Celestron CPC925 or CPC1100

[Translucidus (Peter)]

I'm considering parting with my 10" Dob and buying either the 9.25" or 11" Celestron CPC for purely portability reasons.

My budget would be happier with the 9.25 but my heart says 11".

The 925 has had great reviews but the 11" is of course a BIGGER light bucket and my older eyes may appreciate this.

I'm not precious about imaging just yet so my usage will be mainly visual on planets and deep sky.

Does anyone here have experience with these scopes and can comment whether the 11" is all that much different (I love my 10" dob).

At the moment I can buy a 9.25" for $5000 (Wife happy) or a 11" for $7800 (Wife would end my life!); a big difference.

I have also an option to buy a Meade LX90 10" for $5000.

Any helpful comments would be appreciated.

[jase (Jason)]

If you're not overly concerned about imaging, then I'd go the 11". The 11" is also a good candidate for imaging, but the low magnification secondary on the 9.25 is a better match for flatter fields - important for DSO work.

[Gama]

Originally Posted by Translucidus

.....
I have also an option to buy a Meade LX90 10" for $5000.

Any helpful comments would be appreciated.

There is a 10" RCX-400 for $6000 http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...ad.php?t=41192 .

I have the 14", and they will eat the other models.
Plus it has a lower f ratio, making imaging easier.

The seller (Stuart) has been trying to upgrade to my scope, thus selling his.

Theo.

[Paul Haese]

I have had a C9.25 and now a C14, both great scopes optically and even the C11's I have looked through look very clean to me. Celestron make great scopes for planetary image, not that great of course for DSO. However, they are still competent for DSO work.

In terms of planetary, the Celestron range of scopes is the preferred option. The Meade units just are not figured as well for this task. If you want to have a look around on my planetary pages you will find plenty of images taken with the C9.25 http://paulhaese.net/Planetary.html

So depending on which way you want to go, will depend on which type of scope you buy.

Best of luck with your pruchase.

[doug_parkes]

hi Peter,

I own a CPC925 and am very happy with its performance. This is the second C925 that I have owned (first one was arranged equatorially on a Losmandy G8 mount) and it is a great telescope and the ease of alignment makes it a dream to use ('two-star auto' is the way to go: just point the scope manually at a known star, engage the clutches and press enter. The scope then runs to a second star that it has selected and you centre it and you are in business!). The only thing that disappointed me when I bought the CPC925 was the sheer weight of it! Maybe it is really a 1100 mount fitted with appropriate spacers so that a 925 tube will fit between the forks? Whatever, it is heavy!

My advice would be to try to lift one before you buy. I can only imagine how heavy the CPC1100 would be.

Bob's Knobs didn't work out in the CPC925 due to the rim of the (head of the) knobs being too close to the inside of the rim of the (back of) the secondary mirror holder. Instead, I used 3mm stainless steel, Allen-headed, cap-head screws for collimation adjustment. Normal Bob's Knobs are Imperial sizes but not the CPC925.

Doug http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/....es/happy19.gif

NexStar C8
CPC925
home-made 381 mm Obsession-style Dobsonian

[Translucidus (Peter)]

Thanks guys - very helpful comments. The CPC1100 is 3Kgs heavier than the CPC950 at some 26Kgs so its heavy but apparently easier to handle than the Meade 10" which I tried to lift in a shop the other day; crikey, how do people manage those things. Many forum posts say how much easier and ergonomic the Celestrons are to lift onto the tripod.

I can see that the larger 1100 is probably the way to go.