Posts Made By: Ron Scarboro

Buy the N11. The OTA isn't much heavier or less portable than the 9.25 and the way Celestron packages the Nexstar series the 11 is a deal and the 9.25 not so much so. If you’re buying just the OTA the cost difference is substantial and the 9.25 is more of a bargain.

I bought the 9.25 which is mounted on a G11. If I could have afforded it though, I would have purchased the 11 OTA.

I think Mark's experience was an aberration. The 11s I've looked through were consistent with the 9.25 in sharpness and contrast.

Actually the 9.25 has a slightly larger secondary obstruction than the 11. Some might tell you that given identically configured optics the 11 would always outperform the 9.25 based on the design alone w/o having to rely on aperture.

I believe the cult following for the 9.25 was generated on the following:

In years past, it was easier to configure the optics on the 9.25 due to the longer focal ratio of the primary and secondary. However, today there is less sample error in the scopes produced by Meade and Celestron and it is unlikely that there is anything magical about the 9.25 over the 11. Certainly nothing that would overcome the larger aperture and smaller secondary.

Todd Gross owns/owned an excellent sample that was reviewed by him and by Ed Ting and published on the web.

If you're going to spend that kind of money though, buy local and test drive first.

Clear Skies,

Ron

Just ignore the clutter, don't contribute.

I think C11XLT should generally outperform the C9.25XLT. Question is, is the additional cost worth it? Money no object get the C11XLT.

I really don't understand Celestron's pricing though.

Nexstar trim the difference is $485
CGE trim the difference is $405
OTA only the difference is $930

Anacortes was the source.

Having said all that I have the 9.25 because I bought the OTA only and couldn't spend the xtra $1,000.

Ok, I give.

My best views were a pristine still night on top of Mount Everest. Dog-gone (choice of words for Herb) great seeing that night above the clouds. A little chilly, but not too bad.

We had hiked up just before dusk and set up. I didn't dare take the lens cap off as I didn't want the resulting dust to affect light throughput or the optical quality of my refractor.

At least 20 divisions of Saturn's rings must have been visible through my 4in refractor that night although I could only make out 17 or so with my SCT (central obstruction and all).

Truely a magical night. I took pictures, but have loaned them to NASA. I'll post later when they're returned.

Regards,

Ron

Although not GOTO (can definitely be purchased that way) I mounted my 9.25 and FLT110 on a G11. It is very stable.

Link to picture of the set-up: http://www.astromart.com/messages.asp?message_id=139702&page=

In addition to the previous responses, paying the higher prices gets you very little sample error. I've never owned or hear of a bad Televue, William Optics, or Astrophysics diagonal.

However, I've owned Meade and Celestron diagonals (always come with the scope) that were good and I've gotten them that were really bad. One Meade diagonal was so poorly collimated that as you rotated the diagonal (scope on a GEM mount) stars in the center of the FOV would move out of the FOV and then back in again depending on position. I owned a Celestron diagonal that made in defocused stars elongage as if the scope was horribly out of collimation.

In the same breath I've owned those branded diagonals that were very good samples.

Mine is the same way. You have to loosen one and tighten the other two for each correction. They should be tight, but not so tight you can't loosen them with your fingers (with effort).

It makes collimation a frustrating experience.

Regards,

Ron

Fly to Norfolk and drive to Hatteras, NC.

William Optics makes a 2" Minus Violet filter.

I've seen one on a Megrez 80 with excellent results. Can be had reasonably from Anacortes.

http://www.buytelescopes.com/product_list.asp?m=49&t=48

Regards,

Ron

I don't have direct experience with that mount, but I did piggyback an AT1010 to a Meade LX90. I wouldn't think a LX90 would be any sturdier than your mount.

In addition to total weight, proper balance is key. I found the Losmandy stuff too heavy to use to mount such a light telescope and made my own out of angled aluminum.

My tips....
Make sure you keep the AT1010 as close to the SCT OTA as possible to keep the momentum down.

Get the the counterweight as far away from the OTA as will clear the fork arms as possible so the lightest weight possible can be used.

Balance it with the diagonal and a typical eyepiece and you should be fine.