C8 vs C9.25 vs 180mm MAK?

[toc]

Hi all - I currently own a good old C8, and use it mostly for planetary and lunar work. Im thinking of moving to either the C9.25 or possibly a Skywatcher black diamond 180mm MAK. Would either of these scopes be significantly better for planetary?

I know that a large Newtonian is probably better, but Im looking for something that is manageable and fairly compact. (I guess the C9.25 is probably at the limit of this already - I have a HEQ5 pro mount)

Abuse away if this is an annoying question :-)

[Dave47tuc]

Hi Tim,
Aperture always wins with the views of the heavens. But really there is not much between the 3 you asked about, I know as i have had them all. At the moment i have the Mak 180 on a CG5 mount. Also I'm about to get a C8 and use it for imaging. If I was to pick one out of the 3 it would be the 9.25 but i would prefer a bigger mount. So with my mount the smaller 2 are better. For planetary work you talk about as I said not much between the 3.
I like the Mak as its long focal length lends it self to using good eye relief eyepieces. But really all 3 scopes do. As you have a C8 I would not bother buying the Mak yes maybe get the 9.25 but really the next step up should be minimum C11 or bigger then you need a bigger mount. If you can have a look through a Mak and your welcome to come and see mine and try to look through a 9.25 i think you will find no point on stepping to either.
All fun to think about, a pic of my mak on the CG5 easy set up not to big and heavy ;) but hey your gear is nice stick with it.:thumbsup:

[toc]

Thanks - exactly the sort of info Im after... :thanks:

C11 would be amazing, but I'm not sure the funds will stretch that far. :)

I guess another option might be the Intes Micro 6 inch MAKs that a lot of people rave about...Im with you though on aperture rules...

[asimov]

Yes, aperture is king, just like seeing.

Having owned a C9.25 I'd own one again no problems. I have a C11 now. Having the C9.25 - Well I was still getting aperture fevor for planet imaging.

I can't comment on a MAK having never owned one.