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 | 3 | (show all)
amdizack
member


Reged: 08/23/12

Loc: Goodyear, AZ
To those that said an Edge would blow me away...
      #5619262 - 01/12/13 03:23 PM

You were RIGHT! Unreal compared to my Nexstar 8SE. I'm seeing things I've never been able to see before!

I'm (even more) addicted now!


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

Reged: 04/13/09

Loc: Scranton, PA
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: amdizack]
      #5619411 - 01/12/13 04:41 PM

I had a serious "Wow!" moment when first looking though my Edge after coming from a CPC-800. I think Celestron really did a nice job on them.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Motokid600
super member


Reged: 06/27/10

Loc: Berlin, New Jersey
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: amdizack]
      #5619566 - 01/12/13 06:10 PM

I have a Cpc1100... your making the envy boil now lol. Let's just say I got an 11" edge HD.. visually.. would I see a difference?

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

Reged: 05/16/09

Loc: northwest NJ
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Motokid600]
      #5619587 - 01/12/13 06:21 PM

Quote:

I have a Cpc1100... your making the envy boil now lol. Let's just say I got an 11" edge HD.. visually.. would I see a difference?



Perhaps you just might. I went from a CPC-11 to a C9.25 Edge and my view of the planets improved. I also liked the pinpoint stars across the entire field of view, even if it is only about one degree.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
David PavlichAdministrator
Transmographied
*****

Reged: 05/18/05

Loc: Mandeville, LA USA
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: amdizack]
      #5619617 - 01/12/13 06:36 PM

On axis, I would think that if both scopes are XLT coated and the optics are, other than the flattener, the same, there would be so little difference that you wouldn't be able to tell. The only way to truly test them is side by side using the same ep and having a couple of people looking through them.

Having said that, I've read a couple of new owners that are SC veterans say that the optics of their Edges were better than their other SCs. It's tough to tell. I owned two C14s and it was clear that the first one I owned was better and that was without side by side comparison, it was that stark.

David


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scott in NCAdministrator
80mm Refractor Fanatic
*****

Reged: 03/05/05

Loc: NC
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: David Pavlich]
      #5619720 - 01/12/13 07:40 PM

Quote:


Having said that, I've read a couple of new owners that are SC veterans say that the optics of their Edges were better than their other SCs. It's tough to tell. I owned two C14s and it was clear that the first one I owned was better and that was without side by side comparison, it was that stark.





Yeah, I'm wondering if the "improvement" that a lot of people think that they see really has to do with Edge vs. non-Edge optics or just simply the normal inter-unit variation in optical quality that seems to be commonplace with mass-produced SCTs. Either way, what's important here is that the OP seems to have ended up with a good one!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
coopman
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 04/23/06

Loc: South Louisiana
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Scott in NC]
      #5619730 - 01/12/13 07:50 PM

I have yet to see any Edge HD users say that they were disappointed with their scope. I have noticed that a fair no. of them have been sold in the last 3 or 4 months on Astromart. I am not sure why, though.

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

Reged: 04/13/09

Loc: Scranton, PA
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: coopman]
      #5619854 - 01/12/13 09:41 PM

Quote:

I have noticed that a fair no. of them have been sold in the last 3 or 4 months on Astromart. I am not sure why, though.




Maybe they're going bigger?

Edited by Footbag (01/12/13 09:41 PM)


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


Reged: 08/23/12

Loc: Goodyear, AZ
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Motokid600]
      #5620131 - 01/13/13 02:17 AM

Quote:

I have a Cpc1100... your making the envy boil now lol. Let's just say I got an 11" edge HD.. visually.. would I see a difference?




Easy--YES! I went from a C8 to the Edge 8 and noticed a big difference just for visual. Planets, nebula, star clusters--very crisp and clear through my edge!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: David Pavlich]
      #5620174 - 01/13/13 04:31 AM

Quote:

On axis, I would think that if both scopes are XLT coated and the optics are, other than the flattener, the same, there would be so little difference that you wouldn't be able to tell.




This assumes all telescopes behave according to their theoretical spot diagrams - but if that were the case then all designs corrected for spherical and chromatic aberration would be perfect and equivalent on axis - but that is obviously not true.

You need to consider the tolerances in the design, ease of collimation, and sensitivity to decollimation - among other things. A Maksutov is theoretically excellent on axis, but the surfaces need to be made exactly right or the result will be terrible - hence their higher cost.

The Edge design, assembly, and sensitivity to collimation error is very different from a normal SCT - while still being based on spheres. So I was not surprised when users noticed an improvement in on-axis performance - which does seem to be the trend in reports. Theoretical performance based on a spot diagram is very different from the realized performance and range of quality in the delivered product.

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
04yellowf150
member


Reged: 01/08/11

Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: freestar8n]
      #5620229 - 01/13/13 07:01 AM

I just recieved my 8inch edge as well. Cant wait to mess with it. Its my 1st scope

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

Reged: 11/17/10

Loc: Adirondack Mountains NY
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: freestar8n]
      #5620301 - 01/13/13 08:52 AM

Does that mean the edge is more tolerant of poor collimation and holds a good collimation better?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: telfish]
      #5620335 - 01/13/13 09:13 AM

Any design with reduced coma will be less sensitive to small collimation errors. And if the collimation changes a bit over time - that would also be less noticeable.

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
David PavlichAdministrator
Transmographied
*****

Reged: 05/18/05

Loc: Mandeville, LA USA
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: freestar8n]
      #5620465 - 01/13/13 10:33 AM

Quote:

Quote:

On axis, I would think that if both scopes are XLT coated and the optics are, other than the flattener, the same, there would be so little difference that you wouldn't be able to tell.




This assumes all telescopes behave according to their theoretical spot diagrams - but if that were the case then all designs corrected for spherical and chromatic aberration would be perfect and equivalent on axis - but that is obviously not true.

You need to consider the tolerances in the design, ease of collimation, and sensitivity to decollimation - among other things. A Maksutov is theoretically excellent on axis, but the surfaces need to be made exactly right or the result will be terrible - hence their higher cost.

The Edge design, assembly, and sensitivity to collimation error is very different from a normal SCT - while still being based on spheres. So I was not surprised when users noticed an improvement in on-axis performance - which does seem to be the trend in reports. Theoretical performance based on a spot diagram is very different from the realized performance and range of quality in the delivered product.

Frank




Like I said, all things being equal which means the optics are essentially the same quality. Under typical conditions (not in an optical lab) and "all things being equal", it would be difficult to see a difference on axis.

David


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

Reged: 02/01/06

Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Motokid600]
      #5620496 - 01/13/13 10:49 AM

Quote:

I have a Cpc1100... your making the envy boil now lol. Let's just say I got an 11" edge HD.. visually.. would I see a difference?





Assuming optical quality is similar, at the center of the field, the view would not be better.

My last C8 had excellent optics, and on planets and the moon, at the center of the field, the view was about exactly the same.

All of the benefit of the EdgeHD design is to be found in the off axis performance.

The value proposition for the EdgeHD (in my own opinion) is for imagers and for people that enjoy using modern ultra-wide field eyepeices.

If you are content with Panoptic class eyepeices, it is very difficult for me to say that the EdgeHD will be a better scope. With Panoptics or similar high quality 68 degree wide field eyepieces, the abberations coming from the telescope are not magnified enough to be prominent.

If you go to a Nagler (or similar 82 degree AFOV eyepeice) or Ethos (or similar), for the same size true field of view, the magnificaiton of the eyepeice will make the abberated blur at the edge of the field easier to resolve, so the outside of the field will not appear as sharp.

The EdgeHD makes the scope visually sharp all the way across when using these new modern wide fields.

For someone that is content with Panoptic type eyepeices (or other similar narrower field types with excellent off axis performance), the EdgeHD may not be as compelling.

And for those that say that they only look at the center of the field, there would appear to be no value whatsoever in the EdgeHD scope design.

But once you become accustomed to using a telescope that presents a pinpoint image right to the field stop of modern wide field eyepieces, you very quickly become sold on the value proposition of the EdgeHD design.

Lots of people say "refractor like," and this has been my own message for a decade. The real value of refractors is their coma-free performance.

The EdgeHD is not "refractor-like." It is "refractor equal" in terms of across the field performance.

It is the only reflecting telescope I use that stands toe to toe with my 6" APO and provides an equal across the field viewing experience. With the 31mm Nagler, the view is amazingly brilliant.

Of course I am limited to the 1.1 degree true field in the EdgeHD 8", but since getting the EdgeHD 8" the 6" APO has been a hanger queen more than ever before. It only comes out for the Milky Way when I want 2 degree fields. If it will fit in the field of the EdgeHD 8", the view is better in the EdgeHD 8".

The best SCT ever made in my opinion.

Is it right for everyone? Dedicated planatery observers will find no benefit and narrow feild eyepeice users will see only a tiny improvement.

But imagers and Nagler, and Etho fans will be in a new place.

A footnote.. When using Ethos and even Naglers, seeing will keep stars from appearin pinpoint in larger SCTs even at the center of the field. The field will still appear much sharper in the EdgeHD scopes because it is all in focus (much of the "Bloat" we observe in SCTs is simply due to the field only being partially in focus), but stars may still appear bloated at the center when you compare the view of a 21mm Ethos to a 35mm Panoptic.

And the bigger the SCT, the worse this will occur.

Even at the center of the field, I prefer the 41mm Pan to my 31mm Nagler in the C14. Stars are just more pinpoint at the center.

For this reason, the bigger the SCT, the more serious the problem becomes, and the value propsition shifts if the user tends to have migrated to Panoptics vs Naglers.

For visual use, I am not sure that the C14 EdgeHD value proposition is still there. I have struggled with this myself. I am not sure I would use Naglers in the C14, so the extra benefit of sharper off axis performance might not be important. I am a staunch advocate of Panoptic class eyepeices in the C14 because of the seeing bloat issue, and the improved off axis performance is negated if you are only using Panoptics.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Taylor
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 07/10/05

Loc: Owasso, OK
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Eddgie]
      #5620520 - 01/13/13 10:57 AM

Would having an Edge HD make a difference for Hyperstar imaging at all?
Or would it be equivalent in results to a regular C11?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
David PavlichAdministrator
Transmographied
*****

Reged: 05/18/05

Loc: Mandeville, LA USA
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Taylor]
      #5620629 - 01/13/13 12:00 PM

Quote:

Would having an Edge HD make a difference for Hyperstar imaging at all?
Or would it be equivalent in results to a regular C11?




Again, assuming that the Edge 14" and the standard Celestron 14" mirrors were equal and Hyperstar imaging is the main reason for the scope, then no, I wouldn't pay the extra for the Edge. The corrector lenses are in the baffle tube. The Hperstar uses only the corrector plate and the primary mirror. The primary mirror is around f2, hence the reason that the HS is f2. In the 14, I believe it's f1.9.

The corrector lenses would essentially become useless weight for HS imaging alone.

David


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: David Pavlich]
      #5620656 - 01/13/13 12:12 PM

Quote:

Like I said, all things being equal which means the optics are essentially the same quality. Under typical conditions (not in an optical lab) and "all things being equal", it would be difficult to see a difference on axis.





Well - if all things are equal - then all telescopes are equal, and there is no possible discrepancy at all as long as the spot diagrams are good. Instead there are a wide variety of designs possible, and the ones that become popular at low cost are the ones that have generous design tolerances and can be made well and reliably.

In other words, all things being equal in the making of individual components may end up with a very different spread of results in the output - due to the difference in tolerances of the design. So - all things being equal, any difference in the design could make the performance quite unequal - and the tight tolerances on a maksutov I mentioned are an example.

There may be other differences in the manufacturing that result in overall improved performance - I don't know. But the main thing is - we know the designs are different, so that is an inequality right there. And there may be other differences also.

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Taylor
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 07/10/05

Loc: Owasso, OK
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: David Pavlich]
      #5620693 - 01/13/13 12:31 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Would having an Edge HD make a difference for Hyperstar imaging at all?
Or would it be equivalent in results to a regular C11?




Again, assuming that the Edge 14" and the standard Celestron 14" mirrors were equal and Hyperstar imaging is the main reason for the scope, then no, I wouldn't pay the extra for the Edge. The corrector lenses are in the baffle tube. The Hperstar uses only the corrector plate and the primary mirror. The primary mirror is around f2, hence the reason that the HS is f2. In the 14, I believe it's f1.9.

The corrector lenses would essentially become useless weight for HS imaging alone.

David




Thanks for the info David, I didn't know that.


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


Reged: 01/10/10

Loc: SE Wisconsin
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Taylor]
      #5621179 - 01/13/13 04:34 PM

I completely agree. I received my new (to me) 9.25 edge a few weeks ago. First light was incredible. My 21 ethos just barely fit the double cluster in the FOV, but the view was very sharp. I had previously owned a C9.25 a few years ago, and quickly sold it since I had issues with pinpoint stars. This one is definitely a keeper!

Gabe

Edited by AstroGabe (01/13/13 04:36 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
David PavlichAdministrator
Transmographied
*****

Reged: 05/18/05

Loc: Mandeville, LA USA
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: freestar8n]
      #5621399 - 01/13/13 06:32 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Like I said, all things being equal which means the optics are essentially the same quality. Under typical conditions (not in an optical lab) and "all things being equal", it would be difficult to see a difference on axis.





Well - if all things are equal - then all telescopes are equal, and there is no possible discrepancy at all as long as the spot diagrams are good. Instead there are a wide variety of designs possible, and the ones that become popular at low cost are the ones that have generous design tolerances and can be made well and reliably.

In other words, all things being equal in the making of individual components may end up with a very different spread of results in the output - due to the difference in tolerances of the design. So - all things being equal, any difference in the design could make the performance quite unequal - and the tight tolerances on a maksutov I mentioned are an example.

There may be other differences in the manufacturing that result in overall improved performance - I don't know. But the main thing is - we know the designs are different, so that is an inequality right there. And there may be other differences also.

Frank




I'm not quite sure what you're getting at, but I thought the discussion was Edge performance relative to a standard Celestron SC. I wasn't aware that other types were involved. I qualified my remarks by stating on axis performance of telescopes with equal quality optics. I still contend that there would be negligible difference between an Edge and a std. Celestron SC, especially under typical viewing conditions.

I'm not an optical engineer and could care less about spot diagrams or Roddier tests or tests by the Sears optometrist. Under real world conditions where 99% of SC users are doctors, lawyers and indian chiefs, not optical engineers, again, it would take a very keen eye to see the difference.

In the end, if you want that extra sharp performance of the outer part of the view, then by all means, purchase the Edge. Or, if you're an imager, purchase the Edge. But if you want to have nice views and aren't overly concerned that the stars aren't pinpoint from pillar to post, you can save some money and get a standard SC and maybe use that saved money to buy an extra ep or filter.

David


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Peter in Reno
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/15/08

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: David Pavlich]
      #5621496 - 01/13/13 07:34 PM

I used to own a regular C-8 and currently own a C-8 EdgeHD. I was not expecting performance increase for visual use but I did notice an improvement. I have tried to visually view M51 with regular C-8 SCT using 31mm Nagler and 13mm/8mm Ethos eyepieces and could not easily see M51. With EdgeHD, I was quite shocked not only to see both nucleus of M51 but the arms connecting between both nucleus as well. Viewing M51 with 8mm Ethos eyepiece was even better than lower power eyepieces with EdgeHD.

I don't know whether Celestron improved quality of EdgeHD scopes but the only part I noticed is an improvement is the way Celestron centers the lens corrector. They now use 4 set screws at the front cell use to precisely align the lens corrector. In regular SCT scope, they use either corks or paper shims to align the lens corrector which are a total joke.

The reason for precision centering of lens correctors is for Hyperstar so that collimating with Hyperstar is easier. So with precision centering of lens corrector could give better views visually through the eyepiece.

Celestron's 4 set screws

Peter

Edited by Peter in Reno (01/13/13 07:44 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Taylor]
      #5621719 - 01/13/13 09:23 PM

But refractors - particularly faster ones - have a fair amount of field curvature. Shouldn't the EdgeHD be better in the FC department?

- Jim


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

Reged: 08/31/12

Loc: SC
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #5621819 - 01/13/13 10:20 PM

I've had and used a fair number of Celestron SCT's. Not a huge number but around 10. I dont like the off axis coma in a standard SCT . For an F10 system they are not very good off axis, plus they have a good bit of field curvature. Side by side.. my 6" newt gave better planetary images than any of the C8s I've had. None of mine had great optics. A couple were OK and one or two were not so good. They are portable, give decent on axis images, but give poor off axis images, very sensitive to collimation, good bit of scattered light and image shift. I might consider an edge in the next year. as it seems to be so much better off axis. My C11 is good but not portable, but I still have to deal with the off axis images and field curvature.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: David Pavlich]
      #5622093 - 01/14/13 04:31 AM

I'm just referring to the two designs here: comatic sct and flat field aplanat with corrective lenses. If the components of two such telescopes are made and assembled with equal care and effort, the end result may be very different since the designs are different and the impact of small errors in tolerance are different. It could be worse for Edge or better - but there is no reason to think they would be the same.

Quote:

it would take a very keen eye to see the difference.




I don't know how you could quantify the difference without knowing the actual performance in the field. The reports from users are fairly consistently positive that they do notice an improvement on axis. There is no reason to think that is a mistake or an illusion - it just means that, indeed, all things are not equal when it comes to comparing actual telescopes even though their theoretical performance should be similar.

Frank


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

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Taylor]
      #5622212 - 01/14/13 07:41 AM

Quote:

Would having an Edge HD make a difference for Hyperstar imaging at all?
Or would it be equivalent in results to a regular C11?




No, there will be no difference.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Alph
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 11/23/06

Loc: Melmac
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: rmollise]
      #5622795 - 01/14/13 02:34 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Would having an Edge HD make a difference for Hyperstar imaging at all?
Or would it be equivalent in results to a regular C11?




No, there will be no difference.



I think we had this conversation before. Optical alignment is critical for Hyperstar performance. The EdgeHD telescopes come out of factory aligned more carefully as stipulated by the design

Edited by Alph (01/15/13 01:06 PM)


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

Reged: 02/01/06

Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Alph]
      #5622935 - 01/14/13 03:54 PM

For Hyperstar use, Rod is right. This is done at the native focal lenght of the primary mirror and the Correcting elements in the baffle are not in the light train.

For Hyperstar imageing, it will be the same as the standard SCT.

Celestron even says the same thing in their white paper.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
fly2work
newbie


Reged: 10/21/12

Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: AstroGabe]
      #5626832 - 01/16/13 07:27 PM

My Edge HD 1100 blows me away whether it is visual or imaging and mounted to the CGEM DX its rock solid! Mind you its been 14 years since I last owned a scope so quite a bit has changed!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dscarpa
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 03/15/08

Loc: San Diego Ca.
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: amdizack]
      #5627973 - 01/17/13 12:09 PM

I've got one of the last made in the USA regular C-9.25s and it blows me away. Very sharp for lunar-planetary and DSOs. It's the equal of my IM-715D for lunar-planetary with very good seeing and smokes it when conditions are excellent. I use Naglers, a 13 Ethos and a 20 ES 100 in it a lot and don't find FC to be an issue. There's some coma but I don't notice it if I don't look for it. David

Edited by dscarpa (01/17/13 12:10 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
GeneT
Ely Kid
*****

Reged: 11/07/08

Loc: South Texas
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: amdizack]
      #5628611 - 01/17/13 06:22 PM

If I ever buy another SCT, it will have EdgeHD optics.

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


Reged: 11/29/12

Loc: California
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: GeneT]
      #5629007 - 01/17/13 10:23 PM

I've got a CPC 1100 HD on the way, can't wait to take that first look through it. I've never had a SCT before, only a fast newtonian. Coma is pretty bad.

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

Reged: 05/16/03

Loc: Franklin, Ohio
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: amdizack]
      #5629167 - 01/18/13 12:09 AM

I spent some time tonight with my new EdgeHD 8" and all I can say is this is the best scope I've ever owned.

When someone says that you can get the same image as a standard SCT at the center of the fov, they're right. BUT, with the EdgeHD, you no longer have to observe in the center of the fov...you're not constrained to making sure your object is centered.

When observing, I've always found myself fiddling with object positioning, trying to get it centered just right. It doesn't matter with the EdgeHD.

That really came home to me tonight while observing the Trap. The seeing wasn't too great, but the transparency was excellent. Nevertheless the stars were round without flaring all the way to the edge. I sat there looking at the Trap's splendor with it sitting 2/3rd of the way off center. That was amazing. I can't wait to see what this scope can do with great seeing.

Patrick


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

Reged: 02/01/06

Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Patrick]
      #5629632 - 01/18/13 10:26 AM

Yes, looking through an EdgeHD is a much different experience than using a standard SCT.

I learned about field sharpness from using large achromats. While the field of a 6" f/8 achromat is not completly flat, it is indeed flatter than a C8, and the design is corrected for coma.

When I started using the 6" f/8 achrmoat, what I really discovered is that what makes refractors the great scopes they are is not what is at the center of the field. Heck most every bigger SCT I have owned was easily better at the center of the field than the 6" f/8 achromat.

But the first time I looked at the Double Cluster in the 6" f/8 achromat, the earth moved under me. The absoute brilliance of the stars even out to the edge of the field of a 22mm Panoptic was nothing short of awe-inspiring.

This was a view I had never had with any other telescope.

And this was the moment that I realized that differences in off axis performance in telescope design are far more important than the relatively small differences in how they pwerform at the center of the field.

And the EdgeHD 8" is an utterly superb off axis performer. The "Space walk" experience is far more apparent using a Nagler in an EdgeHD than it is using a Nagler in a standard SCT.

Wonderful scope. Ties with my 6" APO for producing the most aesthetically pleasing view.


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

Reged: 05/16/09

Loc: northwest NJ
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Patrick]
      #5629732 - 01/18/13 11:14 AM

Quote:

I spent some time tonight with my new EdgeHD 8" and all I can say is this is the best scope I've ever owned.

When someone says that you can get the same image as a standard SCT at the center of the fov, they're right. BUT, with the EdgeHD, you no longer have to observe in the center of the fov...you're not constrained to making sure your object is centered.

When observing, I've always found myself fiddling with object positioning, trying to get it centered just right. It doesn't matter with the EdgeHD.

That really came home to me tonight while observing the Trap. The seeing wasn't too great, but the transparency was excellent. Nevertheless the stars were round without flaring all the way to the edge. I sat there looking at the Trap's splendor with it sitting 2/3rd of the way off center. That was amazing. I can't wait to see what this scope can do with great seeing.

Patrick



Great to see another great sample of the Edge. Can't wait to see how you like it when doing AP. The C9.25 Edge is the best SCT I've owned but I've only owned 3 SCTs in my life. Just wish the reducer for the C9.25 was out by now....more than a couple years waiting...


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

Reged: 04/13/09

Loc: Scranton, PA
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: ewave]
      #5629821 - 01/18/13 11:59 AM

I'll relate my experience with the Edge. I first received the Edge 800 and did a bunch of visual observing while learning about my new mount. The views were amazing. I used it for about a month, and then one day noticed that the dovetail bar wasn't seated properly, I tried to fix it, but learned that the mounting holes were drilled off. I spoke to the vendor I purchased it from and they sent me a replacement.

I received the replacement and noticed my views were disappointing. I fretted about the scope I gave up. Then, the first time I used the 2nd edge for imaging, I noticed very odd star shapes in different directions. At first, I thought it was collimation, but after troubleshooting, I think it had to do something with the focuser/mirror lock mechanism. Like it was binding the mirror even when unlocked.

This time, my vendor referred me to Celestron. I have heard horror stories of Celestron's customer service, but I had a great experience. I explained my problem, and they hand selected a replacement. My first views through the new Edge, pop! Amazing views and detail. When imaging my star shape is perfect.

So, with the exception of the one OTA that had the problem, both of the 800's I've looked through were equally impressive.

Now, for those who say the performance is only better off axis, the performance is still better, right?

I really wonder if Celestron is taking their better mirrors and putting them into the Edge HD's. I seem to remember seeing a site which compared strehl's and the Edges seemed to perform very well compared to other SCT's. But, I can no longer find this site and am wondering if I made it up in my head.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
aa6ww
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 10/23/11

Loc: Sacramento, Calif.
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Eddgie]
      #5630183 - 01/18/13 04:09 PM

Quote:

Quote:

I have a Cpc1100... your making the envy boil now lol. Let's just say I got an 11" edge HD.. visually.. would I see a difference?





Assuming optical quality is similar, at the center of the field, the view would not be better.

My last C8 had excellent optics, and on planets and the moon, at the center of the field, the view was about exactly the same.

All of the benefit of the EdgeHD design is to be found in the off axis performance.

The value proposition for the EdgeHD (in my own opinion) is for imagers and for people that enjoy using modern ultra-wide field eyepeices.

If you are content with Panoptic class eyepeices, it is very difficult for me to say that the EdgeHD will be a better scope. With Panoptics or similar high quality 68 degree wide field eyepieces, the abberations coming from the telescope are not magnified enough to be prominent.

If you go to a Nagler (or similar 82 degree AFOV eyepeice) or Ethos (or similar), for the same size true field of view, the magnificaiton of the eyepeice will make the abberated blur at the edge of the field easier to resolve, so the outside of the field will not appear as sharp.

The EdgeHD makes the scope visually sharp all the way across when using these new modern wide fields.

For someone that is content with Panoptic type eyepeices (or other similar narrower field types with excellent off axis performance), the EdgeHD may not be as compelling.

And for those that say that they only look at the center of the field, there would appear to be no value whatsoever in the EdgeHD scope design.

But once you become accustomed to using a telescope that presents a pinpoint image right to the field stop of modern wide field eyepieces, you very quickly become sold on the value proposition of the EdgeHD design.

Lots of people say "refractor like," and this has been my own message for a decade. The real value of refractors is their coma-free performance.

The EdgeHD is not "refractor-like." It is "refractor equal" in terms of across the field performance.

It is the only reflecting telescope I use that stands toe to toe with my 6" APO and provides an equal across the field viewing experience. With the 31mm Nagler, the view is amazingly brilliant.

Of course I am limited to the 1.1 degree true field in the EdgeHD 8", but since getting the EdgeHD 8" the 6" APO has been a hanger queen more than ever before. It only comes out for the Milky Way when I want 2 degree fields. If it will fit in the field of the EdgeHD 8", the view is better in the EdgeHD 8".

The best SCT ever made in my opinion.

Is it right for everyone? Dedicated planatery observers will find no benefit and narrow feild eyepeice users will see only a tiny improvement.

But imagers and Nagler, and Etho fans will be in a new place.

A footnote.. When using Ethos and even Naglers, seeing will keep stars from appearin pinpoint in larger SCTs even at the center of the field. The field will still appear much sharper in the EdgeHD scopes because it is all in focus (much of the "Bloat" we observe in SCTs is simply due to the field only being partially in focus), but stars may still appear bloated at the center when you compare the view of a 21mm Ethos to a 35mm Panoptic.

And the bigger the SCT, the worse this will occur.

Even at the center of the field, I prefer the 41mm Pan to my 31mm Nagler in the C14. Stars are just more pinpoint at the center.

For this reason, the bigger the SCT, the more serious the problem becomes, and the value propsition shifts if the user tends to have migrated to Panoptics vs Naglers.

For visual use, I am not sure that the C14 EdgeHD value proposition is still there. I have struggled with this myself. I am not sure I would use Naglers in the C14, so the extra benefit of sharper off axis performance might not be important. I am a staunch advocate of Panoptic class eyepeices in the C14 because of the seeing bloat issue, and the improved off axis performance is negated if you are only using Panoptics.




Try finding the Pup in your Edge scope, or try splitting IZAR on any given night. Try taking in the entire Andromeda in your Edge in one field of view. Every scope wants to have views a refractor can have, but only a refractor can do that. Ive never heard or a refractor that wanted to optics like any SCT. Seriously.
Every scope has its reason for existing, they are all as unique as people are. Once people realize this, the world will be a wonderful place!!

...Ralph


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

Reged: 01/06/04

Loc: Toronto, ON, Canada
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: aa6ww]
      #5630234 - 01/18/13 04:35 PM

Hmmm, I haven't tried the Pup yet (is it _ever_ going to clear up?!), but I have split Antares a few times now, but only with the C8. Never with the refractors. I've also never found a refractor that will show as much of Andromeda as the C14 has (definition of dark lanes, star clouds and globulars *in* M31).

The Edge HD has views with very similar characteristics as refractors. Well, very big refractors that is!

Clear skies,


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lane
Post Laureate


Reged: 11/19/07

Loc: Frisco, Texas
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Gord]
      #5630271 - 01/18/13 05:14 PM

I would like to own an HD, but here is my problem with that purchase:

The regular C11 is $1799 and a C11 HD is $3399 and the only true difference in these two scopes is a small lens mounted inside the telescope. So buying an HD is like spending $1600 for a corrector lens. Even Tak with their ridiculous accessory prices does not charge that much for a corrector.

Plus the simple fact that for only a few hundred more you can get a C14 instead of C11 HD.

Maybe it is worth $1600 to see a nice flat field with no distortion at the edges, probably is worth it, but I can't help feel they are taking advantage of us.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Peter in Reno
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/15/08

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Lane]
      #5630276 - 01/18/13 05:20 PM

I was getting annoyed with comatic stars around the center when imaging with regular C-8 at F/10 (without F/6.3 focal reducer-corrector). So I replaced it with EdgeHD and to me it was worth the extra expense of getting flat FOV from edge to edge. Celestron did it right with EdgeHD scopes.

Peter


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
cn register 5
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 12/26/12

Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Lane]
      #5630287 - 01/18/13 05:30 PM

Someone has to pay for the R&D that goes into designing those few pieces of glass.

Perhaps knocking the bottom out of a milk bottle and taping it onto the back out a regular SCT would work - but I doubt it.

Chris


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

Reged: 05/16/03

Loc: Franklin, Ohio
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Lane]
      #5630293 - 01/18/13 05:33 PM

I was not able to justify spending $3400 on a EdgeHD 11 either, but I could justify the $1300 for the 8". It's one of the best value scopes on the market, IMHO.

Patrick


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

Reged: 11/12/06

Loc: Sherman Oaks, CA
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Patrick]
      #5630319 - 01/18/13 05:49 PM

I agree, the 8" EdgeHD at $1300 is kinda hard to resist.

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

Reged: 02/01/06

Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Footbag]
      #5630580 - 01/18/13 09:02 PM

Quote:

I really wonder if Celestron is taking their better mirrors and putting them into the Edge HD's.




Not possible at least for the EdgeHD 8". The EdgeHD 8" uses a faster mirror than the standard C8, and the mirror spacing for optimal focus is a little closer as a result.

But people used to say this about the C9 (The optics were supposedly the best, but they clearly were not. I can point you to three interferometer tests that show conclusively that the quality varied on the C9 across the normal spectrum).

The Ultima was another example where some people felt that the Ultima model received special mirrors, but there was no conclusive proof.

My guess is that lower manufacturing costs simply allow them to produce a consistently better range of products. Their ED refractors for example are rolling out of the door with what used to be premium quality optics in the past. Now it is the norm.

And makeing high quality SCTs with all spherical mirrors should not be hard. It just takes time and care. If your labor is cheap enough, you can build iPhones, Toasters, or almost anything else to consistently excellent levels of quality if you want to.

And apparently Synta wants to. Bravo.


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


Reged: 10/13/09

Loc: Victoria, BC
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: johnnyha]
      #5630582 - 01/18/13 09:02 PM

This thread is killing me! I have an order placed for a (back-ordered) Comet Hunter + Twilight II mount for the AMAZING price of $999... but now I'm reconsidering if I shouldn't just spring for an EdgeHD 8" and stick it on my Voyager. More money, and less FOV... but almost certainly better views. Gah!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
David PavlichAdministrator
Transmographied
*****

Reged: 05/18/05

Loc: Mandeville, LA USA
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Lane]
      #5630754 - 01/18/13 10:50 PM

Quote:

I would like to own an HD, but here is my problem with that purchase:

The regular C11 is $1799 and a C11 HD is $3399 and the only true difference in these two scopes is a small lens mounted inside the telescope. So buying an HD is like spending $1600 for a corrector lens. Even Tak with their ridiculous accessory prices does not charge that much for a corrector.

Plus the simple fact that for only a few hundred more you can get a C14 instead of C11 HD.

Maybe it is worth $1600 to see a nice flat field with no distortion at the edges, probably is worth it, but I can't help feel they are taking advantage of us.




An educated guess leads me to believe that Celestron was looking at the quickly expanding imaging side of our hobby. A flat field f10 SC is very attractive to those looking for image scale. A well done image of the Ring Nebula using an f10 SC is quite impressive in its native form. A lot less cropping is required to have a nice image. Then add the flat field of the Edge and you have a very pleasing image. And there's that option of adding a Hyperstar to the imager's bag of tricks and you have an imaging scope that can suck in a lot of photons in a hurry and have that widefield option for stuff like M45.

Besides, I have an 11" Edge that will arrive the 23rd. I'll find out just how flat the field is when I stick my QHY8 Pro on it.

David


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

Reged: 05/16/03

Loc: Franklin, Ohio
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Hothersale]
      #5630884 - 01/19/13 12:25 AM

Quote:

I have an order placed for a (back-ordered) Comet Hunter + Twilight II mount for the AMAZING price of $999... but now I'm reconsidering if I shouldn't just spring for an EdgeHD 8" and stick it on my Voyager.




They are really two different animals (I've got both right now). The Comet Hunter is a wide field dream scope. It has a wide flat field that's capable of a 3.5 degree field of view at 730mm f/l. The EdgeHD 8" is still an SCT with a max TFOV of about 1.3 deg at 2000mm f/l. The Comet Hunter is a very nice imaging scope as well.

So, it really depends on what you want to do with it. I don't think I'd be happy mounting an 8" SCT on a Voyager mount due to the weight. Also, starhopping with an 8" SCT is a recipe for frustration.

Not to dissuade you from the Twilight II mount...I had one and sent it back. I was not happy with the Comet Hunter on the mount. The Comet Hunter is a rather "large" 6" scope weighing about 18 lbs with all the finders, etc attached. And it's about 28" long. That's the price you pay for the wide field of view.

Patrick

Edited by Patrick (01/19/13 12:37 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lane
Post Laureate


Reged: 11/19/07

Loc: Frisco, Texas
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Patrick]
      #5632557 - 01/20/13 01:46 AM

Actually the C8 works extremely well on the voyager. I have used that combo a lot. Very stable.

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

Reged: 05/16/03

Loc: Franklin, Ohio
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Lane]
      #5632730 - 01/20/13 08:14 AM

Quote:

Actually the C8 works extremely well on the voyager. I have used that combo a lot. Very stable.




Sounds good. What works well for one person may not for another. A lot of it is purely personal preference.

Regards,

Patrick


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Moonglum
professor emeritus


Reged: 06/01/08

Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Patrick]
      #5632790 - 01/20/13 09:29 AM

I too was hoping to eventually starhop with a 8"Edge on a Universal Macrostar with no electronics, but now ya got me worried Patrick. Would it not be ok if I attached my F50 finder to the Edge ota? (I ask because I haven't used my F50 to find the brighter DSO yet, so I don't know how effective it will be- I live in a small town with fairly dark skies...)

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


Reged: 11/17/09

Loc: Bruce County Ontario
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Moonglum]
      #5632833 - 01/20/13 09:48 AM

I too looked at the edge when I was looking at going to a C11. The price of 3400 vs 2000 for the non edge was a bit much for the pocket book. In the end I got a used C11 and focal reducer for 1100. I am very happy with the results for visual. I dont think the field is quite as flat as the edge but I am happy with what I have. In the future though I will definately be looking at an edge.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
kwjohnson
super member
*****

Reged: 03/27/11

Loc: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Moonglum]
      #5633422 - 01/20/13 03:28 PM

Quote:

Would it not be ok if I attached my F50 finder to the Edge ota?



I'm using an FV50 on a C8 Edge, mounted on a Twilight II. Love it. I have the finder mounted at the 4:00 position, and a multi-reticle finder at 10:00 on the tube with doublesided foam tape. From home in a white zone, I can quickly starhop with the FV50, then zero in with the C8 for very pleasing views.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JS999R
super member


Reged: 12/07/11

Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: kwjohnson]
      #5633645 - 01/20/13 05:44 PM

I haven't paid much attention to the differences in views between refractors and SCTs until I decided one day I wanted an SCT. I thought it would make a very good DSO and general purpose viewing scope with the ease of using the alt/azi mount. The equatorial motion was not syncing with my brain.

I haven't had my CPC1100 that long and I haven't used it as much as I would like because it is a little on the cumbersome side. I think the resolution to that will be a wheeled cart. But so far I really like the scope and it does provide the views I hoped for, especially after installing a reducer. However, for the first time I noticed what others have been talking about here, the distortion near the edges thats new to me because my current and previous stable of telescopes are refractors. Just like others have indicated on the question whether the edge distortion is annoying enough, for me it is a little and combined with portability issues I foresee a change in equipment. Because of this thread I think a 9.25 Edge on the new VX Celestron mount might be the ticket in my case. Sharp views to the edge and portability as well. I don't think a reduction in aperture of 1.75" will make that big a difference, right?

Lastly, while I have some people's attention. Is the inability to reach focus caused generally by the diagonal being too close to the OTA? In other words, I bought a 6.3 reducer, placed it in front of my WO focuser (1.5" draw tube)and its impossible to reach focus now. I replaced the WO focuser with a TeleVue extender (2.25") in the optical train and I can now partially come to focus down to almost an 11mm EP. The difference in length of the two set ups is about 1.5". My logic tells me the shorter of the two achieved some success, going shorter would be impossible though. So now I'm thinking I need extenders/spacers to lengthen the optical train. BTW, the Celestron f/6.3 reducer has so far been a nice upgrade, except for trying to reach focus.


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

Reged: 05/16/03

Loc: Franklin, Ohio
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Moonglum]
      #5633850 - 01/20/13 07:51 PM

Quote:

I too was hoping to eventually starhop with a 8"Edge on a Universal Macrostar with no electronics, but now ya got me worried Patrick. Would it not be ok if I attached my F50 finder to the Edge ota? (I ask because I haven't used my F50 to find the brighter DSO yet, so I don't know how effective it will be- I live in a small town with fairly dark skies...)





Everyone's situation is different. If you're under dark skies and faint objects pop out, then no worries! I live in suburban skies in the beltway between Dayton and Cincinnai. On the very best of nights, I can just barely make out a trace of the Milky Way, only because I know where it is. My first experience starhopping was with an 8" f/5 Newtonian. I tried in vain to find M101 and M102. In nearly frustrated me to the point of giving up and I never could find them. To this day, I still cannot see those galaxies from my deck even with my goto scope pointed right at them.

Secondly, I had my C6 mounted on a Voyager mount and I didn't care much for the experience. I think it was the mount, not the setup more than anything. But if I'm going to starhop, give me a nice 10" Dobsonian with a wide field eyepiece and a Telrad.

As an alternative, something like a DiscMount or the Macrostar (as you suggested) would be great. Again, this is just my preference...I'd get something I could add digital setting circles too. It looks like the Macrostar has that capability.

Clear skies!

Patrick


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


Reged: 02/15/09

Loc: Alicante, Spain
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Patrick]
      #5633868 - 01/20/13 08:13 PM

I love the view through Maksutov telescopes but looking throug my 9,25 edge HD telescope is amazing.

Toni


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
WadeH237
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 02/24/07

Loc: Snohomish, WA
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Patrick]
      #5634158 - 01/20/13 11:40 PM

Quote:

I tried in vain to find M101 and M102.




M102 is tough under the darkest of skies


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

Reged: 05/16/03

Loc: Franklin, Ohio
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: WadeH237]
      #5634502 - 01/21/13 08:49 AM

Quote:

M102 is tough under the darkest of skies





Yeah, I know that now, but just starting out I had no clue!

Sorry for dragging this thread off in the weeds.

Patrick


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: To those that said an Edge would blow me away... new [Re: Eddgie]
      #5643562 - 01/25/13 11:21 PM

"The EdgeHD 8" uses a faster mirror than the standard C8, and the mirror spacing for optimal focus is a little closer as a result."

Unclear if this is true. The White paper contradicts itself on this point (i.e., states two different focal ratios for the 8" Edge primay).

Regards,

Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | (show all)


Extra information
8 registered and 12 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: 5223

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics