Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_dslr_mirrorlesss_winners.thumb.jpg.9deb4a8db27e7485a7bb99d98667c94e.jpg

Brian28

Which Mount ?

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I am looking to upgrade my HEQ5 Pro ..  a Mesu and 10 micron mount is out of the question for the obvious reason . 

I had these options in mind , and your thoughts and /or opinions would be appreciated. 

I will not have a permanent set up , though I will be able to leave in position covered for a few days should the weather permit .. 

scopes , 15Kg Orion Optics CT8 with accessories  , or 8" Celestron Edge  

1 . EQ6-R Pro

2. Ioptron CEM60 

3. EQ8 

 

Edited by Brian28

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Brian28 said:

I am looking to upgrade my HEQ5 Pro ..  a Mesu and 10 micron mount is out of the question for the obvious reason . 

I had these options in mind , and your thoughts and /or opinions would be appreciated. 

I will not have a permanent set up , though I will be able to leave in position covered for a few days should the weather permit .. 

scopes , 15Kg Orion Optics CT8 with accessories  , or 8" Celestron Edge  

1 . HEQ6 Pro

2. Ioptron CEM60 

3. EQ8 

 

All good mounts (I assume you mean NEQ6).  If you like using EQMOD then one of the SW ones will suit best, and whilst the EQ8 would be the obvious recommendation, it is a pretty chunky mount.  The NEQ6 has a very good track record, lots of knowledge available but at 18Kg recommended for imaging is not leaving you much room for wiggle.

The CEM60 is building itself a very good reputation, and seems a very good contender, but won't run EQMOD.  However, the Commander software supplied by iOptron is pretty good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi yes I meant the EQ6R actually , and just revised my question ..  

i didn't realise the Ioptron wouldn't run EQMOD though ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Brian28 said:

Hi yes I meant the EQ6R actually , and just revised my question ..  

i didn't realise the Ioptron wouldn't run EQMOD though ..

No problem.  EQ6-R seems to be a really good mount.  Quite a few people have them now and the reports seem to be pretty good.  Nice and compact too for the 20Kg imaging capacity.

No, I'm pretty sure EQMOD is for SW mounts only, but the CEM60 does come with its own software (same as my CEM120) which is actually pretty good, if not a little basic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have enough budget to stretch it to CEM60 with encoders?

It looks like CEM60 with encoders can easily match and surpass guide precision of tuned and belt modded HEQ5 without any modding of its own. EQ6-R has factory fitted belts, but knowing fit and finish of SW mounts it will need tuning and probably bearings replaced for high quality ones to get close to 0.5" RMS sustained.

I think CEM60 with encoders does such guide performance "out of the box".

Don't know much about EQ8 and it's performance, but I think it is probably in line with HEQ5/EQ6 models from SW - increased capacity but one needs to tinker and mod to get maximum out of the mount.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EQ8 might be a bit bulky for a temporary setup.  But if you are happy with the weight then CGX-L might be also worth considering (I have no experience of this).

Or there is the Losmandy G11 (ianking) that you could look at.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think not having a permanent set up may limit your options slightly. I have read awful reports about the eq8 but having seem one set up in the flesh recently I would now consider that to maybe be my next upgrade. I am sure the reports I read were of old mounts and a from a minority. I guess the proof is in the availability of second hand ones. They very rarely come up (maybe I just keep missing them).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, spillage said:

I think not having a permanent set up may limit your options slightly. I have read awful reports about the eq8 but having seem one set up in the flesh recently I would now consider that to maybe be my next upgrade. I am sure the reports I read were of old mounts and a from a minority. I guess the proof is in the availability of second hand ones. They very rarely come up (maybe I just keep missing them).

Yes I think you're spot on.  Some of the earlier EQ8's had a bit of a reputation for corrosion, and some backlash issues, but I understand this has all been eradicated in the newer models.

A very good mount, and certainly a bit of a lump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, spillage said:

I think not having a permanent set up may limit your options slightly. I have read awful reports about the eq8 but having seem one set up in the flesh recently I would now consider that to maybe be my next upgrade. I am sure the reports I read were of old mounts and a from a minority. I guess the proof is in the availability of second hand ones. They very rarely come up (maybe I just keep missing them).

 

7 minutes ago, RayD said:

Yes I think you're spot on.  Some of the earlier EQ8's had a bit of a reputation for corrosion, and some backlash issues, but I understand this has all been eradicated in the newer models.

A very good mount, and certainly a bit of a lump.

Do you have any figures on guide performance of EQ8? How well does it guide (out of the box, without hyper tuning it and such)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, vlaiv said:

 

Do you have any figures on guide performance of EQ8? How well does it guide (out of the box, without hyper tuning it and such)?

I don't have personal experience, but I know Sara uses one to pretty good effect and doesn't seem to gripe too much about poor guiding performance, so I am assuming it isn't abnormally bad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RayD said:

I don't have personal experience, but I know Sara uses one to pretty good effect and doesn't seem to gripe too much about poor guiding performance, so I am assuming it isn't abnormally bad. 

I thought she switched to Mesu, and I'm certain she is not complaining about it's guide precision :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, vlaiv said:

I thought she switched to Mesu, and I'm certain she is not complaining about it's guide precision :D

She has both.  Last time I saw she rated the EQ8 very highly as far as bang for buck goes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, RayD said:

She has both.  Last time I saw she rated the EQ8 very highly as far as bang for buck goes.

Yeah, just checked ... here is quote from her website:

"Finally it was really two things that made be take a chance on the EQ8...... firstly the price. For the weight capacity it was offering, it was a good price for a mount and also, as I was using it for my Taks, with an imaging scale of 3.37" per pixel, it didn't matter if the guiding wasn't as accurate as the Mesu as I'd not notice it and it wouldn't affect my images. "

At 3.37"/pixel - it really does not matter much ...

Link: https://www.swagastro.com/latest-dual-rig-adventure.html

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Yeah, just checked ... here is quote from her website:

"Finally it was really two things that made be take a chance on the EQ8...... firstly the price. For the weight capacity it was offering, it was a good price for a mount and also, as I was using it for my Taks, with an imaging scale of 3.37" per pixel, it didn't matter if the guiding wasn't as accurate as the Mesu as I'd not notice it and it wouldn't affect my images. "

At 3.37"/pixel - it really does not matter much ...

Link: https://www.swagastro.com/latest-dual-rig-adventure.html

 

Ah ok, it is a pretty generous imaging scale.  I think Gina also has an EQ8, so she may also be able to qualify actual guiding figures.

To be honest, the majority of the complaints I've ever read or heard about the EQ8 is corrosion, and only the odd backlash ones, and that was pretty well exclusively on older models.

Obviously it isn't going to touch the Mesu with accuracy, but then it is half the price, so I guess that is to be expected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RayD said:

Ah ok, it is a pretty generous imaging scale.  I think Gina also has an EQ8, so she may also be able to qualify actual guiding figures.

To be honest, the majority of the complaints I've ever read or heard about the EQ8 is corrosion, and only the odd backlash ones, and that was pretty well exclusively on older models.

Obviously it isn't going to touch the Mesu with accuracy, but then it is half the price, so I guess that is to be expected.

From what I've gathered in quick online search - it looks like EQ8 is inline or a bit better (due to stability and wind resistance) to other SW mounts (HEQ5, EQ6 family) at about 0.7" RMS. Guess with hyper tuning that can be lowered to 0.5" RMS.

I'm looking at this, because CEM60 from what I've seen so far, at least version with encoders, is able to go sub 0.5" RMS out of the box - no need for tuning of any kind. Granted CEM60 is more EQ6 class in capacity - EQ8 is well above that. Still not Mesu level, but again - half the price, sub 0.5" RMS out of the box is pretty good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EQ8 is a fantastic mount with a bit of luck... While the newer batches are immensely better than the old ones they still have their quirks but a new EQ8 should be able to carry any scope in the 1200 FL. Anything above that is just a matter of tweaking the mount. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

From what I've gathered in quick online search - it looks like EQ8 is inline or a bit better (due to stability and wind resistance) to other SW mounts (HEQ5, EQ6 family) at about 0.7" RMS. Guess with hyper tuning that can be lowered to 0.5" RMS.

I'm looking at this, because CEM60 from what I've seen so far, at least version with encoders, is able to go sub 0.5" RMS out of the box - no need for tuning of any kind. Granted CEM60 is more EQ6 class in capacity - EQ8 is well above that. Still not Mesu level, but again - half the price, sub 0.5" RMS out of the box is pretty good.

Yes, the CEM60 is very good, but I think .50" RMS is about its limit.  I have the encoder version of the CEM120 and I am just about getting that, so I doubt it would be much better with the CEM60.

I think the figures quoted by John aren't "/p as looking at the figures on his screen caps this is about 0.58 or so, which is about where I would expect.  They do, however, have an incredibly low PE, which makes guiding a bit more consistent.

The CEM range is very good indeed.  I have the Mesu 200 and the CEM120 and, whilst the CEM isn't quite as good as the Mesu, it isn't a million miles behind.

Edited by RayD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, mihaighita said:

EQ8 is a fantastic mount with a bit of luck... While the newer batches are immensely better than the old ones they still have their quirks but a new EQ8 should be able to carry any scope in the 1200 FL. Anything above that is just a matter of tweaking the mount. 

I think that's the biggest thing the EQ8 has in its favour, is the carrying capacity for the money; it's exceptional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one I got my hands on for a short while was running around .50" - .30" and I know this could have been improved with better balancing, PA and more time tweaking phd but I was really just there to help the owners get all the software working together. As this was straight out the box I didn't think it was that bad.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, RayD said:

I think the figures quoted by John aren't "/p as looking at the figures on his screen caps this is about 0.58 or so, which is about where I would expect.  They do, however, have an incredibly low PE, which makes guiding a bit more consistent.

I stand corrected here, the earlier cap shows 0.35"/p, so assuming the guiding parameters are correct, this is exceptional.

Having a look on CN, the best people seem to get is around 0.40"/p in short spells, with average of around 0.50"/p - 0.70"/p.  I would say it is a testimony to the mount design to get it down this low at the price point anyway, but lower than this really is something.

I'm back out to Spain with my 120 next weekend (drones permitting) so I will run some tests (weather permitting) and see how low I can get it.

Edited by RayD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I've been down to 0.33"/p Ray with my RC, not sure if that is because I am using an OAG, but with the Esprits I am using guide scopes so would anticipate that to not be as good.

I reckon there is still a lot of room for improvement with the RC/OAG combo.

NB. The imaging load capacity for the CEM60 EC is 27Kgs and it only weighs just over 12Kgs so is easy to lift around.

Edited by Jkulin
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I vote CEM60, EC if you can achieve it. The way you guide it might shock some folks though.

My ieq45 pro is a regular in the 0.45" RMS club and this started happening after I ditched the 2 inch  tripod for a proper pier inside a ROR:

Obs_guiding.jpg

That wasn't something over a short period it kept 0.38" for an entire night. This was with my Edge 8.

 

One problem with getting the mount reacting like that is you start noticing the flaws in your optical chain. In a bad night with seeing limiting guiding to 0.6 my stars are nice and round. Down to 0.4-0.3, I realize my mirror has some tilt in it.

Edited by cotak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having used an EQ6R for a year now I can say that in terms of bang for buck its a pretty good mount.
The QC from skywatcher must have improved a lot because the mount was immaculate, well adjusted belts with little backlash no black gunk to be seen and no swarf inside the casing.

Carrying handle makes it easy to move outside if you are on non-permanent base.
Guiding averages 0.7” RMS (on tripod ST80 guide scope) and on a night with good seeing (rare) I have guided over an evening at under 0.6" RMS
My PEC curve (5 full rotations of the worm) was ±6.5” 

I have no doubt with a hypertune it could get to 0.5" RMS

You are covering a pretty wide price range so it really comes down to how much you want to spend, EQ6R is good for the price, an EQ8 (too big to lug around) or a CEM60EC would be fantastic (but then again so would a Mesu ?)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, vlaiv said:

Yeah, just checked ... here is quote from her website:

"Finally it was really two things that made be take a chance on the EQ8...... firstly the price. For the weight capacity it was offering, it was a good price for a mount and also, as I was using it for my Taks, with an imaging scale of 3.37" per pixel, it didn't matter if the guiding wasn't as accurate as the Mesu as I'd not notice it and it wouldn't affect my images. "

At 3.37"/pixel - it really does not matter much ...

Link: https://www.swagastro.com/latest-dual-rig-adventure.html

 

Guys what is imaging scale ? Sorry for my ignorance ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Jkulin said:

I've been down to 0.33"/p Ray with my RC, not sure if that is because I am using an OAG, but with the Esprits I am using guide scopes so would anticipate that to not be as good.

I reckon there is still a lot of room for improvement with the RC/OAG combo.

NB. The imaging load capacity for the CEM60 EC is 27Kgs and it only weighs just over 12Kgs so is easy to lift around.

OAG surely improves measuring precision of star position so it's giving more accurate RMS figures.

You might also try to extend your guide period to 4s or more. If mount is smooth - and it should be with encoders, no reason to not use longer exposures - it will average seeing effects and get you even more precise RMS values. It's better to run fewer corrections on a smooth mount.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.