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.

maxchess

To dual mount on a CEM60 or swap scopes on my HEQ5?or not?

Recommended Posts

I am trying to plan out my longer term equipment strategy, rather than go for impulse purchases and would like some advice on dual mounting scopes.


At present I have a roll-off shed with steel pier in concrete block. The mount is an HEQ5-Pro, stellar tuned and belt driven which is supposed to have an astrophotography payload of around 11Kg.  My main camera is an ASI294MC. Guide camera Lodestar x2. 
I switch between two scope set ups.  (Weight for both includes cameras and filter draw.)
•    ES102 with 50mm guide scope, FL=714, weight is 7.5 Kg
•    C8 (not edge) with 6.3  FR and OAG, FL = 1260,  Weight is 8kg
So clearly I cannot mount both on my HEQ5 Pro.
One of the reasons for going with a fixed pier in a shed is that once set up and aligned, I can just push back the roof, align, focus and get imaging in 5 mins.  However as targets change I need to swap scopes, rebalance, rewire etc. Not a massive effort but I am wondering if I could dual these scopes and perhaps eventually add something like a WO GT71 FL= 420, weight 2.93  for the wide stuff.  So total weight around 19kg.  Then maybe in the future go for a Mono camera and filter wheel and even perhaps an C9.25 Edge pushing the weight to around 23kg. 
To do this I would plan to buy a CEM 60    mount that claims a payload of 27.2 kg, although it is not clear if this is imaging, although I can’t see why anyone would buy one just for visual. I would then just guide with the OAG.

So I have two questions:
Is this a realistic strategy or would I loose guiding accuracy by loading the mount in this way. Perhaps even compared to keeping the HEQ5-Pro and swapping when necessary.  Or maybe just forget the GT71 and C9.25
If I do go down this route, what is the best way of dual or triple mounting? I have read that mounting two dissimilar scopes side by side risks unbalancing the setup, but also that mounting the ES102 on ADM rings risks flexure.

Any other advice or observations most welcome.

Thanks

Max
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From FLO's website:

"iOptron's quoted max' payload is a guide only. If you will be using the mount for astrophotography (or your telescope is unusually long or large) we recommend the quoted max' payload be reduced by 1/3rd."

James

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears that iOptron themselves are a little cagey about the payload, too.  They say:

"These are only guidelines. Some telescopes are very long or very big for their weight and may require a larger mount. Remember also that imaging requirements are more rigid than visual observation"

James

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As has been stated above, 27kg is really just a guideline for visual, and to reduce by 1/3 for imaging purposes, so that would be approx 18kg, which is actually equal or even a bit less than the EQ6 payload for imaging...🤔🤔 go figure...

Edited by WanderingEye
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20191221_140709-1843x874.thumb.jpg.23c090336418a30e15371d4928e8e623.jpgThis is my setup & it pisses that load (110 & 70mm apo's with cameras, filter wheel etc) on the CEM60. I moved from the HEQ5 & never looked back

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Andy274 said:

20191221_140709-1843x874.thumb.jpg.23c090336418a30e15371d4928e8e623.jpgThis is my setup & it pisses that load (110 & 70mm apo's with cameras, filter wheel etc) on the CEM60. I moved from the HEQ5 & never looked back

Yes, but I am sure that “load” is well under 18kg... 😀👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not weighed it to be fair but its definitely an upgrade over the skywatcher. A friend of mine has an early paramount & the rms error on my 60 is half that of his paramount. He was quite upset by that. If id have known what it meant I probably would have felt really smug. 

All I can say is I love mine & would go ioptron over skywatcher anyday

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Andy274 said:

This is my setup & it pisses that load (110 & 70mm apo's with cameras, filter wheel etc) on the CEM60. I moved from the HEQ5 & never looked back

Both of your scopes are relatively short focal length (770mm and 420mm) which means that imaging is more tolerant of tracking errors.

The combined weight of a two scope setup would be somewhere near the CEM60 limit so I think you might be pushing it if you plan on using a scope with over 1500mm FL.

You might end up regretting pushing it to the limits and then face another upgrade IMHO

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CEM120?

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By AstroRuz
      For sale is my beloved but now superfluous to requirements HEQ5 Pro for £700
      It's in a used condition as you would imagine. I've had it for about 4 years and found great success with this mount. Ideal for those beginning astrophotography and also good for visual users.
      I'm calling it "deluxe" due to the upgrades I've had done.
      - It's belt modified
      - It's had brand new bearings and grease
      - The backlash has been expertly setup 
      - It has the latest polar scope
      - The power port has been replaced with an aviation style port which is a lot more secure
      It'll come with the hand controller and at least 1 counterweight (if I can find the second it'll come with both). The polar scope cover has been lost. The counterweight is rusty as always. There is some marring on the counterweight bar housing as shown in the photos.
      It also will come with the modified power cable required also.
      Note: the power LED sometimes doesn't illuminate but the mount is still powered (please see the photo with the hand controller).
      Collection or local delivery within Northampton







    • By etunar
      Last week I discovered a reasonably wobble on the RA axis on my HEQ5 which ended up causing lots of double stars on my subs (i am guessing because the mount kept wobbling between the two positions.) So I did the worm gear adjustment and the wobble seems to have disappeared. I did a full slew rotation check and couldn't tell any binding/grinding (I had binding at 1st attempt but was resolved after further adjustments).
      Thanks to the clear skies last few nights, I had it running throughout the night 3 times now. My overall guiding is much better than before, averaging between 0.6 and 0.8 Total error. However, when the mount gets closer to the home position (usually after 2-3am), I seem to start having tracking issues. I have attached screenshots to show examples; sometimes it's trailing, sometimes it's double stars, and sometimes it makes a u-turn to track back to the original position.
      PHD log files from another night are here: https://openphdguiding.org/logs/dl/PHD2_logs_tych.zip
      Is this a balance issue that becomes apparent when the mount is more vertical? I'm relatively new to using this mount, so most of my previous sessions have been closer to the meridian. Or is my worm gear tightened just a bit too much and causing issues? I can't really hear anything wrong when slewing at high speed.
      Only other thing i can think of is, I sometimes get error messages on PHD but pulse command being ineffective, but these happen at other times as well without causing any issues.
      It's losing me 7-8 frames over the span of 2.5 hours, so it would be nice to get it resolved if anyone has any ideas?
      Thanks



    • By lkimber
      I know it may be a bit of a long shot but I'm looking to buy a HEQ5 Pro mount or an NEQ6 Pro or something similar. Preferably belt driven but not necessary as can happily modify it. Please let me know if you have anything! Thanks.
    • By Martin AB Cohen
      After trying and failing some time ago to find a video tutorial on how to strip-down my Skywatcher HEQ5 Pro mount, clean all the bearings and gears, re-grease them, and put it all back together again, I eventually learned how to do this from various other online resources and have now created my own video tutorial. For those of you with a Skywatcher HEQ5 or HEQ5 Pro mount, or indeed an Orion Sirius EQ-G mount (which is the same mechanically), this video can help you to keep you mount running smoothly through regular DIY servicing (~every 2 years).  I hope you find it useful.  Here is the link...
       
    • By Bajastro
      Today after the midnight I recorded the spectrum of C/2020 F3 (Neowise). I couldn't change new diffraction grating  (300 l/mm) before the midnight in my Low Spec 2 spectrograph. I have printed second unmodified mounting for grating and I had to use it, because dispersion angles are different than the 1800 l/mm diffraction grating. It was also necessary to assemble and run the setup. Not all lines were identified, the spectrum is different than spectra published on the internet. The violet range is worse due to the poor correction of chromatic aberration in achromatic lenses in my Low Spec and my APO, so lines are weaker. Intensity hasn't been corrected. I think that this comet was too low above the horizon to do it well. This is also the first light with a diffraction grating 300 l/mm used in the Low Spec 2.
      Slit position, PHD2 screen:

      Spectrum with stretched histogram, faint LP of my city is present in the background, 5x60s stack:

      I hope that I correctly substracted LP from the comet spectrum.
      The result obtained in the BASS software:

      We have carbon C2 bands, CN and strong emission of sodium doublet. Some lines are unidentified yet.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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