Celestron NexStar 6SE vs. Meade LT-6 ACF

[Craven]

After all the research, the rookie questions, viewing videos of set up and use, looking at my budget, etc. I've decided on a 6 inch SCT. The question I have is this: which of these models would YOU choose and why? I understand there is some cost savings with the Celestron "bundle" but I'm not too worried about that right now, BUT if a bunch of you come back and say, "Hands down, the Celestron is the superior scope" I'll buy that one. I suspect, though, that Meade is the higher quality scope and this one is Advanced Coma Free.

[OleCuss]

Since no one else has responded I'll do so despite my relative lack of expertise. To a certain extent my post is intended to get the real experts to see your thread and to chime in if they think I'm way off base.

IMHO, the Meade ACF will have better optics. The benefit will be fairly small, however, and I'd not pay too much of a premium for that. You give me the option of a 6 inch telescope with superb optics at a high price - I'll take the money and run to an 8 incher with very good optics. The 8 incher will have better resolution and light-gathering than the 6 incher even though the optical quality might not be quite as stellar on a per-inch basis.

But back to the basic question, the Meade ACF optics are likely to be a bit better than the Celestron 6SE optics.

From what I've read, I think the alignment process for the Meade might be a bit better than that for the Celestron - but you should find both quite adequate.

The Meade will be significantly heavier. The increased weight would be well worth it if it led to much greater stability but I've not gotten the impression that it has much of an edge in that area.

FWIW.

[jonbjon]

I would agree that the benifits of having the 8 inch mirror would out weigh the slightly better optics of the Meade. In the long term you will be happier spending the extra dollars on a Celestron 8SE.

[Nero]

Go for meade in my opinion.Even if it costs a bit more but its better built and better optics (not by much).And it suppose to allign easier but dont quote me on that...
But if thats your first scope get a dob instead.Best value per inch of aperture.

[Bob327]

Craven:

I own 3 Goto Scopes two forked mounted Celestrons SCTS and one Meade Gem mounted 5" Refractor... My point is that I personally do not have a horse in this race ...

I've used several dozen Meade Scts with ACF optics and I will say that in general they are a hair better at the extreme edge of the FOV ...say 20 bucks better... But all Scts also have field curvature at the edge of the FOV and the ACF optics do not do a darn thing to counteract that...

Quality ? I'd go with Celestron on quality ... and I'm not going to say C is better then M but my gut tells me you will have less chance of having trouble with the Celestron ..

Alignment ? well neither is exactly hard to align (actually the opposite both are easy to align ... Celestron does not require you to do anything more then to eyeball level the tripod and center 2 or 3 Stars and you are done... The Meade requires you to also start out with the Scope pointing North and level (eyeball usually good enough here too) then align on 2 stars... minor difference ...with the Meade and with the Celestron if you use any 2 star alignment you will eed to know what stars you are aligning..(not a big deal) but you can use Celestrons 3 star alignment even if you have no clue what the name of those 3 bright stars are... alignment is basically a wash between the 2 systems and both can be accomplished in about 5 minutes

In my opinion the Celestron has two advantages...
1. The OTA can be removed from the mount in 3 seconds..and you can mount the OTA on Gem if you decide you want to mess around with doing and semi serious Astro photography or you can mount a small refractor on the original Mount.
2. And this one is VERY Personal ...The Celestron HC is much more user friendly and requires much less scrolling thur menu after menu just to do simple things.... That said once you get accustomed to either both work just fine and neither is hard to use... (remember I own and use both)

IF you can bust the budget the 8 inch scopes are well worth the extra price and will only add 3-4 pounds to the weight ...

MY gut says Celestron but you will have to compare them side by side and buy the one you like the best and in the end no matter which you choose I'm betting you will get years worth of smiles out of the scope...

This is a Ford vs Chev thing and only you can make the final call before you take out the checkbook...

Bob G.

[OleCuss]

To re-visit this for a moment?

I don't know the priority of the OP, but I did a little price checking.

An 8 inch Celestron NexStar SE on Amazon costs just $100 more than the Meade LT-6. Me, I'd pay the extra $100 for the NexStar 8SE.

But what I'd really do is go to the used market. Astromart has a classified that just went up for an 8 inch Celestron NexStar GPS with a lot of nice eyepieces, an off axis guider, nice finderscope, etc., etc., etc. We're talking a very nicely equipped scope which will blow away the Meade LT-6 for $100 more (well, you do have to pay shipping from Portland, OR). If I were currently in the market for a scope I'd not be telling you about it - I'd be buying that myself!

[Joe Lalumia]

OleCuss is correct. The 8 inch will be almost as portable and has 2 more inches of aperture. The Celestron mount is pretty NEAT. Later you can but another OTA like an 80-120mm refractor mount a dovetail bar on it and attach it to the Celestron mount.

You cannot do that with the Meade-- look at my signature line before you say I do not like Meade. The mount and aperture make the 8 inch Celestron a better deal for your first scope.

Just the rantings of an OLD GUY.

Clear skies!

[sxinias]

Hi,

Choice between the Meade LT6 and Celestron 6SE is difficult. The major differences between the two telescopes are:

1. Cost: The LT-6 with ACF optics is $300 more expensive than the 6SE or $200 more expensive without ACF optics. If you purchase a Celestron SE series telescope before the end of December, there is an additional $100 cash credit from Celestron making the difference between $300 and $400. With the $100 cash credit from Celestron the LT6 without ACF optics costs the same as an 8SE. Unless portability is very critical or perhaps photography, ... a Celestron NexStar 8SE is probably the better alternative.

2. Flexibility: The OTA and mount of the LT6, as well as the LS6, are designed as a single unit and do not separate. This may or may not be a concern but does limit the flexibility of the LT6 in comparison to the 6SE. The 6SE has a dove tail mounting and is easily removed from its mount and can also be easily attached to other mounts.

3. Optical quality: I haven't read of any side by side comparisons between the 6SE and LT6, but the LT6 will need to be one darn good scope to be significantly better than the 6SE. I suspect that they are equivalent.

4. Photography: Sky at Night in its Nov 2010 review of the LT8 ACF mentioned that the scope was suitable for astrophotography within the limitations of field rotation caused by its azimuth mount. It also reported its drives struggled slightly with a medium weight camera and at high magnifications the reviewers experienced some scope wobble from the tripod. Other than not hearing much about anyone using the 6/8SE for photography, I have no information concerning the suitability of the 6SE for photography. Perhaps someone can add here.

5. Reliability: The Meade LT series is fairly new without a track record but seems to get good press. The Sky at Night magazine's equipment reviews, unlike those in Sky & Telescope as well as Astronomy Magazine, tend to tell the story as it is. Their review of the LT8 ACF was very positive. The LT8 got an 81 out of 100 for Build and Design, 97 out of 100 for Ease of Use, 93 out of 100 for Features, 94 out of 100 for Mount Accuracy, and 92 out of 100 for Optics. The overall score was 91 out of 100.

Portability. Both telescopes as well as their larger 8 inch counterparts are portable. The 8 inch scopes are only a few inches larger and a few pounds heavier. The additional weight is not a problem. However, the extra few inches for the 8 inch OTAs could create portability problems in some situations such as carry-on for airlines, packing everything up for one trip between car and observing site, etc. If you are getting a 6 inch SCT for its portability, then consider the impact of the larger 8 inch OTA tube will play in your particular situation if you decide to go to an 8SE instead of the LT6. The slightly larger tube may or may not be a problem.

Which one to get? Its your nickel. Either way you will have an excellent telescope.

[md_mc]

Quick follow-up question - I'm also looking at the LT6 ACF as my first telescope, and until Dec 31 Meade has a mail-in rebate for their Series 4000 Eyepiece Set (#07169) that makes it free. The set includes 6 different eyepieces, a 2x Barlow, and several filters. Normally this set sells for $199.

Does this change the equation any?

[Granpa_Cobra]

I am very new to astronomy. I have a 6se and have had it out twice since I got it a week ago. Took only about 5 to 10 minutes to align to 3 stars. Tracked several objects for 5 to 10 minures each and they never moved in the eyepiece. Moving to another object always put them into the eyepiece and very slight adjustment was needed to center in the eyepiece. I only have the 25mm eyepiece so far, I can't comment on higher magnification but the scope does seem very solid on the tripod.
Mark