925 XLT - imaging?

[ScubaMike]

I have come into a bit of money, and have the early opportunity to move towards what I would like as a setup.

Couple of questions.

1. The Celestron 925 XLT looks to be a decent OTA, F10 makes it easy to barlow to F20/f30 for planetary imaging, f6.3, F3.3 makes it convertable for DSO imaging (which will be MUCH later on). Vanilla it would be nice for viewing with much easier access to the eyepiece (a big consideration when your legs are too short - like me).

Is the 925 XLT a good scope to go for in terms of general imaging? Is it a "jack of all trades" with the appropriate adapters?

2. The Celestron CGEM GoTo. Looks like a decent mount? Will this be stressed by the 925 with a guide scope added later? I.E. would it be a degree of "future proofed". Quite like the "all-star" alignment capability of this, in case I went to a site with limited views of polaris (which is why I am looking at this in preference to the HEQ5/NEQ6).

Is the step up in aperture from 6" to 9.25" going to give me some relief from aperture fever (for a while anyway?)

I would be going for the mount first, so would like to make sure I go for the one which would give me some degree of expansion capacity.

I have read the literature on these and it looks to be more than capable, but would prefer first hand experience.

[ollypenrice]

Forget the 3.3 reducer which should come with a health warning explaining that it is only good for tiny webcam- like chips. The 6.3 is fine.

The mount should be okay when using the reducer for DS but I think you'd struggle to guide at the full FL, though you probably wouldn't want to do that anyway. Whether it is worth paying the extra over the EQ6 is something on which I can't comment, never having seen the Celestron in the flesh.

Olly

[brantuk]

I've not used mine for imaging yet but with a pair of binoviewers on the back it gives some beautifully immersive views of space. The 925's a very significant step up from 6" giving a lot more aperture for light gathering, and it will be a lot sharper and more contrasty with planets with it's 2.3 meter focal length.

For imaging dso's it needs to be polar aligned on a wedge, and an off axis guider will eliminate flexure - a 6.3 reducer as Olly says, is going to be the weapon of choice. The new Celestron wedge is a very nice piece of kit and significantly better than the older model - being stronger and more easilly adjustable.

I had the 800 for a while and the tracking and goto are so easy to set up and very very accurate - you don't even need to know what the alignment stars are called, so I have no hesitation assuming the 925 will be as faultless - beautiful scope. Hope that helps

[ScubaMike]

Thanks Olly,

Payload wise, The CGEM & NEQ5 should be pretty much comparable, as FLO have described it as "an evolution of the NEQ6" (http://stargazerslounge.com/sponsor-announcements-offers/82590-celestron-cgem-mount-update.html)

The only real benefit I can see would be the "all-star" which kind of appeals, but I should really ask myself, How much would I use it away from home? and of those times, how often would I not be able to get a sight on polaris?

Then, would covering those times be worth the additional £200 or so.

I would have thought that I would be on tracking for Planetary (with barlow) and on reducer for DSO (eventually - so much to learn before then).

I was just wondering if I would be able to use the 9.25 eventually, and wanted to ensure I bought a mount to suit.

Thanks for your guidance.

[ScubaMike]

Thanks Brantuk,

It will be on an EQ mount. Still to decide which one.

CGEM or HEQ5, or NEQ6.

Price will play a part as the less I spend, the more I will have saved towards the tube.

Any input on CGEN vs HEQ5 vs NEQ6 gratefuly recieved.

[ollypenrice]

Brantuk, the CGEM is an German Equatorial so no wedges, I think.

Don't go for the CG5 or HEQ5, you would be badly undermounted for imaging and very unhappy.

Olly

[brantuk]

Ooops - scratch my post - it's all true but I'm refering to the CPC of course - I just woke up and realised you're asking about the ota only lol.

Oh and on a cgem too - I really shouldn't post when Im flaked out lol

[ScubaMike]

It's still nice to have the input on the tube I'm eventually looking at putting on the mount, all info welcome

[Mr Spock]

Here's my kit. It will give you an idea of the size of a C9.25 mounted on a NEQ6 Pro.

Great combination

[ScubaMike]

Any downside Mr Spock?

Anything you would have changed done different?

[Mr Spock]

Probably would have gone for the wider dovetail. The OTA was a sale item so I didn't have the choice outside the standard size. Still works ok though.

Upgrades? It could do with a right angle finder - crawling on the floor to look up isn't much fun.

No real downsides I can think of other than the finder. The whole lot just performs flawlessly.

[KE400]

Hi Mike

If I may add my 2p, I'm currently going through the steep learning curve with my set up,(so am by no means an expert like many on here). I have made the change from a 6" to the 9.25" and can see a big improved difference. My ownly planetary viewing comparison between the 2 was Saturn and was simply blown away by what the difference in aperture makes, (I think it's to do with the extra light gathering/ focal length etc!?!?)

A thing to remember is the amount of time needed for the OTA to cool down compared to the 6", there's loads of helpful people on here who can advise more, I try for around a 3hr cooldown period which admittedly sometimes is frustrating trying to 2nd guess the clouds in the UK when having to set up only to strip down, (unless you have a permenant set up of course which would reduce this greatly!).

As far as the imaging, I'm still finding my feet so can't really comment. I'm extremely happy with the set up so far and can only see it getting better with more understanding and know how. I can't comment on the mount you have in mind but can certainly recommend the NEQ6, (it feels very sturdy and is very heavy too!)

Good luck with your purchase