Really silly question...HEQ5 for the sake of less money?

[emadmoussa]

I'm about pull the trigger on an NEQ6 Syntrek mount and also EQMOD adapter, both I think will mount to about £870. So, I understand the benefits of this mount, well...that's why I'm upgrading. But I'm also tempted by the HEQ5...it's a sturdy mount and can be computerized as well...Is it worth saving £100 by buying HEQ5 instead of NEQ6? How is compared in terms of astrophotography capabilities?

Before you rush to slagging me down for such a ridiculous question, let me assure you that I'm more for the NEQ6, but I don't know much about the HEQ5, and who knows I might be missing out.

[PARTY MARTY]

That depends what scope you're going to mount it on, However after seeing you're the equipment you have, I would suggest that you opt for the NEQ-6 mount, the mount is heavy duty and will handle up to 25Kg mark, while the HEQ-5 handles around 14 Kg. So I would go for the NEQ-6 everytime, I f need a study mount for Astro-photography you can't beat the NEQ-6. I have one which handles my Skywatcher Quattro 8" F4 scope with a ST80 as my guide scope, here together with the QHY8L CCD and QHY5v guide camera with all the cables fitted and Dew heaters, coma corrector My set-up mounts up to the 15Kg mark, And the NEQ-6 handles it without any tracking issues. The thing is you need to buy a strong mount as a good general rule is to never overload it at it's maximum capacity, everyone who suggested to me is alway's go the 3/4 of the maximum payload and you can't go wrong! After I listened to their advice, I got the NEQ-6 the best move I ever did!

[Daniel-K]

dont skimp on the mount its easier to buy a better scope but buying a bigger mount is pain on the finance's

[fondofchips]

Go for the stronger mount, even the slightest of wobble will be an issue at the distances of the objects you are looking at.

If you are at a dark site & the wind gets up then you can hang a bag of ballast on the stronger tripod to help stabilise it.

Can't do that if you are already at the weight limit.

An aperture fever may need that extra weight capacity as well.

Clear skies mate & remember that having to upgrade again will cost you more in the long run.

[emadmoussa]

Go for the stronger mount, even the slightest of wobble will be an issue at the distances of the objects you are looking at.

If you are at a dark site & the wind gets up then you can hang a bag of ballast on the stronger tripod to help stabilise it.

Can't do that if you are already at the weight limit.

An aperture fever may need that extra weight capacity as well.

Clear skies mate & remember that having to upgrade again will cost you more in the long run.

Well, guys, I'm pretty happy with my Explorer 200p, it's an excellent scope. All I need is a better mount to replace my EQ5. And yes, I agree, the aperture fever will kick in at some point in the future.

[Luke]

We have a HEQ5 and NEQ6 and they are similar in terms of performance when we've used them.

The big thing, as said, is the difference in load capacity. I'd go for the NEQ6 hands down if using a 200P.

If I was very confident I would only image with lighter scopes, like an 80mm or 100mm refractor, I'd go for the HEQ5 for its lighter weight (I set up from scratch as I have no obsy. Less weight is good if I can get away with it!)

[emadmoussa]

Mmm...that's what I was thinking. It'll require a heavy duty mount if I'm to mount the 200p, ST80 (with dovetail), autofocuser and an EOS 1100D (especially with the extra battery attached)....not to mention there will be a guide camera some time in the future

[PARTY MARTY]

Emadmoussa! The despite the cost of the NEQ-6, just one thing that I wanted to point out to make you aware that the NEQ-6 is not a light mount indeed, the mount alone weighs around 16Kgs and 7.5Kgs with the tripod, and that's not including the counterweights! So it's a very mount, so my best advice is to invest in a protective case for the NEQ-6 mount head especially if you're setting up on a dark site! However despite being heavy this is a rock solid mount and you'll not run into any vibrations at all, As a lot of guy's suggested that's easier to replace a scope but getting a much better mount would be cheaper for you, you can alway's upgrade to a bigger scope. I believe that the NEQ-6 mount easily handle a 12" Skywatcher Reflector but only used for visual only! 10" scope would be the maximum I would go for an imaging rig to be set on this mount!

[emadmoussa]

Emadmoussa! The despite the cost of the NEQ-6, just one thing that I wanted to point out to make you aware that the NEQ-6 is not a light mount indeed, the mount alone weighs around 16Kgs and 7.5Kgs with the tripod, and that's not including the counterweights! So it's a very mount, so my best advice is to invest in a protective case for the NEQ-6 mount head especially if you're setting up on a dark site! However despite being heavy this is a rock solid mount and you'll not run into any vibrations at all, As a lot of guy's suggested that's easier to replace a scope but getting a much better mount would be cheaper for you, you can alway's upgrade to a bigger scope. I believe that the NEQ-6 mount easily handle a 12" Skywatcher Reflector but only used for visual only! 10" scope would be the maximum I would go for an imaging rig to be set on this mount!

I appreciate the advice. I understand it's pretty heavy. Luckily, I don't have the luxury of owning a car, so my back garden is my obsy. So moving around too much is not an option for at the moment.

I like to think that at some point I'd like to upgrade the tube, say, to the Celestron C80-SGT (XLT)...I think it's 11"...I assume this will do OK in terms of astrophotography?

[SnakeyJ]

I'm using my 200p on an HEQ5 and to be honest I think I've reaching the point where I'd be looking for a heavier mount - visually no problems except when the wind blows, however by the time I have dew shields, telrad, camera, barlows and filter wheel it is starting to get very twitchy indeed and I certainly need a third counterweight or extension bar to correctly balance. This is well before considering an ST-80, guide cam and auto-focusers. You may just get away with a SWE150P + gubbins on an HEQ5, but I think you're still going to be pushing the envelope for imaging.

I'm sitting here waiting for SW to launch the EQ8 Pro - not because I want one yet (actually I'd love one, but too big and heavy for current needs unless I ever build the obsy), but I reckon a lot of the observatory based imagers will be replacing their NEQ6s and there may be a few deals to be had.

[PARTY MARTY]

I'm sorry Emadmoussa! I can't help on that scope, I'm more a Newtionian guru, I don't know the weight of that scope! I'm assuming that this Schmidt is a Fast star system or Hyper star, you'll need that so that you can do imaging at F2, which incredibly fast. I'm assuming that this Cassegrain might not have this which if it doesn't you'll need focal reducer for imaging. With a fastar you can take out the secondary mirror fit the adapter and the CCD, which will give you this great imaging scope! If you are serious in imaging I would suggest to get a hyper star upgradeable Cassegrain! But there might someone who know a lot than I do with these kind of scopes, Have you spoke to FLO about this, maybe they can help you mate?

[ollypenrice]

I like to think that at some point I'd like to upgrade the tube, say, to the Celestron C80-SGT (XLT)...I think it's 11"...I assume this will do OK in terms of astrophotography?

I think you may have your Celestrons confused here. If you mean the C11 (11 inch SCT) then you can't assume the NEQ6 will cope with it for DS imaging. It will for visual, but that kind of focal length requires not just a strong mount but an accurate one and the SW mounts are not inherently very accurate. They will often guide out well enough for long FL imaging but you certainly can't take it for granted. Neither of mine would guide at the FL of an 11 inch SCT. Some do, though. I wouldn't be keen on trying it.

Olly

[PARTY MARTY]

I agree with Olly in this the SW mounts aren't accurate enough for longer focal lengths, And Schmidts do have a long focal of around F10. The skywatcher mounts are accurate to F6 and below. Plus if it's an C11 Schmidt it will be too heavy for NEQ-6 mount, and then you'll back to drawing board again! And I won't even consider a Schmidt if it's hyperstar system, even with the standard schmidts and fitted a focal reducer you'll still at F6.3, ideally for DSO imaging you'll something of F6 and below!

[emadmoussa]

I think you may have your Celestrons confused here. If you mean the C11 (11 inch SCT) then you can't assume the NEQ6 will cope with it for DS imaging. It will for visual, but that kind of focal length requires not just a strong mount but an accurate one and the SW mounts are not inherently very accurate. They will often guide out well enough for long FL imaging but you certainly can't take it for granted. Neither of mine would guide at the FL of an 11 inch SCT. Some do, though. I wouldn't be keen on trying it.

Olly

Thanks Olly, I've just looked it up and I have to say...the Celestron is way too heavy for the mount, it's like asking to mount to commit suicide. It's almost 40 Kg I don't mean to be pushy with questions, but for future reference, if I want to increase my 200mm aperture, which telescope will be the one for this mount? I'd like a shorter tube one though...

[PARTY MARTY]

Sorry I made a mistake on of my sentences, I would consider a Schmidt if its a hyper star system, if it isn't I wouldn't bother with normal Schmidt!

[tingting44]

interesting read, i will be upgrading to the NEQ6 one day also, like you OP i also use my setup from my garden 95% of the time so setting up and taking down with my current setup is non existent, i basicly pick up my whole scope with mount and everything, plop it in the garden and thats it, when im done, the whole setup gets carried back into the corner of the living room (never any taking apart or setting up), so what im really wondering is with the NEQ6 is it ok to leave the scope attatched to it all the time? just wondering if it will do any damage over the long term leaving the scope on the NEQ6 say at maximum payload? love to hear what you guys do with your NEQ6's

all the best

Martin

[PARTY MARTY]

Martin! The NEQ-6 mount is really heavy, and even if you could lift 33.5Kgs with it's 2 x 5kg counter weights included, you'll run the risk in chances of you might slipping over something and heaven forbid drop your scope set-up!!! OUCH it would hurt and your wallet! I'm afraid you'll have to what I do every night I set-up, is strip it down including the mount head!! Unless you have Obsy in your back garden where you can have permanent set-up that will be much better plan Martin!!!

[PARTY MARTY]

If you're leaving the scope as a permanent set-up, it's totally fine on the mount as long it is properly balanced it's not going to damage the spur gears and motors, People who have Obsy's have had their scopes mounted on a NEQ-6 mount for years on end!

[emadmoussa]

Even with the EQ5, it's very difficult to move it around if the telescope and counter weights are on. Major problem is balance, it's possible to drag 35 Kg for like 20 yards. You always jeopardize knocking the tube or the mount...say, if you want to take it through the door. It's not a small thing unfortunately.

[emadmoussa]

If you're leaving the scope as a permanent set-up, it's totally fine on the mount as long it is properly balanced it's not going to damage the spur gears and motors, People who have Obsy's have had their scopes mounted on a NEQ-6 mount for years on end!

The only reason I take the OTA off the mount is space. Considering the laws of physics, permanent mounting shouldn't be a problem if it's within the limits of the mount.

[SnakeyJ]

Thanks Olly, I've just looked it up and I have to say...the Celestron is way too heavy for the mount, it's like asking to mount to commit suicide. It's almost 40 Kg I don't mean to be pushy with questions, but for future reference, if I want to increase my 200mm aperture, which telescope will be the one for this mount? I'd like a shorter tube one though...

Obviously not Olly - but if you wanted a bigger apperture for imaging the Quattro F4 10" or with caveats on size/mageability the 300PDS should be ok on the NEQ6 mounts. Though for the shorter tube the quattro looks a better option:

Quattro 250 (10-inch) specification (specs from FLO)

• Diameter of Primary Mirror 254mm
  
• Telescope Focal Length 1000mm (f/4)
  
• Note: Eyepieces NOT supplied
  
• 9x50 Finderscope
  
• Parabolic Primary Mirror (Pyrex)
  
• 2" (50.8mm) Dual-Speed 10:1 Linear Power Focuser
  
• Tube Rings and Dovetail Bar
  
• 0.5mm Ultra-Thin Secondary Mirror Supports
  
• 56% more Light-Gathering than 200mm
  

[tingting44]

nice info on the weight and moving it guys! thinking about it i would probably struggle lol my current 130p setup is not heavy at all, but i do find it a pain getting it through my garden door and i have banged it a few times......not sure how much my setup weighs? cant be half of the NEQ6 lol when i ever get mine i might take the OTA off and try it like that, i quite like it setup in my living room as with my noob setup at the moment it all ways gets the wow factor when people come in and see it for the 1st few times lol imaging a beastly NEQ6 and C9.25 lool the mrs might kick me out when i ever get it lol but ill be ok sleeping in the garden with my sleeping bag and scope loool it will be worth it, never seen one in the flesh yet so im sure ill be surprised when i do see an NEQ6 as the pics do nothing really,

one more thing with my az mount i keep it at its lowest height because of vibrations, which at that height the 130p comes to about my hip, with the NEQ6 at its lowest im guessing it comes to around your head height lol

[emadmoussa]

nice info on the weight and moving it guys! thinking about it i would probably struggle lol my current 130p setup is not heavy at all, but i do find it a pain getting it through my garden door and i have banged it a few times......not sure how much my setup weighs? cant be half of the NEQ6 lol when i ever get mine i might take the OTA off and try it like that, i quite like it setup in my living room as with my noob setup at the moment it all ways gets the wow factor when people come in and see it for the 1st few times lol imaging a beastly NEQ6 and C9.25 lool the mrs might kick me out when i ever get it lol but ill be ok sleeping in the garden with my sleeping bag and scope loool it will be worth it, never seen one in the flesh yet so im sure ill be surprised when i do see an NEQ6 as the pics do nothing really,

one more thing with my az mount i keep it at its lowest height because of vibrations, which at that height the 130p comes to about my hip, with the NEQ6 at its lowest im guessing it comes to around your head height lol

I never ever stretched the legs of the EQ5 tripod, I also like it at its lowest. Having said that, even at lowest set-up the 200p telescope is almost your height.

And yes, the Mrs will be ...what the..!!!! When she sees the NEQ6. I've showed her some pictures just to prepare her psychologically. The technique goes, whenever I make a big buy I usually get her something or cook a nice meal...just a diversion :D

[Gomtuu]

Interesting thread. I'm currently looking at replacing my EQ5 with an NEQ6.

My major concern is how easy/heavy it will be to take out and set up at a dark site, as I can't do anything much from home.

[LDUNN1]

I went through the same dilemma when I started 2 years ago.

I ended up going for an nEQ6 (& EQMOD) as I was not sure what scope I'd end up with - initially when I was starting, I just wanted a motorised mount that I could put a DSLR & long Camera lens on & track the heavens.

Because I was not sure what size scope I'd end up with, I decided to 'play safe' & went for the increased payload of the nEQ6 over the HEQ5........& here's the irony, I ended up with a scope that pushed the nEQ6 to its imaging limits.......& last year ended up biting the bullet & getting an even bigger mount (AP 900GTO).

I had about 17kg hanging off the end of the nEQ6 - if I got it perfectly balanced, then it was just about okay with this load for imaging, but a simple operation like swopping out the camera going from say a DSLR to a webcam for planetary, was enough for the clutches to slip due to the momemntary unbalance. This was a pain. I eventually worked out that I was best to balance it slightly tail heavy most of the time, so that when I swopped cameras then the clutches would still hold without the cameras in place.

I think the quoted 25kg for the nEQ6 is optimistic for imaging, but might be 'okay' for visual.

Others may disagree with me, but it is what I felt about my set up at the time.