Comparing the images is a bit tricky. The SCT and Newt have longer focal lengths and therefore provide magnified image scale. This makes their images appear less crisp than the APO. However, the Newt and the SCT are providing more detail, better resolution and deeper reach. Look closely at some of the fainter stars and details to see this. If the comparison had been performed using a camera having an 4/3 or APS-c sized sensor in the SCT and Newt, and then the images downsized to the same image scale as the 224/APO combination, the SCT and the Newt would have easily won the comparison. In a sense, the OP acknowledged this in his blog, by pointing out that he did not use focal reducers.
Having said that, I do think that this is a good comparison for a beginner to look at. I am only trying to provide clarification, not criticism. In that vein, a good lesson to take away from this comparison is that it is easier to get crisp images from a shorter focal length scope, especially a short APO. And therefore, a short APO is well suited to a beginner. Also, relatively inexpensive astro cams, commonly purchased by beginners, have relatively small sensors and pixels, which make them a nice match for relatively short focal length scope.
But, to be clear, that does not mean that an 80mm APO is a better EAA scope than an 8" SCT or Newt. For example, take a look at some of the work that Astro Jedi, Gofish and Roelb have done with 8" SCTs and Newts and small sensor cameras. And for examples of what can be done with a 8" Newt and an APS-C sensor, take a look at Howie1's youtube videos (under the name "Carl Smith").
Edited by Rickster, 13 February 2019 - 03:16 PM.