Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Celestron edgeHD 11... Out of the question?

catadioptric dslr Celestron astrophotography
  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 wxcloud

wxcloud

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2020
  • Loc: Denver, Co

Posted 19 February 2020 - 11:47 AM

Right now I'm mostly a DSLR user, this might go to dedicated monochrome camera eventually if the hobby ever picks up (read weather and work schedule behaves), but right now I'm just researching a potential rig for my light polluted back yard.

Currently have a EQ R 6 pro (that I still need to get to) for a mount for the tube, and a Celestron 80d for "wide field"

I'm primarily set up for wide field astrophotography, nebula mostly, but would like to eventually add galaxies (only the brightest!) Planets when they return to the night sky and some lunar.

For some reason I'm thinking the 11" edge might be the best all around jack of most trades (aside from diffuse nebula).

A quick glance does show the mount should be able to handle it, but adding additional guide scope and camera and accessories I do wonder if trying to image will just go out the window and the rig would just end up being a visual / planetary rig.

Is the edge 11 something I just need to get out of my head now?

I wonder if I goofed getting the EQ R 6 pro since I haven't got around to using it yet. A cem60 was also considered when I was mount shopping but with limited time out and it's price, I didn't want that much just sitting around... And yet now I'm looking at a large scope with a 3500 price tag (not including tax and shipping) that's probably very limited as well.. :/

#2 aa6ww

aa6ww

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,474
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2011
  • Loc: Sacramento, Calif.

Posted 19 February 2020 - 12:32 PM

You may want to consider one of the Celestron package deals where you purchase a C11EDge and CGEM11 mount. I see them at B&H Video for $3999.00

You can then turn around and sell the GGEM for $1000 or $1100 or probably more. You would save at least $500 Minimum over the cost of a C11 Edge by itself.

I'm thinking along these lines also, in that I would like to purchase a Celestron 9.25 edge, but also I would like to purchase a CGEM11. The package deal on these two would save me about $850.00.

It would be easier if you had a buyer for the mount first, but it seems to be an easy way to save some big $$ and still get an excellent new OTA.

...Ralph

#3 wxcloud

wxcloud

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2020
  • Loc: Denver, Co

Posted 21 February 2020 - 02:02 AM

Did a little bit more poking around since I failed to get outside tonight, I'm wondering if the 9.25" would actually be a more reasonable pursuit, slightly lighter, about 1200 bucks cheaper and still good in versatility...

#4 Jeffmar

Jeffmar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 902
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2012
  • Loc: salt lake city, utah

Posted 21 February 2020 - 02:20 AM

I have a C11 Edge HD scope I had on a CGEM for a few years. It worked well for visual and it would just get by for imaging. When I put my C11 on a CGX mount it was a significant improvement in both visual and imaging. I don’t know what the weight rating is on your present mount. The CGEM is rated for 40 pounds and the CGX is rated for 55 pounds, but the CGX feels much more stable than it should for such a marginal rating increase. The C11 focal length is pretty long even with a .7 reducer so imaging is definitely more challenging, but I am very happy with that scope. 



#5 Jeffmar

Jeffmar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 902
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2012
  • Loc: salt lake city, utah

Posted 21 February 2020 - 02:24 AM

You won’t notice a large difference between the C9.25 and the C11, performance wise. The C9.25 is only about 7 pounds lighter than the C11, but it is also 2 inches shorter and almost 2 inches narrower. All of that makes a difference on how well a mount works with a telescope. I don’t know what the weight rating of your present mount is but maybe it would work with the C9.25.


Edited by Jeffmar, 21 February 2020 - 02:34 AM.


#6 Michaeljhogan

Michaeljhogan

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 329
  • Joined: 25 Aug 2014

Posted 22 February 2020 - 06:21 AM

 

 

Right now I'm mostly a DSLR user, this might go to dedicated monochrome camera eventually if the hobby ever picks up (read weather and work schedule behaves), but right now I'm just researching a potential rig for my light polluted back yard.

Currently have a EQ R 6 pro (that I still need to get to) for a mount for the tube, and a Celestron 80d for "wide field"

I'm primarily set up for wide field astrophotography, nebula mostly, but would like to eventually add galaxies (only the brightest!) Planets when they return to the night sky and some lunar.

For some reason I'm thinking the 11" edge might be the best all around jack of most trades (aside from diffuse nebula).

A quick glance does show the mount should be able to handle it, but adding additional guide scope and camera and accessories I do wonder if trying to image will just go out the window and the rig would just end up being a visual / planetary rig.

Is the edge 11 something I just need to get out of my head now?

I wonder if I goofed getting the EQ R 6 pro since I haven't got around to using it yet. A cem60 was also considered when I was mount shopping but with limited time out and it's price, I didn't want that much just sitting around... And yet now I'm looking at a large scope with a 3500 price tag (not including tax and shipping) that's probably very limited as well.. :/

Your gonna learn the hard way you’re talking about Edge HD 11 which is nearly the payload of the EQ6-R Pro 28lbs with extras 40lbs the mount is everything it comes before all then the scope why not get a proper mount then Edge HD 9.25 I’m saying this cause I learned the hard way myself.


Edited by Michaeljhogan, 22 February 2020 - 06:28 AM.

  • George N likes this

#7 wxcloud

wxcloud

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2020
  • Loc: Denver, Co

Posted 22 February 2020 - 03:37 PM

Your gonna learn the hard way you’re talking about Edge HD 11 which is nearly the payload of the EQ6-R Pro 28lbs with extras 40lbs the mount is everything it comes before all then the scope why not get a proper mount then Edge HD 9.25 I’m saying this cause I learned the hard way myself.


I kinda figured the 11 and even 9.25 would probably be out of the question for the mount. I think I mentioned that in a previous thread I have somewhere around here lol. It looks feasible but very frustrating. Seems perhaps I should have saved a bit more and got a cem60 or something but wasn't sure if I was comfortable spending that on a mount that may or may not get used often and I realize the irony of looking at a 3500 ota.

#8 WadeH237

WadeH237

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,440
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2007
  • Loc: Snohomish, WA

Posted 23 February 2020 - 10:07 AM

Personally, if it were me in your place, I would get the EdgeHD 8.

 

If you use a modern CMOS camera, the pixels will probably be small enough that you will be seeing limited for deep sky work.  I faced this same question a few years ago and bought the EdgeHD 8, and it's working out great.  Even with the F/7 reducer on it, I'm at about 0.5 arc seconds per pixel with both my previous camera (an ASI1600MM-cool) and my current camera (a QSI 690wsg-8).  Also, size and weight of the 8" makes it much easier to mount.

 

For visual work or planetary imaging, I would lean towards the 11", so you should think about which is the priority.

 

Oh, and I would consider the EdgeHD 11" on an EQ6 to be under mounted for deep sky imaging.  It would be a good match for the 8", though - and even then, you will find that deep sky work at 2000mm (or even 1500mm with the reducer), is a lot different from wide field imaging.  Everything is far less forgiving.


  • Jeffmar and bobzeq25 like this

#9 Jeffmar

Jeffmar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 902
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2012
  • Loc: salt lake city, utah

Posted 23 February 2020 - 06:02 PM

Personally, if it were me in your place, I would get the EdgeHD 8.

 

If you use a modern CMOS camera, the pixels will probably be small enough that you will be seeing limited for deep sky work.  I faced this same question a few years ago and bought the EdgeHD 8, and it's working out great.  Even with the F/7 reducer on it, I'm at about 0.5 arc seconds per pixel with both my previous camera (an ASI1600MM-cool) and my current camera (a QSI 690wsg-8).  Also, size and weight of the 8" makes it much easier to mount.

 

For visual work or planetary imaging, I would lean towards the 11", so you should think about which is the priority.

 

Oh, and I would consider the EdgeHD 11" on an EQ6 to be under mounted for deep sky imaging.  It would be a good match for the 8", though - and even then, you will find that deep sky work at 2000mm (or even 1500mm with the reducer), is a lot different from wide field imaging.  Everything is far less forgiving.

I have done some imaging with my C8, with a .7 focal reducer on my CGX-L. The C8 weighs about 12 pound and the CGX-L is rated for 75 pounds. It seems to work really well for imaging. 



#10 bobzeq25

bobzeq25

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 18,912
  • Joined: 27 Oct 2014

Posted 23 February 2020 - 07:57 PM

Right now I'm mostly a DSLR user, this might go to dedicated monochrome camera eventually if the hobby ever picks up (read weather and work schedule behaves), but right now I'm just researching a potential rig for my light polluted back yard.

Currently have a EQ R 6 pro (that I still need to get to) for a mount for the tube, and a Celestron 80d for "wide field"

I'm primarily set up for wide field astrophotography, nebula mostly, but would like to eventually add galaxies (only the brightest!) Planets when they return to the night sky and some lunar.

For some reason I'm thinking the 11" edge might be the best all around jack of most trades (aside from diffuse nebula).

A quick glance does show the mount should be able to handle it, but adding additional guide scope and camera and accessories I do wonder if trying to image will just go out the window and the rig would just end up being a visual / planetary rig.

Is the edge 11 something I just need to get out of my head now?

I wonder if I goofed getting the EQ R 6 pro since I haven't got around to using it yet. A cem60 was also considered when I was mount shopping but with limited time out and it's price, I didn't want that much just sitting around... And yet now I'm looking at a large scope with a 3500 price tag (not including tax and shipping) that's probably very limited as well.. :/

Are you doing good images with the 80?  Do you do bias, flats, darks?

 

Then stepping up to the 11 is not a silly idea.  But it will be a _very_ large step.  A prudent move would be to get an intermediate scope.  1000mm focal length is something of a sweet spot for many people's average skies.  A reduced C8 is another option.  But, it's your decision.

 

In light pollution optical speed is important.  A reducer for the 11 would be indicated.  Is there a reducer available for the 9.25?  If not, I'd disqualify it.

 

With most modern CMOS cameras, you'd be slightly oversampled at 1000mm.  Longer will make that worse.

 

Note that many imagers spend more for the mount than the scope.  Because it's more important.  Even at 910mm (weight is not the only thing), I'm happy I have a CEM60.  That would be the absolute minimum mount I'd recommend for any of the choices.  An off axis guider would be a good idea, even with an Edge.

 

Note to others reading this.  _Starting out_ in astrophotography with the 11 is a bad idea.  You need to have the basics down first.  _Really_.


Edited by bobzeq25, 23 February 2020 - 08:09 PM.


#11 wxcloud

wxcloud

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2020
  • Loc: Denver, Co

Posted 24 February 2020 - 02:21 PM

Yup, this 11 edgeHD idea I had is looking more and more... Um. Yeah I'm not ready for it, these past couple nights have shown me that :) I thought the scope was something I could grow into. Right now it'd likely frustrate me out.

Guiding? Non. No guide scope or camera.
Laptop? Eh, working on that
Flats? Dark frames? Bias frames? Nope, I mean when I can't get much of light frames or usable data to do much with.

Basically only ended up with a handful of sub frames when I finally do get framing and focus down.

Camera lenses kind of work for some stuff.

Edit:
The thought of perhaps a space cat or something along the lines of that in the wo line up and small guiding set up to get my feet wet did cross my mind. Right now 600mm even at f/6.3 might be pushing it, especially on my flimsily mount star adventurer.

Edited by wxcloud, 24 February 2020 - 02:24 PM.

  • bobzeq25 likes this

#12 dr.who

dr.who

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 15,313
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2012

Posted 24 February 2020 - 03:00 PM

Get a 80-102mm APO and a EdgeHD 8" with TEMPest fans, focal reducer, and the Feathertouch focuser for it. That will get you what you want AP wise and will do really well as a combined visual option. You can add a rail and a saddle on the top of the 8" and put the APO on top. That way you can use both visually at the same time. Start imaging with the APO. 



#13 bobzeq25

bobzeq25

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 18,912
  • Joined: 27 Oct 2014

Posted 24 February 2020 - 04:54 PM

Yup, this 11 edgeHD idea I had is looking more and more... Um. Yeah I'm not ready for it, these past couple nights have shown me that smile.gif I thought the scope was something I could grow into. Right now it'd likely frustrate me out.

Guiding? Non. No guide scope or camera.
Laptop? Eh, working on that
Flats? Dark frames? Bias frames? Nope, I mean when I can't get much of light frames or usable data to do much with.

Basically only ended up with a handful of sub frames when I finally do get framing and focus down.

Camera lenses kind of work for some stuff.

Edit:
The thought of perhaps a space cat or something along the lines of that in the wo line up and small guiding set up to get my feet wet did cross my mind. Right now 600mm even at f/6.3 might be pushing it, especially on my flimsily mount star adventurer.

The small WO and a Star Adventurer would be a fine choice.  But do it right this time.  Bias, flas, darks.  Good processing.  I recommend Astro Pixel Processor, both stacks and processes, relatively easy to use as these things go.

 

Once you're doing images that you like, the future path forward will become much clearer.




CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: catadioptric, dslr, Celestron, astrophotography



Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics