|
fwiw, I have a 200f4 GSO, a 250f4 Skywatcher CF and a 300f5 GSO. All have much better resolution than the atmosphere for DSO imaging and the two GSO scopes also do a good job of high res lucky imaging (haven't tried the SW in this role).
For visual use, the Skywatcher is possibly slightly ahead on contrast, but the 200f4 GSO has slightly better figure. For imaging, they are all way better than required - if you are concerned that the contrast might be a slight bit lower on a GSO due to slightly rougher surface, just boost it in software - imaging lets you easily correct things that could be a problem with visual.
CF is great for thermal stability. For DSO imaging, I typically have to refocus my steel tube scopes every 15 minutes or so, but the CF can stay in the zone for maybe an hour on a good night.
Mechanically, the SW CF is better made than the two GSOs - but so it should be, it cost more than the other two put together.
Last edited by Shiraz; 25-11-2014 at 06:13 PM.
|