Stellalyra RC8 or Edge800

[Moodtastic]

I have 2 refractors that provide nice wide field images, but I'm looking to fill a gap for the smaller DSOs and maybe some planetary with a long focal length scope.

I have previously been thinking of the Edge800 but the price increase earlier this year from Celestron makes the FLO RC8 look attractive.

Anyone had any experience with either of these, should I budget for any additional gear?

Initially I will be using a guidescope, but if I have issues I might look at an OAG.

 

[johninderby]

You might also consider the StellaLyra 8” Classical Cassegrain which is more of a planetary scope than the RC. The RC s better for bigger DSOs though with it’s wider fov although you mention smaller DSOs.

If imaging then it would be a good idea to upgrade the stock focuser to a Baader Steeltrack RT focuser. The stock focuser is so so but usable for visual use.

I use an 8” CC for visual but will try some planetary imaging when I get the motor drive for my AZ100.

Found a few images online taken with an 8” CC. A better camera would improve things I would think.

Edited October 29, 2021 by johninderby

[Sp@ce_d]

To be honest?... I went from fracs to a C925 & RC8... & 6 years later..  I'm back to a frac..with an Esprit150... no comparison for ease of imaging. The C925 is a lovely visual scope but I wasted a year trying to stop the mirror moving during imaging. Ok so Edge has the locks to sort this.. next was the carbon (altair - gso) RC8.. nice, lasted a few years in the Obsy but collimation & striving for pinpoint stars wore me out in the end. It's a nice scope if you have the time to maintain. Lucky my wife treated me to a nice frac for a "special" birthday last year... lovely.. it just works. Downside.. the cost.. fracs at that focal length are expensive but considering the time, effort.. worth it in the end if you're running a remote Obsy.. even if it's down the garden!  Funny enough I'm just through my old subs from them all as the weather has been so bad.. for some reprocessing & I'm surprised the C925 when it worked had nice contrast.. but if I had to choose between 2 for imaging ( C925 is a great visual) I'd go back to the RC8 & accept collimation is part of the "joy".. 

[Sp@ce_d]

oh and... at that focal length... OAG.. regardless

[Clarkey]

I have the Stella RC8 and I have been really pleased with it. For the money I think it is excellent. I have changed the focuser to a SteelTrack which certainly helps for AP. The standard focuser would probably be OK for planetary imaging but if you are planning to add an auto focuser the slight slippage is a problem.

With regards to collimation it was a concern of mine too. However, during the summer I did re-collimate and it is now much better. I used a combination of the TSRCKOLLI (Reego) and the DSI method. Once you get it 'sorted' in terms of methodology it is not too bad. Fortunately, once set it does not really move. Of all my scopes this is the one definite 'keeper'. I particularly like the fact that I do not have to mess about getting perfect spacing with flatteners or coma correctors.

For planets I would probably go for the CC, but the higher F ratio would be more of a problem for DSO's.

Here are a couple of images I took with it. These were actually done with an ST80 guidescope - but I now have an OAG. I am a novice at AP - only my second season - so these could be better. Also, I now use OAG and have better collimation.

 

[johninderby]

Agree if planetary is the main interest then go with the CC but if it’s DSOs then it’s the RC.  Would like the 10” CC but only available in the truss tube so ££££££

[callisto]

1 minute ago, johninderby said:

Agree if planetary is the main interest then go with the CC but if it’s DSOs then it’s the RC.  Would like the 10” CC but only available in the truss tube so ££££££

Step back John, step back 🤣

[neil phillips]

9 minutes ago, johninderby said:

Agree if planetary is the main interest then go with the CC but if it’s DSOs then it’s the RC.  Would like the 10” CC but only available in the truss tube so ££££££

Not much info on 10" Wonder how it stacks up to the !0" Newts. C9.25s commonly used for lunar and planetary. A solid tube version would have been good. Though better temp control with the truss

[neil phillips]

4 hours ago, johninderby said:

You might also consider the StellaLyra 8” Classical Cassegrain which is more of a planetary scope than the RC. The RC s better for bigger DSOs though with it’s wider fov although you mention smaller DSOs.

If imaging then it would be a good idea to upgrade the stock focuser to a Baader Steeltrack RT focuser. The stock focuser is so so but usable for visual use.

I use an 8” CC for visual but will try some planetary imaging when I get the motor drive for my AZ100.

Found a few images online taken with an 8” CC. A better camera would improve things I would think.

Can tell a lot from that.  Especially Jupiter. But processing not my cup of tea.  Not a lot of high res images out there. Which by now there should be. Thinking of getting a CC6. But also like 6" F8 Newtonians 

[johninderby]

7 minutes ago, neil phillips said:

Not much info on 10" Wonder how it stacks up to the !0" Newts. C9.25s commonly used for lunar and planetary. A solid tube version would have been good. Though better temp control with the truss

There is the old S&T review.

https://agenaastro.com/mwdownloads/download/link/id/65/

Edited October 29, 2021 by johninderby

[neil phillips]

4 hours ago, johninderby said:

There is the old S&T review.

https://agenaastro.com/mwdownloads/download/link/id/65/

Cheers for that John 

[johninderby]

While I would love to get the 10” CC my bank account says be sensible. 😕

Or would have to sell a few scopes to afford it so not on for now. 😭😭😭

[neil phillips]

4 hours ago, johninderby said:

While I would love to get the 10” CC my bank account says be sensible. 😕

Or would have to sell a few scopes to afford it so not on for now. 😭😭😭

Tell you what would love to do a head to head with my 10" Newtonian see what fairs better. I reckon it would be close. I am not sure though ?

its a real unknown. But the open tube of the CC is good for cooldown. Different design is interesting, bigger secondary obstruction than my Newt. Though better baffled.  Higher focal length on the CC. I would say its a design that warrants attention. Against 10" Newts.  C9.25.  C11S. I have no idea at this point which is superior I am talking imaging. Though any benefit will translate to visual. They look very nice. Kind of imagine one on a fork mount

Edited October 30, 2021 by neil phillips

[johninderby]

I found the 8” CC was pretty close to my 10” dob on lunar / planetary so think the 10” CC would do rather well.

Bit academic though for now. However if they brought out a 10” CC solid tube it might be affordable. Surprised they haven’t done it allready? 🤔

BTW that old review of the 8” on CN was a load of ********* as far as I’m concerned. They messed up the actual aperture calculation as well. Newer reviews back up my findings. 🙂

Edited October 30, 2021 by johninderby