Which newton scope for observatory

I don't see any reason not to choose the 300 f/4 assuming there are of equal quality. 1368mm focal length is rather ideal with current sensors for high-resolution work while keeping a large FOV.

What's most important is the quality of the design and execution, both optical and mechanical.  Which particular scopes do you have in mind?

The one I have in mind is the Artec 250 or 300. Working with 1m of FL I see there is still a little room for more resolution. But its hard to tell what the max resolution is under my sky.

The mount is a GM2000. No problem to handle it.

Vandewattyne:
The one I have in mind is the Artec 250 or 300. Working with 1m of FL I see there is still a little room for more resolution. But its hard to tell what the max resolution is under my sky.

The ARTEC astrographs look good on paper. What bothers me is that they don't mention the origin of the optics. Personnaly in this price range I would not accept mass-produced optics from China or Taiwan. 

 In case the focal length is a bit too much for you seeing, you could trade the 1.14 corrector for a corrector with no magnification (or with slight reduction). In any case you'd benefit from the extra light gathering ability of the 300 over the 250.

The ARTEC astrographs look good on paper. What bothers me is that they don't mention the origin of the optics. Personnaly in this price range I would not accept mass-produced optics from China or Taiwan.

They told the next batch of scopes will have a Ronchi and Fringe Test report but no details about the origin of the mirrors. Also some details about the mirror cell would be nice.

Or if I may suggest, you can get also very reliable f4 Newton from Lacerta Austria . I have their 200/800 (now 200/600 with Nexus coma corrector) and cannot complain anything at all.
Only problem will be maybe waiting time, this you would have to check with them.

You can look on my profile and find many pictures I did with this scope.

https://lacerta-optics.com/FN30012c-new#m

Just my five cents..

David

Vandewattyne:

The ARTEC astrographs look good on paper. What bothers me is that they don't mention the origin of the optics. Personnaly in this price range I would not accept mass-produced optics from China or Taiwan.

They told the next batch of scopes will have a Ronchi and Fringe Test report but no details about the origin of the mirrors. Also some details about the mirror cell would be nice.

If they don't say we understand what it means. At this price point I'd like optics from reputable mirror makers in Europe like Romano Zen, Fausto Giacometti, Franck Grière (Mirrosphere) or Michel Bonin (Skyvision) to name a few.

While the overall shape of industrial-made mirrors can be OK, their polish is typically rather rough and they often have edge problems.

I'm working with an 8" f/4 with Romano Zen optics and get results like this:
https://www.astrobin.com/k4joar/

and a 10" f/4.8 with Franck Grière optics which gives me this:
https://www.astrobin.com/31x2yd/G/

300 for sure, not even a question in my mind given your constraints or lack thereof.

Thx for everyone input.

After adding all the extra's on the TS-Optics Astrograph 12" I'm getting close to the price of the ARTEC 300. 
(2x long dovertail, Pegasus focuser & baseplate, internal flocking of the tube, main mirror ring, rigid spider, stainless steel end ring, covering the  back of the tube end, check of the optics on the bench). In the worst case the optics need to be redone also.

About the one from Lacerta you get a better deal but they dont want to change the focuser to something else like an ESATTO 2. The holes of the octoplus plate don't fit for a Esatto. 

There is indeed no origin of the ARTEC optics. 

In these 3 case it can be a good enough optics or just not good enough optics.

Another option is a scope from Axis instruments with a craftman mirror. The price is a bit more but you get a full option quality scope.