C9.25 or C11

I used to have a C8 but got rid of it due to unsatisfactory images. Now, I'm wondering if it was more lack of knowledge of the design, than a problem with the scope :S Anyway, I'm considering getting another compound, but this time, I'm looking into the C9.25 and C11. Which would you choose? also...Carbon fiber or Aluminum? Other than looks, Any real advantage to CF? Appears that Celestron has discontinued them.

Will be using with a DM-6 Alt/az, which should be able to handle either one.

Thanks.....

Kurt Endres said:

I used to have a C8 but got rid of it due to unsatisfactory images. Now, I'm wondering if it was more lack of knowledge of the design, than a problem with the scope :S Anyway, I'm considering getting another compound, but this time, I'm looking into the C9.25 and C11. Which would you choose? also...Carbon fiber or Aluminum? Other than looks, Any real advantage to CF? Appears that Celestron has discontinued them.

Will be using with a DM-6 Alt/az, which should be able to handle either one.

Thanks.....

Unless you buy used, it will be aluminum, and unless you are an imager it doesn't make any diff. Actually, aluminum-tube scopes reach thermal equilibrium faster.

As for your previous problems, the two keys are collimation (on a star's diffraction rings), and cooldown.

9.25 or 11? That depends on you. Everything will look better in the 11, especially if you must observe from light pollution.

8)

The 9.25 makes slightly different assumptions in its design (than most SCT's) and has had a reputation for years as one of the high points in the lineup.

However, the move from an 8 to a 9.25 will not be as big an improvement as to an 11.

You got the mount? Can the DM-6 handle the larger scope comfortably?

Alex

The one thing that I did not like about my C9.25 were the soft images for visual work. I agree that the C11 would be a better upgrade from your C8.