M31 - What a difference a mount makes

[Guest]

I recently bought the NEQ6 mount and tried it for the first time tonight on M31

There's a considerable difference in star quality compared to my previous images with the EQ-5

The guiding was rock solid throughout as well

This image was just a quick process to see how things were going - 7x1200 sec - no pre-processing - Teleskop Service 65mm astrograph - QHY8 ccd

I used the auto-colour adjust facility in Nebulosity to speed things up a bit so I lost some data

David

[ian_bird]

Well that is well nice! I agree - the mount makes all the difference. I upgraded from a CG-5 to a CGEM DX. Makes a huge difference.

Cheers

Ian

[ian_bird]

Were you guiding on that - or just the mount?

[allcart]

must have been guiding. If a mount could track that well for 20 minutes I would be most impressed. I would like to see it processed properly. It would seem a shame to leave it unfinished.

[Velvet]

I have done the same, upgraded from EQ5 to NEQ6, the difference is phenomenal. Wish I had bought the NEQ6 first as it would have saved me a ,lot of money. Such is life

Velvet

[ollypenrice]

That's working well. Also the star shapes confirm Steve's S at N review in which the famous pinched optics were no longer present. Those are pretty good across the chip. The acid test will be when the cold weather comes but so far, very good indeed.

You are certainly not undermounted any more and what a pleasure that is!

Olly

[Guest]

Thanks guys

It was such a relief to see the guide camera lock on ...and stay locked on for the whole session.

This upgrade means I can stop wondering if the equipment or (more normally) my poor knowledge of it's use is at fault. And with the Eq-5 I've got "goto" in the field now - cool.

I'll be re-processing this over the next few days

Olly - thanks for having a look at this - yes it seems the optics are ok so far, it was quite cold last night (at least down to 4c) so I was really happy not to see the astigmatism.

Now for the load test - next clear night - using the Celestron C8-N. My Eq-5 could just about produce poor results with all that weight - looking forward to seeing the difference.

David

[swag72]

Great post and good that you notice such a difference. I hope that people read this and take the real experience on board. You can not get good, quality, consistent subs with an elastic band and a cardboard box

Disclaimer *** I am not suggesting that the EQ5 (Or EQ insert any number ) is so rudimentary as rubber and cardboard but just making the point that if you want decent subs in AP you are going to have to pay for it. There are real live people on here who have tried the more budget approach and then had to fork out for a better mount when it doesn't work as well as hoped.

[VigdisVZ]

Threads like this make me happy I went for broke and got the NEQ6 first

Did I mention your M31 looks really good also? It does

[Guest]

Thanks again guys - here' s the finished process

David

[Gina]

Nice

[JamesF]

Very nice.

James