[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would recommend either a Meade or Celestron Schmidt-Cassegrain 8".
[/ QUOTE ]
from reading a bit and looking at pricing, ive noticed the schmidt style is more expensive than the maksutov. im assuming there is some advantage to the schmidt over the mak. could you explain this for me? all i can tell so far is the optics are different, but im not sure what the results and pros/cons of the difference is.
[/ QUOTE ]
They both have similar advantages and disadvantages, but Maksutov-Cassegrains actually have better contrast and resolution on the moon and planets than Schmidt-Cassegrains or reflectors because of their smaller secondary mirror obstruction. In this regard, they are the best of all the catadioptrics and reflectors, and nearly as good as refractors of the same aperture. Their thicker correcting lens makes them heavier than Schmidt-Cassegrains, and they take longer to cool down to a stable temperature, though that is mainly a problem with larger appertures > 90 mm. They cost less because they are easier to make, not because they have poorer performance.
This page from the Astronomics website I referenced discusses them briefly.
While both of these are fine instruments, most are above your $500 price range, especially with an 8" aperture. You could probably find some 3-4" Maksutov's in that range. Reflectors are generally much less expensive for the same aperture, though not as portable.