Posts Made By: Jim Zinn

Before I got my NextStar 11, I considered a 9.25 because of the weight. Then I hefted both. For the extra aperture, I didn't really feel the difference. The 11 weighs only 7 pounds more than the 9.25. They are essentially the same size physically too.

I have found that the problem is not in carrying or managing the beast. It is bending and twisting to get it out of the suitcase style JMI case. On occasions, I have carried it to star parties or dark skies riding under a blanket, belted into the passenger seat of my car where it is much easier to grab. Once lifted, the scopes are balanced well. On more than one occasion, I have carried the 11 across several dozen yards of observing field to set up. I am careful to not trip, but my 61 year old back doesn't complain about holding or carrying - only lifting it from the blasted case. Now I believe that the new JMI cases for the CPC is a straight up lift, not the twist and groan of the old NexStar cases.

I've never regretted getting the 11. The cost is close and the weight is closer to the 9.25. And it would definitely be an improved view on the 8.

Jim in Texas

Nice shots. That box looks like something my Carolina Wrens could use. Any plans or drawings?

Jim in Texas

Sort of wonder if it has anything to do with current prices. In the old days, ep's weren't all that high end it seems. Now with premium types going for $400-$800, maybe it seems time to jump in.

Jim

I am an SCT guy.

Fork mounted 11 inch Celestron. I, too, am a visual observer so I consider the CPC/Nexstar scopes to be the best visual observing platform. The compromises that you have to make call for prep and attention to detail on the part of the observer.

You have to cool the scope. How hard this is depends on where you live. Here in north Texas, I use a Cat Cooler. The most I ever had to use it to get to stable images was thirty minutes before I started and then (this one time) about thirty minutes around 2am as the temp dropped.

You have to collimate the scope. It holds longer than a dob but still needs to be done. It isn't hard, but you would be surprised how many of the tales of "fuzzy" SCT's involve poorly collimated scopes that haven't been cooled. The views from my properly cooled and collimated C11 have been jaw dropping.

I do planets but prefer deep sky. This scope does it all well.

It's biggest advantage is the tracking. I like the go-to but could live without it. Not without the tracking. It's not just a matter of how ling the object is in the field, but keeping it in the center. I don't really like trying to view things at the edge of the field. With my Nexstar, I put an object in the center and it is there for hours. I sketch so I need an object to remain in it's position relative to its surroundings for a long time.

Then there is the comfort. With the addition of a viewing chair, an alt-ax SCT has the most comfortable viewing position of any scope, the eyepiece always erect and the travel of ep from horizon to zenith is only a mater of inches. I believe comfort is a big viewing feature. I can easily enjoy gazing for several minutes at a time at one object. I get more detail the longer I look without having to contort my back or strain my neck.

The two drawbacks that I see are field of view and scanning. You will be limited to approximately one degree. And the tracking SCT's don't really let you amble about the sky. I do like pushing and pulling on a dob when I'm playing around just scanning a section of sky, but then when I find something I have to start the nudge, nudge to keep it in view.

I solve both problems by having a small refractor on a manual alt-az mount. Wide views and simple predictable scanning. I believe you already have the refractor. I set both scopes up beside each other and alternate all night long.

But then I am, as I said, and SCT guy.