Quote:
Originally Posted by multiweb
I got an Hyperstar 3 for my C11 a long while ago before they made RASAs. From an imaging point the RASA is designed for that exactly. The hyperstar is a little trickier to use. Tilt can be an issue. Collimation is a bit awkward. It's heavier than a RASA. You need a solid dewshield to do calibration frames. You need a micro focuser for the primary. Other than that it's a fast system easy to use. You have to ask yourself how much imaging you're going to do vs. visual. If it's primarily imaging get a RASA. If not then a SCT with hyperstar is the way to go. Starizona is the place to get all the bits you need.
|
Thank you to all that have responded.
Marc, I'm still leaning towards the 925. Even though I plan on a lot of imaging, I also want the flexibility of imaging and visual, especially for planets.
My initial kit will be:
925 Edge HD
CGX mount
Celestron focuser
Celestron .7 reducer
Celestron Deluxe OAG
Second round will be:
ZWO ASI 174MM mini
ZWO ASI 294MC Pro
Third round is up in the air but might look like:
Either the Hyperstar V3 plus dew shield and other peripherals.
OR
an entirely separate wide field refractor.
I still like the idea of the Hyperstar. I'm hoping after a few months of ownership I'll be comfortable in colomating the scope, so the Hyperstar should be a non issue.
We'll see. I need to lock in stage one very soon as I'm about to pull the trigger on this baby.
