beginner needs help making a Celestron decision - weightless 8i or optics 9 1/4

Greetings all,

I have had the bug for years to buy a good telescope. In the past,
the amount of research required has deterred my desire, but a few
months ago I decided to forge ahead.

I was hoping to hear from some of the more respected members of this
community to assist me with a dilemma - choosing the right telescope.

As an amateur/beginner, I am interested in purchasing a quality goto
scope (that I will be happy with for many years, and not get the
"upgrade bug" every year), and my research tells me that SCT is the
way to go. The feature set, and the comments from newsgroups, have
given the lean to Celestron, and I have decided on either the 8i or
the C9-1/4SGT. I have seen and heard many comments about both, which
have both helped and hindered my effort to make a decision.

It might be good to mention that I am not interested in
astrophotography.

Weight is certainly a factor. At roughly $2000, I want something that
I will use regularly, rather than be reluctant to lug it into the
yard, or nearby Skyline Drive. For this reason, the 8i fits the bill
nicely - good optics, computerized goto, lightweight. I have read
both pro and con statements on the single fork mount, and have
dismissed the negatives as a detriment to my choosing this scope,
largely because I don't anticipate hanging huge amounts of gear from
it.

However, most people I have spoken with say that the increased
aperture of the 9 1/4, well within my budget, is the way to go.

I have just a few questions - thank you for putting up with my
ramblings in setting the stage this far.

1) The 9 1/4 clearly will require disassembly and reassembly for
transporting, unless perhaps I can handle it for the short trips to
the yard. Is it a long, complicated process for one person to remount
the scope on the CG-5 mount?

2) Is the CG-5 mount and tripod adequate? I have read so many
different sides to this story, my head is about to explode!

3) The single fork mount on the 8i looks to be relatively
troublefree, while the equatorial CG-5 mount looks about as
intimidating as Elizabeth Hurley. Any comments?

4) Will the increased aperture make that much of a difference to me,
as an amateur? The price difference of roughly $400 is not a factor,
and doesn't necessarily fit in the equation.

5) Would one definitely go for the Starbright XLT coatings as a
feature enhancement?

6) GPS - is it really worth it? I have a small handheld Garmin Etrex
that I use for hiking - won't this suffice, or is the added
convenience of the optional GPS worth it? The same GPS addon will
work with both scopes, part #93963, for $199.

7) Lastly, I am extremely interested in how shops derive their prices
- for the first time, I have seen virtually no difference in price
from internet shops, which leads me to believe that Celestron (and
Meade) dictate retail prices. Is this true.
Interestingly enough, though, Anacortes lists the Nexstar 8i with
Starbright XLT for $1324, and the same scope with free tripod and free
computerized hand controller for $1424. I tried several times to
contact them to determine what was "free" for $100, but haven't heard
a response. Hmmmm.

It must be stated that I live in a remote area of Virginia, and would
have to drive a minimum of 80 miles just to see these scopes in a
retail store. I don't count that as an option - and, I have already
decided what I want. In addition, astronomy clubs aren't exactly
coming out of the woodwork here in banjo-pickin territory, and the one
time I ran across one on Skyline Drive (I was doing a full moon bike
ride) were so elitist that they would not acknowledge me until I
finally fibbed on an interest to join their club (again, they
travelled 50+ miles). So, I have tried that route, and while it would
be great to participate, it is simply not feasible.

Thanks much for any thoughts, comments, facts that might help me make
a decision. I am extremely excited about getting into this hobby, and
eager to begin.

Regards,

J. Carbone
Washington, VA

On 10 Sep 2003 06:32:28 -0700, (J. Carbone)
wrote:
SNIP
Weight is certainly a factor. At roughly $2000, I want something that
I will use regularly, rather than be reluctant to lug it into the
yard, or nearby Skyline Drive. For this reason, the 8i fits the bill
nicely - good optics, computerized goto, lightweight. I have read
both pro and con statements on the single fork mount, and have
dismissed the negatives as a detriment to my choosing this scope,
largely because I don't anticipate hanging huge amounts of gear from
it.
SNIP

RUN AWAY! RUN AWAY!

Seems that you've done some good research and have identified the best
scope for yourself. Now hurry out and buy that 8i before you're
deluged with everybody else's preferences.

:^)

Les Blalock
http://www.txastro.com

The 9 1/2 IS THE ONLY WAY TO GO FOR YOU. You'll never regret it and that scope
will last you till you die, or want a 18" motoDOB

8i ain't that great.

Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord


--
"In this universe the night was falling,the shadows were lengthening
towards an east that would not know another dawn.
But elsewhere the stars were still young and the light of morning
lingered: and along the path he once had followed, man would one day go
again."

Arthur C. Clarke, The City & The Stars

SIAR
www.starlords.org
Bishop's Car Fund
http://www.bishopcarfund.Netfirms.com/
Freelance Writers Shop
http://www.freelancewrittersshop.netfirms.com
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord

"J. Carbone" wrote in message
om...
Greetings all,

I have had the bug for years to buy a good telescope. In the past,
the amount of research required has deterred my desire, but a few
months ago I decided to forge ahead.




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.515 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 9/1/03

It must be stated that I live in a remote area of Virginia, and would
have to drive a minimum of 80 miles just to see these scopes in a
retail store. I don't count that as an option - and, I have already
decided what I want.

Personally I strongly recommend driving that 80 miles. It could save you a
great deal of frustration and disappointment.

Catalogs and web pages are very nice ways to get an idea of what you might be
looking at but they do not convey the reality of the scope. If you want to
avoid the chance of an unpleasant surprise when those boxes arrive on your door
step, seeing the scopes upfront and in person will let you see how big they
really are whether you can handle the larger scope.

You have taken the time to do some quality research but I think the final step
is important and necessary. Otherwise, if you decide to go with the 8 incher,
you will always wonder if you should have gotten the larger scope and
visa-versa.

You can also find out about the other accessories that you will be needing to
make the scope function.

I am not suggesting that the scopes you are considering are poor scopes, rather
that without seeing them, you cannot really appreciate what they truly are.

Jon Isaacs

"J. Carbone" wrote in message
om...

Thanks much for any thoughts, comments, facts that might help me make
a decision. I am extremely excited about getting into this hobby, and
eager to begin.

I started with a Tasco Starguide 4 (Nexstar 4 clone). Less than 6 months
later I bought a used Celestron 8" SCT with StarBright coatings (a 1994
Ultima 8-PEC to be exact). This is a fork mount on wedge setup. I'm not
alone when I tell you that the C8 can be an excellent performer, provided it
is properly collimated, and adequately equalized to the ambient temperature.

Sometimes I wish I could just run out and buy a NX9.25GPS for purely visual
use, but my humble old Ultima 8 is too good to part with. The reaon I would
want the NXGPS is for the altazimuth mode tracking. Same you will get with
the 8i. In fact, I'd be very happy with the NX8GPS if it's optics are
anywhere close to the Ultima 8's. The NX series is more suited to use for
imaging (something I dabble in) when mounted on a wedge. I think that's
pretty much all you're paying for compared to the 8i.

The only reason I'd want the 9.25, is it's reputation for good optics, and
the added smidgen of aperture. But, the 8" is a good, very good, starter
scope, as well as life long companion for many under the sky. You could do a
lot worse than an 8i as a starter scope.

Having said all of that, I missed your reason not to get a sub-$500 8" F6
Dobsonian. There is nothing inherently wrong with these scopes. The only two
detractors to using them, is the lack of tracking, and the need to find
stuff on your own (not that the latter is really a detractor to anyone other
than a newbie, someone with physical limitations, or someone with a lack of
patience). The former problem can be resolved with an EQ platform like the
Johsonian. The latter problem can be resolved with Digital Setting Circles
(DSCs). Although adding the two of those would blow beyond a $1000 budget.

Why would you bother adding those two appliances to an 8" F6 Dob, rather
than getting the 8i? Well, that's the real question now isn't it.

- The 8" F6 Dob has a 1200mm focal length which means inherently it is
capable of wider fields of view at low powers. The 8" SCT has a 2000mm focal
length, and requires either a focal reducer or a 2" diagonal mirror and 2"
eyepieces to exceed 1 degree of field. A lot of astronomy can be (is) done
in larger than a 1 degree field of view. (Don't get me wrong, I use an R/C
and a 24mm Panoptic for 1.2 degrees in my C8, and I'm quite happy with it,
but it's (much) more expensive than simply buying a 32mm Plossl eyepiece for
the Dob.)

- The 8" F6 Dob assembles in two easy pieces (base and OTA). But, then so
does the 8i (tripod and one arm mount w/OTA). With platform drive and DSCs,
the Dob would become a little more work, but really no more than one would
need to open up a tripod, and align a GoTo computer. So here I see no
advantage to one over the other.

- The 8" F6 Dob's primary objective is buried all the way down into the deep
end of the OTA. A natural dew shield. The SCT has a corrector plate out
front which is a dew magnet. If you live in humid environs, you will need a
suitable prevention method. This can be as simple as a dew shield which
attaches to the front of the scope and can buy you anywhere from an extra
half hour, to an extra 2 hours depending on conditions. However, for
sessions that last more than a couple of hours, a heater strip is a virtual
requirement, and yet another "hidden" cost. (Again, don't get me wrong, I
like the 8" SCT over the Dob. I'm just pointing these things out.)

Well, that's it for now. I gotta go. I still like the idea of the 8i, if it
suits you to let the scope do the finding. That can be fun, but it can also
be frustrating if you're the type who likes to see where he's going, rather
than letting someone lead you pretty much blindly from one scenic vista to
another.

Best wishes,
Stephen Paul
Shirley, MA

"J. Carbone" wrote in message
om...
Greetings all,

I have had the bug for years to buy a good telescope. In the past,
the amount of research required has deterred my desire, but a few
months ago I decided to forge ahead.

I was hoping to hear from some of the more respected members of this
community to assist me with a dilemma - choosing the right telescope.

As an amateur/beginner, I am interested in purchasing a quality goto
scope (that I will be happy with for many years, and not get the
"upgrade bug" every year), and my research tells me that SCT is the
way to go. The feature set, and the comments from newsgroups, have
given the lean to Celestron, and I have decided on either the 8i or
the C9-1/4SGT. I have seen and heard many comments about both, which
have both helped and hindered my effort to make a decision.

It might be good to mention that I am not interested in
astrophotography.

Weight is certainly a factor. At roughly $2000, I want something that
I will use regularly, rather than be reluctant to lug it into the
yard, or nearby Skyline Drive. For this reason, the 8i fits the bill
nicely - good optics, computerized goto, lightweight. I have read
both pro and con statements on the single fork mount, and have
dismissed the negatives as a detriment to my choosing this scope,
largely because I don't anticipate hanging huge amounts of gear from
it.

Having owned many SCTs in the past, and currently owning 3 of them, it's
easy for me to say that I love SCTs! You have made a good choice in the
SCT, so do not be deterred. There are not many telescope designs which
offer the portability, the advanced electronic technology, the optics and
the price of the modern SCT.
I suggest only that you look carefully at what Meade has to offer. You
can't go wrong with Celestron, but the Meade LX200 is very nice indeed.



However, most people I have spoken with say that the increased
aperture of the 9 1/4, well within my budget, is the way to go.

I have just a few questions - thank you for putting up with my
ramblings in setting the stage this far.

1) The 9 1/4 clearly will require disassembly and reassembly for
transporting, unless perhaps I can handle it for the short trips to
the yard. Is it a long, complicated process for one person to remount
the scope on the CG-5 mount?

Do not buy this scope with the CG-5 mount! While the CG5 is very capable,
the 9.25 is undermounted, which makes the combination a poor selection for
astrophotography.


2) Is the CG-5 mount and tripod adequate? I have read so many
different sides to this story, my head is about to explode!

Absolutely not! A good fork mount is better, IMO.


3) The single fork mount on the 8i looks to be relatively
troublefree, while the equatorial CG-5 mount looks about as
intimidating as Elizabeth Hurley. Any comments?

The single fork mount is clearly not up to advanced astrophotography.



4) Will the increased aperture make that much of a difference to me,
as an amateur?

No, you will not easily see the difference.


The price difference of roughly $400 is not a factor,
and doesn't necessarily fit in the equation.

In that case, go for an LX200...at least take a look at them.



5) Would one definitely go for the Starbright XLT coatings as a
feature enhancement?

If money is an issue, you can easily pass this up.



6) GPS - is it really worth it? I have a small handheld Garmin Etrex
that I use for hiking - won't this suffice, or is the added
convenience of the optional GPS worth it? The same GPS addon will
work with both scopes, part #93963, for $199.

The built in GPS feature makes the scope a little easier to use, but it's
certainly not necessary. I'll tell you a feature that you _should_ be
interested in, particularly since you will be moving into photography. The
feature is the Zero Image-Shift Microfocuser. Unfortunately, it's not
offered with Celestron telescopes, only Meade. All new LX200s come with
this feature as standard equipment, and you should look into it.



7) Lastly, I am extremely interested in how shops derive their prices
- for the first time, I have seen virtually no difference in price
from internet shops, which leads me to believe that Celestron (and
Meade) dictate retail prices. Is this true.

Yes, this is true. This is a practice which is quite common on the
marketplace, and telescope manufacturers are not the only people who use it.


Interestingly enough, though, Anacortes lists the Nexstar 8i with
Starbright XLT for $1324, and the same scope with free tripod and free
computerized hand controller for $1424. I tried several times to
contact them to determine what was "free" for $100, but haven't heard
a response. Hmmmm.

Anacortes is a very agressive dealer, who has built a fine reputation and is
deserving of all accolades. When you finally decide on which telescope to
buy, that's a fine place to buy it.

Al



It must be stated that I live in a remote area of Virginia, and would
have to drive a minimum of 80 miles just to see these scopes in a
retail store. I don't count that as an option - and, I have already
decided what I want. In addition, astronomy clubs aren't exactly
coming out of the woodwork here in banjo-pickin territory, and the one
time I ran across one on Skyline Drive (I was doing a full moon bike
ride) were so elitist that they would not acknowledge me until I
finally fibbed on an interest to join their club (again, they
travelled 50+ miles). So, I have tried that route, and while it would
be great to participate, it is simply not feasible.

Thanks much for any thoughts, comments, facts that might help me make
a decision. I am extremely excited about getting into this hobby, and
eager to begin.

Regards,

J. Carbone
Washington, VA

On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 16:16:42 GMT, Al scribbled:

"J. Carbone" wrote in message
om...

It might be good to mention that I am not interested in
astrophotography.


snip

Do not buy this scope with the CG-5 mount! While the CG5 is very capable,
the 9.25 is undermounted, which makes the combination a poor selection for
astrophotography.

snip

The single fork mount is clearly not up to advanced astrophotography.

snip

It appears that he's not interested in astrophotography. However,
since I'm thinking about the same issues and am interested in
astrophotography, I found your comments to be very useful.

VJM

Do not buy this scope with the CG-5 mount! While the CG5 is very capable,
the 9.25 is undermounted, which makes the combination a poor selection for
astrophotography.


With the 9.25" OTA mounted on it, the CG-5 eq head itself can work fine... the
supplied tripod, though, is the weak link. I've not tried the 9.25" OTA with
the supplied tripod, but I know it didn't work well at all with the 8" OTA, so
the 9.25" OTA would be worse. BUT, with a good tripod, the CG5 works very well
with the 9.25" OTA for visual use (I haven't tried astrophotography with it),
with short damping times and not enough vibration to hamper focusing at even
high powers. This is along with a 9x50 finder, a Telrad finder, and a 2" AP
Maxbright diagonal, so it's well loaded. The tripod I use is the heavy duty
wood surveyor's tripod from Universal Astronomics, along with some Celestron
Anti-Vibe pads (which are good to use with nearly any scope... you can never
have too little vibration).