This must be a basic question to which I haven't found quite the right answer despite searching. I'm happy to get pointers to relevant discussions that I've missed.
I use a Celestron CPC 1100HD and a ZWO ASI294MC Pro for EAA and dabbling in AP. I also have (and love) a Hyperstar v4, but I'm looking for ways to get better images of objects with a small apparent size. To that end, I've been experimenting with omitting the Hyperstar and attaching the ASI294MC to the back of the 1100HD with the standard 2" diagonal, and sometimes a 2x GSO Barlow.
Results have been satisfying, though I'm up against the limits of seeing (Bortle class 6) at this level of magnification. The frustrating thing is that some targets wind up filling too much of the FOV. So I could use the Hyperstar and waste a zillion pixels, or drop the Hyperstar and struggle to keep the target in the effective FOV. (This scope has an AltAz mount, so I get strong field rotation artifacts at the corners, limiting the effective FOV.)
My goal is to use a focal reducer to capture a wider FOV without going full Hyperstar. Celestron sells a 0.7x reducer for the 1100HD, but the $700 price point is higher than I'm willing to pay to fill a niche use like this. I'll accept lower quality images, but I'd like to know how the quality will be lower.
I'm looking at the Antares f/0.63 (currently about US$90) and the GSO 0.5x reducer (US$50). The Antares attaches to the rear of the tube, and the GSO attaches to the camera or its extensions. I'm open to other options in this price range. Which is better, and how? What kinds of question should I be asking?
Thanks in advance!!