Is EQ5 sufficient for Equinox 120ED for visual?

[Piero]

Hi Everybody,

First of all, I thank you all for this forum. There are really many nice discussions to read. This is my first one, and I apologise if it is possibly a trivial question.

For years I have own a Newtonian 114mm and I am seriously considering to upgrade it. After months of research, I ended up with the conclusion that the SW Equinox 120ED will give me the type of view that I want to see. Beside this, it is also a great tool for astrophotography, which is something that I would like to try one day.

The idea would be to use an EQ5 mount for visual, and buy a second mount (probably the HEQ5 Pro) to dedicate exclusively for AP.

The reasons for this are that the HEQ5pro 1) is heavier (which I can accept for AP, but not for carrying it around every time for visual), and 2) forces me to use Goto/electronics (which I recognise it to be great for AP, but I prefer a fully manual equipment for visual).

So, my questions: is an SW EQ5 mount sufficiently stable for the Equinox 120ED for visual? I am aware that the declared payload capacity for the EQ5 is 9kg, but I would much appreciate a comment from people who actually tested (or use?) this set up. In addition, are the two counterweights required or one is sufficient?

Thanks a lot for your help,

Piero

[oldpink]

the EQ5 will be fine for visual
I have a 200p mounted to mine with a DSLR hanging off of it though the HEQ is a better option

[John]

I have an ED120 Pro. The EQ5 would be OK for visual although the HEQ5 would be better. For imaging you may well need to consider an EQ6. Pillar extensions are a good idea for visual as they raise the eyepiece to a good height even when viewing objects high in the sky.

I use my ED120 on a Giro-type alt-azimuth mount for visual although recently I've used it a couple of times on an EQ6.

[Piero]

Thank you for your answers. Glad to know that the EQ5 is OK for visual from your point of view. For imaging, the HEQ5 is an option. Have you ever tried the ioptron iE45 for imaging?

What do you think of the Giro-type Alt-Azimuth mount with the ED120 Pro?

Many thanks again

[DaveS]

I think the IEQ 45 has a bit of a reputation where long tube refractors are concerned, there have been threads on here about it. The spring-loaded worm has too much backlash to guide long OTAs reliably.

[Piero]

I have an ED120 Pro. The EQ5 would be OK for visual although the HEQ5 would be better. For imaging you may well need to consider an EQ6. Pillar extensions are a good idea for visual as they raise the eyepiece to a good height even when viewing objects high in the sky.

I use my ED120 on a Giro-type alt-azimuth mount for visual although recently I've used it a couple of times on an EQ6.

Just a curiosity

I haven't ever done AP in my life, so I apologise if this is a silly question. Did you suggest to consider an EQ6 for imaging, due to the weight of the 120ED or for the additional weight of a heavy (I suppose) AP equipment?

I did not specify in the first post, but when I talked about AP, I meant to use a standard DSLR (something like a Canon EOS 350D) and a finderscope 8x50 as autoguider for long exposure. IF one day this additional hobby evolves furthermore,

I might consider a CCD (< £1200 current currency, which I think is a light CCD). I guess the total weight would stay below 9kg with the DSLR or with the CCD.

Do you think an EQ6 is really needed in any case?

Thanks for your answer, and for suggesting the pillar extension which I will definitely consider.

[oldpink]

for AP the better the mount is the better your imaging will be (in theory)
the Imaging weight is always quoted lower than visual as the telescope needs to be as stable as possible
I just about manage with my 200P and 600D mounted and I'm over the suggested limit for AP

[Piero]

Since the declared payload capacity for the HEQ5 is 18kg, and assuming that Skywatcher added 3kg for selling more, this would mean that the effective payload capacity is at least 15kg for visual (under-estimation).

So 8-9kg for OTA+AP equipment is 50-60% of the maximum payload capacity for that mount. As far as I know, 50-60% is the max for AP. 

Is it maybe due to the fact that a long OTA (such as the 120ED) needs a heavier mount? Shouldn't be enought to replace the plate supporting the dovetail and potentially the tripod (again, assuming 8-9kg for OTA+AP equipment)?

[GuillermoBarrancos]

Since the declared payload capacity for the HEQ5 is 18kg, and assuming that Skywatcher added 3kg for selling more, this would mean that the effective payload capacity is at least 15kg for visual (under-estimation).

So 8-9kg for OTA+AP equipment is 50-60% of the maximum payload capacity for that mount. As far as I know, 50-60% is the max for AP.

Is it maybe due to the fact that a long OTA (such as the 120ED) needs a heavier mount? Shouldn't be enought to replace the plate supporting the dovetail and potentially the tripod (again, assuming 8-9kg for OTA+AP equipment)?

Where did you read that the payload capacity is advertised as 18 kg for the HEQ5 Pro?

[Piero]

http://www.opticstar.com/Run/Astronomy/Astro-Mounts-Skywatcher.asp?p=0_10_2_0_1

but there are other sources. In any case, I considered that it was over-estimated, and assumed 15kg, as you said.

[GuillermoBarrancos]

http://www.opticstar.com/Run/Astronomy/Astro-Mounts-Skywatcher.asp?p=0_10_2_0_1

but there are other sources. In any case, I considered that it was over-estimated, and assumed 15kg, as you said.

Really annoys me when retailers do this and just add 4 kgs, just to make a quick sale to the unaware! 

I was actually wrong, it's even less (looks like they re-adjusted payload capacities further down a while ago). Advertised on Skywatcher own site for HEQ5 Pro is now 13,7kg.

http://www.skywatcher.com/product.php?cat=19&id=92

and 18,20kg for the NEQ6 Pro.

http://www.skywatcher.com/product.php?cat=19&id=91

[John]

What do you think of the Giro-type Alt-Azimuth mount with the ED120 Pro?

Excellent - no hassle, no alignment and no cables to mess with. Simple observing, which is my strong preference 

The ED120 is quite a long scope though and length has as much, if not more, impact than weight when considering mounting options.

I don't image either but those that do tell me that you really can't overmount a scope for imaging.

[Piero]

Excellent - no hassle, no alignment and no cables to mess with. Simple observing, which is my strong preference 

The ED120 is quite a long scope though and length has as much, if not more, impact than weight when considering mounting options.

I don't image either but those that do tell me that you really can't overmount a scope for imaging.

I admit that I like this option too. That was the main reason why I considered the EQ5 rigorously UNPRO: no hassle, no cables, no batteries, but simple observing. The only two reasons why I would select the EQ5 are that 1) allows easier tracking, 2) I found more reviews, 3) as far as I noticed it is cheaper than an equivalent Alt-Azimuth solution.

Despite this, I would like to know more about those mounts and tripods, since I think they are a nice solution for pure observation.

Can I ask you which model do you have?

I read mixed reviews for the SW SkyTee 2 and none for the Altair Sabre AA v2 mounts.

About the vixen Porta 2, I read that the mount is good, but requires a better tripod.

mm...

[John]

I admit that I like this option too. That was the main reason why I considered the EQ5 rigorously UNPRO: no hassle, no cables, no batteries, but simple observing. The only two reasons why I would select the EQ5 are that 1) allows easier tracking, 2) I found more reviews, 3) as far as I noticed it is cheaper than an equivalent Alt-Azimuth solution.

Despite this, I would like to know more about those mounts and tripods, since I think they are a nice solution for pure observation.

Can I ask you which model do you have?

I read mixed reviews for the SW SkyTee 2 and none for the Altair Sabre AA v2 mounts.

About the vixen Porta 2, I read that the mount is good, but requires a better tripod.

mm...

Mine was made by a UK engineering company but it's been out of production for years. It's a heavy duty mount similar to the Giro III. I have it on a 2" steel tubed CG5 tripod and sometimes use a 16" pillar extension as well. I was using a 10lb counterweight here but it's not really needed to be honest. Here is a photo of my ED120 on it:

[Piero]

I see now, that's very very nice! Thanks for posting it. How did you find the tracking with that type of mount?