Can a C11 HD replace a MAK and 12" Dob

[owned]

Hi,

Just joined and wanted to see what people’s opinions were to this question. I’ve searched for the last week and not found any specific threads that answer this, but during the last week I’m now more clued up on SCT’s vs MAK’s and what not to put on a smallish GEM (i.e. a large Newt).

Here’s my situation. I’ve had a lifetime of semi serious astronomy, getting into it every 10 or so years for short whiles. Nothing very nice scope wise over the years, mainly 4” reflectors and other small stuff. I’ve just built a 6” f12 refractor and I like it, but not enough it seems. I’m gagging for some more aperture and less chromatic aberration, hence a change of direction is required I think. If I had built a 6” APO refractor with a lens that cost a five figure sum, then I don’t think I would be complaining, but it’s just an air spaced acro doublet and I think a good 8” newt would have it any day. I’ve not looked though any big scopes and never joined a club, so can’t judge how good my 6” refractor is against bigger SCT’s, newts or similar sized MAK’s.

So my question is. Would you buy a 12 or 14” skywatcher GOTO dob and Skywatcher MAK 180, or for around the same amount of cash get a Celestron C11 edge HD. I already have an HEQ5 Pro mount which tracks very well from my location and would be ideal for the MAK 180, leaving me with getting a 12 or ideally 14” GOTO dob. If I went for the C11 edge HD I maybe able to use the HEQ5 Pro mount just for visual, but there is no way I could hang any serious AP kit off it and would probably sell it and get an HEQ6 Pro instead.

I’m about 80% visual and 20% AP at the moment, but think I could get more into AP as I get more time. I’ve only really had scopes that have been good at planets so far in my life so have always looked at them, but I’m gasping to look at some DSO and think that I would go mainly for DSO as there is so much more to see than planets.

So can a C11 replace a MAK for planetary use and a large GOTO dob for DSO.? And how much difference bettween the C11 and the C11 edge HD.

[umadog]

My understanding is that the field is better corrected in the EdgeHD. Less coma around the edges. It'll make the difference for AP but possibly not worth the price increase for visual.

I don't believe in this distinction between planetary and visual scopes. I'm not trying to stir up controversy, but it seems to me that scopes with very long focal lengths and small primaries are described as "planetary" scopes not because they're great on planets but because they're aren't so great at DSOs. Sure, they can often produce good planetary views for their size, but that doesn't mean better views aren't possible. Similarly, large reflectors which have sub-standard primary mirrors (or are poorly collimated) don't produce sharp images and you notice that more on planets than DSOs. So big scopes with optical issues become "good DSO scopes." When everything comes together correctly, a well made large reflector is a killer scope both on DSOs and planets. The brighter image makes a difference on planets. So if you're mostly visual, I'd suggest the 14" Dob (assuming you can handle the size) for all your visual needs. (Large commercially made scopes with good optical quality are now coming out of Asia. It's still a lottery, though, and some may need re-figures.) Then get something specialised for AP. A good fast refractor will do the job very well. I have a friend who consistently pulls stunning images out of a 3" refractor.

[dave armeson]

I have a Skywatcher Mak 180 Pro - it is absolutely AWESOME on the Moon and Planets and very impressive on Deep-Sky Objects. Remember most of the Messier objects arent large and despite a Mak's smaller FOV at f/15 you can still get great views and resolution on star cluster, galaxies etc, with the proper choice of eyepiece you could call a 180 pro a reasonable "all rounder" with superb punch for the Moon and planets. OK it's never going to be a wide-field scope - but how often do you need one?

[faulksy]

have you considered the 9.25 sct amazed with mine, but i would say that

[Dunkster]

From the little time I've had out with it so far, my C11HD has blown my socks off, even from my light polluted back yard My frame of reference is a Nexstar 6SE though, which would be no match for your 6" refractor!

The C11 is reasonably light too (13kg) and it should be OK on your HEQ5 for visual. A 12 or 14 inch Dob would obviously give you more light collecting ability.

[ollypenrice]

If you want to get into DS imaging a long focal length F10 scope is about as bad a choice as it would be possible to make, in my opinion. It can be done (Tim does it superbly) but I would not want to be doing it. I would take DS AP out of the equation.

In visual I find my own 10 inch SCT too cramped. You can say that most Messiers are small but I prefer to have a shorter FL for visual. On the other hand the SCT is mighty convenient. However, bear in mind that our ten inch SCT has a longer FL than our twenty inch Newt, so the Newt goes both wider and way deeper. Four times the light grasp. But on the other hand the Edge optics are exquisite. AAAAaaaarrrrgghh!!!!!! What a nightmare...

Olly