Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_31.thumb.jpg.b7a41d6a0fa4e315f57ea3e240acf140.jpg

Recommended Posts

The EQ4 is a perfectly fine mount for something like a small refractor, or a 4 inch reflector, (or a lightweight 4inch SCT.)

The 200p is a very capable and excellent telescope as it is easy to use and a great starter telescope as you get great views of DSO without too much difficulty . It is however a big heavy telescope that needs at least an EQ5 size mount to stop it wobbling around. 

(I used to have one on an EQ5).

 

It is just that the two components do not fit together particularly well , not that either has anything intrinsically wrong with it. Overall you still got a good deal.

 

If you plan on getting a small refractor/SCT as well as the 200p then keep the EQ4 for it.

(when you get one scope they soon begin to multiply)

 

If not you could sell on the EQ4, someone will be looking for a smaller mount for a refractor, especially if they want a lightweight travel kit.

 

 

To mount the 200p I would look out for a bigger mount. They do come up often 2nd hand here or on other astro sites.

 

(I eventually put my 200p onto an NEQ6pro).

Edited by fifeskies
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 46
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I always felt sorry for the EQ7. Never allowed out to play with it’s brothers and sisters. Locked away in the broom cupboard of astronomy. Dejected, worthless, an embarrassment to equatorial mounts, i

Certainly here in the UK, the HEQ5 is a VERY different beast to the EQ5 - The HEQ5 is much more capable than the EQ5 and both are available with GoTo

Thanks. The seller says it's a skywatcher 200p but he didn't know exactly what model, but it looks like an Explorer. The mount is apparently an old eq5 which from what I've read is the same as an eq4.

Posted Images

4 hours ago, Alan64 said:

That does beg the question as to why there never was an EQ-7.  However, the numerical designations haven't been in existence for that long.  I think Sky-Watcher started that, and at the turn of this century.

I would presume that there was just not a market for anything between 6 and 8.

7 was probably on the drawing board and got shelved before production.

Anyway, I feel I must apologize, as I have dragged the thread away from the original post, sorry Jm1973.

Marv

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Jm1973 said:

So do you think upgrading the tripod to the 1.75" stainless steel, version, which will take 30kg, will not help that much? Is it the mount itself that is the weak link?

The tube length is what puts the strain on the mount and on the tripod in particular, more so than the weight of the scope.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Jm1973 said:

So do you think upgrading the tripod to the 1.75" stainless steel, version, which will take 30kg, will not help that much? Is it the mount itself that is the weak link?

To add to a previous reply to your question, I got this kit a year or two ago...

kit2.jpg.e70ec4a8e957b0bfc6379636a09f9143.jpg

It's smaller than the one you're considering.  It's a 114mm f/8 Newtonian on an EQ-2.  I've used it at least once, in motioning it about the sky, and it wasn't bad, not at all...

724814736_072618-2ndLight3.jpg.2224a0df72aa23b519bbb88039889752.jpg

Incidentally, I didn't use the mount properly there, but it worked nonetheless.  In most aspects, the kit you're considering is more like that configuration.

Still, the telescope is under-mounted there as well.  On another night, I placed it upon this tripod-type alt-azimuth...

 1681945278_072118-FirstLight2.jpg.18268284e0d5eb833edf4f0fd97ea0cd.jpg

The telescope was supported more closely to the ideal in that instance, as that's the alt-azimuthal equivalent to an EQ-3.  But, that's an alt-azimuth.

Now, this is a 150mm f/5 Newtonian, mounted on an EQ-3, and with a pier attached(for refractors).  The telescope is the next size down from a 200P...

3a.jpg.0f4fe1140b6950c32237aa469cd3b8a8.jpg

In that instance, the telescope is supported ideally, for visual-use with eyepieces at least; hence, a 200mm f/5, a 200P, on an EQ-5 is ideal.

Aside from that, always keep in mind that whilst a telescope may shimmy and shudder on its mount, it may also be steadied with the hand(s) when placed correctly.

I'm no stranger to larger telescopes on smaller mounts.  One learns to adapt.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well thanks again for all the replies. I did buy it, and I am very pleased with it. 

 

I am still not quite sure whether it is worth upgrading the tripod to the 1.75" stainless steel version, if it fits.

 

There is a used one currently on sale at a reasonable price (£55).

 

My thinking is that at the price it is a nice cheap upgrade... if it will make a noticeable improvement.

 

And I haven't really seen any EQ5 or NEQ5 mounts for sale second-hand, and I can't really justify shelling out another £350 for a new one.

 

Incidentally, all afternoon there have been clear skies and beautiful sunshine, now after putting my daughter to bed and coming back down, the skies are completely cloudy. Typical!

Edited by Jm1973
additional
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can remove the mount head from the tripod, you can check the tripod hub fitting is EQ3 / EQ5 / HEQ5 compatible before you commit to buying another tripod.

The steel tubed tripod is a noticable upgrade over the aluminium tripod.

Maybe try the scope under the stars first though and see how you get on ?. It will be at higher magnifications (100x plus) that you notice vibrations / unsteadiness, if they are there.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jm1973 said:

Well thanks again for all the replies. I did buy it, and I am very pleased with it. 

 

I am still not quite sure whether it is worth upgrading the tripod to the 1.75" stainless steel version, if it fits.

 

There is a used one currently on sale at a reasonable price (£55).

 

My thinking is that at the price it is a nice cheap upgrade... if it will make a noticeable improvement.

 

And I haven't really seen any EQ5 or NEQ5 mounts for sale second-hand, and I can't really justify shelling out another £350 for a new one.

 

Incidentally, all afternoon there have been clear skies and beautiful sunshine, now after putting my daughter to bed and coming back down, the skies are completely cloudy. Typical!

Ha! I was just looking at that scope on Astrobuyandsell. I asked the seller what the mount was as I couldn’t figure out if it was an EQ2 or EQ2-3. At £265 I thought it was probably too much of a bargain to be an EQ5 and it didn’t look quite right. 
I have the SW 130 and am looking to upgrade but can’t justify the £480 that the 200P and EQ5 are brand new. The score is still listed as for sale so I guess they didn’t get around to updating the listing yet :(
 

Guess I’ll keep looking.  There have been a couple on eBay recently, but they disappeared before auction end. Probably because the seller found someone local to sell them to. Shipping a large scope is not really practical for second hand...

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, LondonSi72 said:

Ha! I was just looking at that scope on Astrobuyandsell. I asked the seller what the mount was as I couldn’t figure out if it was an EQ2 or EQ2-3. At £265 I thought it was probably too much of a bargain to be an EQ5 and it didn’t look quite right. 
I have the SW 130 and am looking to upgrade but can’t justify the £480 that the 200P and EQ5 are brand new. The score is still listed as for sale so I guess they didn’t get around to updating the listing yet :(
 

Guess I’ll keep looking.  There have been a couple on eBay recently, but they disappeared before auction end. Probably because the seller found someone local to sell them to. Shipping a large scope is not really practical for second hand...

The seller said it was an 'old eq5'. I did some googling and apparently there was an eq5 that was released sometimes between Helios and Skywatcher, that is the same as the eq4. So it's not as solid as an Eq5, but it seems ok for now. Possibly it won't hold up too well in windy conditions etc. and probably no good for AP, but good enough to get some planet shots and stuff and for visual observing. 

I just saw what looks like the same telescope on sale, just the OTA, on ensoptical for £240, so I guess this was still a bargain.

But yeah, I'm seeing stuff all the time, but usually on the other side of the country. What made this atractive as well, is the guy was visiting near where I live and was able to deliver. Saving me a 4 hour round-trip which would have added 40 or 50 quid onto the price.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Jm1973 said:

The seller said it was an 'old eq5'. I did some googling and apparently there was an eq5 that was released sometimes between Helios and Skywatcher, that is the same as the eq4. So it's not as solid as an Eq5, but it seems ok for now. Possibly it won't hold up too well in windy conditions etc. and probably no good for AP, but good enough to get some planet shots and stuff and for visual observing. 

I just saw what looks like the same telescope on sale, just the OTA, on ensoptical for £240, so I guess this was still a bargain.

But yeah, I'm seeing stuff all the time, but usually on the other side of the country. What made this atractive as well, is the guy was visiting near where I live and was able to deliver. Saving me a 4 hour round-trip which would have added 40 or 50 quid onto the price.

 

 

I have this 127mm f/8 catadioptric-reflector, a "Bird Jones" it is often called, and here on a manual alt-azimuth...

082019b.jpg.d38f544de4925cbe461ab7b5a7a533d6.jpg

This is an old point-and-shoot camera, made in 2002; and with which I've taken numerous afocal-shots through this eyepiece and that, and through this telescope and that...

2113375708_MinoltaDiMAGEF100b.jpg.62cc4b933df8df4c85018bea5022b67f.jpg

I centre the brighter object in the eyepiece, position the camera, and snap a shot;  the mount with no electronics, no motors, and with a rudimentary, manual tracking capability.  With that telescope and camera, I took these...

400351486_071119-bundled4mm3.jpg.8c3e038f020208ddcf73ceb37e2b466e.jpg

858960292_082319-Jupiter.jpg.bdbd223abb10a41f7d25a39f151b5eaf.jpg

1942162387_082319-Saturn.jpg.c7b3d85b6635e9cd810032e7998bc50d.jpg

160759292_082319-Ascella.jpg.981db42f0d803ebddea1cae2267bc006.jpg

Again, that was with a manual alt-azimuth.  If you equip the EQ-4 with a simple motor-drive, for the RA-axis only, I don't see why you couldn't do better than that, much better even.  Here's what I took through the 150mm f/5...

sampler.jpg.b2951a031279c5574d99648d80144880.jpg

...and a collage of pot-shots through the eyepiece.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Jm1973 said:

The seller said it was an 'old eq5'. I did some googling and apparently there was an eq5 that was released sometimes between Helios and Skywatcher, that is the same as the eq4. So it's not as solid as an Eq5, but it seems ok for now. Possibly it won't hold up too well in windy conditions etc. and probably no good for AP, but good enough to get some planet shots and stuff and for visual observing. 

I just saw what looks like the same telescope on sale, just the OTA, on ensoptical for £240, so I guess this was still a bargain.

But yeah, I'm seeing stuff all the time, but usually on the other side of the country. What made this atractive as well, is the guy was visiting near where I live and was able to deliver. Saving me a 4 hour round-trip which would have added 40 or 50 quid onto the price.

 

 

Yes! That’s what I’m finding. A few 200ps have been available but all seem to be a 200mile round trip away. I’m also not sure if upgrading to the 200p from my 130 will allow me to see that much more, so a little reluctant to take a punt. I just found there’s an astronomy shop about 40mins drive away so I think I’ll go there and hopefully check out a few scopes to see for myself. I’ve kind of set my self a £300 limit for my upgrade, but think that’s too optimistic!
(A boxed pretty much mint condition 200p +EQ5 went on EBay for £250 early last week - whoever got that was very lucky!)
 

Hope you enjoy the scope and have some clear skies soon! I’d be really interested in hearing what you think of it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Alan64 said:

I have this 127mm f/8 catadioptric-reflector, a "Bird Jones" it is often called, and here on a manual alt-azimuth...

082019b.jpg.d38f544de4925cbe461ab7b5a7a533d6.jpg

This is an old point-and-shoot camera, made in 2002; and with which I've taken numerous afocal-shots through this eyepiece and that, and through this telescope and that...

2113375708_MinoltaDiMAGEF100b.jpg.62cc4b933df8df4c85018bea5022b67f.jpg

I centre the brighter object in the eyepiece, position the camera, and snap a shot;  the mount with no electronics, no motors, and with a rudimentary, manual tracking capability.  With that telescope and camera, I took these...

400351486_071119-bundled4mm3.jpg.8c3e038f020208ddcf73ceb37e2b466e.jpg

858960292_082319-Jupiter.jpg.bdbd223abb10a41f7d25a39f151b5eaf.jpg

1942162387_082319-Saturn.jpg.c7b3d85b6635e9cd810032e7998bc50d.jpg

160759292_082319-Ascella.jpg.981db42f0d803ebddea1cae2267bc006.jpg

Again, that was with a manual alt-azimuth.  If you equip the EQ-4 with a simple motor-drive, for the RA-axis only, I don't see why you couldn't do better than that, much better even.  Here's what I took through the 150mm f/5...

sampler.jpg.b2951a031279c5574d99648d80144880.jpg

...and a collage of pot-shots through the eyepiece.

Thanks for taking the time to post this.

 

I think you are right. I will try to improvise with what I've got for now, and see how I get on. 

 

Probably best to wait until I butt up to my limitations before thinking of upgrading, as I don't know what my limitations are yet. Realistically, I don't even know what I will enjoy most in this hobby, as I am only just starting out, so no point shelling out until I know what I want out of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, LondonSi72 said:

Yes! That’s what I’m finding. A few 200ps have been available but all seem to be a 200mile round trip away. I’m also not sure if upgrading to the 200p from my 130 will allow me to see that much more, so a little reluctant to take a punt. I just found there’s an astronomy shop about 40mins drive away so I think I’ll go there and hopefully check out a few scopes to see for myself. I’ve kind of set my self a £300 limit for my upgrade, but think that’s too optimistic!
(A boxed pretty much mint condition 200p +EQ5 went on EBay for £250 early last week - whoever got that was very lucky!)
 

Hope you enjoy the scope and have some clear skies soon! I’d be really interested in hearing what you think of it. 

I saw that 200p and EQ5 I think. And if it is the one I am thinking of, the seller has re-listed it, as he says the buyer messaged him to cancel it.

Must be mental to get a bargain like that and cancel it. If I were of a more suspicious nature I'd suspect some skullduggery was afoot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John said:

The optical tubes can be bought for around £120 used and the EQ5's for around £100 (undriven). Worth bearing in mind.

 

Really? I've not seen them going that cheap.

Although I've only been looking the last few weeks really.

I could do with buying an EQ5 for £100.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, John said:

The optical tubes can be bought for around £120 used and the EQ5's for around £100 (undriven). Worth bearing in mind.

 

Hi John,  Where have you seen them for that price?  Every advert I've looked at so far (Astrobuysell, Ebay, Gumtree, and the private ads forum here) has been ~£350 for a complete scope and mount or about £250 for scope and £250 for the mount if sold separately.  Are there other good places to look?

 

Thank you :)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/08/2020 at 21:20, John said:

If you can remove the mount head from the tripod, you can check the tripod hub fitting is EQ3 / EQ5 / HEQ5 compatible before you commit to buying another tripod.

The steel tubed tripod is a noticable upgrade over the aluminium tripod.

Maybe try the scope under the stars first though and see how you get on ?. It will be at higher magnifications (100x plus) that you notice vibrations / unsteadiness, if they are there.

 

I tried it last night, and at higher magnifications it was extremely wobbly. Although bear in mind I am very new to this, and I was probably being heavy handed. 

If I were to buy the tripod, assuming it fits, do you ever see the mounts for sale on their own?

I haven't seen a single EQ5 mount for sale in the last month or so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/08/2020 at 17:49, LondonSi72 said:

Hi John,  Where have you seen them for that price?  Every advert I've looked at so far (Astrobuysell, Ebay, Gumtree, and the private ads forum here) has been ~£350 for a complete scope and mount or about £250 for scope and £250 for the mount if sold separately.  Are there other good places to look?

 

Thank you :)

UK Astro Buy & Sell. I've sold them for that as well.

Used prices just now might be a bit inflated because new kit is difficult to source.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...

I bought a used kit today and i think its The same mount: Eq4 but my scope is the older sw200p.

I was speculating that The mount would be a Eq4 but im a bit confused right now Tbh. Id assume these parts would been sold as a kit, but this stand is to weak for the scope(in terms of The weights it came with anyway). Im new to this so perhaps im doing some thing wrong. I even tried moving out The pole that holds The weights as faar as possible with no success. 

I ended up using a plastic bag and filled some water bottles just to be able to balance it. 

Been out a couple of hours already and im about to head out again :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cornelius Varley said:

@_Challe_ Hello and welcome to SGL. The mount you have is the EQ3-2, not the EQ4 or EQ5.

Thank you very much :)

Ok, that makes sense. 

Feels so odd why someone would make a combination like this. It didn't really bother me doe(with my extra weight) . I think it Will feel alright for my use If I add a permanent weight. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, _Challe_ said:

Feels so odd why someone would make a combination like this.

It looks like the previous owner has added an aftermarket dovetail and puck adapter to attach the telescope to the mount. The normal way to attach the rings to the EQ3-2 is to bolt them directly to the top..

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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.