HEQ5 ok for visual use with 250mm newt??

[crazyjedi]

Would a 250 newt be too heavy for visual use on an HEQ5? I was thinking of getting an HEQ5 with an 80mm SW apo for A/P and plonking a 250 newt onto the same mount for visual use to save money on buying two mounts. I'm worried about the payload being excessive with the 250 though.

[earth titan]

For visual, should be fine.

[Bizibilder]

You will get away with the 250 on an HEQ5 for visual (I have had my 200 with a guidescope and camera etc on mine and it is overloaded for imaging). You can then swap over to the 80mm for imaging - but note swap! you can't have both on the mount at the same time or the mount will be overloaded.

[Andymac79]

You know what will happen, you will sneak a camera or webcam on the end of the newt, cant help ourselves!

Spend the same, Get a second hand EQ6 to save the bother. You know it makes sense. 6s seem to come up s/h fairly often

[crazyjedi]

I did think of a second hand NEQ6 but when I looked at the step motor and guide accuracy the HEQ5 looked better. I could be wrong as I have limited experience of A/P

[Naemeth]

I think the NEQ-6 and HEQ-5 are the same accuracy, just different payloads. I think you could well get away with the 250 on the NEQ-6 and a bit of imaging.

[Andymac79]

Always here to help spend other peoples money............................!

[crazyjedi]

Would the HEQ5 be able to handle a SW Evostar 100ED plus A/P kit? Or should I stick with the 80ED? Also would there be much benefit of the 100 over the 80mm?

[Bizibilder]

My HEQ5 handles my Evostar 120 APO, ST80 guidescope and cameras etc with no trouble. Beware the ED100 - it has a "longer" f-ratio than all the other ED APO's (even with a reducer) and will therefore need much longer exposure times to achieve the same results. The ED80 is an exellent scope to start Astrophotography.

[crazyjedi]

My HEQ5 handles my Evostar 120 APO, ST80 guidescope and cameras etc with no trouble. Beware the ED100 - it has a "longer" f-ratio than all the other ED APO's (even with a reducer) and will therefore need much longer exposure times to achieve the same results. The ED80 is an exellent scope to start Astrophotography.

The 120mm is just too a big a jump in price for me so I think the 80mm is the way to go. I see what you mean about the f-ratio of the 100mm. It's rather slow.

[Bizibilder]

It certainly took a long time to save up for that 120 APO but it has turned out to be more or less my "everything" scope - DSO's, with a flattener/reducer, Sun (stopped to 100mm aparture and Solar filtered), Moon - native focal length and planetary, with a 2.5x powermate.

[crazyjedi]

I have a 150 Newt for every day use and was planning on getting the Apo plus HEQ5 mount to start me off in A/P, then save up for a 250 newt for visual use (eventually).

How would the 120mm compare to my 150 newt?

[Bizibilder]

The 120 Apo is probably somewhere between the 150 and 200 size Newt in terms of performance for visual observations.

[kirkster501]

HEQ5 is a fabulous mount and I miss mine a lot - it's a kinda cute thing and just does the job with no fuss. I had a ED120 on it a lot with full imaging rig no problems at all.

[Astro_Baby]

I'll dissent and say the 250 is too big for the HEQ5. Personally I think its too big for the NEQ6 .......its not just the weight its the bulk and the fact that the 250 is quite a lot bigger than mere dimensions on a web page would suggest....its like a sail and in the least wind it will wobble badly, it will also wobble badly at the lightest touch.

A solid mount is worth an inch of aperture any old day and while i might be just about usable on the HEQ5 it wont be nice, what you gain in aperture you'll lose in endless wobbles.

Given that newts are seldom friendly on an EQ at the best of times, and I would suggest you would need some form of ring rotation system you might find even with a ring rotation system like wilcox rings or similar it will be pretty unpleasant to use.

Thats my take on it and why I sold the 250 I had.

[kirkster501]

I'll dissent and say the 250 is too big for the HEQ5. Personally I think its too big for the NEQ6 .......its not just the weight its the bulk and the fact that the 250 is quite a lot bigger than mere dimensions on a web page would suggest....its like a sail and in the least wind it will wobble badly, it will also wobble badly at the lightest touch.

A solid mount is worth an inch of aperture any old day and while i might be just about usable on the HEQ5 it wont be nice, what you gain in aperture you'll lose in endless wobbles.

Given that newts are seldom friendly on an EQ at the best of times, and I would suggest you would need some form of ring rotation system you might find even with a ring rotation system like wilcox rings or similar it will be pretty unpleasant to use.

Thats my take on it and why I sold the 250 I had.

That's a story I read a lot AB and agree from experience when I borrowed a 250 - they are HUGE! And ring rotation wrecks the alignment very easily.

[crazyjedi]

I'll dissent and say the 250 is too big for the HEQ5. Personally I think its too big for the NEQ6 .......its not just the weight its the bulk and the fact that the 250 is quite a lot bigger than mere dimensions on a web page would suggest....its like a sail and in the least wind it will wobble badly, it will also wobble badly at the lightest touch.

A solid mount is worth an inch of aperture any old day and while i might be just about usable on the HEQ5 it wont be nice, what you gain in aperture you'll lose in endless wobbles.

Given that newts are seldom friendly on an EQ at the best of times, and I would suggest you would need some form of ring rotation system you might find even with a ring rotation system like wilcox rings or similar it will be pretty unpleasant to use.

Thats my take on it and why I sold the 250 I had.

Boo! I thought I was being clever there. I would be using it mostly in my back garden which is pretty well sheltered. Will it be that wobbly?

I could always use a Dob but I've always liked using EQ. Not sure how I'd like the Dob way of life.

[Naemeth]

A Dob is about as simple as it gets, put it down, and move the scope left/right and up/down .

[crazyjedi]

I know it seems daft but it's the little differences, sitting rather than standing, and the way it moves around the sky. Plus I was going to get the HEQ5 anyway for my 80ED and A/P set up.

I might quite like Dob's but I am so used to EQ's. I'll never know until I give it a go though eh?

[Bizibilder]

I've just checked and SW sell the 250P on an EQ6 so maybe they are right - the HEQ5 is just too lightweight for the 250.

[StuW]

A 250 is far too heavy, my 200 won't balance now I've added a motor focus so without extra weights or extended bar you've no chance!

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

[Astro_Baby]

Even if your garden is sheltered the scope will wobble badly at the lightest touch of the focuser. Youd need as a minimum an additional 5kg counterweight and hefting a 250 onto a mount is no great joy. Its a recipe for a slipped disc.

I hear what you say about not liking Dobs, not keen on 'em myself either. Why not just go a little smaller to a 200 whixh an HEQ5 can handle.

[Chris]

I agree with astro baby, a 200p f/5 will be very good both visually and for imaging and will sit nicely on an HEQ5. I've had this configuration in the past and it felt about right. I've just sold most my kit and bought another 200p and an EQ6 pro for my obsy, but even though I'm setup up in an obsy and will have an EQ6 by the weekend I'm not sure I'd eventually upgrade further to a 250p?

[crazyjedi]

How much of a difference is there between the 200 and the 250 from an, in the field, eye on lens perspective?

Will the 200 be a decent step up performance wise, from my trusty 150p?

Truth be told I am a little worried about lifting the 250 on to the mount. I can carry my 150 plus mount in to the garden in one go. It is a little awkward but not too difficult to do on my own. I'm not sure how I would hold the 250 in position and tighten the mount screw on to the dovetail plate without growing a third arm ??

[ollypenrice]

I'll dissent and say the 250 is too big for the HEQ5. Personally I think its too big for the NEQ6 .......its not just the weight its the bulk and the fact that the 250 is quite a lot bigger than mere dimensions on a web page would suggest....its like a sail and in the least wind it will wobble badly, it will also wobble badly at the lightest touch.

A solid mount is worth an inch of aperture any old day and while i might be just about usable on the HEQ5 it wont be nice, what you gain in aperture you'll lose in endless wobbles.

Given that newts are seldom friendly on an EQ at the best of times, and I would suggest you would need some form of ring rotation system you might find even with a ring rotation system like wilcox rings or similar it will be pretty unpleasant to use.

Thats my take on it and why I sold the 250 I had.

I totally agree with Astro Baby and have been surprised by the generally favourable responses to the question. A 10 inch Newt is heavy, it's a wind catcher and it's long - all of which are things mounts don't like. I wouldn't consider a 10 inch Newt on an HEQ5 even for visual.

There's a slight undercurrent running through the refractor discussion in which I sense that the idea of 'aperture is good' is playing a part. In imaging aperture is only good when it's used to reduce F ratio. If it's used to increase focal length then it isn't good, it's just different. You frame a different amount of sky. So how big's your object? A daytime photographer has different focal lengths for different targets and the same is true in AP. Short and long FLs are equally good, but which does your target need?

Olly