[toryglen-boy (Duncan)]

Thanks for that Mark, but i kinda knew all that

i was really after what are the differences to use, and what the slight optical differences do to performance, eg. does one have a flatter field than the other, or does one have a wider field of view than the other

that kinda thing

thanks anyway !!

Originally Posted by M_Lewis

http://astro-observer.com/telescopes/catadioptric.html

Shows a 2d visual view of the main differences.

Answering which is better, is like asking how long a piece of string is. Some are of the opinion that SCT's are optically better than Mak's, others (like myself) are of the opinion they are not. It's really more about what do you want to do with the telescope, not about which is "better". So I prefer to stand by the statement, they are similar, but different. Lens and surface quality will be a major factor in the overall quality of the tube.

You'll be hard pressed to find large Mak's because of the lense weight at the front of the scope, so you'll see a lot of small sizes. Hence why you'll commonly see a SCT up to 14" or bigger.