Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

CGEM vs NEQ6Pro

ChrisEdu

By ChrisEdu
in Discussions - Mounts

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 26
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Dixie

Dixie

Posted
Posted

I've got an NEQ6 and it's a smashing mount. I use mine for imaging with a C8 and 80mm refractor on top - adds up to the same weight as a C11. Does a great job and the only limitation is me. If you were to use a light guide scope or better still off axis guiding I'd go with it over the CGEM. Just my view. I'm no AP expert, but as a Celestron veteran I really like the Synta.

Rich

Kielder Forest Star Camp

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ben Ritchie

Ben Ritchie

Posted
Posted

Are you doing long-exposure imaging, or lunar/planetary?

Think the EQ6 is a nice option for the C11 OTA, but not sure if it's up to long-exposure imaging at 2800mm focal length and even reduced at f/6.3 it's a lot of focal length to cope with. PEMPro shows mine's a bit choppy and although it's fine to guide out at 1000mm focal length, the guiding tolerances drop sharply as focal length goes up. But the EQ6 will cope just fine with lunar/planetary though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Deneb

Deneb

Posted
Posted

Have any of you guys seen a Celestron CGEM DX in the Flesh, it's mmaaaaaaaaaaaaaasive, 2.75" legs, the base is bigger then the CGEM & the counterweight bar is a good 1.5" inches thick.

The things a monster.... Thats my next mount upgrade....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
m.tweedy

m.tweedy

Posted
Posted
Have any of you guys seen a Celestron CGEM DX in the Flesh, it's mmaaaaaaaaaaaaaasive, 2.75" legs, the base is bigger then the CGEM & the counterweight bar is a good 1.5" inches thick.

The things a monster.... Thats my next mount upgrade....

I know but it carries a smaller load capacity than the NEQ6. Maybe they are more truthful in its real capacity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Merlin66

Merlin66

Posted
Posted

Naw...

Thought of that but decided it may be overkill ;-)

I'm actually thinking of setting it up as a dedicated Photometric set up - the ATiK usb filter wheel with the Photometric Schuler filters and the trusty ol' MX916...

( It's too good to sell...but I need to do something with it)

The 12" Lx200 is "pending sale" so maybe I need another NEQ6......

Onwards and Upwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChrisEdu

ChrisEdu

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I've just joined the C11 "users club" and with the Losmandy dovetail (and safety clamp!) it will be sitting on the NEQ6pro with a couple of cameras and the Spectra-L200 Littrow.

Watch this space.....

It'll certainly be interesting to hear how it goes! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
Posted

It isn't just weight! Have another look at Ben's post, with which I heartily agree. Focal length and the guiding accuracy required thereby is what you need to be considering. I have a couple of EQ sixes and would not entertain trying to image beyond 2 metres with them. That would apply if the OTA weighed just one kilogram. In fact, like Ben, I call a halt at a metre though I know I'm being a little conservative there.

If you want to use a big SCT for DS imaging then I would look for mounts a whole step up the pecking order, I'm afraid. Losmandy G11 or Tak EM200 or the new Mesu friction drive. The C11 is not, for me, budget mount territory. I have seen these focal lengths deliver great results here on the EM200, the AP Mach One, AP900 and the G11. There are people who are very skilled at fine tuning the EQ6, that too I have seen, but I personally don't know how they do it. They are very experienced imagers.

I might wait a while, too, because new technologies are filtering into the lower end of the mount field. Although hi res encoders seem to be giving ASA and their owners a hard time I suppose this technology will be made to work in time. Meade are claiming an arcsecond under guiding for their new mounts, for instance. I hope they are right! I'm sure we all do. I reckon a new generation of mount is around the corner and long overdue.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Merlin66

Merlin66

Posted
Posted

Olly,

I think you're being a bit hard here...

We managed to get some very good DSO etc at f10 with the Celestron and Meade SCT, manually guiding with X eyepieces and a OAG back in the "good ol' days"

I spent almost 15 years of my life working with them and hypered film etc.

That was on the old fork mounts!

I think it can be done, just takes patience and practise.

Just my 0.02euro

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
Posted
Olly,

I think you're being a bit hard here...

We managed to get some very good DSO etc at f10 with the Celestron and Meade SCT, manually guiding with X eyepieces and a OAG back in the "good ol' days"

I spent almost 15 years of my life working with them and hypered film etc.

That was on the old fork mounts!

I think it can be done, just takes patience and practise.

Just my 0.02euro

I wasn't trying to be hard, Ken, so much as realistic, I hope. In truth I suspect you under-rate the contribution of your own expertise here. I knew you'd come back on this! The fact that you can do it doesn't mean the rest of us can!! In my post above I alluded to an EQ6 I see regularly here, fine tuned after a strip down. It taps out a guide trace of about 0.05 pixel average error in AstroArt. Mine occasionally match that but vary, sometimes struggling to do better than 0.15, which is not good enough for a long FL SCT. TJ also gets good results from an EQ6/C9.25. But, but, I get to meet lots of imagers and the overwhelming majority would, I'm sure, share my doubts about going below a G11 for a C11 on deep sky. There are lots of C11s out there and more than lots of EQ sixes, but there are not many images posted from the combination. I think that tells a tale.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ben Ritchie

Ben Ritchie

Posted
Posted

I've got the "been there, done that" T-shirt for DSO imaging with a SCT too. It's not impossible, but it is significantly harder - while "click here" autoguider calibration is fine for short focal lengths, once you're much above a meter of focal length you really need to start fine-tuning the parameters, understanding the mount's PE, tracking down flexure etc. and it takes time (...and a great deal of frustration, at times...). My G11 and fork-mounted LX200 both drove me nuts at times trying to get the setup capable of guiding through everything, with the LX200 I never quite managed it thanks to a notchy bit of worm gear with PE greater than 1"/second.

edit: My sadly-departed 1200GTO was terrific though, I could do 5 minutes unguided at 2500mm focal length - peak-to-peak PE on that was a measured 0.8", and I suspect that was likely the seeing :)

If the OP wants to "dabble in a bit of astro photography / imaging" then it's worth understanding what he's getting into, because while aperture is good for visual, it isn't necessarily true for imaging. In fact, the C11 is almost the last 'scope i'd pick for "dabbling" in long-exposure work. But, as I said, for lunar/planetary work it'll be terrific, with none of the issues above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.