Sunday, May 11, 2014
Eight and a Half Years after the Honeymoon
“Wait just one cotton-picking minute, Unk. I know you and
Miss Dorothy have been married for dang near twenty years.” Right you are Skeezix. My honeymoon with my lovely
bride is not the subject this morning. What I am talking about is what I
recounted in this post many a moon back,
muchachos. A honeymoon is, among other things, traditionally “a period of
adjustment,” and I dern sure went through that with my ETX125, Charity Hope Valentine.
I see the blank and puzzled expression on your mug, Johnny
B. Novice. And that makes me feel a little sad. I still have a hard time
believing the legendary and beloved ETX is no more, and that some newbies have
never even heard of it. OK, OK, I’ll tell you what an ETX was; it was the Maksutov Cassegrain telescope (MCT) that made Maks
popular and affordable for us proles in amateur astronomy.
Not that MCTs hadn’t been sold to amateurs for at least 40
years before the coming of the Meade ETX; there’d been the legendary Questars
and Quantums and others. The amateurs who owned ‘em liked ‘em. They packed long
focal length (usually their focal ratios came in at around f/15) into short
tubes and had a reputation for high optical quality. That quality came at a
price, however, and before the ETX few of us could afford the Mak species of
quality.
The mid 1990s changed everything. Not only was Meade selling
a 7-inch Mak in LX200 Classic garb, there was a flood of Russian MCTs from
Intes, Intes Micro, Lomo and others. The prices were not quite as low as what
you’d pay for a Schmidt Cassegrain of similar aperture, but they were far
cheaper than what we’d been accustomed to. Quite a few amateur astronomers
began to find out they’d been right—and wrong—about Maks.
“I don’t get it, Unk. How is an MCT different from an SCT?
They look the same.” And they are similar
at heart. The two major differences are the scopes' main mirrors’ speeds—their
f-ratios—and the designs of the corrector plates. The primary in an MCT is
almost invariably slower than an SCT primary. Instead of f/2 or thereabouts,
most Maks come in at f/3 or higher. That results in longer tubes, but also
flatter fields.
If you ain’t sure whether you are looking at an MCT or an
SCT, take a gander at the front of the tube. An SCT uses a thin-lens corrector with
a complex curve. It looks like a flat piece of winder glass. An MCT’s corrector
couldn’t be more different. It is thick and it is deep. It is, in fact,
sometimes called a “salad bowl corrector.” Its advantage? It is easier to make
well than an SCT’s lens and can potentially do a better job than an SCT’s
corrector at removing—correcting for—the primary mirror’s spherical aberration.
Like SCTs, MCTs use primaries that are spheres (or close to it), and the
corrector is essential.
Disadvantages of the design? There are some, but probably not the ones you think. The biggest
problem is making the thick corrector requires a right expensive piece of
glass. That’s not fatal at smaller apertures, but as you get over 6 – 7-inches,
it causes the price of an MCT to skyrocket.
Otherwise? I know what you’ve been told, “The thick
corrector makes Maks impossible to cool down. They never achieve thermal
equilibrium and, so, never live up to their potential.” I used to think that
till I was schooled by a maestro, Roland Christen. Seems as it is not the
corrector, but the overall design of the tube that makes some MCTs hard to cool-down. For example, Meade’s 7-inch had a hard
time adjusting to outdoor temperatures because of the big, heavy, heat-absorbing
weight in the rear cell used to make its long tube balance on an LX200 fork.
“That’s cool and all, Unk, but everybody knows the real problem with MCTs. They are
slow, high magnification scopes and are only good on the Solar System, not the
deep sky.” Now, that couldn’t be more
wrong. Contrary to what some Newbies think, an f/15 scope delivers an image
every bit as bright as an f/5 telescope when
they are used at the same magnification. You just need a longer focal
length eyepiece in a Mak to achieve the same power as the fast scope.
More importantly, I reckon, folks forget most of the objects
we look at are actually on the small side. I’ll see your handful of M31s and
NGC 7000s and raise you a passel of small and medium sized galaxies, clusters,
and nebulae. One of the strengths of the MCT is its potential for delivering high
contrast, and that can make it not just usable on the deep sky, but a deep sky
powerhouse.
Where was we? Oh, yeah… Meade and the Russkies had brought
the Mak to the attention of Joe and Jane amateur, but what pushed the design
over the top was Everybody’s Telescope,
the ETX90, a cute little Questar “clone,” that hit the streets in ’96. It
looked a lot like the telescope, the Questar 3.5, that amateurs of my
generation salivated over but could never afford. The Meade ETX90 wasn’t quite as pretty as the Questar. Well, it
wasn’t nearly as pretty, honestly,
but it damned sure was more affordable at a price of 500 bucks.
While most of us were mightily impressed by the price of Meade’s
“Questar” and by the company’s big full-color ads for the little thing, we were
also skeptical the company could deliver anything close to the Q3.5 for less
than 1/6th the price. Unk was as wary as anybody else, but he sure got fired up
when one of his mates bought a 90. Purty soon, we weren't just planning to test
the little feller, but to do a shootout
between the ETX and another Possum Swamp Astronomical Society member’s Questar
3.5.
That showdown got Unk in a heap of trouble with Questar
fans. You see, I told the truth about it.
Try as we might, we couldn’t see a lick of difference between the images in the
Questar 3.5 and those in the ETX. On any object we tried, they were similarly
excellent within the bounds of what’s possible for a 3.5-inch telescope. The
mounts were another story. While the Q’s little fork is not perfect, not
hardly, it was light-years ahead of Meade’s all-plastic-all-the-time build
quality. That observation did not redeem me in the minds of the Questar
fanatics, however; I had committed heresy.
Meade did more than just challenge the Questar—for optical
prowess, anyway. They started a small revolution. Purty soon, it seemed like
everybody owned an ETX, and a cottage industry of aftermarket accessories
sprang up to support the scope. There were Yahoogroups and websites aplenty,
too, including a legendary one, (Mike) Weasner’s Mighty ETX Site, which went on the
air not long after the 90 came out and became the goto place for all things ETX.
Meade was aware they had a hit on their hands and were not
slow to capitalize on it. They soon upgraded the original 90, adding goto with
the Autostar hand control, which made the LX200’s controller suddenly look old.
And… They brought out more ETXes, the ETX105, a 4-inch, and the ETX 125, a
five-inch. “And everybody lived happily ever after,” right? Sorta. The ETX was
not problem free, with most of the telescope’s difficulties being traceable to
all that plastic and to computer bugs. Meade worked hard to get the ETX working
right, however, while keeping the price down.
The ETX just rolled on year after year, for well over a
decade, till Meade’s fortunes began to decline in the years after the turn of
the century. At first, it looked like the ETX would be the winner during
Meade’s transition period. ETX production moved to China and, despite a few initial
hiccups, the telescope was soon arguably better than it had been in the
beginning. The “Chinese” ETX125PE, for example, unlike earlier models, has a metal
fork (plastic covered). Also, after years of expanding the Autostar’s features
and squashing its bugs, there was little that needed improving there.
Then, last year, even before Meade went belly-up and was
bought by the Chinese firm Ningbo Sunny,
the hammer fell on my favorite Meade telescopes. The 105 had been gone for a
while—it was always the odd man out in the lineup—and that was understandable,
I reckon. What wasn’t so understandable was that the still popular 90 and the
125 were discontinued as well. Oh, there were still ETXes, but they were not real ETXes. For a while, Meade
classified its new LightSwitch (LS) telescopes as “ETXes,” but they were SCTs, had
little in common with the ETX, and soon became a separate product line.
Today, what is left is a beginner-centric pair telescopes,
the ETX80 and the (new) ETX90. The ETX80 is an achromatic refractor on a mount
like the one Meade used for years on its el cheapo refractor-design beginner
“ETXes,” the ETX60 and ETX70. The 80s may (or may not) be nice starter scopes,
but they have little in common with the ETXes we knew and loved; they are most
assuredly not “everybody’s telescope.”
When I heard the ETX90 was going to be kept on, I initially
rejoiced. Until I got a look at it in Meade’s magazine ads and read Gary
Seronik’s review of the scope in the June 2013 Sky & Telescope. His verdict was that while the mount seemed more
or less on a par with the old ETX
mounts, albeit with less consistent goto accuracy, the optics were not.
The example he tested had “soft,” undercorrected optics.
Poor optics in an ETX was a surprise, since one thing the ETX, and especially
the ETX 90, always had going for it was outstanding optical quality. That may
not matter, anyway. The days of the last of the ETX tribe may be numbered, too.
It’s not clear in which direction the new owners intend to
take Meade, but both of these latter day ETXes are often back-ordered, and much
of what Meade was showing at the 2014 NEAF astronomy gear extravaganza consisted
of, I understand, small refractors and Newtonian reflectors like the ones its new
parent, Ningbo Sunny, sells.
Anyhoo, there’s a distinct feel of things winding down in
the ETX Universe, and I can’t help feeling blue about it. The premier ETX
Yahoogroup once boasted message traffic of a dozen—or more—posts every fracking
day. Now, if you see one post a month it is doing good. That was also the case with the Mighty ETX Site. While, it is still being updated, Mike only does that occasionally.
Of course, the ETX story is not over for your old Uncle Rod.
His ETX125PE, Miss Charity Hope Valentine, is still going strong almost nine
years after I carried her over the threshold of Chaos Manor South. I still love
her and we are still having fun together. Which is kinda ironic, since I never
planned to buy an ETX125…
Set the WABAC Machine for the fall of 2005. Old Unk, not
quite so old then, was on the horns of a dadgum dilemma. While I wasn’t as old
as I am now, I was every bit as lazy. And the weather that year had been dern
near as bad as it’s been this year. I had got to the point where I was reluctant
to haul even the C8/CG5 out to the club dark site for just another skunking. I
needed a portable rig, but one with some fraking reach in case the sky suddenly
improved on them “iffy” nights.
The obvious choice seemed to be Celestron’s NexStar 5, the
time-honored C5 on the NexStar goto mount. I knew the NS5 had excellent optics,
since a buddy in the Possum Swamp Astronomical Society, my late friend George Byron, had one and I’d tested it extensively. Another plus was that I
already knew how to work the NexStar hand control. A NexStar 5 it would be,
then. Or so I thought. When I tried to buy one, I found out the C5 was on one
of its periodic hiatuses from Celestron’s product line.
Hokay. What was similar? There was the ETX125. I looked a
little askance at the scope’s build quality thanks to the one example of the “big”
ETX I’d tested. However, those in the know informed me the scope had been
improved to the tune of, as mentioned earlier, a metal fork. Further, the just-released
incarnation of the ETX, the “PE,” had kicked things up another notch or two with
plenty of new features.
There didn't seem to be an alternative that would suit me—a
convenient, portable goto rig with an aperture of 5-inches—so I got my courage
up and gave my credit card number to Scopetronix, a now-gone but much-liked
little Florida dealer. Scopetronix’s owner,
Jordan Blessing, had made a name for himself selling fixes and enhancements to
the owners of the ETX and other Meade scopes, and had gone on to become a Meade
dealer, the closest one to me.
When the big box bearing my ETX arrived at the Old Manse, I
was both excited and a little appalled. A new scope, any new scope, big or
small, is exciting. The “appalled” part? That
tube. I knew from the advertising pictures that the PE’s tube was tarted-up
with a silkscreen deep sky image—kinda like the Moon map trope of the Questar
OTA. I didn’t expect it to be quite as gaudy as my ETX125’s pink and red vista
of the North America Nebula, though. After a little while, however, I decided I
actually liked the 125’s looks OK. Like cats, all telescopes are black in the
dark, after all, and the OTA sure gave her personality.
Personality was something my ETX, whom I quickly named
“Charity Hope Valentine” after Broadway’s hapless heroine, wasn’t short on.
She’s always had her neurotic quirks, that’s for sure. Some nights her goto is
great, sometimes not so great (which means I just need to do a procedure Meade
calls “drive training). Sometimes she makes such weird noises when slewing that
I think she is about to collapse in a heap. But she never has; she always comes
through in the end.
What was it like using Charity in the field? Turned out she
was just what I needed for those semi-punk nights when I want to get going in a
hurry and might have to shut down in a hurry, too. The “PE” in ETX125PE refers
to a couple of enhancements that make the scope almost like a GPS without a
GPS. Getting her goto aligned is almost identical to aligning my NexStar 11 GPS:
quick and easy, that is.
The scope does not have a GPS, but it does have battery-backed
memory that holds-in date and time. Unless I move to a substantially different
observing location, I don’t have to enter any data into the Autostar; just turn
on the scope and mash the Autostar’s “0” key to begin alignment. Charity then
levels, finds north, and slews to the first of two alignment stars. I center
the stars in her red dot finder (which houses the PE “LNT,” “north and level”
circuitry and the battery that keeps the clock running) and I am done. Packing
up when the thunder begins to boom and the lightning flashes? I can have Missy
off her tripod and in the truck in five minutes or so.
Which brings us to a Saturday night a few weeks back, which
wasn’t forecast to be any kind of iffy. The weatherman said “dead clear” and
“cool, not cold.” So why was Miss Valentine involved? With the Deep South Regional Star Gaze Spring
Scrimmage beginning the following Thursday, I had all my gear for the star
party—C8, VX mount, etc., etc.—marshaled in the front parlor, and laid-out just
so so I wouldn’t forget anything. I didn’t want to disturb it. Further, if
you’ve been reading the Little Old Blog from Possum Swamp attentively, you know
me and Miss D. are preparing to move to the suburbs. All the packing and
throwing away and other work involved in buying a new home had Unk plumb
tuckered. Sweet Charity it would be.
Sure was different from the run I talked about in “Two-and-a-half
Years after the Honeymoon.” On that evening, I drove through a thunderstorm on
the way to the PSAS dark site. Not this time. The weather was beautiful and
obviously intended to stay that way.
I was surprised only two other PSAS stalwarts joined me on
such an obviously superior night. Where was everybody else? I have no idea.
Must have been a cotton-picking Mountain Monsters marathon on the cable TV. Anyhoo, I was happy to have some company,
anyway, and got Miss on her tripod in two shakes.
It wasn’t yet dark when I fired up my little girlfriend. I
wanted to check her LNT battery. Mashed the Mode button and had a look at date
and time. Spot on. Which was surprising, since it had been over a year since
I’d last used her, since the evening after Unk’s Awful Tooth adventure in February of 2013. The button cell that powers the LNT
generally lasts no more than 6 – 8 months, but this one was still OK more than a
year later. Maybe because the last time I replaced it I used a Duracell instead
of a no-name battery from Big Lots.
I figgered I should train the drives while I waited for
darkness. Charity’s goto would probably have been OK without out doing that,
but I had time, so why not? I focused on a telephone pole a couple of hundred
meters away, started the procedure, and re-centered the pole in azimuth and
altitude after the Autostar slewed off it.
I don’t know if it was the drive training or if Charity was
just awful hungry for starlight, but this was one of those times when my girl
could do no wrong. She performed her little alignment dance like a trouper and
headed for Sirius, which was close to the red dot when she stopped. I centered
it, centered Capella, the second alignment star she chose, and we were off to
the races. From then on, every single object I asked for was somewhere in the
field of a 20mm eyepiece (about 100x). From horizon to horizon.
After a quick look at Jupiter, which was nice at 200x despite
somewhat punk seeing, Charity and I started a four hour deep sky tour. What did
we look at? I thought it would be fun to revisit some of the objects from the Two-and-a-half
Years blog, the ones that weren’t too low in April—the observing for the old article
was done in May.
M42 was getting awful low, and I figured this would be my last view of the marvel for this season. Looked good, mighty good. It always does in any scope, but Charity seems to sometimes pull out more than her share of dark lane detail.
M42 was getting awful low, and I figured this would be my last view of the marvel for this season. Looked good, mighty good. It always does in any scope, but Charity seems to sometimes pull out more than her share of dark lane detail.
M13: Six years ago, I opined the Great Glob wasn’t
much different in Charity than it is in a C8, and I felt the same on this
night. Good amount of resolution around the edges and a grainy core despite the
cluster still being way down in the Possum Swamp light dome.
M5 looked
terrific, even better than it had in 2006. I’m always been surprised by how
well Charity does with globs. I’d previously have thought you’d need at least a
6-inch to get the kind of resolution the ETX delivers. Her sharp optics bring
back hordes of itty-bitty stars.
M82. I didn’t see
the supernova, which is down to magnitude 14+ judging by the view I had of it in
my friend Taras’ 15-inch Dob, but I did see plenty of detail in the galaxy. At
150x, the criss-crossing dark lanes were amazing.
M3 and M53, the spring globulars, were both
nice. M3, in particular, gave up a bunch of stars despite being just outside
the light polluted region in the east. It’s no competition for M13 or M5, of
course, but is still nice. M53 was OK, showing a few stars here and there, but
it really needs more aperture.
M67, the aged
open cluster in Cancer is one of my faves. It’s reasonably rich and has some
character, being composed of rather subdued yellowish stars. Charity showed
plenty of ‘em, since, unlike in ‘06, I remembered to catch it before it got too
low in the west.
M65 and M66 were subdued on the Two-and-a-half
Years run. Not tonight. Not only were they bright in the 20mm eyepiece (an
Orion Expanse) as they culminated, they showed plenty of detail and were easy
to distinguish from each other. I even got a look at dimmer and larger NGC
3628, the third member of the Leo Trio.
M105 and company.
I love this little galaxy group in Leo’s “belly” area. The ETX usually shows
two of the three, but this time I was able to pick out all three members. Quite
a catch for an humble five-inch.
Omega Centauri
was probably the biggest surprise. It was just above the treetops, but actually
began to resolve in the ETX despite a sky background that was bright gray.
M104, The Sombrero
Galaxy is another favorite of mine, and Missy did right well. The galaxy is always
smaller than I remember it being and a little tougher detail-wise than you’d think
a bright Messier would be. Charity showed the dust lane nevertheless. Barely.
M87, the monster
elliptical in Virgo, Virgo A, wasn’t just visible as a bright, round spot; it
had company. Nearby NGC 4476 was easy and NGC 4478 peeped in occasionally.
The Ghost of Jupiter, NGC
3242, was one of the hits of the evening; it was big, bold, and slightly
bluish in the eyepiece, floating in a rich field of southern stars. It even
showed hints of internal detail at high power. Wished I’d brought along a
cotton picking OIII filter.
The above weren’t all Charity and I essayed. The sky held
in, and my girl was champing at the bit, picking off deep sky marvels like a
kid gobbling penny candy. Centaurus A, the disturbed galaxy near Omega
Centauri, was amazingly bright. The Eskimo Nebula over in Gemini showed some
detail at 300X when the seeing cooperated. M97, the Owl Nebula, was easy, and I
almost imagined I could see the eyes.
Finally, though, after we’d passed the “forty objects”
number or thereabouts, the night began to grow old, Unk’s bones began to grow
cold, and the heavy dew got me to thinking about Chaos Manor South’s warm den. A
good look at Mars, who, at 300x, showed a tiny polar cap, plenty of dark
detail, and a limb brightening, and I was done. Time to get Charity back in her
case (a nice aluminum job I got from OPT). She was packed and in the 4Runner in
less than five minutes.
Setting in front of the cable TV, sipping a warming draught
of the Yell, I ruminated. Sweet Charity had done spectacularly well, muchachos.
So good I almost wanted to promise myself I’d use her more frequently.
Experience, however, says that will not happen. I usually want more telescopic
horsepower. There will always be Charity Hope Valentine nights, though—and they
will likely increase in number as Unk becomes ever more decrepit—and on those
evenings I will have my sweet little ETX to turn to.
Next Time: The NEW Chaos Manor South...
Comments:
<< Home
Dear Unc
I bought a ‘new’ etx-90 last year and I must say I’m very pleased with it. Goto is pretty accurate and reliable. Optics seems good to me – diffraction rings looks nice. Overall the telescope is a huge improvement to my old etx-70.
As Gary Seronik mentioned in Sky & Telescope the original etx-90 would have cost over a 1000 dollars, today the new etx sells for less than 400 dollar included a much sturdier inox tripod and a case. So I think the new etx is still everybody’s telescope – maybe more than ever.
Thank you for all your blogs and publications – I always enjoy reading them.
Greetings from the Netherlands,
Peter Nijhuis
I bought a ‘new’ etx-90 last year and I must say I’m very pleased with it. Goto is pretty accurate and reliable. Optics seems good to me – diffraction rings looks nice. Overall the telescope is a huge improvement to my old etx-70.
As Gary Seronik mentioned in Sky & Telescope the original etx-90 would have cost over a 1000 dollars, today the new etx sells for less than 400 dollar included a much sturdier inox tripod and a case. So I think the new etx is still everybody’s telescope – maybe more than ever.
Thank you for all your blogs and publications – I always enjoy reading them.
Greetings from the Netherlands,
Peter Nijhuis
I've probably owned 20 or more of the ETX's over years including the frustrating refractors. I once tested 32 ETX 90s in a row and found them remarkably uniform in performance. The 105mm now is a bit of a mythical scope as few were sold relative to the 90 and 125 so of course it's rumoured to be "the best." I've seen some variation in the 125s, but overall, no ETX Mak I've seen has ever been less than good.
-Rich
Post a Comment
-Rich
<< Home