
New Celestron Cats...
#26
Posted 15 July 2009 - 10:26 AM
It appears that they took a basic correcter 2-element lens assembly and integrated it into the baffle tube. Sounds like it does half the work of the classic f/6.3 reducer-corrector.
The charge for that and the Fastar optics is about $400 more than the "standard" OTA. My conclusion is that if you (a) don't need Fastar or mirror locks (i.e., don't image) and (b) already have one of the old reducer-correctors, there's not much new here.
I also noticed that the lone "classic" rear cell hold-out, the C14, has finally succumbed to the rear cell redo. The C14 retained its ribbed cell design while everything else 11" and down received a new trifoil cell casting. The new C14 appears to have the updated casting.
Kind of sad. I loved the traditional C14 rear casting - purposeful and workmanlike.
Regards,
Jim
#27
Posted 15 July 2009 - 10:27 AM
Go ahead and add those accessories to a scope that is already more accessible to more people because it doesn't start out with the extras that you might want but I may not. You wouldn't get much of a break on pricing since only two items would come from Celestron (the diagonal and the FR) and the margins on the basic scope are already very low.
Bob's Knobs - $17
FT SCT microfocuser - $159-189
RACI 50mm finder - $90
2" SCT 99% diagonal - $150
26mm Nagler - $540
F6.3 FR - $130
Total - $1086-1116
Optioning up another model scope means more SKUs which drives dealers nuts. Especially a SKU that won't be that popular and cuts into a dealer's accessory sales (a really big no no). To keep costs down simpler is the way to go, and then let the buyer add what they feel is appropriate.
Edit ... I noticed that C is now including a 2" diagonal with the C11 and 925 models. So drop $150 from my totals. Perhaps they are listening to our cries a bit.
Talking Focal reducers, will they even work with these scopes as the scope has already 0x power field flattener and the FR's have you too in each 6.3 FR.
Of course they could come out with specific FR 6.3 for these scopes with field flattener lens removed I guess.
#28
Posted 15 July 2009 - 10:34 AM
Here the video all you guys was looking for...
http://www.celestron...s/tours/edgehd/
I find it funny the guy is looking at the ceiling through the scope

#29
Posted 15 July 2009 - 10:47 AM
Price for a CGEM HD C11 is $3,499.
Stand alone pricing for the CGEM - $1,400 and Axiom EP - $300, leaves $1,800 for an HD C11 OTA. Seems like a pretty good deal to me if you're in the market for an imaging system.
#30
Posted 15 July 2009 - 10:58 AM
#31
Posted 15 July 2009 - 10:59 AM
At $1800, I would probably go for it (And then sell a bunch of EPs, and then hide it from my wife for a while... and then... and then...)
Right now, I can only drool.
Maybe I should place one of those want ads on Amart for something that's still on preorder... (who really thinks that will work??)
Now, to be a bit more serious. How will this be better than a "normal" C11 using the 6.3FR? Can I buy one of those HD flatteners and put it in my "normal" C11 to save some $$?
#32
Posted 15 July 2009 - 11:14 AM
The problem with ONLY aspherizing the secondary (as I understand it anyway) is that while you can eliminate coma with this approach, the field curvature gets worse.
So, my bet is that the rear element is a dedicated field flattner.
This means that the scope should be (as they say) a really excellent visual AND photographic platform.
A good move by Celestron, and a great approach. I think they really did their homework on this one.
#33
Posted 15 July 2009 - 11:38 AM
#34
Posted 15 July 2009 - 11:44 AM
#35
Posted 15 July 2009 - 12:02 PM
#36
Posted 15 July 2009 - 12:41 PM
Sorry, but that description of Celestron's lock sounds even more Rube Goldberg than the kludge mirror lock used in the Meade ACFs.
Is that good or bad? Celestron's mirror lock design sounds better than Meade's even though it may be a bit more complicated. I am not sure I like the idea of flexible rods especially when the weather is at sub-freezing temperature.
It's whole lot better than without mirror lock, bottom line.
Peter
#37
Posted 15 July 2009 - 12:57 PM
Sorry, but that description of Celestron's lock sounds even more Rube Goldberg than the kludge mirror lock used in the Meade ACFs.
Is that good or bad? Celestron's mirror lock design sounds better than Meade's even though it may be a bit more complicated. I am not sure I like the idea of flexible rods especially when the weather is at sub-freezing temperature.
It's whole lot better than without mirror lock, bottom line.
Peter
While it may be "better" than none, it certainly puzzles me that Celestron didn't use this opportunity to redesign the rear cell and baffle tube so as to eliminate mirror flop and at the same time provide a decent focuser mechanism. Other companies have sold telescopes with zero-shift, moving mirror focusers since the 1990s. People who want to image with these EdgeHD scopes still have to spend hundreds of dollars to buy a good focuser because there is no way to adjust focus when the mirror is locked (with count 'em, two knobs)! IMO it's a dumb design from that standpoint alone.
Build the focuser mechanism properly and there is no shift or mirror flop, and no need for multiple lock knobs.
#38
Posted 15 July 2009 - 01:09 PM
I maybe wrong but this system is not really a lock system, though you can probably do that by tightening the tension rods up.Sorry, but that description of Celestron's lock sounds even more Rube Goldberg than the kludge mirror lock used in the Meade ACFs.
Is that good or bad? Celestron's mirror lock design sounds better than Meade's even though it may be a bit more complicated. I am not sure I like the idea of flexible rods especially when the weather is at sub-freezing temperature.
It's whole lot better than without mirror lock, bottom line.
Peter
While it may be "better" than none, it certainly puzzles me that Celestron didn't use this opportunity to redesign the rear cell and baffle tube so as to eliminate mirror flop and at the same time provide a decent focuser mechanism. Other companies have sold telescopes with zero-shift, moving mirror focusers since the 1990s. People who want to image with these EdgeHD scopes still have to spend hundreds of dollars to buy a good focuser because there is no way to adjust focus when the mirror is locked (with count 'em, two knobs)! IMO it's a dumb design from that standpoint alone.
Build the focuser mechanism properly and there is no shift or mirror flop, and no need for multiple lock knobs.
It sounds more like a friction tension type system, where you set tension only enough to stop mirror flop but still have full focus adjustments available (with sight tension).
Sure they could of done a high tolerance mirror mount slide with focus but i am betting cost would go way up.
This seems like good way IMO, simple so hopefully be trouble free.
Just have to wait an see how it works in real life usage .
#39
Posted 15 July 2009 - 01:33 PM
I guess with respect to Fastar I was wrong. I really don't understand Celestron pushing this concept so hard. In fact the way it's worded one might think that Fastar is a product, it's not. Celestron hasn't sold a Fastar kit for many many years, and to the best of my knowledge has no current plans to do so. The only way to get the F2 capability today on any SCT is to buy a Hyperstar kit from Starizona. Those kits are available for scopes with the removable secondaries (Fastar compatible) and for many without that capability ... for many of those "non Fastar" scopes you simply have to buy a conversion kit for a few hundred dollars.
So why the emphasis? Sure the term Fastar is something that only Celestron can claim and use but the actual product (Hyperstar) is available on a variety of SCTs not just Celestron's new HDs. Sure imaging at F2 is a very neat concept and produces some exceptional extended DSO shots so there's no question Hyperstar has it's benefits. It's also an obvious marketing benefit to have the Fastar checkbox (we got it, they don't) but what I continue to question is the emphasis on it, over and over again in the marketing literature. Perhaps there wasn't enough marketing text on the new HD features themselves that Celestron felt the need to add more to the imaging capabilities?
Don't get me wrong, I think the EdgeHD line brings real value to the commercial SCT concept, but I fear we are entering into a period of increased marketing speak. Lots of hyperbole with neat unique terms (Now with SHS - Super Hypertechno Stuff) and little useful content.
#40
Posted 15 July 2009 - 01:41 PM
Bill
#41
Posted 15 July 2009 - 01:42 PM
They missed fans, two speed focusing knob, carbon fiber tube, dielectric seconday, and an option for premium optics.....
#42
Posted 15 July 2009 - 01:48 PM
#43
Posted 15 July 2009 - 01:58 PM
nothing new...sad
#44
Posted 15 July 2009 - 02:02 PM
#45
Posted 15 July 2009 - 02:26 PM
Yes, fans would be nice, premium optics package, etc...
But when you add this stuff the price goes up. Eventually the price is so high to where people would rather buy higher end stuff then stuff from Celestron and Meade. Its the same thing that Meade did with their Max Mount 16 and 20. People who are willing to spend that much are not going to look into Meade or Celestron they are going to go towards RCOS and other high end companies.
I see Celestron is trying to give their best without getting into a huge price tags. $10,000 for a CGE Pro 1400 Edge HD seems pretty good to me. 14" SCT with flat field optics and a AP900 Class mount for $10k seems pretty darn good!
#46
Posted 15 July 2009 - 02:29 PM
Celestron reacted swiftly to protect it's market and product against a competing design. IMO, they executed with a finesse rarely seen in large multi-nationals. The competing RC designs are now back on a uphill battle, because no packages with a decent GEM is offered for them. My perception is that they where not pushing Fastar so much as the imaging capability of this instrument.
#47
Posted 15 July 2009 - 02:30 PM
Well for MY money, I'm just happy these actually did appear.
Ticks all of my boxes for passive cooling + anti-mirror flop solutions.
Subject to first light reports, I'm lining up the EdgeHD 14"

Regards,
skybsd
#48
Posted 15 July 2009 - 02:36 PM
Mike R.
#49
Posted 15 July 2009 - 02:52 PM
What I think funny is the frightened look on the guy's face, like "Oh, cr*p, I hope it doesn't fall off the mount!"

Mike Rapchak Jr.
#50
Posted 15 July 2009 - 02:52 PM
I also see that the 9.25" is Fastar ready?! Could there be a new Hyperstar on the way for the 9.25?