Disclosure: If you buy something via our link, we may earn a commission with no additional expense to you. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Learn more
Ranking All 50+ Catadioptric Telescopes in the US
Rank & ratings last updated by Zane Landers on
Catadioptric telescopes are compact and fairly low-maintenance telescopes that we've seen being popular among visual observers and imagers alike, as well as being heavily marketed to beginner astronomers. While various catadioptric configurations exist, the only two common ones are Schmidt-Cassegrains and Maksutov-Cassegrains, both variants of the Cassegrain telescope.
The front view of a Maksutov Cassegrain optical tube
Cassegrain telescopes, including both Maksutov and Schmidt variants, use a concave primary mirror with a central hole and a convex secondary mirror, as shown in the diagram below. Both Maksutov and Schmidt-Cassegrain telescopes use spherical primary mirrors and approximately spherical secondary mirrors.
A Celestron's Schmidt-Cassegrain with its light path and parts marked
The secondary mirror “folds” or reflects the light path back towards the primary mirror. The focal point, where we place the eyepiece, is at the rear of the telescope, like in a refractor type of telescope. The corrector lens is used to fix the resulting aberrations of one or both mirrors being spherical in curvature. Spherical mirrors are still used because they are easier and cheaper to manufacture than a parabolic or hyperbolic mirror, but they induce massive aberrations that, without the correct lens, would've ruined the image.
Focusing: The majority of Maksutov-Cassegrain and Schmidt-Cassegrain telescopes have a focuser system built into the telescope, where you turn a knob at the back of the tube to move the primary mirror while the eyepiece/accessories remain in place.
Attaching Eyepieces/Accessories: Schmidt-Cassegrain telescopes use a universal thread system and size for attaching accessories to the back of the optical tube, while Maksutov-Cassegrains can have various types of threads and adapters to attach accessories.
Maksutov-Cassegrains, also referred to simply as Maksutovs, Maks, or MCTs, use a thick meniscus corrector lens in the front. The secondary mirror on the front usually shares the spherical curvature of the corrector, simplifying manufacture.
A Makstuv's corrector lens and the secondary mirror in its center.
Schmidt-Cassegrains, usually abbreviated as SCTs, use a thin Schmidt corrector plate, which appears flat but actually has a complex curve. The secondary mirror is attached to a holder on the corrector, as seen in the picture below.
Mirrors and the correct plate in a 6" Schmidt Cassegrain
Maksutovs are easier to make to high standards of quality than Schmidt-Cassegrains. The built-in secondary mirror in Maksutovs is also smaller, reducing the overall light path obstruction, which allows for sharper and higher-contrast images. The Maksutov-Cassegrains' secondary mirror being integrated with the corrector also greatly reduces the need for collimation.
However, Maksutovs are impractical to manufacture in large sizes due to cost and performance reasons. I've even seen Maks above 5” in aperture sometimes having secondary mirrors separate from the corrector, known as Rutten-Maksutovs or RuMaks. The largest Maksutov-Cassegrains and Schmidt-Cassegrains ever built are both 22” in aperture. From what I came to know, the Celestron 22” Schmidt-Cassegrain was ostensibly a production unit, and a half dozen were made before the line was discontinued. The largest of either design we usually see is 16”.
Schmidt-Newtonian: Spherical primary mirror Newtonian reflector with Schmidt corrector. These are designed for very fast f/3 to f/4 imaging or as wide-field visual scopes. We noticed less coma than a regular Newtonian but few other advantages. We believe third-party coma correctors are a more convenient option. These are mass-produced by Celestron and Meade in fairly large numbers.
Maksutov-Newtonian: Newtonian reflector with a spherical primary mirror and Maksutov corrector. These are usually optimized to have a small central obstruction and good planetary performance as a result, but the small central obstruction affects the usefulness of deep-sky imaging. And again, we think that a regular Newtonian usually is just fine.
Klevstov-Cassegrain: Sold as Vixen VMC, Meade 107D, various Russian and Japanese small brands, and also used by many mirror-lens designs. A small corrector lens attached to the secondary mirror results in often poor performance and large central obstruction, and thus we don't recommend these. The Field-Maksutov design is basically the same as the Klevstov in general layout and performance.
Argunov-Cassegrain: Klevstov-Cassegrain with a slightly different lens/mirror configuration and the same flaws as the Klevstov. I've seen it being sold as Vixen VC but otherwise uncommon.
Corrected Dall-Kirkham: Used by many imaging scopes, Dall-Kirkham with coma correcting and field flattening lenses. Usually not economical for amateur-sized scopes.
The low-quality “Bird-Jones” telescope, a Newtonian with a small sub-aperture corrector in the focuser drawtube, is also technically a catadioptric. Other sub-aperture corrector designs such as these exist, though few are common or well-designed, as do a few other front corrector configurations like the Lurie-Houghton.
What You Should Expect While Buying Catadioptrics
Though not all catadioptrics are necessarily of the Cassegrain, Maksutov, or Schmidt configuration, the following apply only to SCT and Maksutov telescopes, since those are the only ones readily available in most cases anyway.
A Schmidt-Cassegrain usually costs at least twice as much as a Newtonian reflector boasting comparable capabilities, if not more, be it a new or used model.
A Maksutov-Cassegrain is more than triple as much as a Newtonian reflector. Large Maksutovs above 7” in aperture are essentially custom products, and we rarely see them available for a reasonable price.
SCTs and Maksutovs use a very stubby tube due to the folded configuration of the Cassegrain optical layout, usually no more than 2-2.5 times the diameter of the primary mirror in physical length.
A sample 127mm Maksutov Cassegrain to showcase the expected physical length.
The sealed design of the optical tube keeps debris, airborne chemical contaminants, and other foreign objects out of Schmidt-Cassegrain and Maksutov-Cassegrain telescopes, meaning the mirror coatings are far less likely to corrode or even get dirty.
How The Catadioptric Design Affects Our Viewing/Imaging Experience
Because SCTs and Maksutovs have the secondary mirror attached to the corrector plate, no spider is needed to hold it in place. This means, unlike a conventional Newtonian or Cassegrain-type reflector, there are no diffraction spikes (bright, star-shaped patterns caused by light bending around the support structure holding the secondary mirror)
SCTs (if collimated correctly with everything tightened) rarely need collimation more than every few uses.
Maksutovs may never need collimation at all owing to the secondary mirror often being part of the same piece of glass as the corrector.
While collimating an SCT or Maksutov isn’t as frequently required, we need to actually point the telescope at a bright star while making adjustments in order to do so. I've also seen many users make the mistake of adding thumb screws or other modifications that do little but make catadioptric telescopes shift in collimation more frequently.
SCTs and Maksutovs’ corrector lenses don’t produce any chromatic aberration (color fringing due to all colors of light failing to focus at the same point), as with a pure reflecting telescope. But we've noticed that some subaperture corrector lenses can still produce chromatic aberration.
SCTs are usually in the focal ratio range of f/8 to f/11, while Maksutovs are usually f/10 to f/16. Since, focal length = focal ratio x aperture, both SCTs and Maks have very long focal lengths as a result.
Longer focal length makes it easy to achieve high magnifications for lunar, planetary, and double star viewing without a fancy Barlow lens or ultra-short focal length eyepiece.
Magnification = Focal Length of Telescope / Focal Length of Eyepiece
Similarly, planetary imaging only requires a modest Barlow lens to achieve the required image scale. In its place, if we're using a f/4 to f/6 Newtonian, we might need a 5x Barlow or even stacking multiple Barlows.
The internal moving-mirror focus system used on almost all Schmidt-Cassegrain and Maksutov-Cassegrain telescopes has unlimited travel but can have the primary mirror rock back and forth on the rod it slides on as we focus. This can cause “image shift,” where the view appears to bounce at high magnifications. Image shift affects most catadioptric scopes, at least in a minor fashion.
“Mirror flop” happens when the primary mirror tilts slightly overtime, resulting in alignment issues, which ruin long exposure images. Many aplanatic SCTs designed for imaging have mirror locks to solve the mirror flop problem.
Compared to a Newtonian reflector, an SCT or Maksutov-Cassegrain requires more time to cool down due to the large secondary mirror (they're even larger than that of a Newtonian reflector of the same aperture) also needing to cool down and the corrector plate trapping warm air inside the tube.
Maksutovs don’t have the mass of the secondary mirror to contend with, but instead, the thick corrector can completely trap warm air, requiring some sort of active ventilation system with 7” and larger apertures. I've personally witnessed it ruining the performance of most larger Maksutov scopes even with countermeasures.
The large secondary mirror in the catadioptric obstructing the primary mirror has a negligible effect on light-gathering power but can reduce contrast at the eyepiece by essentially smearing the image slightly.
Maksutov-Cassegrains rarely have a central obstruction below 25% or so.
Even the most optimized SCTs have obstructions of around 33% or greater, and some have obstructions exceeding 40% when the baffle around the secondary is accounted for.
Central obstructions over 30% are noticeably detrimental to the image contrast, particularly with smaller telescopes. A central obstruction above 40% with telescopes like the Celestron C5 SCT essentially ruins high-resolution planetary viewing (C5, as we've tested, is ironically capable of little else owing to its small aperture and limited field of view).
The several-meter-long focal length of SCTs and Maksutovs means we get a narrower field of view with any given eyepiece.
Additionally, we've experienced that 8” and smaller catadioptric scopes typically don’t illuminate the field of view of the widest possible 2” eyepieces and some cameras, even if they technically allow the attachment of 2” eyepieces/camera, further limiting the field of view possible with such telescopes.
Larger catadioptrics still don't allow us to use a 2” eyepiece and a focal reducer without vignetting, which means that the field of view is always cramped.
The long focal lengths of SCTs and Maksutovs place an incredibly high demand on tracking/guiding requirements for deep-sky astrophotography, while the slow focal ratio prohibits imaging without an extremely long exposure time.
Dedicated focal reducers are practically mandatory for imaging nebulae, galaxies, and star clusters with an SCT, while there are only limited options for Mak-targeted focal reducers.
2024 August Update: Orion Telescopes & Binoculars's retail website went offline on July 31st and their storefronts are all shut down from mid-July. We're in the process of removing Orion's and Meade's (Orion owns Meade) telescopes from our recommendations and rank lists.
Rank Category: Catadioptrics Below $200
Make no mistake—all Maksutov telescopes available in this price range are tiny scopes with few capabilities. They are only going to work well, if at all, on the brightest targets, i.e., for a quick peek at the Moon or Jupiter. They are of little practical use on most targets that actually require any light gathering or resolving power (which includes most deep sky objects). With its limited field of view and light-gathering capability, we couldn't observe fainter objects at all, and the brighter star clusters simply don’t fit in these scopes' small field of view. But still, for the money, we believe these are a nice catch. I even keep a Sarblue 70 with me on the doorway for quick glances.
The SarBlue Mak70 comes with an actually decent mount/tripod, unlike the cheaper tripod-mounted Mak60 variants listed just below. When compared to the slightly cheaper Mak60 optical tube, Mak70 has an all-metal build and 36% more light-gathering ability and a smidge more resolving capability. It has the same razor-sharp optics, as we expect with any Maksutov-Cassegrain type of telescope. We get a decent accessory pack (finder, eyepiece, and star diagonal) to get started with. It has an extremely compact form factor when disassembled.
A scaled-down version of the nifty Mak70, the SarBlue Mak60 with Dobsonian mount package is an excellent choice if you’re looking for a compact telescope. The tabletop-mounted version is especially extremely simple, rock-steady, and affordable. Similar to the Mak70 optics, the Mak60 has near-perfect optics with sharper views of the Moon, planets, and double stars than what we get with the similarly priced best-in-class Newtonian reflector telescopes. Mak60's beverage can-sized optical tube is small enough that we can pack it in a backpack or handbag, and the package includes a reasonably useful medium-power eyepiece, star diagonal, and finder. The maximum achievable field of view is similar to that of Mak70.
Mak60 Dobsonian telescope (blue) and Mak70's optical tube without its tripod.
This Mak60 configuration, which has a standard photo tripod, works well. But we find aiming and tracking targets at high magnifications with the provided tripod frustrating and challenging. Since the scope uses the same Mak60 optical tube, this scope is still great for viewing the Moon and planets, though.
The Mak60/tabletop tripod combination is the cheapest available. But we found it extremely hard to aim and that is worsened by the lack of a dedicated finder scope. While usable, this wasn’t exactly a fun package for us. However, if you already have a sturdy, high-quality standard photo tripod and can get used to the tiny nibs on the optical tube for aiming, this package will save you a few bucks.
Rank Category: Catadioptrics Between $200 and $500
One of the cheapest acceptable computerized GoTo telescopes available, the Celestron Astro-Fi 102 is a significant upgrade over a 90mm or smaller Maksutov with significantly better resolution on planets. It is mounted atop the Celestron Astro-Fi GoTo mount, which is controlled via the SkyPortal app that is to be installed on your smartphone. Other than through the smartphone app, you can’t aim/use this scope manually at all. The Astro-Fi computerized GoTo mount automatically points at and tracks any celestial object that we choose on our phone after an initial GoTo system setup and alignment. We also realized that the Astro Fi mount and tripod were significantly steadier than the older NexStar SLT mount that Celestron offers with its 90mm and 127mm Maksutovs (named NexStar 90SLT and NexStar 127SLT), while also consuming less power and possessing an easier-to-navigate interface.
Explore FirstLight 100mm Mak with EQ3 Mount
List Price: $399
Rank 2
3.7/5
The Explore Scientific FirstLight 100mm Maksutov-Cassegrain offers excellent performance, and the provided EQ3/”Exos Nano” manual equatorial mount is sturdy and easily motorized. Unfortunately, the included diagonal, eyepiece, and red dot finder are extremely low quality and next to unusable, and replacing them at this price range puts you nearly into the category of the price of a computerized scope of this aperture. Additionally, an equatorial mount is a little more complicated and difficult to get used to than an alt-azimuth mount (AZ) design is for beginners.
Explore FirstLight 100mm Mak with Twilight Nano AZ Mount
List Price: $379
Rank 3
3.7/5
While we find it poorly accessorized and lacking slow-motion controls on its alt-azimuth mount, the FirstLight 100mm Maksutov has tremendously good optics, just like the above-mentioned EQ3 version's optics. Its compact tube and a lightweight mount make it easy to bring it out in a hurry or even fly with on a plane.
We're not saying that NexStar 90SLT is a bad scope. It features an acceptable mount and accessories along with great optics, but setting up and aligning the mount is time-consuming and, quite frankly, overkill for a small instrument that’s almost exclusively useful for the Moon and planets. Also, for the price or even lower, you could get the above-ranked Celestron Astro-Fi 102, which has a higher aperture, largely the same features, and an easier-to-use and steadier mount.
Rank Category: Catadioptrics Between $500 and $1000
127mm (5") aperture provides significantly better performance than smaller apertures, allowing for excellent views of the Moon, planets, double stars, and the brightest deep-sky objects.
Using Celestron’s C5 SCT optical tube atop the StarSense Explorer mount, the StarSense Explorer DX 5” (127mm) gave us similar views as the 130mm Newtonian StarSense Explorer tabletop model. But it was slightly steadier and more compact thanks to the C5 optical tube’s Schmidt-Cassegrain design, and the mount is of course easy to use thanks to the StarSense Explorer technology. StarSense Explorer technology shows you where your telescope is pointed in the sky by making use of the camera and gyroscope of your smartphone attached to the mount, and then you have to physically move the telescope accordingly.
While we’d prefer the slightly more, but justifiable, priced NexStar 6SE due to its greater aperture (that extra inch matters a lot more than you might think!), the NexStar 5SE isn’t a bad choice for those on a very tight budget or looking for a little more portability.
Sky-Watcher 127 mm Skymax AZ-GTi Mak GoTo
List Price: $880
Rank 3
3.5/5
The Sky-Watcher Skymax 127 offers excellent optical performance, and we see it as an ideal match for the compact, versatile, and high-tech AZ-GTi GoTo mount. The AZ-GTi mount is controlled via your smartphone with the SynScan app, but can also be aimed manually with or without the mount powered on. While technically only possessing a stopped-down 120mm of aperture instead of the specified 127mm due to an optical design quirk of Synta Maksutovs, the Sky-Watcher Skymax 127 still boasts a substantial performance boost over a 102mm unit. The Skymax 127 package includes two eyepieces, a star diagonal, and a red dot finder to get you started. The whole package is also fairly compact when broken down.
The NexStar 127SLT has sharp optics and enough aperture to show us some faint fuzzies, same as the Sky-Watcher's above-ranked SkyMax 127. But we felt that the mount is a little undersized, and unlike the Sky-Watcher AZ-GTi, we can't move the scope manually at all. If prices are in your favor, you might save some money though.
Sky-Watcher 102 mm Skymax AZ-GTi Mak GoTo
List Price: $680
Rank 5
3.5/5
The Sky-Watcher 102mm Skymax AZ-GTi package, to us, is a great telescope with fabulous optics, a very functional and user-friendly mount, and an adequate set of accessories. The only difference between this telescope and the cheaper and identical Celestron Astro-Fi 102 is that the AZ-GTi mount can also be manually pointed as an extra feature, which you may or may not find worth paying extra for. Both scopes have the functionality of being able to be controlled with a smartphone. If you’re ready to spend this much on a telescope, it might be worth considering upgrading to the larger 127mm Skymax model instead, or spending the difference on buying additional accessories after opting for the Astro-Fi 102.
The Celestron NexStar 4SE has the same optics as the Astro-Fi 102mm and Skymax 102, but we don't like that it comes with an integrated flip mirror of lower optical quality than a standard 1.25” prism or dielectric mirror star diagonal. Additionally, the NexStar SE mount is quite heavy and bulky for the price, making it not as portable as the Astro-Fi 102 and Skymax 102, both of which in any case also offer more features at a comparable cost.
Explore FirstLight 127mm Mak with EQ3 Mount
List Price: $529
Rank 7
3.2/5
While it does deliver us a true 127mm aperture, unlike the Sky-Watcher/Celestron “127mm” Maksutovs, the Explore Scientific FirstLight 127mm’s super-long 1900mm focal length and 1.25”-only eyepieces severely constrain its field of view. The EQ3 mount was adequate for holding this scope—if a bit on the light side—and can be easily motorized. But, in our view, the poor included accessories and lack of versatility hurt the value of the FirstLight 127mm Mak severely compared to a more well-equipped 102mm or spending a little more on an equivalent scope from another brand.
Explore FirstLight 127mm Mak with Twilight I Mount
List Price: $500
Rank 8
3.2/5
The 127mm Explore Scientific FirstLight Maksutov-Cassegrain telescope is an excellent performer optically, and we share the opinion that the Twilight I is a rock-solid, high-quality, manually operated alt-azimuth mount. However, its price tag is comparable to several computerized 127mm options, and its accessories are of low quality, making this combination a bad deal.
Explore FirstLight 127mm Mak with Twilight Nano Mount
List Price: $500
Rank 9
3/5
The Twilight Nano makes for a nice combination with a 100mm or smaller scope, but the fat 127mm Maksutov-Cassegrain’s long focal length and much higher weight require a beefier mount and one with slow-motion controls. And as usual, the accessories are junk.
Rank Category: Catadioptrics Between $1000 and $2000
6" aperture options open up in this price range. With 6”, we can observe a fair amount of deep-sky objects and see details such as dust lanes in galaxies and individual stars in globular clusters, where smaller aperture scopes fall short in capability.
The Celestron NexStar 6SE Schmidt-Cassegrain is more versatile than smaller Maksutovs and we think of it as reasonably priced for its capabilities. Of the four Celestron NexStar SE telescope models, the 6SE is the only one we really recommend, as the 8SE is unsteady while the other two models (4SE and 5SE) offer poor performance for the price. The NexStar SE mount requires a fair bit of setup to get going, but once ready, it can easily track and slew up to 40,000 objects of our choosing from its database. It comes with a hand controller by default, but you can purchase and install a WiFi dongle to use your phone or tablet for remote operation. The scope is light and compact enough that I can take it on a plane with the tube attached to the mount as carry-on and the the tripod checked in.
The NexStar Evolution 6 is essentially a better equipped version of its cheaper cousin, the NexStar 6SE, but with the same 6" aperture and viewing ability. While we have the opinion that none of the improvements over the Celestron NexStar 6SE are jaw-dropping with the NexStar Evolution 6, what you do get is pretty nice. In addition to a pair of Plossl eyepieces, the NexStar Evolution 6 features a mount with no plastic components and a superior-quality drive system. It also has a built-in rechargeable battery and can be controlled either with the included handset or with your smartphone thanks to its built-in WiFi adapter. However, you could also just buy a WiFi dongle and batteries for the 6SE and get the same features, or spend a little more and wind up with the far more powerful 8” Evolution model.
We believe that the C6 optical tube is best with either a HyperStar unit or an f/6.3 reducer for deep-sky astrophotography, but it is still a reasonable scope to start with and works well on the Advanced VX mount. However, setting up this relatively small scope on a clunky, big, and complicated mount for visual use is simply overkill in my opinion.
Explore FirstLight 152mm Mak with Twilight I Mount
List Price: $1199
Rank 4
3.8/5
The Twilight I mount felt to be a little bit of an unusual pairing for a 152mm Maksutov-Cassegrain, but it supports this telescope just fine and makes for a great “grab n’ go” setup for viewing planets. The single-speed, 2” Crayford focuser on the back of this scope, along with the rotating tube rings, make it a lot more versatile and comfortable to use.
While we'd still call it a decent pick, the NexStar 8SE’s mount is less than ideal due to its rather small tripod legs and lightweight single-arm fork design. We’d recommend stepping up to the 8” NexStar Evolution if you must have an 8” GoTo scope.
Rank Category: Catadioptrics Between $2000 and $3000
Celestron’s C9.25 XLT Schmidt-Cassegrain optical tube provides slightly better resolving power and resolution than the smaller C8 optical tube that’s used in the next-ranked NexStar Evolution 8. The AVX 9.25 package is also easier to focus and collimate (as well as typically made to a higher standard of quality) thanks to its longer f-ratio primary mirror and more weakly curved secondary mirror, similar to the typical configuration of many Maksutov-Cassegrains. The Advanced VX GoTo mount is the smallest and lightest mount configuration that supports the C9.25 well for visual use. Being a German equatorial mount, even though it’s designed for deep-sky astrophotography, the C9.25’s weight exceeds the mount’s capacity for deep-sky astrophotography, and a smaller telescope would have to be swapped in on the AVX mount for that purpose. The C9.25 Advanced VX package is ideal if you want a fairly large aperture scope and a setup that’s easily used for both viewing and imaging (planetary with the C9.25 and deep-sky with another telescope on the Advanced VX mount) and breaks down into fairly lightweight and compact pieces when disassembled.
The Celestron Nexstar Evolution 8 is easily the best version of the Celestron’s classic C8 optical tube available today, being far more stable and high-quality than the cheaper NexStar 8SE that uses the same C8. The Evolution mount is less cumbersome than an equatorial mount but is still a very advanced alt-azimuth GoTo mount. The NexStar Evolution mount features a built-in lithium battery, clutches to allow (theoretical) manual aiming when the scope is powered off, and a WiFi dongle along with a hand controller that allows us to run the scope with either the handset or our smartphone/tablet. The Evolution is significantly sturdier than the NexStar 8SE model, which we don’t particularly recommend, and the whole scope breaks down into fairly manageable pieces for portability too. We also get a decent pair of 1.25” Plossl eyepieces to start out with.
An imaging-only telescope, the Celestron RASA 800 offers a wide field with its mere 400mm focal length at the super fast speed of f/2. The Advanced VX mount makes for a decent pairing with this instrument and a good one-shot color CMOS or CCD camera for deep-sky astrophotography, though it’s not the most accurate or well-equipped mount for the job.
The addition of Celestron’s EdgeHD optical configuration provides minimal benefit for a visual telescope like the NexStar Evolution 8”, but it comes with some imaging perks, and the added vents help with better cooldown time. Also, the included StarSense AutoAlign makes setup even more of a breeze.
The 8” Advanced VX Schmidt-Cassegrain makes for a surprisingly portable setup, and is especially good for planetary imaging. However, the Advanced VX is simply not up to the task of supporting the 8” Schmidt-Cassegrain optical tube for deep-sky astrophotography, nor is a C8 an ideal first astrophotography scope.
The CGEM II mount makes for a good pairing with the Celestron C8 XLT optical tube for deep-sky imaging. However, visual astronomers will be happier with the more compact and feature-ridden NexStar Evolution 8, while astrophotographers intending to use the C8 XLT for deep-sky imaging might want a larger mount with better tracking and guiding accuracy and/or to opt for the more expensive EdgeHD version of Celestron CGEM II 800 that comes with better field-flattening and mirror locks to improve imaging capabilities.
The Celestron Advanced VX 700 Maksutov would be a great deal were it not for the existence of Celestron’s C9.25 XLT, which is similar in weight and bulk but offers significantly more light-gathering power, comparable or better resolution, and with the added benefits of faster cooldown time, a wider maximum field of view, and some deep-sky astrophotography capabilities (at least in principle). The 700 Maksutov is amazing on planets, the Moon, and double stars, but is severely hindered in deep-sky viewing performance by its long 2800mm focal length and inability to illuminate the field of a 2” eyepiece, and its long cooldown time can be an issue for some users.
The Advanced VX 8” EdgeHD provides little in the way of advantages over the regular C8 XLT for visual astronomy or planetary imaging, and the Advanced VX is insufficient to carry the C8 optical tube for long-exposure deep-sky imaging unless you use the scope at f/2 with a HyperStar conversion, which costs a lot more than just buying the 8” RASA instead.
The 9.25” NexStar Evolution is an extremely massive setup – as bulky as the 12” Dobsonians on our list. However, it’s got all of the same features as the Evolution 8 with just a bit more aperture – all perched atop a super-heavy-duty tripod.
The CPC 800 is a little less fancy than the 8” NexStar Evolution, but comes on a beefier mount and can be used for astrophotography on an equatorial wedge (sold separately).
Rank Category: Catadioptrics Between $3000 and $6000
The Celestron 8” RASA is a great astrophotography instrument, and the CGX mount is a rock-solid platform for imaging with it, enabling very long exposures with fewer limitations than a smaller and lower-quality mount option.
Celestron CGX 1100 RASA
List Price: $6499
Rank 2
4.7/5
The Celestron 11” RASA is pushing the CGX somewhat for the most demanding imaging applications and can be a little much to get used to for those coming from smaller imaging setups, but it’s a fabulous research-grade option for quality deep-sky images—though at only 560mm focal length, not all targets are going to be optimally framed.
Celestron CGX 925 EdgeHD SCT
List Price: $5299
Rank 3
4.6/5
While perhaps a little overkill for visual use, the Celestron CGX makes for a rock-solid platform for imaging with the EdgeHD 9.25” optical tube and an f/7 reducer, while also being fairly good for visual observation without too much complexity or bulk and an easy user interface with its hand controller.
The Celestron CGX is more than adequate for astrophotography purposes with the EdgeHD 8” optical tube, and is usable for a variety of imaging and visual tasks at f/2, f/7, native f/10 or with a Barlow lens for a longer f/raito. However, the CGX is capable of supporting the larger C9.25 EdgeHD too.
Celestron CGX 1100 EdgeHD SCT
List Price: $6399
Rank 5
4.5/5
The Celestron CGX mount is more than enough to hold the C11 or EdgeHD 11 optical tubes for visual observation and decent enough for long-exposure deep-sky astrophotography, though a beefier and probably permanent mount would be more ideal for the job. The views through this scope are a delight too.
The Celestron CGEM II makes for an ideal mount for the C11 XLT for visual astronomy and planetary imaging use, being much sturdier than the Advanced VX and more compact than the CPC or larger CGX mounts. Neither the scope nor CGEM II is ideal for deep-sky imaging, but the C11 XLT is a fabulous scope for the visual observer or planetary imager.
The Celestron CPC 1100 is the largest of the three CPC scopes and is the only alt-azimuth mounted configuration offered for the C11 XLT optical tube. However, it is rather bulky and heavy as the C11 is permanently attached to the heavy-duty fork mount, which can make storage and transport difficult.
The Celestron CGEM II mount isn’t much of an upgrade from the Advanced VX for imaging purposes, though it’s adequate and a little steadier with the 8” RASA. However, we would recommend springing for an EQ6Ri Pro or CGX mount instead if you can afford it.
The CPC 9.25 is bulkier and heavier than the NexStar Evolution 9.25” but is significantly more sturdy. The CPC fork mount is simpler to set up than an equatorially-mounted configuration of the C9.25 XLT optical tube, though it’s of course a lot heavier and less versatile. You should probably consider an equatorial mount for the C9.25 XLT regardless of what you plan to do with it, but of the alt-azimuth C9.25 and mount configurations, the CPC is definitely the better choice.
The regular Celestron C9.25 is not ideal for deep-sky astrophotography compared to the EdgeHD version, and the CGX mount is overkill with this scope for visual use. As such, there’s not much of a point in purchasing, though the CGX makes for a fine mount with plenty of capabilities.
Celestron CGX 800 SCT
List Price: $3799
Rank 11
4.2/5
The Celestron C8 XLT is extremely overmounted for visual use on the CGX while being sub-par for deep-sky astrophotography compared to the EdgeHD or RASA designs. As such, while there’s nothing inherently wrong with the scope, we do not recommend this combination as highly compared to those options.
Celestron CGEM II 800 EdgeHD SCT
List Price: $3399
Rank 12
4.1/5
The Celestron CGEM II can technically carry the 8” EdgeHD optical tube for deep-sky imaging, but it’s subpar for the job compared to other mounts with stepper motors, and overkill for visual use compared to the Advanced VX (the EdgeHD optics are also unnecessary for the task).
Celestron CPC 1100 EdgeHD SCT
List Price: $5099
Rank 13
4.1/5
The Celestron EdgeHD optical configuration offers few perceptible advantages over the regular C11 XLT for visual use or planetary imaging, but the CPC fork mount is not exactly the best for deep-sky astrophotography, even when paired with a wedge and autoguiding. It also possesses the same extremely bulky and heavy frame as the regular CPC 1100 model, which may be uncomfortable for many users to set up or transport.
Celestron CGEM II 925 SCT
List Price: $3399
Rank 14
4.1/5
The CGEM II is somewhat overkill for holding the C9.25 XLT for visual use while being completely insufficient for deep-sky astrophotography with such a big scope. However, it is a little steadier than the Advanced VX if you demand more rigorous requirements.
