EQ6-r pro vs CEM60

[Jkulin]

I've had an HEQ5 Pro, AZ-EQ6-GT, CEM60EC and now have a 120EC, I haven't had much chance to use the 120EC yet, but up until its arrival the CEM60EC was the best by a clear margin, I'm not expecting the 120EC to bloom until the firmware gets better which it is doing, but its early days yet.

[vlaiv]

20 minutes ago, RolandKol said:

Unfortunately, my brains are in a lack of the processing power, to ask for a bit better questions

And probably, due to that, I would not benefit from EC version also!

And my impression is, CEM60 (non EC) is just a tiny step up from NEQ6, - so for next few years, I am staying with SW...

My 130PDS piggybacked with Canon+Samyang is probably not a very good load "balance-wise" for both mounts, I guess...

 

 

 

I'm sure that both CEM60 and CEM60EC are capable of let's say 0.5-0.6" RMS guided performance - but so is HEQ5/EQ6 (belt modded and tuned that is). True difference would be seen in actual RMS and p2p errors.

If EC version is capable of doing for example 0.3-0.4 while regular only down to 0.5" RMS and EC version never having p2p larger than 0.6-0.7" while regular one going up to 1.2" and over for p2p - then that puts them into separate mount class performance wise.

[RolandKol]

2 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

I'm sure that both CEM60 and CEM60EC are capable of let's say 0.5-0.6" RMS guided performance - but so is HEQ5/EQ6 (belt modded and tuned that is). True difference would be seen in actual RMS and p2p errors.

If EC version is capable of doing for example 0.3-0.4 while regular only down to 0.5" RMS and EC version never having p2p larger than 0.6-0.7" while regular one going up to 1.2" and over for p2p - then that puts them into separate mount class performance wise.

P2P should actually be lower on EC mount, as per my understanding, it should work smoother in RA.

nice question which I am going to copy!

I hope Rick will reply.

[cotak]

I ordered a CEM60EC. I considered the non EC but in the end here's where I am coming from:

1) My ieq45 Pro parks itself belows 0.5 RMS on RA basically all the time when seeing isn't limiting, when  seeing is great it works at 0.4 or below for RA and 0.2-0.3 for DEC.

2) My DEC ends up being better in all sessions but setting more more oscillation in my DEC is not something I want to do because the DEC still has residual backlash which I suspect is due to the rudimentary spring loading on the worm. I could change out for different springs to see if it fixes it but I don't want to mess around unless I have to.

3) I want my RA RMS to go down more to match normal DEC RMS limits but at this stage I am pretty sure I hit the wall in terms of what guided performance will achieve there just isn't much more to get.

4) The 45 will have max about 1.8 arc-second peaks (randomly) on RA which will happens within 1 seconds (typical guide exposure used), so I don't think that peak is correctable using just guiding.  

I don't think there's no differences between CEM60 and CEM60EC. You never see any CEM60EC used for sale, but CEM60s are pretty common. And the above aspects makes me think that there is a RMS/peak limit beyond which guiding just cannot pass as is. So I am going with the EC to see if that limit can be exceeded.

[vlaiv]

5 minutes ago, cotak said:

I ordered a CEM60EC. I considered the non EC but in the end here's where I am coming from:

1) My ieq45 Pro parks itself belows 0.5 RMS on RA basically all the time when seeing isn't limiting, when  seeing is great it works at 0.4 or below for RA and 0.2-0.3 for DEC.

2) My DEC ends up being better in all sessions but setting more more oscillation in my DEC is not something I want to do because the DEC still has residual backlash which I suspect is due to the rudimentary spring loading on the worm. I could change out for different springs to see if it fixes it but I don't want to mess around unless I have to.

3) I want my RA RMS to go down more to match normal DEC RMS limits but at this stage I am pretty sure I hit the wall in terms of what guided performance will achieve there just isn't much more to get.

4) The 45 will have max about 1.8 arc-second peaks (randomly) on RA which will happens within 1 seconds (typical guide exposure used), so I don't think that peak is correctable using just guiding.  

I don't think there's no differences between CEM60 and CEM60EC. You never see any CEM60EC used for sale, but CEM60s are pretty common. And the above aspects makes me think that there is a RMS/peak limit beyond which guiding just cannot pass as is. So I am going with the EC to see if that limit can be exceeded.

This is related to mount "smoothness" - and is one of key aspects of "premium" mounts. You want your mount to be able to do 5 or more seconds between corrections without worrying if it's going to spike or not. It needs to have smooth changing error. That way you can comfortably use longer guide exposures - which smooth out seeing and everything

[cotak]

Yes I understand that. Although to 

3 hours ago, vlaiv said:

This is related to mount "smoothness" - and is one of key aspects of "premium" mounts. You want your mount to be able to do 5 or more seconds between corrections without worrying if it's going to spike or not. It needs to have smooth changing error. That way you can comfortably use longer guide exposures - which smooth out seeing and everything

Smoothness and premium.

I dislike intensely the term "premium" because it's ill defined. I find a lot of people over in NA who wants a premium mount gives a lot of reasons why but in the end I see the flag bearing brand to have just as many of the problems the  extra money was supposed to make go away. And as the same time I don't see consistently better performance and better smoothness in the resulting guide trace.

Anyhow my own opinion aside above, I sure hope more expensive mounts are more smooth. However, I have this feeling that for the most part a worm and wheel can only go so far (you are asking two bits of metal to slide, rather than roll past, each other). Encoders will help but end of day I do wish it is more economical for us in Canada to get hold of alternative drive tech mounts. As such it is rather a bit more dear for a mesu so I stick with iOptron for the moment.