Orion optics SPX 200 mm vs SPX 250 mm

[aljosa]

Hello,

I am deciding between these two. I will go for 1/10 PV optics upgrade and I already have a focuser for it (JMI EV-2). I just can't make up my mind, which one to buy.
My biggest concern is portability, even though they are the same length (200mm F=6 and 250mm F=4.8), I just can't decide. Will I need a ladder for 250? Because I really need to drive for at least half an hour to get to my "dark" site. So, is there no big difference, or should I go with 200mm?

The scope will be used with EQ6PRO and for all targets, including planets and moon. I just want the best all-round scope. I think that 250 mm will be better than 200 mm. Money is not the issue on this one.

Thanks for input...

[gregbradley]

Is this for visual or imaging?

Aperture kind of rules for both but protability comes into it. If they are both the same length then its just a matter of weight and diameter which shouldn't affect portability.

How heavy are each of them?

What is the weight ability of your mount?

As a general rule I think larger aperture with the constraints of portability and mount capacity would be the formula.

F4.8 would be quite widefield though for visual and you'd need some short focal length eyepieces or a nice barlow.

For imaging its an easy pick- the 10 inch F4.8. Large aperture and faster speed = easier to get a nice bright image especially if you have to travel to your site and the vagaries of clouds etc limit your total exposure time for an image. Although if you really wanted to go for broke on imaging you would choose their astrograph range rather than their Newt range. These are essentially the same as the ASA scopes.

Greg.

[aljosa]

Well, this is for both, but I am not planning to start imaging for a year or two, so primarily this will be a visual machine. The mount is capable of carying both. They both have 1200 mm of focal length. I would much rather go with 1600 mm, but this doesn't fit easily into my European-sized car.

They are 8 vs. 11 kg.