LX200 12"UHTC vs C11 XLT - tough decision

[GTom]

Considering a larger SCT to step up from my grab and go C5, can't decide between 11" (Celestron non-edge XLT) and 12" (Meade LX200, UHTC, non-ACF): I need some input from those who had the pleasure comparing these two scopes (F10 version from Meade), what would be the verdict? 

 

Visual, planetary and DSO AP all considered, DSO would be using the Starizona 0.63x - not planning Hyperstar. Some mobility is required, but lucky me I can lift the 12" LXD200 - very likely would be in trouble with the 14" Meade.

 

[Cleetus]

I have never used a Celestron but I had a 12" GPS Meade for many years. It was a great telescope and never broke down in over 20 years. However, it is huge and and I eventually sold it because I wanted to downsize to something more manageable. Furthermore, it was housed in an observatory and I still felt the need for something smaller so if you are going to set up and take down every session then you have to ask yourself how long before you get tired of this. Only you can answer that question.

Also, had I bought the 10" instead I have a feeling I would never have got rid of it. You should consider this as well as taking into account your skies, what type of objects you will mainly observe, and the difference a 10" compared to the 12" would be. Of course, a bigger aperture will be capable of showing more but will your seeing conditions allow you to take full advantage?

[JeremyS]

When I looked at this years ago, I went for the C11 as it is much lighter. 

[Deadlake]

The C11 has been around years, well supported and all the accessories you could imagine.

I went with a C11 as well.

[DirkSteele]

I used the 10” LX200 for my masters astrophysics project for a year  and the 12” LX200 as resident astronomer at a lodge in Nambia for several weeks. I bought a fork mounted C11 in 2002 post uni. At the time, that was driven by the noise of the motors. The Meade were very loud and Celestron was noticeably quieter (and I was worried about complaints from neighbours).

 

While that was driver for my choice, having now experience of both, I would still pick the C11. Why? The size and weight. One inch might not seem much, but it adds a material amount of extra weight and size. Extra glass in the mirror. Extra glass in the corrector. More metal in the forks and the tube itself. I was setting up and taking down each time I used it and the OTA plus fork was at the limit of carrying (less the weight but the awkward bulk x weight of it).

 

Both scopes are more or less equivalent in the optics (12” will via touch deeper but not by much and both should be good optical quality) and both use most of the same after market accessories as they both established the standard for SCTs. So unless you are using a permanent set up, C11 should be the choice.

[ollypenrice]

I think you'll find precious little to choose between them, the deal you get being, in all probability, the major factor. I currently have two Meades, 10 inch and 14 inch, but only because they happened to turn up. On a dead level playing field I'd probably go for Celestron but would beware of storms in teacups.

Olly

Edited July 15, 2023 by ollypenrice
typo

[Deadlake]

10 hours ago, DirkSteele said:

Both scopes are more or less equivalent in the optics (12” will via touch deeper but not by much and both should be good optical quality) and both use most of the same after market accessories as they both established the standard for SCTs. So unless you are using a permanent set up, C11 should be the choice.

The rear cell is different between the Meade and Celestron for starters…

The only time I would say Meade is they have a faster F8 version, but apart from that not much to choose from apart from popularity..

[DirkSteele]

2 minutes ago, Deadlake said:

The rear cell is different between the Meade and Celestron for starters…

The only time I would say Meade is they have a faster F8 version, but apart from that not much to choose from apart from popularity..

Unless they changed that since 2012 both use the same thread visual back size which is what I was referring in regards aftermarket accessories. If Meade have changed, the disregard the comment on same accessories use.

[Deadlake]

1 hour ago, DirkSteele said:

Unless they changed that since 2012 both use the same thread visual back size which is what I was referring in regards aftermarket accessories. If Meade have changed, the disregard the comment on same accessories use.

AP have different sized real cell adapters to 2.7”  for Meade and Celestron for example.

[GTom]

Many thanks for all comments, while doing my research on the ota-s noticed that Meade LX200 users quite often satisfied using guidescopes for AP and complain little about image shift, flexure, etc. The c11-c14 camp is quite the opposite, OAG seems to be a must.

The added weight is both bad and good news: I can manage the weight. Not comfy, but perfectly doable. The good news: once the heavy stuff in place, WIND becomes much less of an issue...