8" Edge vs C 9.25

[Elp]

Define better.

You'll get the light gathering capability and speed going larger but you'll also increase the focal length, if you're imaging your mount and autoguiding need to be much better as a result. A decent refractor will generally be sharper than an SCT (I assume this is in relation to your comment of being better).

The edge HD is known to be a better imaging scope than the standard SCT but it depends on how good you need the mechanics of the scope to be and the corrected field of view.

What ever option you choose for imaging, you have to dedicate the hours into getting a good image.

Edited December 8, 2023 by Elp

[bosun21]

On 07/02/2021 at 10:19, Stu said:

Potentially useful review here:

https://astronomynow.com/2015/02/25/celestron-nexstar-evolution-9-25-review/
 

It says there is a three second damping time with the tripod at mid height. That’s ok but may be a little frustrating at high powers. Single arm mounts just can’t be as stable as dual, or a good alt az or EQ mount. It would be interesting to hear from anyone who has used this combo. For example the 8” SCT is often said to be a bit much for the SE mount, is the 925 similarly a bit much for the Evo or is it ok? I don’t know, others will be able to advise better. Next step up is the CPC but that is a much more cumbersome arrangement with the scope and mount as one unit.

I used to own the C8 on the SE mount and found that it vibrated like a tumble dryer at high magnification. I fitted an electric focuser motor to compensate for this. Needless to say I sold both.

[Elp]

I'd assume they'd use an EQ mount, attempting to image DSO on an alt az isn't wise.