C8 Edge or not for visual

[DaveGibbons]

Simple question of choice. Putting aside the cost difference. Is it worth getting the Celestron HD edge for pure visual use as opposed to the old school model? answers on a postcard please!

regards

Dave

[Gutross]

from what ive read and watched about the edge, it was designed to have pinpoint stars edge to edge, allowing for 35mm imaging chips to have pinpoint stars edge to edge. If you will be doing visual only, from now till you cant set up the scope anymore then i dont think the extra cost for the edge series is worth it, stick with the XLT series for the sharper visual views

i myself have settled on the VX8 XLT over the edge, i will be working my way into imaging but i dont think ill ever get a 35mm CCD to justify the extra cost of the EDGE ,  just need to save the cash.

but if imaging ever crosses your mind at all the edge might be a good idea if you can aford it. plus you get to say your living on the edge

[DaveS]

I think, from what is written on the FLO, that for purely visual with no imaging intended that the original will serve as well as the Edge HD version at a useful cost saving.

[nmoushon]

With wide EP you will notice some eggy stars near the far edges in visual. But if you dont have the extra wide EP I think you wont even notice the eggy stars. So unless you dont mind spending the extra cash or really want a complete flat field across the entire FoV for any EP then the non-edge version should work great.

[Stu]

Coincidentally, I have an 8" Edge HD coming my way on Wednesday. This will be purely for visual use, but I will be using Ethos eyepieces in it (amongst others), so the extra correction/flat field should be useful.

Will report findings as soon as I can.

Stu

[melsky]

I've used my 8" edge HD with the 0.7 reducer and a 21mm Ethos eyepiece and it's lovely and crisp all the way to the edge.

Mel

[ollypenrice]

Oddly enough I've never read a back to back comparison in visual use and it would be nice to see one because standard wisdom tends to say it makes little difference visually. But does it? I haven't a clue though I'd like to know.

Olly

[Stu]

Oddly enough I've never read a back to back comparison in visual use and it would be nice to see one because standard wisdom tends to say it makes little difference visually. But does it? I haven't a clue though I'd like to know.

Olly

I couldn't find anything when I was looking either Olly. Just a couple of references to the fact that there was some benefit for widefield eyepieces (as mentioned by Melsky) which I intend to use.

[ollypenrice]

I couldn't find anything when I was looking either Olly. Just a couple of references to the fact that there was some benefit for widefield eyepieces (as mentioned by Melsky) which I intend to use.

I certainly would want at least one widefield EP if using an SCT. My ten inch Meade isn't perfect near the field stop in the long FL TeleVues so the Edge might be worth having.

Olly

[Stu]

I certainly would want at least one widefield EP if using an SCT. My ten inch Meade isn't perfect near the field stop in the long FL TeleVues so the Edge might be worth having.

Olly

I'll give the 31mm nag and 21e a go and see what they are like. 31 should give a 1.25 degree fov, not too bad.

[Chris]

I've owned both the C8 XLT and the C8 Edge, and used eyepieces ranging from 68 to 100 degrees with both. 

The C8 xlt was a nice scope but did show a noticeable drop off in sharpness off axis even in my old 68 degree Maxvision's, and on axis the stars were quite 'big'.

The C8 Edge was as you would imaging flat right across 100 degrees! Also I noticed on axis stars were sharper.  

I will be interested to hear how Stu gets on with his Edge when he gets it, I would certainly have another one down the line at some point.

[Grotemobile]

I had a C11, before my 8"cpc edge.

Optics are a lot better all round.

Getting better picts now, than I ever

did with the C11.

Steve.

[Stu]

I had a C11, before my 8"cpc edge.

Optics are a lot better all round.

Getting better picts now, than I ever

did with the C11.

Steve.

Do you think any of that is seeing related Steve?

[coopman827]

I tried a C8 once before and the field curvature was very noticeable to me. The central 50% of the FOV would be clear and the rest of the FOV was blurry. I just received an 8" Edge HD that is awaiting first light. I hope that I see a BIG improvement.

[Chris]

I tried a C8 once before and the field curvature was very noticeable to me. The central 50% of the FOV would be clear and the rest of the FOV was blurry. I just received an 8" Edge HD that is awaiting first light. I hope that I see a BIG improvement.

Oh you will, trust me

[Grotemobile]

Do you think any of that is seeing related Steve?

 

With the edge, U can use higher mag,

than the basic C scopes. Lot clearer.

The C11 was to big.Ok for dark sites.

I still cannot believe a smaller scope

would be better. Depends were U live.

If U got perfect conditions, a big scope

would be better. I live in a town. If U

could afford it, the edge 9.25 would be

the one to go for. My CPC 800 HD is spot

on, for planetary imaging. No way of doing,

DSO imaging here.

Steve