| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Astro - Amateur Forum » C11 or meade lx200 r 10"...
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| olli... |
 Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 12:01 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Hello,
For only visuel use especially for deepsky observations what would be
the better choice?
C11 ota or lx200 acf 10" ota on a EQ6 pro mount!
Maybe someone who's in the position of one off those scope can help me
out.
What can I expect for deepsky observations!
regards
olli |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| LarryG... |
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 4:45 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 21, 5:01 pm, olli <olivier.... at (no spam) telenet.be> wrote:
Quote: Hello,
For only visuel use especially for deepsky observations what would be
the better choice?
C11 ota or lx200 acf 10" ota on a EQ6 pro mount!
Maybe someone who's in the position of one off those scope can help me
out.
What can I expect for deepsky observations!
regards
olli
Assuming that both have equivilent coatings and throughput, the C11
should yield slightly brighter images on-axis. Meade has made a
selling point of its oversize primary mirrors, to catch more edge rays
from the corrector. I don't know if the C11 has an oversized mirror
or not.
In all, the issue could be a wash, and would come down to reputation
for optical quality and mechanical features, rather than just light-
gathering power alone.
At one time, a few years ago, the C9 was widely rumored to have
excellent optics. The Meade 2080 (8") I had 20 years ago, had great
optics, while the C8 I had up to 5 years ago, was a little softer on
focus.
Larry G. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Craig... |
| Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 11:14 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 15:01:17 -0700 (PDT), olli wrote:
Quote: Hello,
For only visuel use especially for deepsky observations what would be
the better choice?
C11 ota or lx200 acf 10" ota on a EQ6 pro mount!
Maybe someone who's in the position of one off those scope can help me
out.
What can I expect for deepsky observations!
regards
olli
If you are going for visual only I'd go for the C11. While the ACF LX-200s
are nice, I'll give Celestron the edge for optical quality any day. I've
got an LX-200 OTA (non ACF) on a G-11 and love it, I've got 2 good friends
that have C-11s on th esame mount and the optical quality on both are
slightly better than mine. One is older by about 2 years and one is brand
new. Plus the Celestrons have better focusers than the Meade with less
mirror shift/flop.
Craig |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Abo... |
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 10:50 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
olli wrote:
Quote: Hello,
For only visuel use especially for deepsky observations what would be
the better choice?
C11 ota or lx200 acf 10" ota on a EQ6 pro mount!
Maybe someone who's in the position of one off those scope can help me
out.
What can I expect for deepsky observations!
regards
olli
If it's for visual only would you not prefer to get a huge Dob instead?
--
Abo |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Wed Jan 07, 2009 7:03 pm
|
|