At last I have a telescope that sees better than I do. This instrument is a carefully designed and built Cassegrain with a big difference, its tube is open at the top like a Newtonian. The Klevzov optical train uses a meniscus like a Maksutov but there the familiar ends. This design offers a few disadvantages and many advantages over all other scope designs. In detail >>>

The Mak guys tend to claim that a Maksutov is a better design than a 200K. I disagree for a number of reasons, but when you compare a TAL 200 with an 8" Intes Mak (say), you aren't comparing like with like. The Intes is a *lot* more expensive than a 200K.
As to optical quality, I personally have seen no evidence that an 8" Mak is better than a properly adjusted TAL 200.
So whether the extra cost of an 8" Mak is worth it is debatable and I personally don't think they are. I can confirm that that the 200K is as good as Bill Brady says it is, and for a very reasonable cost. No colour either. Images sharp & point like pretty much to the edge of the field. No coma whatsoever. Images of the moon were razor sharp - I almost felt I could reach inside the small craters and touch the deep, black shadows in there. Amazing.
I just checked out the price of an equivalent 8-inch Intes M809 Maksutov - they seem to be around 3500 to 4000 GBP for the OTA. If I'd had that much money to spend and bought a 200K instead, that leaves me, let's see ... well over 3000 GBP to spend on a decent stand, eyepieces, luxury heated hand-mitts and a decent CCD camera. Probably build a small observatory as well. I believe it's pretty much the same as any 8" Maksutov - and at a fraction of the price.
Overall, I've found the 200K to be excellent value for money. Would I buy one again? Yes, absolutely and without hesitation. You can spend a *lot* more money and get something only a bit better.

With my 200K I can see visually a significant improvement in my 200K optics over my Meade 10" f6.3 but I reckon it would take instruments to measure the superiority of a TAK or AP over the 200K OTA.
You get a lot of optical performance for very little money. To get that (very) little extra the dollars are out of proportion to the improvement left unrealized.

My name is Randy, I have 200K #133 purchased from Photon Instruments. Here in California at 9000 feet there has been many nights I have been able to compare the view of the Tal200k to a 7inch fluorite. Also be able to view at 400 power.
You can clearly count 9 bands on Jupiter. My 11 inch Celestron would not accomplish this. I have other very expensive scopes, none better for the Money.
Taking all things into consideration, this scope gives you the most bang for the bucks. And you don’t need expensive eyepieces. The views have been so good, I sold my C11.