Which SCT

[catburglar]

I've decided to plump for an SCT to complement my cuuent ZS80, but which one?

I'm not interested in DSO imaging so only need Alt Az mount.

Computerised goto and tracking would be nice.

Thinking of around 10 inches of aperture, but still want fairly quick setup/takedown by one person.

Opinions sought on CPC 9.25 or Meade LX80 or 90.

Any other ideas?

[CGolder]

i have the meade LX90 and its a cracking scope, if i had a choice between the 10" meade LX90 or CPC 9.25 i would get the CPC... but with my actual cash, second hand the meade can be pickup up for a fraction of the price of the celestron and visually they are about the same, meades reputation destroys the 2nd hand price but i would say dont let this put you off, my scope is A1.

[catburglar]

How easy is it to get the scope on the mount? The CPC looks to be a bit easier to handle, and has built in location sockets?

[CGolder]

the LX90 has a single bolt and i use a locator tray so its easy and a single bolt, they are not suitable for a wedge and AP and dont try to be, the CPC however can be mounted on a wedge using the 3 bolts or in AZ mode,

both are pretty easy to handle as they have handles, the CPC is much wider than the LX90 as the arms go out and not just straight down.

[brantuk]

You do get a lot of clearance on the CPC 925 for stuff like right angle finders and cameras, filter wheels, etc. But if you arent interested in imaging then it's no issue. You'll also not need a wedge cos that's meant for imaging and polar alignment.

So all you can compare is the optics and electronics. As Colin says the optics are pretty comparable, and the electronics and gps perform roughly identical functionality. I think your choice will likely boil down to price and aesthetics.

I chose the CPC cos I upgraded from the 800 so I knew what I'd be getting in the 925. But either would be a fine choice that won't disappoint

[m.tweedy]

Go on-be tempted by the C11. You know you want aperture.

[BlueAstra]

I've read that the 925 is the sweet spot of the range of Celestron SCTs. I believe the Meade motors may be noisier than the CPC if that is important. I remember some videos on youtube that recoded the noise quite nicely. Check you can handle the weight of everything if you have to move it around.

Having said that, did come across THIS

[damnut]

Hi There,

I have the LX 200 10" and it is a s big as I can handle alone. The tube is c70lbs, it is an absolute cracker though!.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I've read that the 925 is the sweet spot of the range of Celestron SCTs. I believe the Meade motors may be noisier than the CPC if that is important. I remember some videos on youtube that recoded the noise quite nicely. Check you can handle the weight of everything if you have to move it around.

Having said that, did come across THIS

It is often said that the C9.25 is optically the best. It has a slower primary, which has the advantage that the secondary obstruction is a bit smaller, and that the spherical aberration is easier to control. Having said that, a C11 will get you more detail on planets simply due to its size (see planetary imaging section). It will also be better on DSOs. I see the 10" Meade is about the same weight as the C9.25 OTA. Over here the CPC 9.25 is quite a bit more expensive than the 10" LX90 ACF. The coma-free optics may well have the edge over the classic SCT design when using ultra-wide-angle EPs (not that I have noticed much in my scope, might be more critical when imaging).

[catburglar]

Thanks for the comments so far- I'm sure 11 or 12 inches would be too big to handle:icon_eek:

I've seen a few posts in various places that say the Celestron is easier to handle, but if I were to see a good price for a second hand Meade it might be difficult to resist.

The Meade does have the advantage of ACF optics, but lots of people on here seem to get along quite well with a standard SCT.

[Nexus 6]

would have to suggest the cpc 925, I have been using one for a couple of years now....only issue I find is its a bit to much for taking out and about so I only use it at home. Have searched for a decent case so I could transport it safely but have not found anyone who supplies one, other than that I would not hesitate to recommend it.

[Charon]

Here is one vote for the CPC800GPS. Excellent scope in my newbie opinion.

[faulksy]

i have the cpc 9.25 as well and its owsome. previous scopes have been 4"reflector 6" celestron sct and last one before this was 6" sw mak pro, all good scopes but his is in a different leaugue realy is that good. and easy to carry around

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

i have the cpc 9.25 as well and its owsome. previous scopes have been 4"reflector 6" celestron sct and last one before this was 6" sw mak pro, all good scopes but his is in a different leaugue realy is that good. and easy to carry around

The size difference really has an impact. 9.25" gets you much more light, and much more detail than 6" instruments. I had a similar experience when moving from my old 6" F/8 Newtonian to my C8.

[catburglar]

CPC 9.25 it is then- now I just need to find one at the right price. Might just take a look down the side of my sofa to see if there's any loose change!

[Mr Spock]

My C9.25 is excellent, both optically and ergonomically. The size just seems to be the right aperture to make to most of seeing conditions, and the focal length a good compromise between a planetary scope and deep sky (deep sky, not widefield...).

[faulksy]

just noticed your from north wales. if you want to come and have a look through it, the scope that is we can arrange something. let me no

[Steve 1962]

Another vote for a C9.25 - the views through mine are just stunning.

I know someone locally with an almost unused CPC 9.25 who is pondering about whether to sell it - would you like me to ask him to contact you?

[catburglar]

Faulksy- I'm in Wrexham too, so it would be great to take up your offer at some point that's convenient for you.

Steve- I may be a month or two away from making a purchase (consider it an early Christmas present to myself), but it would be good to have some sort of guide price from a potential seller- I don't recall having seen one of these come up for sale in recent times. Obviously if you wanted to PM me so as not to show the seller's hand.

[faulksy]

ok mate will let you no. have to wait for this cloud to go. were in wrexham?

[Steve 1962]

Hi Catburglar

I've asked my mate with the CPC9.25 to PM you

Steve

[catburglar]

Thanks Steve.

Faulksy, I'm in Llwyn Onn Park, about 1mile from the industrial estate. I'm interested in looking at it as well as through it (ooh err). I need to be sure it's a fairly manageable setup/takedown as well. My fallback scope would be an 8 inch, but that's an opportunity missed if the bigger one is not too bulky.

[beetlejuice]

Another vote for the C925. It's got great optics and strikes a balance between portability and ability. Where I live around this size is the max worthwhile having for the sky conditions. You have to consider that when buying. No point buying something big if light polution limits visibility - and the bigger and heavier the set up is, the less likely you are to use it. The best telescope is the one you use the most.

[Dixie]

The 9.25 is a very nice scope, as is the C8. I've had both. Just one point about the former though - whatever it's optical advantages one is not that is has smaller central obstruction - it is actually larger than a C8 - approx 35% v 32% of diametre. I found planetary performance very similar with both. The 9.25 does drag in the expected slight boost in DSO brightness.

Cheers

Richard

[mert]

Thanks for the comments so far- I'm sure 11 or 12 inches would be too big to handle:icon_eek:

I've seen a few posts in various places that say the Celestron is easier to handle, but if I were to see a good price for a second hand Meade it might be difficult to resist.

The Meade does have the advantage of ACF optics, but lots of people on here seem to get along quite well with a standard SCT.

I can handle the 12" on my own, once you get the hang of it, its worth it