|
Thanks Rajah guess I will have to comment.
First, we need to clear something up, I grow tired of this falicious argument that Dobs are better than SCT's, quite frankly this is bull dust, each scope has its benefits and flaws and I will give some of them. All the LX range scopes are f10 meaning that they are slower photographically and visually. The sky will not be as bright visually. The images will still be good and sharp though. There are many good astrophotographers who are using LX series scopes, you just have to take longer and deeper images to get the same results as say a SN10 on a good mount. Besides the LX scope is setup for astrophotography, a dob is not.
Second, these scopes are made for people who don't want to go searching for objects in the sky. I did this for 20 years and I grew really tired of it. A dob on the other hand means that you will have to know the sky quite well to see many objects that are faint. It can be rewarding to do this, but also frustrating.
Third, LX scopes are relatively small and are easier to transport. They can fit easily in a good size boot and the 8" is very easy to lift. A dob can be hard to fit into a boot and is at times cumberesome.
Fourth, the optics on a LX series scopes are very good. Good bang for buck and you dont get coma. Nor do you get aberation. These are symptomatic of Newtonians. Paracors are needed on Newtonians to correct this issue. They are very costly.
Fifth, the longer focal length of the LX series scopes means that you can do serious planetary observation and photography given the right seeing conditions. A dob is not designed for this and many mods have to be made to attempt this. Look at the work Mike has done on his scope. Even with a 5x on his scope his image scale is only just the bigger than a 2.5x on mine.
Sixth, the LX series scopes are really a moderate all rounder. They can do lots of things but they are only a master of planetary stuff and high mag work. They have their limitations. A dob can only be a master of visual work on DSO's if it is setup correctly. They don't have tracking, the focal length or the computer system. I think that by and large most owners of the LX series scopes will say they are happy with their scopes.
Seven and more to your question. Aperture, aperture rules. LX 90 10 will show more than the 8", not only on really hard objects. Also the 10 is a lot heavier than the 8". I am a pretty fit guy and quite strong. If you not this way inclined go and have a look at a 10 and ask if you can lift it. You don't want to be a wirey person trying to lift this. However GPs does come in handy, you should consider this option.
Finally, you must decide what is in your budget, what you want out of a scope, how much you are going to use it and what are your future goals. This hobby can be really infectious and astrophotography is certainly on most peoples minds. If you buy wisely then you will have little need to sell one scope and then buy another. For myself, if given the chance again, I would have bought the C9.25 purely for planetary work.
In addition to the above collimation is not really an issue for the average SCT user. I have gone collimation mad because I do planetary imaging at very high magnifications. Collimation under such demands needs to be excellent, not just good. Most people would not know the difference between good collimation and excellent collimation, but it can mean the difference in an imaging session. Besides collimating a SCT is actually easier than a Newt.
Anyway that is my take. Feel free to ask questions if you like.
|