The first photo is unprocessed but shows the seeing that night. The second is the same photo processed with RigiStax 6 . I used a Quantum 6 Mak 33% CO, that I have had since 1978 and an old Orion StarShoot imager III camera. I would rather observe than image but on a poor night I can get pretty good results imaging because I can stack fleeting moments. My Mak has never taken a back seat to any SCT in over 35yrs until I got a mint 30yr old Super C8 Plus last summer. I used to laugh years ago when I read Celestron had 1/10 wave optics. I'm not laughing anymore. Since this SCT can run with my Mak,(big CO and all) the advantage is 8" vs 6" and it is much lighter than the 6" Mak. They say Celestron SCTs are lighter than the same size Meade. I will leave the reflector, both dob and eq mounted to others, although I have a C5 with very good optics that I would take over the wonderful RV-6 that I had years ago because the C5 is sooooo easy to move around. I don't have any experience with large refractors but I am enjoying a 60mm mounted on my new to me C8 for its low power wide field views.
Cool. Could you give some specifics as to the number of frames, percent used, wavelet settings and stuff like that?
IME, the Super C8 introduction marked a turning point toward quality for Celestron. Nice scope. I've a friend who has a Nexstar version C8 and it's optically excellent too. They are noticeably lighter than the Meades and thermally "quicker".
There are practical advantages of a Mak relative to a SCT: The slower thermal mass of the thick meniscus takes longer to dew up, plus, as it has no optical power, heating and cooling of the meniscus does not contribute much degradation during the instrument's heating & cooling.