Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

CG5 GT GOTO vs. HEQ5 PRO GOTO

Russe

By Russe
in Discussions - Mounts

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 43
  • Created
  • Last Reply
malc-c

malc-c

Posted
Posted

Russ, normally its the CG5 and EQ5 that get compared, not the HEQ5

Basically:

CG5 has 2" tri-pod legs, uses servo motors (make a noise on fast slewing), 10kg payload. HEQ5 uses precision stepper motors, has a higher payload capability of 18kg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coco

Coco

Posted
Posted

The skywatcher all the way... but if its the CG5-GT First Light Optics - Celestron CG-5 GT GOTO then there would be nothing in it really... the celestron is reported to quieter, Deneb ( Nadeem) regularly used to post none guided 1,000mm 5 minute exposures with his CG5-GT and was extremely content with it... The CG5-GT has a more robust tripod too...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stephen

Stephen

Posted
Posted
The skywatcher all the way... but if its the CG5-GT First Light Optics - Celestron CG-5 GT GOTO then there would be nothing in it really... the celestron is reported to quieter, Deneb ( Nadeem) regularly used to post none guided 1,000mm 5 minute exposures with his CG5-GT and was extremely content with it... The CG5-GT has a more robust tripod too...

That's still just an EQ5 Pro is is not though, would a HEQ5 still not be better?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Deneb

Deneb

Posted
Posted

Between the two I would go for the CG5 Goto, only due to it having 2" diameter legs opposed to 1.75" legs, which lets the HEQ5 Pro down... anyway the noise of the CG5 is really not that bad come to think of it.... I would rather have a sturdier mount with better legs.

Payloads are exaggerated from manufactures & the Goto System is much better on the CG5 as well... The only thing what does go amiss you have to fit a polar scope to the mount, but thats no biggy...

Nadeem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lukebl

lukebl

Posted
Posted
The CG5 GT is compatible with ASCOM, controlling the CG5 GT from a computer is not a problem.

Peter

I stand corrected. That's good, as I am looking for a lighter second mount but had rejected the CG5 as I thought it couldn't be controlled via ASCOM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
billhinge

billhinge

Posted
Posted
The skywatcher all the way... but if its the CG5-GT First Light Optics - Celestron CG-5 GT GOTO then there would be nothing in it really... the celestron is reported to quieter, Deneb ( Nadeem) regularly used to post none guided 1,000mm 5 minute exposures with his CG5-GT and was extremely content with it... The CG5-GT has a more robust tripod too...

I have the FLO CG5 ASGT and I find it perfectly useable with the C11, true I have added a Berlebach UNI and ADM Losmandy adapter, greased my dec axis and padded with sorbathane pads powered by a 26A AC-DC convertor

Mine isn't noisy or scabby inside either :)

off to improve my dslr imaging ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Revs

Revs

Posted
Posted

I can't believe no-one has asked to two main questions! :)

What's going on it and what are you doing with it, ie, visual or photo?

For visual use with a payload up to say 8kg, the CG5GT might be easier to live with. Need more info really :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spikey

Spikey

Posted
Posted

If it's of any use to you I can relate my experience. I use a HEQ5 via EQDIR and also with an ED80 plus ST80 on a dual mount side by side bar. I can pick the whole thing up - mount/both scopes/weights/cameras in one go and carry it back through my patio doors after an evenings imaging. This is just about manageable but with me still having full control over carrying and guiding it in on an angle (not for the faint hearted). I also use the mount for a 200p & Mak 127.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Revs

Revs

Posted
Posted

HEQ5 Pro for sure. I had a Mak on mine for a while and it was really solid, though far from the ideal scope for deep sky.

I suspect you'd do alright with an ED80 on a CG5GT due to the low weight and shorter focal length, but the added solidness of the HEQ5 will come in one day and the guide port is nice to have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grenfell

Grenfell

Posted
Posted

My CG5-GT is rock solid and with both weights on I can lift it fairly comfortably into the boot of my car. It is a little noisy slewing but silent when tracking. I Purchased it on clearance at FLO so can't fault it for the price but I don't have any experience of the Skywatcher mounts to compare it against. The scope wobbling on the dovetail has always been the weak point for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
red dwalf

red dwalf

Posted
Posted

i`ve had both mounts and did prefer the software on the Celestron mount to that of the Skywatcher, for one the Celestron software allows you to use Sun mode and slew to the Sun when you have proper filters of course, something i missed when i had the Skywatcher mount, not a problem now i`m using EQ mod of course.

then it comes down to design, the Skywatcher is better put together. illuminated polar scope, something you have to pay extra for with the Celestron, i like the way the counter weight shaft can be put up inside the mount head when not in use, the Skywatcher is alot quieter than the Celestron when slewing fast, o.k. in daytime but it sounds very loud in the middle of the night and your standing in the garden on our own.

i would add that i had no problems with the scope being solid on the Celestron mount, just as good as the Skywatcher.

£ 200 price differance worth it ? i would say yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Russe

Russe

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for all those comments so far! Very informative. Always difficult to make a decision when having dish out so much dough.

Have a mak127 on an alt/az and have started clicking planetary pics with a webcam. Now I'm completely hooked and I would like to have a to at DSO's.

Don't want to go for a massive scope yet, thought an APO would be a nice idea. The misses won't agree yet...

Thought I start upgrading with a proper mount first and later a scope. No money for both. As for the camera... that'll be difficult. Thought I'm gonna try my best with modding my SPC 880 to a LX and see how far that takes me.

I see now, that starting with a mak on alt/az wasn't the best idea. Should have started with an APO on a proper mount.

How are you gonna make newbies believe that the mount should come first????

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.