EQ3 + steel tripod vs EQ5

[Stub Mandrel]

I ask too many complicated questions so here's a simple one.

Is it worth upgrading an EQ3 mount by putting it on a steel tube tripod like this:

and how would it compare with going the whole hog to an EQ5 deluxe, which presumably comes with the same tripod?

Thanks.

[ronin]

Would help as they are better, however it means that you would have to get one at a good price as I doubt it is worth buying one new - you may as well add the money to the potential EQ5 purchase.

If you can get hold of one then I think it would be a fair improvement, as long as the thought of adding more weight to the mount does not come into it.

There are occasionally some on the the used market ABSUK.

If you are expecting to stick to the EQ3-2 head for some time it is worth considering if the cost is reasonable. It all (to me) hinges on cost of tripod (I would only consider a used item) and when the possible upgrade will be.

By the way check that the EQ3-2 head will fit. I think it should but...........

[Cornelius Varley]

Replacing the lightweight alloy tripod of the EQ3-2 with steel EQ5 / HEQ5 tripod will improve stability but not necessarily increase the load capacity.  

[xtreemchaos]

hi mate,if you get the chance to up grade to steel legs i would go for it,thay make a big difference "very steddy" there is a weight difference but i have leg problems and i can handle the mount easy. i hope this was helpfull.all the best charl.

[Stub Mandrel]

A wanted ad has tracked me down an EQ5 tripod that should fit my EQ3 :-)

If these clouds lift before I can collect on Friday I will be very upset ;-)

[RichM63]

I have both, see sig', yes the SS tripod is beefier, but the EQ3-2 standard is certainly up for the job of a 150P, however we always require better kit.

(currently going for a cut down existing EDF elec' pole for a pier, by EDF. )

[brantuk]

I would sell the EQ3 mount and tripod together and put the money towards an EQ5 complete. Probably more cost effective in the long run, and the EQ5 is a leap in stability. You'll also be able to put other heavier scopes on the EQ5. Hth

[Stub Mandrel]

I would sell the EQ3 mount and tripod together and put the money towards an EQ5 complete. Probably more cost effective in the long run, and the EQ5 is a leap in stability. You'll also be able to put other heavier scopes on the EQ5. Hth

It never bloomin' ends with you lot, does it?

I get an EQ5 mount, everyone will say I need an EQ6, and then an an EQ8 and then...

[Alien 13]

The EQ3-2 is good at what it does, use it with a camera and lens an you have a lightweight imaging setup but I am not sure that adding a more rigid/ heavy tripod does it any favors although it will improve it.

As for the upgrading cycle I could have ended up with a HEQ5 but I said no I want something I can actually lift and carry fully loaded.

Alan

[wookie1965]

I have EQ3-2 mount on HEQ5 SS tripod a lot more steadier I'm saving for a HEQ5Pro.

[astrofox]

Not only is the EQ5 tripod sturdier but in the long run will last. I have seen a few EQ3-2 tripods hit an early demise due to the casting that holds the leg retaining screw fail. The usual fix is to bind the casting raound with a strong nylon tywrap.

Shouldn't happen the casting should have been designed strong enough to withstand  the tensile forces the screw produces.

[Roy Challen]

Not only is the EQ5 tripod sturdier but in the long run will last. I have seen a few EQ3-2 tripods hit an early demise due to the casting that holds the leg retaining screw fail. The usual fix is to bind the casting raound with a strong nylon tywrap.

Shouldn't happen the casting should have been designed strong enough to withstand the tensile forces the screw produces.[/quote

The older tripods have metal castings which should be fine. The newer tripods have plastic 'castings' which need gentle treatment. The best way of avoiding damage is to lightly grease the threads of the clamping screws. This helps to avoid overtighening (it's easier to tell when it's properly clamped) and helps to avoid stripping the threads.

[Stub Mandrel]

Cripes!

The top of my EQ3 tripod appears to be an alloy casting.

[brantuk]

"I get an EQ5 mount, everyone will say I need an EQ6, and then an an EQ8 and then.."

What I mean is - with your 150PL - if you put the EQ3 mount on the EQ5 tripod then you retain the instability of the mount.

It's much better to switch the whole thing for an EQ5 with the sturdier mount as well as the tripod. I had an EQ3-2 and 150P which I considered to be a little top heavy and suffered excessive vibration - I would never have put a 150PL on it because it would've taken "top weight" over the edge. The EQ5 proper will handle a PL with ease.

[Stub Mandrel]

I know what you mean, but unless you're offering bursaries or are willing to come round and explain the difference to my wife...

My own judgement is that the EQ3 tripod is a poor design, but that the EQ3 mount may be more lightly built than the EQ5 it doesn't have the abundant poor features of the tripod. The 80:20 rule suggests I can get most of the benefits at the lowest cost by swapping tripod rather than mount. If I get an EQ5 mount in the future, I will still have the 'lighter' (ho ho!) tripod as a spare or to sell.

[brantuk]

Yup - the EQ3 tripod is the worst offender so your reasoning is sound. I once picked up an EQ5 tripod for £40 in excellent condition (the guy had pier mounted his HEQ5). In fact I may have one for sale soon if I can only find an pillar/adaptor for a Skytee2 and an EQ6 tripod.....

Will let you know.

[YKSE]

My own judgement is that the EQ3 tripod is a poor design, but that the EQ3 mount may be more lightly built than the EQ5 it doesn't have the abundant poor features of the tripod.

That's about the same reasoning as I had.

I bought a AZ4 with steel leg tripod(same as EQ5's 1.75" tube), just switched the mount heads, now the EQ3 with steel tripod works fine with C8 or 120ED, while AZ4 is good for PST, or 80ED for grab & go.

[Stub Mandrel]

My first post might not have been entirely clear - I've found someone who will sell me an EQ5 tripod only at a very fair price.

N.

[jiminbeds]

Hi,

I've got the same (150pl with eq3-2) and am in the same process of upgrading as you. I think the main problem is with the mount itself. The longer tube with the pl sets up a lot of vibration in the ra axis if you touch the scope particularly when using that awful focusser! I'm sure the eq5 tripod will be a step in the right direction but I feel the only real cure is a complete upgrade.

kind regards.

[Stub Mandrel]

I'm pretty pleased with the results. This is my first proper DSO photo, done last night. This is the best four 30-second subs out of 8, and the stars are decently round. I think the full moon limited how good the picture could be.

I've donated the EQ3 tripod to the basic EQ mount for my smaller Bresser refractor (see DIY astronomy).

[Stub Mandrel]

Follow up 3 years of experience on.

Simple answer - if you can get an 'EQ5-style' stainless steel tripod for your EQ3 mount it will greatly improve it at reasonable cost.

"EQ3 Aluminium Tripod - you ARE the weakest link!"

[John]

I agree Neil. Even the older 1.5" steel tripod is much more stable than the alumimum one. Initially 6" F/8 refractors and 8" F/5 newtonians were sold on an EQ5 mount on that flimsy alu tripod - what were they thinking ? (profit margins I guess ).