SN10 or C9.25?

I have an opportunity to purchase a used Meade SN10 with UHTC coating for a good price. There are used Celestron 9.25s available on AM from time to time a somewhat higher prices.

In the opinion of this august group, which would be better for deep space imaging? The SN10 is much faster at f/4 than the C9.25's f/10.
But the SN10 weighs 30 pounds and the C9.25 only weighs 20 pounds.

I have a non-go-to Losmandy G11 which would handle either. But I would like a go-to mount that is more easily portable than the heavy G11 for visual use. I'm thinking of an Orion Sirius. Or if I can save enough pennies, a G8 with Gemini 2.

I live under the heavily light-polluted skies of Florida's Central Gulf Coast. Sometimes I go to a darker remote area or to Chiefland for really dark skies.

So, given the above scenario, assuming I use the G11 for imaging and the lighter mount for visual, would the SN10 or the C9.25 be more satisfying?

Steven Gaber
Oldsmar, FL

The 9.25" would be the better choice to mount on a G-11 I would think, but you could probably use either one. I believe a GM-8 would handle the 9.25" but not sure about the SN10.

The SCT would have more DEW issues on the corrector plate and would take a little longer to cool down at night. It will hold collimation better than the SN10, which will require constant tweaks.

The SN10 will give wider fields than the SCT, which may or may not make a difference to you.

For imaging, the SN10 would be easier, SCT's with their long focal length and mirror flop would require an OAG for guiding and would be harder to get good guiding than the slower SN10 most likely.