Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

Recommended Posts

What makes the EdgeHD C11 £1,700 more than the XLT version aside the flat field? Is the field flatter than using an XLT with a field flattener which only costs £100?

This is purely an academic question as I already own a standard C11 and was asked how much "better" the EdgeHD was, comapred to an XLT with a flattener. 

Thanks.

James

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. That link doesn’t clearly explain the benefits over an XLT with a flatener but the 24 page PDF may do, and I’m planning on reading that tomorrow. Thanks for the link.

James

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends on what you are intending to use it for.  For Deep sky it allows for a much greater field of view without optical distortions becoming apparent.  Most SCT flatteners have more limited fields in this regards because of limitations of their design whereas the Edge's I believe are corrected for full frame (or close to) cameras which requires a lot more glass and hence expense.  In addition there are mechanical differences between the two.  There is likely also the impact of what the market will pay for an off the shelf design factor and in the UK I think there is a bit of one distributor syndrome that is coming into play.

If you are a deepsky imager with a large CCD then the Edge wins.  For visual, photometry, spectroscopy or solar system imaging the Edge only really has the mechanical benefits (e.g. mirror lock etc).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. 

The 24 page article is fascinating to read.

Optically, it seems the differences are:

- the EdgeHD is coma free as it has a lens inside the baffle tube

- the EdgeHD delivers a flat field as it has a second lens inside the baffle tube

- the EdgeHD may generate less vignetting as they have "placed the primary and secondary mirrors closer than they had been in the classic SCT, and designed new baffle tubes for both mirrors that allow a larger illuminated field of view."

As you say, mechanically the differences are:

- the mirror lock

- ventilation ports as the baffle tube is now sealed with lenses inside.

 

As I only really use the central part of the FoV for imaging, I can stick with the classic SCT, but can see the advantages of the EdgeHD for full frame deep sky stuff.

James

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EdgeHD are much better you can take really good images with SCT with flattener /Reducer but EdgeHD have pinpoint stars and mirror locks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think others have covered the differences very well. 
 

The edge hd scopes are mainly for imaging I wouldn’t get one just for visual.
 

Just want to add I’ve recently started imaging with my 11edge and I’ve been very pleased how well the scope covers an aps-c sensor especially at f10. 
 

The mirror locks on mine didn’t stop flexure but that could have been from other causes. An OAG is essential if going over 2min exposures. 
 

unfortunately I’ve only got one mount and at the moment want to concentrate on wide field but I have full confidence the edge hd will give me results in the future. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The real size of the corrected field of the Edge scopes was initially unclear and Celestron revised it. They now say 42mm without reducer and 26.7mm with it. https://www.celestron.com/blogs/knowledgebase/what-is-the-optimized-image-circle-for-the-edgehd-otas-and-reducers

They claim that this will illuminate a 35mm sensor, unreduced, but it strikes me that this is optimistic. I think my Kodak 11 meg CCD needs about 45mm.

Olly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the XLT version, the outer part of the FOV is distorted when the on-axis image is in focus.  With the Edge HD version, the whole FOV is flat and fairly sharp (as sharp as an SCT can get, anyways).  This is my viewing experience (visual only).      

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a product is skillfully marketed, a higher price on its own is viewed by many customers as a real advantage 🤠
Terms such as "premium" or "for the serious user" imbue an air of exclusivity in their own right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Its probably like most telescope equipment/optics. To get that little bit more performance can cost an awful lot more money. Diminishing rate of increase in performance for an extra lot more money. I suppose the buyer has to weigh up if that extra performance is needed and if the extra cost is really worth it to them. You pays your money and takes you choice

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The production cost increases significantly when working to higher tolerances.

That in combination with the additional optical elements in the baffle tube to correct for both coma and field curvature is the reason for the price difference.

Also the margins tend to be higher on premium products.

The white paper makes a good read, a skilfully executed technical sales document.

For Visual some people are more sensitive to the coma in conventional SCT designs which makes the EdgeHD attractive.

Another thing is that as interests evolve over time the EdgeHD is better futures proofed for an observer who starts out main interested in visual but becomes interested in imaging.

The pricing in the UK is incredibly expensive compared to the US it looks as if Celestron want to preserve their profit margins in USD despite the fact that the telescopes are manufactured in China by Syntra.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The C9.25, 11 (and 14) are a big big jump up in price and makes the 8" seem like a good buy in comparison.

I've seen the 8" in the £1000 - £1100 sort of territory at Astroshows. At that price its a good scope and a compelling choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.