C11 or.........?

[JB80 (Jarrod)]

...... something else?

Hi all,

I know questions like this have been asked numerous times and probably open up a can of worms but this is going to be an important purchase and probably the scope of a lifetime(or at least the extended future) for me so when the time comes I want to make sure I'm can get as much info and others experience to make sure I'm making the right choice.

I guess stating what the main uses for it are going to be is a good start, basically and probably mostly I want to use it for planetary imaging and it does seem to hold up well in that respect. I also want to be able to view and image faint comets and supernova, nothing like fancy astrophotos just more so to document them for my own keepsakes.
I love my little newt but it's just not up to the task for the fainter objects.
And I dare say it will get used for just general observing as well. That's about the gist of it.

Now the something else is most likely to be the Meade 12" or 10" but I have less of an idea about them and the different models like the lx90, lx200, lx800 etc.
Maybe there is another make worth considering?

As I understand it the EdgeHD version doesn't bring anything else to the table for planets so it's not easy to justify the extra expense in that regard and I assume it would be similar with the Meade models. Which is good because the C11 price is around what I want to be paying, kind of.
So yeah I keep ending back up at the C11.

The mounting I don't see as much of an issue either way if all I want it for is what I stated above, I see the advantage of the EQ mount but the forks should suffice. A lot of that will depend on what deal I can find at the time, I might just get the OTA or if there is a good secondhand CPC/meade on forks offer then why not. I'm not sure I want to get a used one but if checked out then I can't see why not.

All in all I guess I'm looking for reasons why you'd choose one or another. Why wouldn't you get a C11 or why would you?
Can you convince me I'd be happy with a 9.25 or 10" as I can just about afford that now but you know, aperture fever and all that.

Thanks for reading and any advice would be great.

[blink138 (Pat)]

hello jarrod
let me start by saying i love my c11
admittedly i think the the native f10 is a bit of a nuisance for visual in general, however for planetary they do a descent job
i do however challenge you to not get bored with that after a short time!
i would also really consider getting yourself a descent GEM as a good one can carry any future OTA which a fork, being part of a package cannot do
i gave myself a five year plan with my current rig and then i will rethink my whole, or part of my setup
within that five years i will have hoped to gain as much experience at astro photography....... and that is exactly the reason i chose tha c11
it has the potential for many configurations depending upon the camera of f10, f6.3,f3.3, f2
i am not sure whether or not i will be able to try all of them, but that was the reason for choosing a c11
pat

[JB80 (Jarrod)]

Thanks Pat for the reply,

let me start by saying i love my c11
admittedly i think the the native f10 is a bit of a nuisance for visual in general, however for planetary they do a descent job

I can't say I have really observed at f10 to get a feel for it, my 6" is f8 and I think the biggest limitation is the sky quality but then I don't think comparing the two is fair.
But the f10 would definitely be better for planets which would be it's main use I imagine.

i do however challenge you to not get bored with that after a short time!

You may be right but the way things are going the weather doesn't permit getting bored.
The solar system is the direction though that I want to head for now though with my observing/imaging. Instead of making it up as I go along I figure I might be better served by concentrating on one area with a bit of general observing thrown in for good measure.

i would also really consider getting yourself a descent GEM as a good one can carry any future OTA which a fork, being part of a package cannot do

Yeah it is the better option and a good neq6 can be picked up easy enough and considering OTAs are more abundant then it's the most likely path.
What kills me though is right now I could walk in to Opt tomorrow and lay the cash on the table for the current price on the OTA they have if I was there. Instead I need to put a bit more aside and be patient.

[Merlin66 (Ken)]

Jarrod,
When I was a young keen astronomer in nappies, I drooled over the Ads in Sky & Telescope and longed to have a C11. I figured, a bit like you that it could be the "ultimate viewing machine".
The usual issues of no money, family, mortgage etc etc made it just a dream.....
I ended up building a 6" reflector, then a 10" reflector and ultimately a 12" f5 reflector. This was a cost effective method (took lot's of effort though) of getting close to "the dream machine"
The 12" did everything I could want, need or desire....majic..
I'm sure if it wasn't for a change in personal circumstances I'd still have, and be using the 12".....
After the 12" I "downsized" to an 8" Lx3 (no GOTO etc in those days)...I thought I'd gone blind!
Later, I started building again, a 13" and then an 18" Dobbie...great scopes, great light grasp BUT big and bulky. Certainly a challenge for the sole astronomer. A crushed back and three months in hospital led me to sell them and get a 12" Lx200. Fork mounted, all the dangle dollies. Good price second hand. Good optics and a nice scope to use. By then I'd given up on astrophotography - "How many photos do you really need of M42...." and started to get the urge to do something "worthwhile" - spectroscopy!
The 12" did that well. Most spectroscopes prefer an f10 beam, but I found the lack of clearance between the forks a limitation. The weight of the set-up was such it really had to be a permenant fixed set-up - the observatory (TSO1) Cut to the chase, I found a C9.25 and a HEQ5pro mount for portability. A compromise. Very good instrument - one of the best I ever had. Worked well for spectroscopy.
About two years ago I was presented with a C11 (thank's Sue!!!) found a NEQ6pro mount and "settled" down with my "ultimate viewing machine"
After almost 50 years I'd made it!!
I'm 100% sure the C11 will see me through to stumps.

A long story, but as you develop and grown your interest things change and you need to adapt. For visual there's nothing to beat a good Dobbie. IMHO something around the 10" mark is the "sweet spot". It's easy to handle, and works well in the normal seeing conditions.
A 10-12" f5 reflector equatorially mounted is a great option for visual/imaging but needs a VERY good mount which will probably cost more than the scope!!
The SCT's are a compromise. (BTW the Celestron's are much lighter Kg/mm aperture than the Meade's) They can and do provide a compact solution - narrower FOV obviously but very satisfying. There's nothing a C9.25 on a NEQ6pro mount can't do.
Think carefully - and dream of the future................

[Poita (Peter)]

You can often pick up a meade 10" ACF scope for a lot less than a C11, and the Meade 10 ACF I had was considerably better than a C11 I had a loan of.

With SCTs it seems that even within a particular model there has been a lot of quality variation over the years.
To be blunt, if you want to do planetary, get a star test done on the scope you want to buy, there are some dogs out there and you need the scope to be as perfect as possible to eke out the best performance for planetary.

Also, how is your seeing? If you seeing is usually poor, you can actually get better performance from a smaller SCT than from a large one.
I've seen a C9.25 outperform a C14 for planetary on less than spectacular viewing nights (but on the one or two brilliant nights a year I get here, a C14 smokes it!)

Take a look around at planetary photos taken on a C8 and a webacam!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/zamb0ni/6085522975/
or with an imaging source camera.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jasmel9...in/photostream


A C11 can be a great planetary scope, but a 9.25 or even a C8 can give amazing results too, and depending on your seeing, may be all you ever need.

[JB80 (Jarrod)]

Thanks Ken and Peter for the replies,

You both mention the 9.25 and for a long time this was the scope that I really wanted, the only thing that has changed in that department is that I would like the extra apeture to weasel out some of those fainter objects. Does the nearly 2" make that much of a difference? If I thought the budget would stretch I'd consider larger still.
I'm going look for some comparisons, same goes for the 10".

It's interesting that the 10" ACF seems cheaper in Oz than Europe, they can be about 500 euros dearer than the C11 here depending on where you look.

I hadn't thought of a star test, that's good advice and the way I look at it essential when spending that much.

Well my seeing here is completely rubbish but we will be moving later in the year which is more when I expect to make the purchase, also a lot will depnd on where we move to so really it will reamain unknown until we get there. I can't imagine it being any worse than here though.

[Irish stargazer (John)]

For planetary work the Celestrons seem to have the edge. I think the C11's retail for about 2K Euro in Europe (Telescope Service). If you look at the best images out there. the imagers all seem to use C11 or C14's

[JB80 (Jarrod)]

They do seem to be the weapon of choice for many. Like Peter said there are loads of great images from a range of models but the C11 does seem to be popular.
Yeah Telescope Service claim to be the cheapest at just under 2 grand but I found it 200 Euro cheaper from the Netherlands. I suspect this is to do with old stock and when the new stuff arrives it might go up again when it's my time.
900 Euro from the US though.

[Rigel003 (Graeme)]

Just something to be aware of if you're contemplating a fork mount for planetary imaging is that it's fine with Jupiter where the fast rotation imposes a total exposure limit of about 2 minutes. However with Mars and Saturn, where the planet's rotation is slow enough to allow you to expose for considerably longer, you will run into problems with field rotation in your image on an altaz mount. It's noticeable especially on Saturn where the angle of the ring plane moves slightly between the R, G and B exposures.No such problems with a C11 OTA on an equatorial mount.

[JB80 (Jarrod)]

Wouldn't that be solved with a wedge?

Still I'm nearly certain I'll end up with the OTA and a GEM.

[deanm (Dean)]

Apart from optical performance, portability may also be a factor in decision-making.

I separately bought a C11 & neq6 new for less than Au$3800 total.

I reckon that this combination is pretty much my upper limit, physically, in terms of being portable/transportable.

The basic set-up comprises 4 components (stored in a shed) which I assemble before use: the tripod, the mount head, counter weights & OTA.

An obs/pier set-up would be fab, but not all off us can go there <sob!>

If aperture fever might sway your mind, there's always this bloke to show you (in 2 parts) how *real* men feel about optical weaponry bigger than a C11 (!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBawz69qo_A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwVg1M6bURI

Dean



Dean

[JB80 (Jarrod)]

Hi Dean,

It is something I have considered a bit but not knowing what sort of place I might be moving to just yet means I need to keep some options.
At the moment I'm leaning to an eq head on top of a rolling pier instad of a tripod so I can just roll the whole setup out but I'm not sure how practical it will be.

I like the idea of a garden shed obs but that will be even further down the track.

I like those vids, nearly enough to convince any girlyman.

[icytailmark (Mark)]

C14 all the way baby!!! only problem is its pretty heavy for older people. Gotta pump those weights.

[Capricorn1(Tom)]

Im nearly 60 Mark and I pump a C14 on and off a G11---keeps us mature guys fit.Cheers Tom

[JB80 (Jarrod)]

Well I should be sprite enough to handle one but the main issue would be I might not be come the time I could afford a C14.

[Capricorn1(Tom)]

Hi Jarrod, buy what you can afford now, and enjoy your purchase. Astronomy is always evolving. I guess scopes for different uses, and everybody is different, in their expectations. For me I have a full range to satisfy my own needs--C14,C8,C90,Mak150,WO 80,WO 88,Mak Newt 150.Having said that I'm a bit of a SCT fan----don't like star spikes---not natural. Best of luck with your prospective purpose. Cheers Tom

[clive milne]

Originally Posted by JB80

Well I should be sprite enough to handle one but the main issue would be I might not be come the time I could afford a C14.

Jarrod, used C14's come up for sale every now and again at reasonable prices. I picked one up last week for $1500.

[clive milne]

Here's one for $1900.

http://www.astromart.com/classifieds...fied_id=807100

Shipping from the states should be under $500.

[JB80 (Jarrod)]

That's pretty decent. $1500 works out well in euros.

I don't normally keep up with the US classifieds apart from occasionally at CN. I probably should but it gets a bit depressing.

I'm definitely considering getting it from the US and I'm not certain but if it can be sent to my wifes work I might even be able to avoid VAT via a loophole, although she doesn't seem keen on finding out exactly for me. It seems it's fine for smaller items but I don't know how security would react if a c11/14 lobbed up.

[clive milne]

Ah, I didn't realise you were in Belgium Jarrod.
fwiw) Freight ex-US to Mechelen for 24" x 24" x 36" @ 40kg would be around 260 euro.

Also, it is worth keeping an eye on Astromart.
There was a 14" f/6 optical guidance systems RC ota on there a couple of weeks ago for $4500 (3400 euro).

Interestingly, I am yet to see a single 12" GSO RC come up for sale second hand on astromart or anywhere else for that matter. That may say something about their value for money.

On the subject of Schmidt Cassegrains; Some of them are actually pretty good from an optical quality perspective, but they are ferociously sensitive to mis-collimation. They are also sensitive to large temperature gradients.
Neither of these issues are deal breakers if you are prepared to address them. However, a newtonian OTA of the same dollar value will always out-perform them, every time. Where the schmidt's come into their own is in their compact size. For any given mount, it will be able to handle a bigger SC than any other genre of ota. I can lift a C14 with one hand, but it does take
two to place it in the rings. The short moment arm of a compact tube raises the resonant frequency of the telescope assembly and reduces its sensitivity to wind.

A 12" RC might be functionally equivalent. Paul Hasse I believe has owned both so it might be worth seeking his opinion on the matter.

regards
~c