damn thing. I have taken to keeping it assembled as much of the time as possible, with the legs collapsed down, so as to avoid the hassle of re-assembly. I am sure I can come up with a better fastening system given a bit of time - but I am surprised an instrument manaufacturer has devised such a lousy method of assembly. Still I suppose it is sturdy enough once erected. Please keep the ETX site going - its an oasis!! Chris Fry (very) Amateur Astronomer UK
Subject: Meade 126 Barlow or Celestron Ultima Barlow for Meade ETX 105 Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 01:54:16 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (christopher shaw) I have a Meade ETX 105 scope and am wondering whether I can use the Celestron Ultima Barlow on it. My dealer says its better to use the Meade #126 Barlow as it will be an exact fit. What do you think? The Celestron Ultima Barlow with its three-element apochromatic design sounds like a better barlow to me. My only concern is the fit and suitability with my ETX 105. Thanks for your advice, ChrisMike here: Some "non-shorty" style Barlow Lens tubes are too long to reach a focus with some models of the ETX. I don't have an the Ultima so can't speak to it specifically; I'll post your inquiry on the next Site update.
Subject: ETX 105 Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2003 02:30:55 From: email@example.com (JON MOORE) Great website! I am looking to buy a telescope and I am a complete beginner. I am interested in the ETX 105, and am keen to take photos through it. What kind of detail can I expect from such a telescope? I am having trouble finding examples on the web. Is there any other scopes you would recommend? Jon MooreMike here: Check the User Observations page. Also, look at the various astrophotography galleries but keep in mind that photos and the eye don't produce the same results, in details or color. The ETX-105EC makes a nice compromise in the portability of the ETX-90EC and the aperture/focal length of the ETX-125EC.
Subject: Nice ETX-105 UHTC Sent: Friday, May 16, 2003 14:34:44 From: Javier.Navarro@cat.com (Navarro, Javier) I purchased an ETX-105 (UHTC) three months ago and I just want to share just good things about it. 1) The lens system and the GO-TO works just fine!!. The key is the align. Last night, my family and I enjoyed the moon eclipse, and watching Jupiter, M44, Iota Cancri (Cancer), Arcturus, Spica, Merak, etc. 2) I highly recommend the "2sky" software for Palm OS devices (http://www.in2space.com/). You get an "exact" representation of the sky, anytime, anywhere. You can also use the calendar to see days, months or years ahead (or back), and get a view of the sky. 3) If portability is an issue, I highly recommend this model instead of the 125. And of course Mike, this is just an oustanding site, congratulations!! Javier Mexico
Subject: ETX-105 Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 13:59:59 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Rodney Christensen) My name is Rodney Christensen and I would like some info please, if you would be so kind. I would like to purchase a telescope and I have read your reviews and appreciate them. would a ETX 105 with the coated optics be a good choice? I also take bird pic's 50 yards minimum. Have 2 kids who like the stars and planets like me. Live in Florida and have a great sky above. And eastern bluebirds that wont get close enough to get a pic. any comments thanks, RodneyMike here: Yes, the ETX-105 makes a fine telescope. Nice compromise of the portability of the ETX-90 with almost the aperture of the ETX-125. The larger telescope will yield brighter views of objects with more details than the -105 but still could meet your needs.
Subject: re: ETX105 question about obstruction Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 22:50:08 From: email@example.com (Richard Seymour) To: Rendelius@rpgdot.com (Warning: i am NOT an optics expert.. but this is one which got drubbed into my head when i got it wrong...) You wrote: > My fear is that if it is indeed 40% of the optical surface, > that would reduce contrast enourmously. There are -two- numbers you have to consider: the "40%" which is an AREA measure, and the actual DIAMETER of the Central Obstruction (CO). It is the DIAMETER which affects CONTRAST. And it's a simple relationship: if you subtract the CO's diameter from the corrector plate's diameter, you end up with an "effective diameter" .. and that's what you compare for CONTRAST questions. So a five in corrector, with a 2 inch CO has about the same contrast as a 3 inch clear-aperture telescope. The 40% AREA number merely (mostly) affects BRIGHTNESS. So if your concern is CONTRAST, then compare effective diameters. If your concern is BRIGHTNESS, compare remaining areas. But don't use the 40% as a contrast criterion. have fun --dick
Subject: ETX105 question about obstruction Sent: Monday, May 12, 2003 06:37:03 From: Rendelius@rpgdot.com first of all thanks for the very informative site. I have recently purchased a ETX70AT as supplement to my 8" SC. I needed a portable, quick scope for those days when carrying around a larger telescope isn't an option. For the money, the ETX70 AT does a great job, and I would recommend it without hesitation as a second scope. However, you may understand that, I am light hungry .-). So I will sacrifice some portability to a little more diameter. I am now thining about the ETX105. I haven't owned a Mak before, but the 105, though being f/13, could be my all purpose lightweight telescope, if... ....well. if I wouldn't have some reservations about the central obstruction. Not so much about the secondary mirror, but abouth the baffles/light tube inside. I have heard that the REAL obstruction is something close to 40% in these Maks - is that true? Since I can't loook into one myself here, I'd be glad if you could answer my question. And a second one: I have heard that the ETX105 is MUCH less noisy than the 90 or 70. True? Thanks for your time. Best regards, Rendelius RPGDot.comMike here: The central obstruction is a fact of life with this design, just like it is with the 8"SC. Yes, some people think it is overly large but those same people haven't actually built one with a smaller CO. And yes, the drive is quieter.
Thanks for your quick reply. How much is the central obstruction in reality, counting in the baffles and tube? My fear is that if it is indeed 40% of the optical surface, that would reduce contrast enourmously. The SC tube is a straight design, so the advertised 16% obstruction with a C8 IS 16%. But the Mak? Regards, RendeliusMike here: See the Meade catalog page for their specs: http://www.meade.com.
Subject: Problem with etx105 Sent: Friday, May 9, 2003 23:20:07 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Michael Gonzaga) I just recived my new 105. Everything looked good when I recieved it. First light went well I Calibrated and trained the drives and did a simple alignment. When it went toward arcturus it went past about 15 degrees or so so I centered it and hit enter. It then went to capella an was short also about 15 degrees. I then centered it and hit enter and it said algnment succesful. I then went to the moon and it missed it short. I then slewed it to the moon and it tracked it well. after viwing the moon I did a goto to jupitor and it was in the view of the eyepiece. First night out seemed ok I was probably off of north. Second night out same thing happened off during easy align then did goto to moon and was in viewfinder , then went ot jupitor and was in viewfinder I then did a goto to saturn and again it was in the viewfinder. From here though is where my problems begin as I was on saturn it was not holding in viewfinder so I kept slewing it every 5 min. or so I then did a goto back to the moon and the OTA slewwed until it hit its vertical stop and the autostar gave me a MUF. I then turned it off and on again and now it will say that the motor is under construction on the top line while scrolling thruogh the sun warning on the lower line. If you push the 5 key or any key it does a test motor but only the horiz. motor moves. After it goes through all of the sun warnings it comes to the message Proc. Trap 2 and the motor turns the unit horizontally untill it stops turning and yet there still seems to be some thing running, from here nothing else will function. Please let me know what you might think has happened and is it something I can fix or will the unit need to be turned in for warranty Best regards, Michael GonzagaMike here: First off, the initial 15 degree pointing errors sounds like a time error (1 hour = 15 degrees). Check the Daylight Savings setting. Also check your site location. One other possibility is if you used a magnetic compass to determine "North". True North is not Magnetic North and the difference, depending upon location, can be upwards of 20 degrees. As to the MUFs, have you tried to RESET? When you power on, press the MODE key several times until you get to the SETUP menu, then scroll to RESET and press ENTER. That might clear the problem. If it does, be certain to CALIBRATE and TRAIN again.
Check the Feedback Archives for previous editions of the User Feedback pages.
Return to the top of this page.
Go to the ETX Home Page.