Which better mount to buy?

[Linda]

Hi.

I am currently using my C8 and 5" Maksutov on an EQ3-2 mount. This is fine for the Mak, but undersized for the C8, although it is doable for visual observing. But I can push the scope through the tightened locks.

We also have a cabin in Darkland where I would like to store a mount permanently. This way, if we drive there, I only need to bring the scope in the car, and not also a big mount and tripod. Therefore I am now willing to spend some money on buying a second mount that can more easily carry the C8.

The Skywatcher EQ5 with steel tripod looks good and affordable for 333 euro. The specification says that it can carry a 8" SCT, some say a 9". I am also thinking about buying a 1 axis motor drive for following DSOs, for the possibility of making sketches. Would it then be better to buy another model mount (Synscan or whatever else)? Or is the cheapest option still to use en EQ5 with extra motor?

Does anyone think that the mount is still a bit undersized for the C8 and that I should invest into something even heavier? That buying an EQ5 is a waste of money?

And something else: what is the difference between Skywatchers EQ, NEQ and HEQ mounts? Is that basic, following and goto? Or is a HEQ5 sturdier than an EQ5?

Thanks in advance you for your opinions.

Linda

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

My guess would be the EQ5 should be fine. I have a C8 on a Vixen Great Polaris mount (wooden tripod type) which carries it very nicely indeed (for visual and planetary/solar/lunar imaging). The EQ5 is a clone of the Vixen GP (sometimes named the most copied GEM around). Early models of the EQ5 were inferior to the GP, it is reported, but I gather later ones are a lot better in terms of engineering quality. The steel tripod should be a step up from the flimsier aluminium ones supplied with the likes of the EQ2 and EQ3. My GP itself continues to function nicely, after 20 years of use. I even added a hefty 14x70 finder scope, and an extra counterweight to balance it up, and it still works nicely. I used it with just a single MT1 motor for over 18 years and then upgraded it with a dual axis motor set (with ST4 guide port) from SkyWatcher, intended for the EQ5. Works neatly.

A heavier mount is of course never a bad idea, but other investments might be more urgent

Hope this helps

[Linda]

3 minutes ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

A heavier mount is of course never a bad idea, but other investments might be more urgent

Thanks for your input.

The heavier EQ6 costs a fortune (3,5 - 4 times the price of the EQ5). Even though I can afford it, but am not really willing to spend that much on a mount if not necessary. And it is nice if it stays somewhat portable. Today I can carry the C8 mounted on the EQ3 in and out of the house. Very practical.

[ronin]

The EQ5 is a nice sized mount, the HEQ5 is bigger and more stable but it is a fair bit bigger. I bought an HEQ5, decided it was going to be too much for everyday use and bought an EQ5. Part of the problem is do you expect to add weight to the set up over a period of time? If so then you need to determine if you will need a heavier mount then the EQ5. Does sketching need the additional stability?

You may as well get dual motors for the mount, the cost difference is minimal and then you have them installed. Will say check that you can get a basic mount and then/later motors. I had the idea that the basic EQ5 was slowly being phased out and that all yoiu can get is the EQ5+goto.but I have not looked for a couple of years at what the options are.

The "EQ" is the sort of normal mount, the HEQ(5) is either a heavy duty EQ5 or a lighter EQ6 - I have heard both references. Not sure of the difference between EQ6 and NEQ6 - sure that they were EQ6 and that slowly they became called NEQ6, but I never found out the difference.

[Linda]

In Norway, where I live, I see a second hand Vixen GP-E for sale, use for roughly 550 euros. It has Synscan 4.

I still think it is a lot more pricey than buying a EQ5 for 333 euros plus a 1 axis motor drive for 103 euros. And any goto system is not needed.

[Linda]

1 minute ago, ronin said:

The EQ5 is a nice sized mount, the HEQ5 is bigger and more stable but it is a fair bit bigger. I bought an HEQ5, decided it was going to be too much for everyday use and bought an EQ5. Part of the problem is do you expect to add weight to the set up over a period of time? If so then you need to determine if you will need a heavier mount then the EQ5. Does sketching need the additional stability?

You may as well get dual motors for the mount, the cost difference is minimal and then you have them installed. Will say check that you can get a basic mount and then/later motors. I had the idea that the basic EQ5 was slowly being phased out and that all you can get is the EQ5+goto.but I have not looked for a couple of years at what the options are.

Okay, good to know that an EQ5 is better for everyday use than a HEQ5. I don't expect to add extra weight in the future. I have a decently big finder scope already. And am not intending to buy a bigger scope (yet). 

Double axis motor is smart indeed. The EQ5 does not seem to be phased out. And I think the more basic the model is, the less that can be wrong with it (ref. Mikael Wilkinson's post about earlier inferior models).

[happy-kat]

The heq5 does not have manual slow motion controls unlike the eq5 from reading I have done previously.

[Sevo]

+1 for the eq5

eq6 is significantly better but also significantly heavier.