I started off by thinking that I'd get a LX200, however I'm now thinking
that I might get a TAL200K, HEQ5 and Skyscan 2000.


Donal, did a bit of homework for you. I think the Tal's secondary obstruction
is a deal breaker. Also, without a correcter plate, it requires spidervanes to
support which will further reduce contrast. I don't like the focuser either,
but this is based only on what I've read. Interesting scope and good optics,
but I'd go with a Celestron 1st. Read the reviews of the 9.25 and Tal.

http://www.cloudynights.com/compound.htm

Everything with a grain of salt. No two scopes perform the same.

RB

"Bobsprit" wrote in message
...
I started off by thinking that I'd get a LX200, however I'm now thinking
that I might get a TAL200K, HEQ5 and Skyscan 2000.


Donal, did a bit of homework for you. I think the Tal's secondary
obstruction
is a deal breaker. Also, without a correcter plate, it requires
spidervanes to
support which will further reduce contrast. I don't like the focuser
either,
but this is based only on what I've read. Interesting scope and good
optics,
but I'd go with a Celestron 1st. Read the reviews of the 9.25 and Tal.

http://www.cloudynights.com/compound.htm

Everything with a grain of salt. No two scopes perform the same.

I've noticed that the obstruction is bigger in the Tal than the Meade.
However, I've also read that the contrast is inherently better in the Tal
design.

I haven't looked very closely at the Celestron range, but the 9.25 keeps
popping its head up. If it weighs less than the Tal, then I will seriously
consider it. I don't want to buy something that is too heavy to carry from
the garage to the garden.


Regards


Donal
--

I've noticed that the obstruction is bigger in the Tal than the Meade.
However, I've also read that the contrast is inherently better in the Tal
design.

In one review of the Tal, the large obstruction is blamed for poor contrast.
The Meade's CO is already bigger than the Celestron's and effective light grasp
on the Celestron is also higher.
I doubt you could go terribly wrong with any of these scopes.
If you haven't read this, check it out.
http://www.cloudynights.com/reviews2/tal200k2.htm
Meanwhile you can also find a review that says the Tal outperforms the 9.25. A
grain of salt as always and few people will say they picked the wrong scope.

RB