SW 130P - SupaTrak Auto Vs Explorer with drive - imaging

[Flying Eye]

Hi all,

I'm trying to chose between 2 scopes for my first proper scope.

I've done some thinking and some pricing. I know I am possibly going to be interested in trying some imaging too, and 95% certain that is to be done with a web cam.

I spotted that adding the optional drive to the Explorer EQ2 mounted version makes it about £20 more costly overall than the SupaTrak Auto.

Thing is, which would be most likely perform nicest for imaging?

I've already made the decision that I do not want a bigger dob mount scope at this time. Maybe another time for one of them.

I have a suspicion simpler is probably better, so the EQ might pay off longer term. I'm not crazy for a goto, it would be incidental if I ended up with that feature. That would not upset me if it happened mind you.

It would be my intention to make some proper wooden legs for either of these. It's not a grab and go thing, it's for home based use only.

Anyone have experience of both mount systems? Especially any imaging experience with them.

[Mike Hackenbacker]

i only have little experience at astrophotography,having started with a skywatcher 130M.added a nexstar 4 now,each have their respective advantages and disadvantages.for imaging i would recomend a goto as it has variable tracking for DSO'S and planets,a webcan like the phillips one sp900 i think it is.its one of the best for price so i have read,others with more knowledge can help you better than i can

[CGolder]

Hello

Personally I wouldn't recommend the EQ1 or EQ2 to anyone, anything below the eq3-2 is flimsey and not really upto the job of being polar aligned and used.

I would personally wither get the 130 on goto or auto or skip it all together and just get the dob in the first place

You would be able to image planets and the moon with either buts won't be super steady, for this imaging the eq mount has no advantages, worse if it doesn't track.

I don't use goto much at home but when its cold or your viewing with others it has its advantages

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

[ollypenrice]

With a webcam for the moon and planets you don't need an equatorial mount but for long exposure DS imaging you absolutely do and the EQ3 is the bare minimum. Personally I'd say the HEQ5 was the real minimum.

For webcam imaging the EQ3 woud be OK but, as above, I wouldn't go for less. It is impossible to over-emphasize the importance of the mount as anyone who has much experience will confirm absolutely every time. It's about the only thing on which any two experienced astronomers WILL agree!!

Olly

[Flying Eye]

Thank you all for your input. I gather from it that I need to go EQ3-2 at a minimum (£164), and then to drive it (£91), and add a polar scope (£32).

This would then cost as much as I had it in mind to perhaps afford in total. And in doing that I would end up with a barely so-so mount. At which point the only thing I have which I could usefully mount on it would be my digital camera.

Would I also be right in thinking that, having (by then) spent about £300, making that mount capable of offering a standard camera mounting screw thread would require further expense? That does appear to be the underlying fact, I'm just struggling to get my head around it.