C11 vs Starmaster 11

The GPS C11 offers so much more than the Starmaster 11(GOTO, tracking) for about the same cost, why would I buy a Starmaster?

Are the optics THAT much better ?
Would I see that much more ?
Is it strictly planetary ?

I have not looked through either - closest is a Meade 8 and 10" - which was not impressive.

Thanks for your advice.

Well, I happen to think that the Starmaster is that much better...or more specifically, the Zambuto mirror MAKES it that much better, IMHO. Much smaller central obstruction, around 17% vs what, 33% CO for the C11? The Starmaster has much better contrast on the moon and planets, faster cooldown than the C11, smoother mirror (can the C11 claim .95 or better Strehl?), no dew problems, much lighter package when broken down, and Rick's legendary customer service. Otherwise, 11" is 11".

I have to admit that tracking would be nice and that can be had with an equatorial platform. With DSCs one can push to faster than the C11 GPS can goto. But, I guess it's a bit harder to do astrophotography with the Starmaster...

Oh yeah, I might be a bit biased.

Doug
Midway, FL
Starmaster 11" f/5.4 ELT

hi,

The Starmaster has better optics for sure ( but the c11 optics are very good ) ...the C11 is much more versatile .. depends on what you want.

clear skies,

Larry Citro

Another thing to consider is weight. The C11 GPS is a large scope that requires lifting the OTA onto the mount. The mirror box in the the StarMaster (and other big Dobs) can also be heavy - although I doubt the 11" would be too bad - but you don't have to lift it very high to get it into the rocker box. If you are willing to buy used, you might consider a 12.5" StarMaster.

John R.

Couple quick comments:

I had my StarMaster ELT 11 F/5.4 down at WSP last
month. Now I might be biased, but the detail I was
seeing on Jupiter and Io equaled or bettered any scope
there including the $40K 10" APO. The equatorial band
on Io was plain as day. It cools fast and has
fantastic optics. I use a Tom O. Equatorial
Platform and tracking is great. Only down side I've
found on this scope, is that the collimation has a
slight dependence on elevation (the 4-pole truss has
a tiny bit of sag). But if you collimate at 70 or 90
degree elevation it should be fine. Heaviest part is
something like 30 pounds; in fact it is not too hard
to pickup the entire assembled OTA and drop in on the
rocker box.

I don't have experience with the C11, but can say a
few words about the C9.25 and C14.

I've also got a C9.25 and the excellent reputation
these have is well deserved. The optics are 1/10
p-v range, but it can take hours to cool some nights.
A C9.25 on a G11 is a really nice professional grade
set up.

I also got a look through a couple C14s at WSP and
I will say they were certainly the most bang-for-buck
10" scopes I saw there. Planetary views compared
very favorably to the 10" APO. But I would not have
given them high marks as 14" scopes; there was
either alot of spherical aberration, or there was
color from the 0.63x corrector. Views were great
but extra-focal star test was not pretty.

Good luck!

Quite a few people have commented that the optics in the Starmaster are going to be better, so that it will be the better planetary scope. Please note that better optics also mean better deep sky performance. Deep sky objects also benefit from quality optics, which will show subtle details in DSOs not revealed by poorer instruments.

Gary,

Every Starmaster and Portaball telescope that I've used having a Zambuto mirror has been superb optically.

Dave Mitsky