Any new EQ8 Reports?

[Stephen]

All I can say is three months in my eq8 is still performing impeccably Though I have put the pier in the shed and switched to a tripod as it's just too awkward and heavy IMHO for portable use

[GuillermoBarrancos]

The AO is very interesting and I wish I had the budget to put into something like that but I don't Maybe in the future once I recoupe the money I can upgrade my camera to one that has it.

I'm aware of the problems with the dual chip camera for guiding. I will be starting with it and will try to keep to the same orientations that you do Olly. Hopefully with 4 options I will be able to find a guide star. I will be keeping my current guide cam and will budget for an OAG just incase the dual chip prove to difficult to work with.

I definately don't want to be repenting or regreting. So I am planning on this being a FINAL setup. Unless I get a lot of money from some where. So that why I'm doing so much research and getting as many suggestions as possible. I'm ever leaning more and more towards the AP900.

Has anyone tried this yet then? http://www.firstlightoptics.com/starlight-xpress-accessories/starlight-xpress-sxv-ao-lf-large-format-active-optics-unit.html

When looking at the big scheme of Things, that's not a huge amount of Money, if you are talking about 10micron Mounts and the like. If you can increase the performance of Mounts like NEQ6 and EQ8 With this AO + OAG system. No?

On the other hand. There are quite a few People out there making fantastic images with a C9.25, NEQ6 and standard OAG setup. That's still 2 meters focal length.

PS. Sara posted her first pic with her C9.25 not too long ago, which was amazing. Using a Mount in the same price range as the EQ8 (if I recall correctly).

[ollypenrice]

But lets face it.. the reason we feel almost compelled to buy an EQ8 is because of it's price.. half of the nearest contender!  SW know what they are doing

The definition of 'nearest contender' depends on the performance of the mount. This isn't just weight capacity, it's underlying PE and ability to respond accurately to the guider. If we don't know these values then we don't know what really is the nearest contender.

Olly

[tony210]

Hi-I'm guiding with 420mm refractor and using 8inch RCT at f5.6 ie approx 1.1metres which was what I was using with my EQ6 previously but never got RMS below 12 on a good night -I agree not that great but seems fair -and the results suggest its guiding quite well although I only guide in dec either north or south to try to avoid backlash issues hopefully-Tony.  

[Tim]

I have used a bog standard EQ6 with my C11edgeHD, and managed up to three hours subs with round stars without too much trouble, just very good polar alignment, so it can be done, but you do need to micro manage it a bit, ie, a good gust of wind will lose your guide star, or a patch of cloud might be big enough to allow the mount to wander enough to lose the star, but if you are monitoring the guiding you can go a long way with even a basic mount.  (http://www.astrobin.com/28442/)

30 minute subs are easily accomplished with a bit of care, and taking enough time to accurately drift align, attaching all trailing wires and cables etc, minding the wind and height of the target, (low targets invite jumpy guide stars at long focal length). You will absolutely need an Off axis guider. The new Celestron one works nicely and is very configurable.

Have you thought of using the edge HD reducer? This will bring your imaging times down and you wont lose much if anything in resolution in normal skies. I have been using mine with the C11edge just this week with reasonable results (see attached work in progress preview M82, C11edge with 0.7 reducer and OSC)

The other issue with long focal length imaging can be actually finding the target. Like Per I have a 10 Micron mount now, and it just puts the target dead centre every time, but a pretty reasonable job was done by my old EQ6 too, although it wasn't always in the initial frame. If your target happens to be a faint Ha planetary nebula or similar then you can potentially waste a lot of clear sky time just framing up.

Hope that helps a bit

Cheers

Tim

[nmoushon]

The definition of 'nearest contender' depends on the performance of the mount. This isn't just weight capacity, it's underlying PE and ability to respond accurately to the guider. If we don't know these values then we don't know what really is the nearest contender.

Olly

This is what I was hoping to find out. If the EQ8 can guide accurately enough (and consistently ) or at least be somewhat close to the AP900 then the price point comes in as a huge factor, for me at least. Since I will have to guide with both the EQ8 or AP900 that is the most important thing since both would easily hold the C11. I know f at least 2 people on here that have a C11 on the EQ8 and would love to see if they have anything to add, but I forget who they are. 

I have used a bog standard EQ6 with my C11edgeHD, and managed up to three hours subs with round stars without too much trouble, just very good polar alignment, so it can be done, but you do need to micro manage it a bit, ie, a good gust of wind will lose your guide star, or a patch of cloud might be big enough to allow the mount to wander enough to lose the star, but if you are monitoring the guiding you can go a long way with even a basic mount.  (http://www.astrobin.com/28442/)

30 minute subs are easily accomplished with a bit of care, and taking enough time to accurately drift align, attaching all trailing wires and cables etc, minding the wind and height of the target, (low targets invite jumpy guide stars at long focal length). You will absolutely need an Off axis guider. The new Celestron one works nicely and is very configurable.

Have you thought of using the edge HD reducer? This will bring your imaging times down and you wont lose much if anything in resolution in normal skies. I have been using mine with the C11edge just this week with reasonable results (see attached work in progress preview M82, C11edge with 0.7 reducer and OSC)

The other issue with long focal length imaging can be actually finding the target. Like Per I have a 10 Micron mount now, and it just puts the target dead centre every time, but a pretty reasonable job was done by my old EQ6 too, although it wasn't always in the initial frame. If your target happens to be a faint Ha planetary nebula or similar then you can potentially waste a lot of clear sky time just framing up.

Hope that helps a bit

Cheers

Tim

Tim, thats a fantastic M1 and M82. Thats the kind of resolution I'm wanting to achieve. I do plan on getting the reducer and use it as well as without out it. Accurate goto is one other things the AP900 has done well and is part of my pro/cons list I've made of the two mounts. I'm hoping wind wont be to much of an issue as I will have an obsy by the time I make the purchase of the C11 (with the mount coming first of course).

[Sp@ce_d]

This is what I was hoping to find out. If the EQ8 can guide accurately enough (and consistently ) or at least be somewhat close to the AP900 then the price point comes in as a huge factor, for me at least. Since I will have to guide with both the EQ8 or AP900 that is the most important thing since both would easily hold the C11. I know f at least 2 people on here that have a C11 on the EQ8 and would love to see if they have anything to add, but I forget who they are. 

Tim, thats a fantastic M1 and M82. Thats the kind of resolution I'm wanting to achieve. I do plan on getting the reducer and use it as well as without out it. Accurate goto is one other things the AP900 has done well and is part of my pro/cons list I've made of the two mounts. I'm hoping wind wont be to much of an issue as I will have an obsy by the time I make the purchase of the C11 (with the mount coming first of course).

Accuracy of goto isn't something I get too hot and bothered about these days (should I?). Do you plate solve? I've been using astrotortilla for the past year or so (but experimenting with pinpoint now) & normally end up on target ready to kick off around a minute or so after unparking.

[nmoushon]

Accuracy of goto isn't something I get too hot and bothered about these days (should I?). Do you plate solve? I've been using astrotortilla for the past year or so (but experimenting with pinpoint now) & normally end up on target ready to kick off around a minute or so after unparking.

Normally I wouldnt consider the goto accuracy that important. But at 2.8m FL I do. Like what was said above I really don't want to spend hours trying to get a target framed correctly. Especially if I have to do that every time I try to go back to that object. 

I have never done any plate solving or used any advanced goto options like software. Since I currently image at 380mm the goto of my mount is accurate enough and only needs a couple nudges to get it back to where it was the last session. That only occurs because I'm trek my gear in and out of my house to use it every night. 

[ollypenrice]

I don't plate solve (yet) but I guess it takes the urgency out of a super-accurate Go To.

Great image from Tim, as usual. Very fine details. But I was always staggered by what Tim coaxed out of an EQ6. I wouldn't be optimistic about emulating that, knowing myself!

Olly

[Velvet]

Normally I wouldnt consider the goto accuracy that important. But at 2.8m FL I do. Like what was said above I really don't want to spend hours trying to get a target framed correctly. Especially if I have to do that every time I try to go back to that object. 

I have never done any plate solving or used any advanced goto options like software. Since I currently image at 380mm the goto of my mount is accurate enough and only needs a couple nudges to get it back to where it was the last session. That only occurs because I'm trek my gear in and out of my house to use it every night. 

I can only comment about the 10 micron GM1000. Once the sky model/PA is done it NEVER fails to put the target smack bang in the middle of the chip.

You can either input co ordinates, name or NGC/IC etc.  I cannot really fault the mount.  Having said that i have never guided with it as I have not needed

to.  That may change when I try the new Tak 130 extended.

Will let you know on that one

Velvet

[FLO]

Isn't it interesting how whenever a thread starts about the EQ8 it is owners of significantly more expensive mounts who are first to respond, to criticise and then to dominate the discussion. This thread is titled "any new EQ8 reports" but it wasn't until post 21 that we heard from an actual EQ8 owner. 

The EQ8 is alive and well (supply should start catching up with demand later this month). Olly's is still the only EQ8 returned here in the UK and the feedback from EQ8 owners we met at Astrofest was excellent. Only one owner requested instructions for adjusting backlash and he freely admitted he only felt the need after reading Olly's comments here at SGL. 

The EQ8 will do what all it's predecessors have done, it will become the benchmark at it's price. But owners of more expensive mounts need not be concerned because the EQ8 will not outperform mounts costing 2x, 3x and more. The high-end premium market still belongs to the likes of 10Micron, Paramount, etc. They are still king of the castle

HTH, 

Steve 

[Zakalwe]

Add in the crummy weather here in the UK and that might also explain the lack of reports.

I've used the mount more for setting up than I actually have for astronomy. I think that I've had less than 4 hours real use out of it since it was delivered in December :mad:

[stephen_usher]

Add in the crummy weather here in the UK and that might also explain the lack of reports.

I've used the mount more for setting up than I actually have for astronomy. I think that I've had less than 4 hours real use out of it since it was delivered in December :mad:

I've had three, maybe four nights since November when the wind has been low enough to risk opening the roof of the observatory. Tonight's no exception, clear but too windy.

[ollypenrice]

I hope I'm not going to be mis-represented on this thread.

Olly

[GuillermoBarrancos]

Add in the crummy weather here in the UK and that might also explain the lack of reports.

I've used the mount more for setting up than I actually have for astronomy. I think that I've had less than 4 hours real use out of it since it was delivered in December :mad:

Heh the weather here around Oslo has been absolutely horrible as well. Been completely cloud covered for over 2 months straight now! Not a single clear night (or day for that matter) since before Christmas!

I finally get my bonus tomorrow, so planning to buy the N EQ6 Mount Next week. But shiver at the thought of the weather continuing like this.

[Zakalwe]

I've had three, maybe four nights since November when the wind has been low enough to risk opening the roof of the observatory. Tonight's no exception, clear but too windy.

Same here. The first properley clear sky in about 2 months and not only is there a full Moon but theres also a howling gale.

《falls to his kness and howls at the sky in impotent rage 》 Why do you taunt me so????

[tony210]

Hi - agreed -I am only now getting to test out tracking on this mount and so far is as expected for me! I am happy with this mount at this price point and so far there are no great problems- we shall see-particularly if there are a few clear nights!! - seems a good upgrade from my reliable EQ6 -Tony

[Davey-T]

Accuracy of goto isn't something I get too hot and bothered about these days (should I?). Do you plate solve? I've been using astrotortilla for the past year or so (but experimenting with pinpoint now) & normally end up on target ready to kick off around a minute or so after unparking.

Accuracy of GOTO is only important if you're whizzing around the sky visually all night from one target to another, if you're imaging the same thing for hours once you've found it that's it. I usually just sync on a nearby bright star then Goto target and it''s centered and that's with 10"SCT.

As the gist of this debate seems to be the suitability of the EQ8 for imaging then the GOTO accuracy, though important, is secondary.

Dave

[Zakalwe]

GOTO accuracy means next to nothing for me. I Unpark and then slew to a star near my target. A laser pointer mounted on the imaging scope gets the star on the FoV of the camera. Synch on the star in CdC and then slew to target. The mount will stay on the target until Im finished.

I really must learn about AstroTortilla sometime.

[tony210]

Hi - as above GOTO  is not a problem with this mount-in EQMOD as long as you have synchronized near to target it wll be in view - I still want a polar scope though as I feel lost with drift or the handset algorithm - perhaps just me - Tony

[Zakalwe]

I've only ever used the handset to set the polar alignment (its got a great routine IMHO) and to reset the home position when using a side-by-side bar.

The polar alignment routine is much easier than the Skywatcher polar-scope..that was quite inaccurate (the circle for Polaris was MASSIVE compared to the image of the star). Now, if they supplied something like the Losmandy polarscope I might change my mind. Then again, the EQ8 arrangement looks like a right faff ...you have to collimate the polarscope with the RA axis first as it hangs out on a gert big metal bar.

[stephen_usher]

I've only ever used the handset to set the polar alignment (its got a great routine IMHO) and to reset the home position when using a side-by-side bar.

The polar alignment routine is much easier than the Skywatcher polar-scope..that was quite inaccurate (the circle for Polaris was MASSIVE compared to the image of the star). Now, if they supplied something like the Losmandy polarscope I might change my mind. Then again, the EQ8 arrangement looks like a right faff ...you have to collimate the polarscope with the RA axis first as it hangs out on a gert big metal bar.

And they've not even bothered to align the image in the scope so that it rotates centrally in the factory, you're supposed to do it yourself. This is the one thing that could and should be done during manufacture. In fact, it shouldn't really need adjusting if the tolerances were reasonable. It's not rocket science. (I was a little disappointed by the build quality to be honest. The reticule on the outside used to gauge rotation itself rotates freely around the scope, making it rather pointless I'm afraid.)

[tony210]

I know its iterative - I presume you use repeated 3 star alignment then polar align with a new star? - do you need to re park at any stage? my results seem a little inconsistent- thanks Tony

[stephen_usher]

I know its iterative - I presume you use repeated 3 star alignment then polar align with a new star? - do you need to re park at any stage? my results seem a little inconsistent- thanks Tony

Basically, you do a three star alignment and then run the polar align on one of the available stars it gives you. This slews you to the star, which you centre in your eye piece. You then press enter and it slews the scope to where the star should be if the mount is aligned. You then re-centre the star using the adjustments in RA and Dec.

Once you've done this you re-align again and go through the polar alignment routine again and you keep doing this until you get the error it tells you after doing the alignment down to an acceptable value. The more times you go around the loop the closer to perfectly aligned you'll get, in theory.

[Zakalwe]

The trick is to make sure that the alt and az locking bolts/screw are slightly loose before starting to align. On my mount it "rocks" slightly when opening or tightening the azimuth locking bolts. Having them slack enough to be able to adjust the az position means that if the mount moves a bit I can re-centre the star by tweaking one bolt or another.