Depends on what you are doing.

For deep sky photography the Meade is superior because it has far less distortion to the field of view and you can lock the mirror. While Celestron has limited mirror flop it is still an issue from what I've heard. If you use a small CCD with a flattener then the difference is smaller but with added elements you have more color issues and reflection issues.

For visual use and planetary photography the Celestron has the advantage of a slightly smaller secondary. I find current optics to be about equal except for that. Meade's quality control is a bit poorer from my experience and Celestron's 9.15" tends to be superior to anything either turns out. My mirror lock arrived not working. I found the fix on line so it wasn't a problem for me but could be for others. Meade LX200 series being designed for deep sky work is more massive than the Celestron.

Basically I'd go Celestron for non deep sky work. But since that is my main interest I got the 14" LX200R where I could use the full field of view without a compressor and therefore have higher resolution.

I'd never buy any RC or RC like scope for anything but deep sky photography. Though the images in my 14" LX200R are far superior to an older C14 I used for many years. But back then neither company turned out optics of the quality they do today.

Rick