I've finally done it.

[Demonperformer]

Some on SGL will know that I have been going on about buying a decent EQ mount for years, and may have wondered if I ever will. Well, I have. New EQ6 syntrek (with EQmod cable) ordered from FLO yesterday afternoon. Delivery times given as "2-3 days", so by the end of the week ....

BTW, the prices on the Astrodevelopments website are no longer accurate (apparently a new site is being produced). The improved alt bolts for the EQ6 are now £28.25.

40+ sec subs, here I come!

[emadmoussa]

Congratulations in advance.

I think the bolts price is correct. I bought them a couple of months ago for a similar price as far as I remember.

[Demonperformer]

The bolts are still listed as £24.99 on the website, but actually cost £28.25.

In the grand scheme of things, this is not a massive investment compared to the originals warping and the hassle that would cause, but was just providing a 'heads-up' for anyone thinking about getting them.

[Luke]

Congrats on the purchase What scope(s) are you going to unleash on it?

[Demonperformer]

The plan is that the main scope will be my 8SE OTA, with 0.5/0.55 reducer and ccd camera.

I also have a 102SLT, but am giving serious consideration to replacing it with something like http://www.firstlightoptics.com/esprit-professional-refractors/skywatcher-esprit-ed-80-pro-triplet.html as/if/when it becomes available in this country, depending on the price.

I've recently purchased an 8-filter electronic filter wheel and OAG, so I'm more or less sorted on the gear that will stop me using that as an excuse for not being able to take half-decent pictures.

My next excuse is going to be not being able to get all the software working properly - guaranteed!!!

[paulastro]

Congratulations! We are sort of in the same boat. I've been uming and ahing for yonks about buying a second hand NEQ6. Finally agreed a purchase of one today and go to pick it up on Saturday. May the force be with both of us with many painless gotos.

[Demonperformer]

The plan is that the main scope will be my 8SE OTA, with 0.5/0.55 reducer and ccd camera.

TYPO!! - That should read 0.5/0.33 reducer.

[Demonperformer]

This is worrying ... from the FEDEX tracking site:

17:23 2 Items at Ipswich

20:28 1 Item at Marston Gate Southern Hub

They've lost half of my EQ6???

What's happened to the rest???

I guess time will tell.

[Demonperformer]

It's all right, there are 2 items in Poole. Now "out for delivery". Getting excited.

[Demonperformer]

And it has arrived ... woohoo!

I'm logging off now, and may be some time!!

[fwm891]

This bit goes here, that bit goes? and what do I do with this...

Have fun

[r3i]

And it has arrived ... woohoo!

I'm logging off now, and may be some time!!

Happy days - enjoy, you've got yourself a great mount there.

[Demonperformer]

Right, I think I am demonstrating remarkable restraint in not getting it out of the box until the replacement ALT bolts arrive (they are apparently "in the post"). In the mean time, I've spent a bit of time familiarising myself with the manuals (will no doubt need to spend a lot more before I get it completely sussed), but one thing that struck me reading through it as a right pain.

When it talks about balancing, it says that it is best to first adjust the altitude to between 15-30 degrees (for RA) and then to between 60-75 degrees (for DEC). I was rather hoping that, having set the altitude to my latitude (about 50.75 degrees), I could more or less just leave it there.

So my question is: in practice, do users actually make all the altitude changes every time they set up and balance the system, or are these altitude changes really not that important for balancing? What practical difference will it make to the end result?

Thanks.

[Spikey]

Mine always stays the same, at my own latitude. The only movement is to give it a little tweak when polar aligning. I've never had a problem with balancing and I operate a side by side dual bar which can be a bit awkward to get the balance spot on.

[Scott]

me either, set-up takes long enough without adding to it . enjoy your new toy and don't worry.... I've got a stack of excuses for dud images. If you get stuck i'll lend you some. (damn neighbours kids on their trampoline last night ruined all my subs ).

[Demonperformer]

Thanks for the responses. More or less what I thought (but what would I know?) or at least hoped.

I appreciate that it will need tweaking, as it will have to be set up and taken down each time I use it, but that is a lot better than massive changes and then trying to get it right again.

[fwm891]

I think its referring to the OTA not the mount when balancing i.e. have the tube at an angle, after all you'll be using it with the PA aligned so why balance the mount in a different position to the one its going to be used in - perhaps its just a poor translation....

[kirkster501]

Great mount. Great choice. I love mine. You can expect 30 min subs if guided. Congrats. I agree with your approach, get the Alt bolts first or else you could end up in the mess I did where the supplied bolt bent 30 mins after opening the box.

[Spikey]

First job.....the bolts.

Second job.....get the polar scope aligned/calibrated in the daytime.

[sloz1664]

3rd job install eqmod brilliant piece of software will make controlling your mount a breeze.

Join eq6 or eqmod yahoo groups for more eq6 info.

Great mount

All the best. Skies are looking good for Friday:rolleyes:

Cheers

Steve

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

[Demonperformer]

Frist job ... they are on their way.

Second job ... I thought about that when I was reading through the manual. It talks about using Polaris and then says you can use a distant telephone pole if Polaris isn't visible, but that would not be as accurate. So I was thinking, there is a fairly distant telegraph pole that is easily visible, so do a rough calibration on that during the day, when seeing the adjustment screws would not be a problem, and then do any final small tweaks at night on Polaris to get it perfect. It says I only need to do it once, so I may as well put in the effort now.

Third job ... I have the cable and the software 'ready to roll' when first and second jobs are completed. Will be running it through CdC and also using Astrotortilla (at least, that's the theory). Applications for EQ6 and EQMOD yahoo groups already sent.

I think its referring to the OTA not the mount when balancing i.e. have the tube at an angle, after all you'll be using it with the PA aligned so why balance the mount in a different position to the one its going to be used in - perhaps its just a poor translation....

It definitely says "the altitude of the mount" and then goes on to talk about doing this "by using the altitude adjustment T-bolt".

Thanks for the suggestions, guys. Keep 'em coming.

[Luke]

The triplet looks a very nice option

Is there a reducer you could use with it? I'm wondering if you could then get close to 300mm reduced, 400 with the flattener, and maybe go mad and use a low power barlow to get around 750mm, or is that daft?

I also have a 102SLT, but am giving serious consideration to replacing it with something like http://www.firstligh...ro-triplet.html as/if/when it becomes available in this country, depending on the price.

[Demonperformer]

I actually know very little more than you do. There is a thread on here from someone who has actually used one. I'm not totally sold on it - depends rather on the price, then I can assess it against other options. The initial attraction for me is that it is a nice fast f/5, which would match my f/10 sct+0.5 reducer/flattener perfectly, providing wider fields of view.

I don't really see why you would want to use a reducer (to get a shorter focal length) and then add a barlow (to make it longer again). Wouldn't a 1.5x barlow produce a 750mm focal length without an extra chunk of glass in the optical path? Or am I missing something?

It might be nice to have a reducer and get it down to an f/4, but (without professing any great knowledge on the subject) I suspect that producing such a beast to match the refractor would have similar problems to producing very short focal length refractors in the first place, like getting all the colours to focus on the same spot. So that would probably make it a seriously expensive piece of glass.

[Luke]

It may well be a daft suggestion, as I don't know how viable reducers/barlows are with triplets

It's just the idea of covering a focal length range from around 300 to 750mm with one scope would appeal to me, as I currently use three scopes over that range. None of my scopes are fast enough really that I'd want to barlow them, but for me F5 might be doable going to F7.5.

Sorry if that's a barmy digression. What CCD will you be using on the SCT with the .33 reducer? That certainly appeals to go that fast with an SCT

I don't really see why you would want to use a reducer (to get a shorter focal length) and then add a barlow (to make it longer again). Wouldn't a 1.5x barlow produce a 750mm focal length without an extra chunk of glass in the optical path? Or am I missing something?

I suspect that producing such a beast to match the refractor would have similar problems to producing very short focal length refractors in the first place, like getting all the colours to focus on the same spot.

[Demonperformer]

SXVR-H9 mono. The reducer either does 0.5x or 0.33x, depending on the gap between the reducer and the camera. I actually think the 0.5x produces better results than .33x (I've done some experimentation on the moon), but if I am going to start using the filterwheel/OAG combination, that gives a gap that more or less forces me into 0.33x territory. Still, it may be that when I start doing "serious" imaging, I will find a way round what appears to be a bit of a 'soft-focus' problem. If not, I may go for a dedicated 0.65x reducer, but I really don't want to start spending any more money atm without checking out the gear I already have properly first. If I can get decent results with the .33x, that will seriously reduce imaging times (or increase faintness-grasp, depending on one's perspective!).