Is this the most frustrating pastime ever.........

[Jiggy 67]

...........You're damn right it is!!!!!

So i've had my EQ6-R Pro for about a month now and still not been able to get the timing right between work, weather and her indoors to give it a good try yet!!.....So at the weekend I thought I would try correcting cone error as per Astronomy Shed's video  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WatdQlPp22Y

This is my second attempt at this and it really isn't as easy as the video makes out. I have learnt to loosen the bolts holding the rings to the dovetail in advance (not to the extent that they are loose) as they can be really tight and trying to loosen them when the scope is trained on your objective is impossible without nudging the mount, even when the clutches are locked. I have found that the adjuster bolts do not make any difference, every time I tighten them to move the scope away from the dovetail everything seizes tight....without moving the fov closer to the target. On both occasions now I have given up and resorted to returning the scope to the dovetail with the adjusters screwed out and not impacting at all on the dovetail, this is the only way I can think of minimising cone error as using the adjuster screws just forces the ring mountings away from the dovetail without improving the cone error.

Does anyone have a solution???.......I'm considering screwing all four adjusters in (at both ends) a few turns, so they are actually moving the rings away from the dovetail a bit, which, I'm thinking, will give me room to adjust back and to....if you know what I mean, any opinions on this.......or.......

Does anyone have a better method.......or.......

Does cone error really matter that much???  my problem is i'm a bit fussy and i would rather get rid if I can.

On a separate issue (for those not getting bored) I have a SW 9X50 right angled finderscope (not the erecting type, the image is upside down) I noticed the other day whilst aligning it to the scope that the image moved over to the other side when i moved the lens over on the diagonal lens (through 90 degrees), in other words it moved over to a different area of the sky without the finder moving. I know I've been away from this hobby for a few years but thats' not right is it, surely it should stay on target. Anyone know the reason for this.

Thanks for reading

 

[joe aguiar]

I think the old way or regular way is 100x better a manual mount just with drives for tracking.

But it's almost impossible to find none goto mounts after the cg4 or lx70 everything bigger is goto. I think it's a scam all the manufacturers are doing to make us spend more

Joejaguar 

[kirkster501]

Quit worrying about little things like this and enjoy your system is my advice to you.

[Marvin Jenkins]

Eq6r pro and a problem with cone error in getting started. I wish I had your problems two years ago with a wobbly eq2. Cone error? Five second wobble delay was my biggest problem.

Marv

[barkis]

I can echo the advice regarding being too intent on perfection.
Nothing is ever perfect. I know nowt about Cone Error, or how to remedy it, but I 
would hazard a guess that perfect alignment is rarely achievable. 
A good mount can cope with imperfect polar alignment, so Crack on with using the setup 
on some targets, and see where you really are. I used to make reflecting telescopes, and was so engrossed in it
I completely forgot about observing altogether. Just plain stupid  really.
Enjoy your setup, it's a damned good one.

Ron.
 

[DaveS]

I shouldn't worry too much. Most dovetails don't have adjustment screws, using shims if anything. A good sky model will take care of cone error. Even if imaging it's not usually a problem, and your kit list looks visual.

Just enjoy the hobby.

[Jiggy 67]

9 hours ago, Marvin Jenkins said:

Eq6r pro and a problem with cone error in getting started. I wish I had your problems two years ago with a wobbly eq2. Cone error? Five second wobble delay was my biggest problem.

Marv

Do you think this is my first mount?

Cone error has diddly to do with the mount and everything to do with the relationship between dovetail, tube rings and OTA.......all of which I've used on previous mounts (but not my wobbly EQ1), they didn't come with this one. When severe it can seriously affect pointing accuracy on GOTO's particularly when crossing the meridian. All I was asking is if anyone had a mechanical solution to this

Edited October 30, 2019 by Jiggy 67

[Marvin Jenkins]

Yes I did. This thread was posted in the beginners section.

[Jiggy 67]

So that’s how you respond to beginners?

[Steve]

Please play nicely... 😐

[Space Hopper]

The joys of equatorial mounts.....

A distant memory thank goodness.

[andrew s]

10 hours ago, Jiggy 67 said:

Do you think this is my first mount?

Cone error has diddly to do with the mount and everything to do with the relationship between dovetail, tube rings and OTA.......all of which I've used on previous mounts (but not my wobbly EQ1), they didn't come with this one. When severe it can seriously affect pointing accuracy on GOTO's particularly when crossing the meridian. All I was asking is if anyone had a mechanical solution to this

You can put shims under one or other of the tube rings to reduce cone error. Bit trial and error to work out which way to go. I have done this in the distant past.

Regards Andrew 

[Jiggy 67]

1 hour ago, andrew s said:

You can put shims under one or other of the tube rings to reduce cone error. Bit trial and error to work out which way to go. I have done this in the distant past.

Regards Andrew 

Thanks Andrew, that’s exactly what I’ve done since first posting, not perfect but a lot better. I’ve given up on using the adjuster screws on the dovetail, they were giving me a world of pain 😀

[James]

On 21/10/2019 at 20:21, Jiggy 67 said:

Does cone error really matter that much???  my problem is i'm a bit fussy and i would rather get rid if I can.

 

16 hours ago, kirkster501 said:

Quit worrying about little things like this and enjoy your system is my advice to you.

 

14 hours ago, DaveS said:

I shouldn't worry too much..... A good sky model will take care of cone error. Even if imaging it's not usually a problem,.....

Just enjoy the hobby.

 

As per all the above

In 15 years I've never even bothered with cone error, not on my CG5/HEQ5/EQ6 etc. If your polar alignment is reasonable (for visual you can be pretty flexible on that) and you do a three star align (two stars one side and 1 on the other) you won't need to worry about it  Park the scope at the end and start next time from the parked position and you'll be fine

I get the wanting to get rid of it bit, I really do, but I don't think it matters

James

[michaelmorris]

I second the view that the easiest way to reduce the effect of cone error when goto slewing between targets is to do a multipoint (>2 points) alignment.  Having at least one of the alignment points approx 180 degrees away from another alignment point should maximise the cone error corrections provided by your mount.

[Jiggy 67]

I agree with everything you’re saying James. SynScan uses 3 star alignment to compensate for cone error, as far as I’m aware, 3 star serves no other purpose and with good PA and little or no cone error a one star alignment is adequate. I guess I was just being lazy and wanted a one star routine.

Any way, it’s sorted now with a ripped up Pepsi can

[James]

2 hours ago, Jiggy 67 said:

Any way, it’s sorted now with a ripped up Pepsi can

Well there you go  Excellent!..  

[Rusted]

5 hours ago, Jiggy 67 said:

Any way, it’s sorted now with a ripped up Pepsi can

Far more sensible than drinking the contents on a chilly evening outdoors.

[Marvin Jenkins]

This will be my last reply to this thread. I am sorry, please accept my apology if you feel you have been wronged by my comments. It is not my intention to belittle your efforts in minimising your issues.

I assumed wrongly that the mount in question with it’s drawbacks was a first for you as it was posted in the beginner section of this forum. As such I thought it was your first mount.

A bientot

Marvin

[Jiggy 67]

Marvin, apology accepted, and very well put

[MarsG76]

To echo other above, Cone error doesn't matter, and perfect polar alignment is not crucial either... close with autoguiding is good enough.... you will waste a lot of imaging and observing time trying to get things perfect and perfect is IMPOSSIBLE.. there will always be discrepancies.... hence the need for some kind of guiding in all long exposure astrophotography. 

[Paul M]

When I'm setting up my EQ6 I find that an empty Stella Artois can ( or two ) is of great assistance.