SW eq1 height

[richbyers]

whats the eq1 like for being high enough- i read 119cm full out - whats this like in use? im 6ft....will there be alot of bending my back involved? when i measured it out it seems rather short.......

just asking as ive never had any other scopes apart from dobs so my new scope coming will have an eq1

rich

[JamesF]

119cm is probably to the tripod head, not to the top of the mount. How high the eyepiece gets really depends on what sort of scope you're putting on top of it.

I'm not really sure I'd recommend an EQ1 for mounting any telescope on though.

James

[richbyers]

the scope already comes with it- its a 102 refractor and i believe with that its fine, it not like im putting a bucket on the thing

besides- recommendations are relative to budget- with my budget im lucky im not putting it on a stick

[JamesF]

If that's the ST102 then it also comes on the AZ3 mount for about £15 less. The only reason raised the issue is that the EQ1 is useless for telescope-based astrophotography and not brilliant for visual because it has no means of polar alignment, so unless you feel compelled to have an equatorial mount for some reason an alt-az does the same job and is less of a faff.

The AZ3 should carry the ST102 without a problem. It's a bit borderline with my ST120, but that's a good deal bigger and heavier.

James

[richbyers]

how do you align it then? SW site gives it as capable of polar allignment- infact they have a pdf on it, ive also checked the internets and other people seem to be managing it

[JamesF]

Then that's really a bit misleading. There's no way to polar align the EQ1 by itself. It doesn't have a polar scope and there's nowhere to fit one. The only way I've ever seen it done is by taking images with a camera and plate-solving. The best I ever did with mine was to set the correct latitude and point it roughly north. Of course it doesn't have a level bubble either, so if you want to make the latitude scale read correctly you have to make separate arrangements to get the tripod head level (and the latitude scale isn't that accurate anyhow).

themos and others have had some success turning the table-mounted EQ1 into an imaging mount for a DSLR and standard lens by plate-solving to get polar alignment, but when it comes to telescopes I really can't see any reason for it (and probably the EQ2 as well) to exist. I'm happy for people to suggest reasons I might be wrong, but I really believe that if you're considering buying a scope on an EQ1 then you'd be far better off with an AZ3.

James

[richbyers]

ok thanks for the advice- its already on its way anyways - ive been doing astronomy for long enough with nothing but the cheap budget bear minimum that im sure ill work something out with it- if not ill perservere till i can upgrade

rich

[JamesF]

You can always slacken the mounting bolt and alt adjuster and use it as an alt-az anyway. Or you may find that if the clutches are both slack you can pretty much push it to where you want anyhow.

James

[tonyh66]

you can polar align EQ1 and 2 without a polarscope, its just a bit more difficult

[JamesF]

As I said, I've seen it done by plate-solving from images, so it's definitely possible. If you know of another way, I'm all ears. Please tell...

James

[PorkyB]

I have found a very rough and ready alignment is fine for visual use with my EQ1. I just mount the scope in the 90 degree position, turn the tripod until polaris appears in (or near) the red dot finder, level the tripod with a Poundland spirit level in the accessory tray and it's ready to use. I have had no problems RA tracking for 10-15 minutes at a time.

[jgs001]

You 'can' with a bit of faff mount a finder of some sort to the barrel of the mount and use that to polar align. It's a bit hit and miss, and therefore not really reliable for imaging (60 to 90 seconds isn't bad though), but for visual, I'd expect it to work fine.