Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

Equipment Discussions >> Cats & Casses

Pages: 1 | 2 | (show all)
barasits
sage


Reged: 06/12/11

Loc: Chicago
Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: rmollise]
      #4766800 - 08/24/11 04:45 PM

Uncle Rod, your equation is missing the personal preference variable. For me, the performance improvement of the EdgeHD was enough to justify replacing my standard SCT. But I understand that it might not be enough of a difference for others.

Geoff


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rmollise
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: barasits]
      #4766953 - 08/24/11 06:06 PM

Quote:

Uncle Rod, your equation is missing the personal preference variable. For me, the performance improvement of the EdgeHD was enough to justify replacing my standard SCT. But I understand that it might not be enough of a difference for others.

Geoff




It's not for me. Why not? The reducer problem. So far no reducer has been shown to be fully suitable with these scopes. That means observing and imaging at f/10.

And the dirty little secret? With the Celestron r/c in place the field in a standard SCT looks very close to that of an HD.

It's considerably cheaper, and I like THAT, too.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
barasits
sage


Reged: 06/12/11

Loc: Chicago
Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: rmollise]
      #4767100 - 08/24/11 07:16 PM

Quote:

It's not for me. Why not? The reducer problem. So far no reducer has been shown to be fully suitable with these scopes. That means observing and imaging at f/10.



Patience. The reducer will come.

Quote:

And the dirty little secret? With the Celestron r/c in place the field in a standard SCT looks very close to that of an HD.



It's not for me.

Quote:

It's considerably cheaper, and I like THAT, too.



I've got no comeback for that one.

Geoff


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rmollise
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: barasits]
      #4767292 - 08/24/11 08:43 PM

Quote:

[
Quote:

And the dirty little secret? With the Celestron r/c in place the field in a standard SCT looks very close to that of an HD.



It's not for me.






That's fine...as always, I can only relate my own experience...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dobsoscope
sage
*****

Reged: 05/24/06

Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: rmollise]
      #4767811 - 08/25/11 02:51 AM

As they say, to each his/her own!
As I see it all new Celestron series will be based on the HD scopes from now on


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rmollise
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: dobsoscope]
      #4767945 - 08/25/11 07:39 AM

Quote:

As they say, to each his/her own!
As I see it all new Celestron series will be based on the HD scopes from now on




Unlikely.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
barasits
sage


Reged: 06/12/11

Loc: Chicago
Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: rmollise]
      #4768781 - 08/25/11 03:07 PM

Quote:

Quote:

As they say, to each his/her own!
As I see it all new Celestron series will be based on the HD scopes from now on




Unlikely.



Please elaborate. Do you think Celestron will continue to produce standard SCTs as well as EdgeHD SCTs for the foreseeable future, or do you think the EdgeHD is Celestron's version of "New Coke"?

Geoff


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
lightfever
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 09/27/04

Loc: Macomb Michigan
Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: barasits]
      #4768800 - 08/25/11 03:24 PM

I really like my 9.25 Edge HD but I can't see Celestron giving up on the standard SCT without an adequate solution to the reducer problem!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rmollise
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: barasits]
      #4769184 - 08/25/11 07:45 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

As they say, to each his/her own!
As I see it all new Celestron series will be based on the HD scopes from now on




Unlikely.



Please elaborate. Do you think Celestron will continue to produce standard SCTs as well as EdgeHD SCTs for the foreseeable future, or do you think the EdgeHD is Celestron's version of "New Coke"?

Geoff




The former. I believe Celestron, like Meade, will continue to also sell conventional SCTs.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
teskridg
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 01/15/08

Loc: PA
Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: Bob Griffiths]
      #4770481 - 08/26/11 01:18 PM

Quote:

I can NOT answer your question as I own 8 and 11 inch REGULAR Scts BUT have looked thru a buddies new 8' Edge a few times...

To me as a 100 percent visual observer who honestly does not dwell looking at the stars at the extreme edge of the eyepieces FOV I "personally" do not see the Edge being worth the extra money....

BUT BELIEVE Me the edge is better... no ands no ifs nor any butts but a visual observer who uses a Focal reducer combined with a pair of old worn out eyeballs have no desire (READ NEED) to upgrade...

Bob G.




Bob G., I believe you have stated before in reference to the improved coma correction in the Meade ACF line (which does not flatten the edge of field as does the Celeston HD's) that the difference from the standard SCT was worth perhaps another $20 to you; I agree. To which I might add that my understanding is that the passive vents in the HD versions may need to be supplemented with fans in order to equilibrate with ambient temperatures satisfactorily. This adds to the costs, the wiring, and the battery requirements. A beauty of the standard CPC series is that a Starizona battery pack works great on the base of the CPC, there are no cables with which to deal, and cord wrap may be turned off, so the darned thing doesn't have to sometimes rotate forever 359° to goto from one target to another. Of course, as I am thinking about adding a dew heater and strips, all bets are off on the cord wrap deal, but the point is a standard 8" SCT will cool down quicker and depending on your tolerance of edge-of-field distortions, will be very satisfactory to you. My recommendation is, before I invested in the HD, I'd like to try the views through both types and see if the upgrade is really worth it to me. Tim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Eddgie
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 02/01/06

Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: teskridg]
      #4770876 - 08/26/11 05:43 PM

I guess I am somewhat surprised at how many people don't really care about the edge of field performance for visual use.

After many years of using refractors, I came to realize that the REAL benefit of refractors was the fact that they tended to have far better off axis performance. I didn't drink the "refrators have better contrast" kool-aid, but every time I looked through refractors with low power naglers in teh diagonal, the view was always amazing. Everything in the field was sharp.

The EdgeHD is the first reflecting telescope that I have ever used that provides esentially the same "WOW" feeling when viewing wide, rich fields.

I personally think the EdgeHD is sooooo far superrior to the standard SCT that I can no longer tolerate Naglers in a standard SCT. The edge of the field (where there is often a lot of stars that add an great deal of context to the field) truely looks "Refractor Like" in the EdgeHD.

Side by side, my EdgeHD gives up very little off axis to my 6" APO when the field is equally as wide. Using it with a 31mm Nagler or a 20mm Nagler is a magnificent experience.

So, you like what you like, and if the loss of off axis sharpness doesn't bother you, I get it, but I just wonder WHY it doesn't bother so many people? 70% of all the background stars in a rich field are in the outer half. It just suprises me that so many people are OK with 70% of these stars being badly abberated.

Anyway, I personally would never buy another standard SCT again. The EdgeHD made the SCT a scope for the 21st century. The old design was a produce of the mid-20th century when 1.25" Erfles were the widefield eyepeice of the day.

So much has changed. And FINALLY, the SCT has caught up to current eyepeice technology.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
lightfever
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 09/27/04

Loc: Macomb Michigan
Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: Eddgie]
      #4771210 - 08/26/11 10:34 PM

Quote:

I guess I am somewhat surprised at how many people don't really care about the edge of field performance for visual use.

After many years of using refractors, I came to realize that the REAL benefit of refractors was the fact that they tended to have far better off axis performance. I didn't drink the "refrators have better contrast" kool-aid, but every time I looked through refractors with low power naglers in teh diagonal, the view was always amazing. Everything in the field was sharp.

The EdgeHD is the first reflecting telescope that I have ever used that provides esentially the same "WOW" feeling when viewing wide, rich fields.

I personally think the EdgeHD is sooooo far superrior to the standard SCT that I can no longer tolerate Naglers in a standard SCT. The edge of the field (where there is often a lot of stars that add an great deal of context to the field) truely looks "Refractor Like" in the EdgeHD.

Side by side, my EdgeHD gives up very little off axis to my 6" APO when the field is equally as wide. Using it with a 31mm Nagler or a 20mm Nagler is a magnificent experience.

So, you like what you like, and if the loss of off axis sharpness doesn't bother you, I get it, but I just wonder WHY it doesn't bother so many people? 70% of all the background stars in a rich field are in the outer half. It just suprises me that so many people are OK with 70% of these stars being badly abberated.

Anyway, I personally would never buy another standard SCT again. The EdgeHD made the SCT a scope for the 21st century. The old design was a produce of the mid-20th century when 1.25" Erfles were the widefield eyepeice of the day.

So much has changed. And FINALLY, the SCT has caught up to current eyepeice technology.





Hi Eddgie,

I have to agree with your thoughts on the Edge SCT. I bought my 9.25 at the beginning of the year and the more I use it the more I like it, this scope is becoming my favorite.

Just had to suspend my observing tonight because my neighbor decided to put on a fireworks show in August! Anyway I had read your post before going out and was paying more attention to the entire view and it is impressive. My 24mm pan gives pinpoint stars right to the field edge.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Bob Griffiths
Getting Grouchy
*****

Reged: 10/10/05

Loc: Frederick Maryland
Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: lightfever]
      #4771722 - 08/27/11 09:25 AM

Eddgie:

I just no not see the need to send the extra money for an Edge HD Sct over a regular Sct for a visual observer like myself.

I'm quite satisfied with the views my regular C8 and C11 provide my old eyes...

Bottom line for me is I'm happy with my scopes so why change...


Bob G.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Eddgie
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 02/01/06

Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: Bob Griffiths]
      #4771738 - 08/27/11 09:38 AM

Well, that is the whole point of this thread. Many people don't think the EdgeHD gives an advantage, and for them, then obviously there is no need to upgrade.

Others that value fidelity not only at the center, but at the edges of the field, will see the EdgeHD as being a big improvement over the standard design.

There is no right or wrong here. We all make our choices based on what compromises we can accept.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
teskridg
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 01/15/08

Loc: PA
Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: Eddgie]
      #4772816 - 08/27/11 08:39 PM

So, the answer is: 1) Don't use Naglers with a standard SCT, and 2) Don't look through refractors or Edge HD's before you decide to buy a standard SCT. I have read Eddgie's post about accomodating the peripheral field in Naglers with SCT's and can only say that when I owned an 11mm T6, I didn't notice it that much and I'm 62. I loved these Naglers in binoviewers, but the additional f/l of the system when added to the f/10 SCT resulted in a little too much magnification for my seeing for the planets, so I sold them. Not because of edge of field curvature and accomodative issues, but because of too much magnification for my conditions. I parenthetically also have found that the additional AFOV of Naglers isn't as appreciated in binoviewers, which I use all the time, as would be the case in monocular mode.
So, Eddgie, to whatever extent that the edge of view is a problem in a standard SCT with Naglers and Ethoi, it can be attenuated by using binoviewers and 68° AFOV eyepieces or by using the wide field setting of the power x switch/a focal reducer.
I am in that happy place where panoramic fields of view aren't necessary to me, so I don't need to have this feature dictate the type of telescope I would have to choose. Indeed, if widefield views were vital to me, I would probably spring for a rich field refractor and not the SCT. I am also fortunate (or foolish) in that were I in the market for a CPC type Celestron 11" SCT, the price difference between the standard and HD versions would not affect my decision. Therefore, while I agree with Bob G. in that I'm not trading up to the HD, because the premium in performance isn't worth the difference in price (cost of HD new minus the resale value of my present scope), if I were buying new, I'd possibly go with the HD, unless the problem with longer cool-down time proved too onerous. Tim

Edited by teskridg (08/27/11 08:53 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
cbeyond
member


Reged: 04/19/09

Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: teskridg]
      #4773009 - 08/27/11 10:55 PM

I have a new Orion 17mm Stratus eyepiece which has a 68 degree field. The extra eye relief is nice and I really like the eyepiece but I did notice a lack of sharpness at the edges of the field (perhaps 75% of the way from the center) when using my Ultima C8. My eyeglasses were on at the time. If that eyepiece was used in a C8 Edge, would the Stratus eyepiece be sharp to the edge?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gnowellsct
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/24/09

Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: Eddgie]
      #4774564 - 08/28/11 09:01 PM

Quote:


I personally think the EdgeHD is sooooo far superrior to the standard SCT that I can no longer tolerate Naglers in a standard SCT.




Some of us crossed the no-Nagler threshold a long time ago, never mind what scope....

Greg N


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Patrick
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 05/16/03

Loc: Franklin, Ohio
Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: Eddgie]
      #4774953 - 08/29/11 12:59 AM

Quote:

Side by side, my EdgeHD gives up very little off axis to my 6" APO when the field is equally as wide. Using it with a 31mm Nagler or a 20mm Nagler is a magnificent experience.





I have nearly pinpoint stars to the edge of the field of view with my standard C11 and 27mm Pan in my Denk PxS in focal reduction mode (0.66x). That's a TFOV of about 0.95 degrees. The C11 EdgeHD (F/10) with a 31mm Nagler is only 0.94 degrees. That's a price differential of more than $1000 if you include the difference between a 31 Nagler and 27 Panoptic. That would more than pay for the Denk PxS, too.

There may be a 'little' difference at the edge of field, but I'm not sure it's worth a whole grand of difference. With CPC's and goto mounts, I don't think most folks are looking at objects on the edge of the FOV. For imaging, it might be worth it, but for visual I know it wasn't for me. And as I said, I'm getting nearly pinpoint stars right now.

Patrick


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Patrick
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 05/16/03

Loc: Franklin, Ohio
Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: cbeyond]
      #4774966 - 08/29/11 01:09 AM

Quote:

I have a new Orion 17mm Stratus eyepiece which has a 68 degree field. The extra eye relief is nice and I really like the eyepiece but I did notice a lack of sharpness at the edges of the field (perhaps 75% of the way from the center) when using my Ultima C8.




I would tend to blame the eyepiece, not the scope. I've looked at a lot of eyepieces in my C11, and by far the TV Panoptic has been superior in regards to edge of field correction. Every other eyepiece I've tried has broken down around that 75-80% field mark. The long focal length and cheap eyepiece scenario is a myth, IMO, at least for SCT's. Try the Panoptics for your SCT...I don't think you will be sorry.

Patrick


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rmollise
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: traditional C8 vs EdgeHD C8 for visual new [Re: Eddgie]
      #4775202 - 08/29/11 07:53 AM

Quote:

I guess I am somewhat surprised at how many people don't really care about the edge of field performance for visual use.





Some people (me) Tend to pay most attention to what's in the middle of the field. Imperfect stars at the edge just bothers some people more than others. Same thing with chromatic aberration. Some folks can't stand the tiniest bit of the color purple...others can tolerate more.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | (show all)


Extra information
14 registered and 15 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  cbwerner, Starman27, kkokkolis 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 5644

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics