Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

EQ-1 and EQ-2 Mounts

Naemeth

By Naemeth
in Discussions - Mounts

Recommended Posts

Naemeth

Naemeth

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Apple obviously don't think you should be allowed to do this :)

You can get a special mount for compact cameras to hold them in front of the eyepiece. There's even a remote shutter release that I've seen. I can't immediately see how an Ixus 700 would fit to a T thread.

James

I've no idea, I know the lens fits exactly into a 1.25" focuser, what is the mount for compact cameras?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 49
  • Created
  • Last Reply
username

username

Posted
Posted

If tracking is what you're after have you thought about making an equatorial platform. Something that caught my eye once is the link below

http://www.umich.edu/~lowbrows/reflections/2010/yinugi.4.html

Not sure how good you are at making stuff but with a bit of planning and cunning foraging you might be able to knock one up cheaply. As for you wobbly table can't you find something to put under/brace the legs.

I'm just thinking that if cost is making you look at an eq2 plus motor (I think new thhis will be around the £150 mark, maybe more) maybe you can try a very cheap bodge at the moment and save for a mount that will take future scopes.

Regarding the mount for compact cameras this is the sort of thing you want http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p219_Digiklemme---Universal-Digital-Camera-Adaptor.html. I'd be careful sticking you lens housing in as a eyepiece as if it moves to focus or has an auto power off feature you could end up with a busted lens motor. The way the mount works is that in the daytime you set your camera up with an eyepiece attached to the mount, make sure the camera is focussed to the eyepiece by focussing your telescope on something and keep the eyepiece attached and then use it at night. That way you're not messing about with the camera focus, only the telescope focus in the dark

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesF

JamesF

Posted
Posted

I've no idea, I know the lens fits exactly into a 1.25" focuser, what is the mount for compact cameras?

I imagine the fit is more of a happy accident than anything else. The mount I was thinking of is something like this:

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/adaptors/skywatcher-universal-camera-adapter.html

Though that's far from the only one and there are cheaper versions available.

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Naemeth

Naemeth

Posted
  • Author
Posted

If tracking is what you're after have you thought about making an equatorial platform. Something that caught my eye once is the link below

http://www.umich.edu...0/yinugi.4.html

Not sure how good you are at making stuff but with a bit of planning and cunning foraging you might be able to knock one up cheaply. As for you wobbly table can't you find something to put under/brace the legs.

I'm just thinking that if cost is making you look at an eq2 plus motor (I think new thhis will be around the £150 mark, maybe more) maybe you can try a very cheap bodge at the moment and save for a mount that will take future scopes.

Regarding the mount for compact cameras this is the sort of thing you want http://www.teleskop-...ra-Adaptor.html. I'd be careful sticking you lens housing in as a eyepiece as if it moves to focus or has an auto power off feature you could end up with a busted lens motor. The way the mount works is that in the daytime you set your camera up with an eyepiece attached to the mount, make sure the camera is focussed to the eyepiece by focussing your telescope on something and keep the eyepiece attached and then use it at night. That way you're not messing about with the camera focus, only the telescope focus in the dark

I'm not great at making anything, I suppose I could give it a go but I don't have any tools. It would definitely be second hand, and I found an EQ-5 for about £80 delivered (no counterweights), is it a bargain?

I imagine the fit is more of a happy accident than anything else. The mount I was thinking of is something like this:

http://www.firstligh...ra-adapter.html

Though that's far from the only one and there are cheaper versions available.

James

Would this be okay:

http://www.scopesnskies.com/prod/Astro-Engineering/Ultra/PH047.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites
username

username

Posted
Posted

I'm not great at making anything, I suppose I could give it a go but I don't have any tools. It would definitely be second hand, and I found an EQ-5 for about £80 delivered (no counterweights), is it a bargain?

I understand :) I'm ok at making things but never seem to have the time to do it! Still might be something to do, doesn't have to look pretty.

Seems a good price for the eq5 but I haven't looked in to sh prices much. I would probably buy it if I was looking. No counterweights isn't a problem; when I wanted a lighter counterweight I just put some coins from my penny jar in a bag and gaffer taped it to the shaft.

Regarding afocal photographry, can your camera manual focus? If it's auto only it can be a bit of pain sometimes but it shouldn't stop you from having a go

Link to comment
Share on other sites
username

username

Posted
Posted

yep all dslrs have manula focus option in addition to auto focus that i know of. The lens diameter of a dslr is a bit of a mismatch for an eyepiece lens though, i would stick to the compact and the afocal mount wouldn't be able to handle a dslr

Not too worry about it being auto only, it just means that camera positioning will be more critical. Mine is auto focus only too and I've managed to get some shots.

Counter weights are something that can be added later, there's stuff everywhere that you can fix to the shaft for the required weight. Sellotape and variants are your friend :D. So long as everything else is alright with the mount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Naemeth

Naemeth

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I hope the mount is okay, I've bought from the seller before and everything was fine there, I may have to wait a while to get it though.

An EQ-5 should support a lot of scopes shouldn't it? Is it the same mount as the HEQ-5, just not as accurate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Naemeth

Naemeth

Posted
  • Author
Posted

nope its a step down from the heq5 with about half the payload iirc

but it will be solid with your heritage. from what i've seen it'll take a 6" newt/4" frac nicely but you could go larger if you balance things nicely

Thanks, just looked up the payload for the EQ-5 and it's around 9-11kg, which should be fine for a long while yet. Probably anything from an 80mm refractor to a 200mm Newtonian. Does it have a Vixen type dovetail?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Naemeth

Naemeth

Posted
  • Author
Posted

As standard it has the vixen dovetail holder from what I've seen on supplier sites but if you're buying second hand of course you should get confirmation that it still has this from the seller

I will do, I need to check everything is in working order as well :).

Should I save up for single axis or dual axis motors?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
username

username

Posted
Posted

I should add that for the time being you might be surprised how easy it is to track by hand with the RA control whilst saving for a motor. I use my mount in alt az and eq mode and miss the smoothness and the one control tracking of eq when in alt az.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
username

username

Posted
Posted

reckon the eq3 would be.

skywatcher package the 6" newt with the eq3 and you're wanting to but a 5" newt on it. Assuming that skywatcher will match a scope with the minimum mount due to profit margins then putting a scope next size down on the mount should make a fairly stable set up.

remember that if you're going to use your heritage dovetail on an eq mount that the eyepiece might end up in a weird place and you won't be able to spin the scope round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
username

username

Posted
Posted

I'm not an imager but from what I've seen around the forum yes. RikM the mod used to image with a 150p on an eq3 and his shots were good. I think when you you use mounts below a heq5 for imaging the main problem is not their reduced load capacity which is relatively easy to stay under but the accuracy of the motor and gears whcih contribute to increased periodic error. Heq5 and above are more accurate and don't jiggle about due to gear tolerances. That's how I understand it anyway but you'd want some input from someonoe with experience in the area. An eq3 with dual drives can be modded for auto guiding and there are threads on it on the forum. I remember quatermass has quite a few threads on modding eq5 motors, there are others but I can't remember.

An eq3 with motor and camera should be ok, the shorted the lnes focal length on the camera the less accurate the guiding will have to be

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nephilim

nephilim

Posted
Posted

I use a Skywatcher explorer 130m on the EQ2 & do planetery imaging with a wecam & it works fine ( I put a sandbag on the EP tray to steady it.) For the moon, jst using the manual slo mo controls worked ok but for Jupiter I use the motor drive, anything more on the EQ2 would, as others have said be far too much for it. Good luck with whatever u get.

Steve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gonzo

Gonzo

Posted
Posted

I think I may go for the EQ3-2. I'll get the motors when the time comes, but it should be fine without for the time being.

Thanks for the help Jim :).

I do think that the EQ3-2 (with a few minor modifications to it) is an underrated mount. Look up for stan26 he's doing great with his EQ3-2 (and many others using that exact same mount).

The EQ1 is great for widefield photography and as a super grab and go, I took to Germany to a dark site and my Megrez 72 last winter, it worked fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesF

JamesF

Posted
Posted

The EQ1 is great for widefield photography and as a super grab and go, I took to Germany to a dark site and my Megrez 72 last winter, it worked fine.

Are you using the same plate-solving alignment method as themos?

James

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.