New scope

[Alex K]

So I am the proud owner of a 6 inch f/5 Achromat. However, deep sky observations, esp. Galaxies, aren't really possible around here without taking a longer trip into the hills which right now just isn't possible due to the kid(s). So I want a scope that is good for planets and the moon (with the f/5 Achromat forget it) compact and light enough so I can haul it onto the balcony without too much of a hassle, low maintenance if possible. It should have some aperture. I should allow for some light photography work if I feel like it. I'm sick of chromatic aberrations, so it's either a Mirror or an APO, and I'm not sure an APO I can afford does what I want.

I'm a bit of a fan of the Celestron C8 classic, and I'm thinking of getting some version of that, possibly the field corrected version. I wonder now, should I get a Fork or an equatorial mount? Fork is less flexible but super convenient, GEM is heavier bulkier and more of a hassle to align?
Does anyone have opinions or experience?

[Jackalope]

An Apo is probably out of the question, given your constraints.

You say you're sick of chromatic aberrations, but surely you must know that all practical reflectors are going to have their own aberrations, in particular coma.

Portability + aperture pretty much means an SCT or Mak, IMO - as much aperture as you can afford and carry. I prefer a fork mount for observing and portability, but that's not exactly optimal for imaging - however, if you're mostly doing solar system targets, field rotation might not be much of an issue.

I'd consider a long-focal length achromat but with any kind of aperture portability is going to suffer greatly.

[Alex K]

Yeah, a slow Achromat... but in general you agree that my preference for an 8" or possibly 9.25" SCT makes sense?

[Jackalope]

Yeah, a slow Achromat... but in general you agree that my preference for an 8" or possibly 9.25" SCT makes sense?

Yeah, if portability is a prime concern. Go for a slow f ratio here as well. I have a 10" f/6.3 SCT, the central obstruction is significantly larger than in a f/10 and that leads to lower contrast. (Though despite that, aperture wins, and a 8-10" SCT has that in spades.)

[Alex K]

Yeah, a slow Achromat... but in general you agree that my preference for an 8" or possibly 9.25" SCT makes sense?

Yeah, if portability is a prime concern. Go for a slow f ratio here as well. I have a 10" f/6.3 SCT, the central obstruction is significantly larger than in a f/10 and that leads to lower contrast. (Though despite that, aperture wins, and a 8-10" SCT has that in spades.)

The Celestron 8" and 9.25" models both have f/10 as far as I can tell. There's the EHD version which is supposed to have improved flat field, but the difference is not so great for the 9.25 model which has a pretty flat mirror.

[Jackalope]

Yeah, if portability is a prime concern.  Go for a slow f ratio here as well.    I have a 10" f/6.3 SCT, the central obstruction is significantly larger than in a f/10 and that leads to lower contrast.   (Though despite that, aperture wins, and a 8-10" SCT has that in spades.)

The Celestron 8" and 9.25" models both have f/10 as far as I can tell. There's the EHD version which is supposed to have improved flat field, but the difference is not so great for the 9.25 model which has a pretty flat mirror.

Perhaps you have a local astronomy club where you might have an opportunity to try one?

[Alex K]

Yeah, a slow Achromat... but in general you agree that my preference for an 8" or possibly 9.25" SCT makes sense?

Yeah, if portability is a prime concern.  Go for a slow f ratio here as well.    I have a 10" f/6.3 SCT, the central obstruction is significantly larger than in a f/10 and that leads to lower contrast.   (Though despite that, aperture wins, and a 8-10" SCT has that in spades.)

p.s. what kind of mount do you have for your SCT?

[Jackalope]

Yeah, if portability is a prime concern.  Go for a slow f ratio here as well.    I have a 10" f/6.3 SCT, the central obstruction is significantly larger than in a f/10 and that leads to lower contrast.   (Though despite that, aperture wins, and a 8-10" SCT has that in spades.)

p.s. what kind of mount do you have for your SCT?

Fork. I have a wedge but I don't ever use it. Alignment of a wedge is as much of a PITA as a GEM and I don't do photography any longer.

[Crunchy]

I have a small 4" reflecting telescope with an equatorial mount and clock drive that I used to use in combination with a camera. I haven't had it out in years but I loved the equatorial mount. It was a necessity for photographs but was also great for just looking at faint objects.

[Minimalist]

New scope

Whew.  Glad you aren't a gun nut.