weighing up scope options

[Somnium]

So i need a scope to go on my new paramount MX which should arrive sometime in the next 2 weeks. it looks like my plans to get a second hand planewave 12.5 fell through because the vendor wants to sell it as a package with the titan mount (if anyone knows someone who would like to part with a cdk 12.5 or 14 please let me know). anyway, now that option has been removed i am looking into a new scope. after looking into all the options, i think the best mix of quality and price are the planewave products. i have been back and forth over the 12.5 and the 14 for a while. the additional price of the 14 is just enough to make me baulk but it has advantages such as; bigger flat FOV, less vignetting, bigger aperture and slightly faster, better design for cleaning, better baffles, integrated dew heaters, truss design. what does everyone think? i am open to other suggestions as well. i am looking for a high quality RC (with flattener) or CDK design between 12 and 14.5" weighing less than 30kg and an f ratio between 5 and 10.

[raymo]

Although it is probably of no help to you, as you have seemingly got your
heart set on a Planewave, or similar, I would plump for the Intes 203mm
f/6 Mak/ Newt. Beautiful instrument. Would mean longer subs of course.
raymo

[Somnium]

i don't have my heart set on a Planewave, definitely open to options. although i think i am tied to the RC/CDK design.

[astro_nutt]

Have you considered GSO RC?

[glend]

As a GSO RC owner I would not make that recommendation to the original poster. As I have learned, GSO RCs - despite good optics, are 'project scopes' that need to be tuned, have things added to them to function properly, etc; they are good for people looking at getting into RCs on a budget and can produce wonderful results when sorted out. Given the original poster wants and seemingly can afford a Planewave it seems to suggest a bigger budget for a more out of the box operational solution. Just my 2 cents. He might consider other higher end RCs (Alluna, etc) but if a particular brand is desired then it seems pretty much decided. I would buy a Planewave if I could afford it.

[Somnium]

I did consider the gso's as an option . But decided against it for the reasons Glen has mentioned. This is going in a remote observatory which means it is difficult to tinker and refine to get great images. While the gso's are great scopes for a great price, I think it is best to take the wallet hit.

[AlexN]

Have you considered the ceravolo 300mm f/4.9 and f/9 double duty scopes. They look amazing.

How about the orion optics imaging optimised dk?

It's a real shame deep sky instruments stopped making the rc14c that was a very nicely priced 14" rc however they now own RCOS and as such the prices are extreme.

[AlexN]

How about a corrected sct? The 12/14" acf scopes are reasonably priced, as is the celestron edge 14. With the f/7 corrector and a Moonlite motorised focuser that makes a real light suckered of a scope. Possibly the ap f/6.7 reducer would work. Giving you 14" f/6.7 - 2380mm.

[Slawomir]

I think Rick in Brisbane has a 300mm Ceravolo - might be worthwhile contacting him for his impressions and experience with this (awesome)telescope.

[rmuhlack]

What about an Orion Optics ODK ?
http://myastroshop.com.au/orion-uk/index.htm

[Somnium]

my understanding is that the ceravolo is designed for fast, wide field imaging. i am looking at longer focal lengths, a Galaxy hunter. the Edge HD looks good and so does the Orion ODK. they are both fine instruments but both have their issues that make them less than perfect, i.e. coma on the edge and build quality on the ODK. One thing that keeps bringing me back to the planewave is the camera coupling and focuser system. with everything bolted on and secure then hopefully i will not get any flexure

[gregbradley]

http://www.agoptical.com/idk/default.html

They have 12.5, 14.5 etc. The 12.5 inch is a truss which would have to be an advantage against tube thermal currents. Also quartz mirrors and rotating focuser included in the price which I believe is less than Planewave or at least it used to be.

Orion Optics is closed tube so keep that in mind. More prone to wind and thermal currents. Ages ago they had an issue with their corrector. I presume that is now fixed but worth checking on.

Greg.

[Somnium]

Thank Greg, I saw AG optical too, is anyone in australia using them? i would love to get an opinion because it does look like for the same price as the planewave you can get an extra .5 inch of aperture, rotator focuser and quartz mirror ... not bad, but i don't want to be a guinea pig

[AlexN]

The edge hd 14 with the reducer will not show coma in the small FOV of an 8300 sensor. The main drama you would have with the edge hd would be that 14" corrector plate vs dew. That said the C14 comes in at under half the cost of the other options. Even when you add a focuser, a rotator and dew control you would almost have enough change left over for an sbig stt3200 with self guided filter wheel and ao8t..If you want to hunt dim galaxies you would be hard pressed to go past the 3200me sensor. 6.8um pixels, 85% QE and huge maximum well depth.

At the fl you plan on imaging I would strongly recommend ao. Even at only 1000mm I find the difference is quite noticeable.

[Somnium]

very tempting ...

[Somnium]

The EdgeHD 14 is very tempting, it is very difficult to find what the issues are with any scope because the net is filled with glowing reports from the vendor etc. is there anyone in this forum that is successfully (or unsuccessfully) using the edge HD 14 in a remote observatory with heavy gear sitting on the focuser?

[AlexN]

Contact Peter ( pmrid) as he has one on a titan in his observatory here in sth east Queensland.

I am working towards a similar setup in the future.

[Somnium]

thanks, i just PM'd him