Marc, you make SCT's sound like poison
!
SCT's are fine visual instruments. Yes, there is some field curvature, but this is really only a photographic concern, not for visual if you use the right eyepieces for an SCT (optical matching of EPs and scope design is waaayyy under explained and under-understood, and sees many eyepieces trashed in many reviews from lack of understanding by the reviewers). An 8" SCT packs plenty of aperture punch. Plus, the mirror and lens coatings have improved a lot over the years, and today's SCTs give visually noticeably brighter images than older SCTs. Not hear-say on my part, but from experience in using an 8SE and an 8" Meade Coma Free SCT. Still, even in my 30 year old C8, the image is lovely. SCT get too much of a bad rap by people who don't see the place in the amateur arsenal. If space was at a premium for you, an SCT, and Mak's too, are an excellent option.
By the way, the rings of Saturn are certainly very easy to make out detail in a 130mm scope. My old C5, a 5" SCT, gave me extraordinary images of Saturn's rings, A, B
& C rings, plus Cassini's Division. Here's something to give you a sense of scale with the rings: The entire north-south length of the continent of South America would fit inside the width of the Cassini Division, and still have several hundred km's to spare!