Beginner's EQ question - doubts.

[Starslayer]

I know there is no such thing as a stupid question but. ..........

I have had my 6" starsense  Celestron sct for a while now and have had great fun and results throwing it around the sky with 'gay abandon'. I love it.    Having acquired the Startravel 102 frac I have not had massive opportunities to play due to weather but I love the scope thusfar. It is the mount that is causing me concern.  EQ1.    I can polar align. Not difficult. I have no intention of doing AP other than messing with my mounted iphone. I am asking myself though why?  I take the scope out, point a leg due north and use compass etc. I set then to 52 degrees. OK.  What then?   Go out when dark and align to Polaris?  OK but then what?    Having set it up I then eg want to look at Arcturus which is around to the West ish.  Do I simply release the clutches and sway around to line up rfd and take it from there? How does the original polar alignment fit with all this and why am I doing it?  Is it purely that I can then use the RA slow mo to keep the new target in view?  If so then why?  Give me an Alt Az mount any day.  Only difference is I use 2 slow mos instead of one?  Have I got this right?  If I have then the EQ is going. Hate the weight which also bumps the legs now and again too and the whole design concept of the thing ( he says appreciating of course the use with AP work ) .    Am I just a visual only philistine and is my gut feeling to ditch this silly eq mount in favour of a decent Alt Az the way to go?

It almost feels like I have just typed a rant.  It is not meant that way.  Clear outside is showing rubbish skies tonight and all is clear again so fingers crossed for later

 

[nephilim]

In a nutshell, yes to all your queries. An EQ mount in my opinion is only of real benefit if your either imaging or you have a motor driven GOTO so that the object your viewing stays in your field of view without you having to do any work. My first scope was the Skywatcher 130 with an EQ mount & manual control 'stick things' (thats as best as I can describe them 😬) and it was awful to use.
 
Obviously use what your comfortable with but before I went over to the dark side (AP 😂) my favorite type of mount was a Dobsonian as they're very easy to use. Due to the scope your using though I'd go back to an Alt/ Az as you'll now know yourself its the easiest & most comfortable option.

Steve

Edited August 18, 2021 by nephilim

[Pixies]

Here are a couple of useful videos. A bit of a cheesy style, but he does explain it all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plx6XXDgf2E&t=18s&ab_channel=EyesontheSky

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7HVDKAZ6eM&list=PLLM5fRxAaC_fxTiSQxQ_csdXof0LG4zh7&index=3&ab_channel=EyesontheSky

First one is alignment, second is actually using it.

[banjaxed]

I have only owned one EQ Mount which I didn’t keep for very long as I saw no benefit for visual use. My mounts now are Skywatcher AZ5 on a stainless steel tripod, a Celestron Nexstar 130 SLT and a Skywatcher SynScan Az Mount and they are all used (weather permitting) 🙄and I am satisfied with all of them. The one thing I would recommend is to get a reasonable sturdy mount or an electric focuser.

[lenscap]

If  you can set the latitude of your EQ1 to 90 degrees, so that the counterweight bar is horizontal, you've got yourself an Alt/Az mount. It will still be a somewhat wobbly mount on a bouncy tripod and you may still want to ditch it, but it will be easier to manually point it at a target than in EQ mode.

I now use my EQ3-2 in Alt/Az mode for visual. It's much less stressful than in EQ configuration.

[etsatlo]

I too found my first telescope's EQ mount a bit of a hindrance and put me off using it. 

Now using an alt az and far easier to live with.

[Kimboman]

Hi I to have a phobia of equatorial mounts and have made two of my own in the past.

Now I have two Celestron goto mounts which I now adore now that I have got to grips with their foibles.

I really enjoy the AP that members show but I have been mainly visual so these types of mounts suffice but its a case of horses for courses.

[malc-c]

If you are just a visual observer then an EQ mount is not much of an advantage over an ALT/AZ.  The only issue is that when following a target you have to push the tube up or down a little as well as in a westerly direction, which in reality isn't an issue, even if the mount is not motorised.  If on the other hand you are using the scope for serious imaging then an EQ is a must.  

To be honest, IMO using an EQ for visual isn't really that complicated.  So long as you nave the RA axis pointing to the North Celestial pole (only need to be an good approximation for visual needs), then it's just a case of releasing all the locks and moving the scope around unto the target is found, lock the scope in position, and then all that is needed is manual adjustment of one axis to keep the target in place.  

[AstroMuni]

16 hours ago, Starslayer said:

How does the original polar alignment fit with all this and why am I doing it?  Is it purely that I can then use the RA slow mo to keep the new target in view?

To understand EQ in simple terms all the stars appear to rotate around the NCP (Polaris is close). Therefore if the mount's axis is pointing to this NCP then a nudge along RA should get your scope to follow this trajectory. This article explains it very well https://www.spaceoddities.eu/2018/08/astrophotography-what-is-an-equatorial-mount-and-how-does-it-work/

The main benefit to achieving PA is that once you have latched onto an object, you should be able to follow its journey across the sky by nudging only the RA knob. And if you attach an RA motor then that will do that nudging.

If you find your having to nudge both RA & Dec then your PA is not good enough.

[Alan64]

I have an EQ-1, and one that I "hyper tuned"...

The wooden legs help a bit for stability.  Leaving the tripod's legs in their retracted position also helps.  The C90 Maksutov there, on the right, seems comfortably perched upon it.

An EQ-1 is actually better designed and manufactured than an EQ-2, the latter being the next step up in size.  From an EQ-1, the next step up is to an EQ-5, I dare say.

The mount is really only suitable, and fun to use, with rather small telescopes, like that C90, and this 50/600 achromat...

The mount that one is perched upon is an AZ1-class mount, and the alt-azimuthal equivalent to an EQ-1.

Yea, and this 70/300, the wee tyke, would most decidedly have a blast spending quality-time upon an EQ-1...

Don't throw the mount away.  Set it aside instead, packed within a box or other, and revisit it in future, with a smaller telescope attached of course.

An EQ-1 is also ideal with just a camera attached, and motorised.  But in order to motorise it, without burning up the motor, the mount oft requires adjusting.

[Starslayer]

Thanks all . The rant that was never intended is over.  I completely understand eqs now and how I can best 'use' mine with the scope as mentioned. Just visual for me . North is noted on a leg and the mount is locked to that with latitude dialled in ok.  That is all I really need. Very quick lock on Polaris and off we go.  Loosen the thumb screws and slew as I feel necessary ( although I did see something about going anti clockwise whenever doing that.  )  Not really difficult and nothing to be scared about.  Not sure about adding a motor. How accurate are they speed wise? 

[Alan64]

7 minutes ago, Starslayer said:

Thanks all . The rant that was never intended is over.  I completely understand eqs now and how I can best 'use' mine with the scope as mentioned. Just visual for me . North is noted on a leg and the mount is locked to that with latitude dialled in ok.  That is all I really need. Very quick lock on Polaris and off we go.  Loosen the thumb screws and slew as I feel necessary ( although I did see something about going anti clockwise whenever doing that.  )  Not really difficult and nothing to be scared about.  Not sure about adding a motor. How accurate are they speed wise? 

It's a simple clock-drive.  It may have quartz within its control-board, or not...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/sky-watcher-mount-accessories/ra-economy-motor-drive-for-eq1.html

Not, I think, as it has a variable-speed control, a slim stem, just under the power-light, which allows you to fine-tune the speed.  I have one, too, but I've yet to use it.

Recap...

Again, before attaching a motor-drive...

...the RA worm-shaft, to which the drive attaches, must spin freely with the fingers, without binding, and whilst it rotates the RA-axis...

It should be able to rotate the axis all the way round, one revolution, without binding and stopping at all...

Else, the motor-drive can strain, overheat and become damaged.  It must be able to easily drive the axis in its revolutions, as smooth as freshly-churned butter, with no binding.

You won't see the axis rotating with the motor-drive attached and powered on, no, as it takes 24 hours for the motor to rotate the axis only once round, and just as Polaris rotates once round the NCP.  Whilst so doing, the motor-drive causes the Earth to stand still, and thereby an object in the field-of-view of an eyepiece to remain motionless, centred within.  With the wee motor whirring away, you can go inside, have a bite to eat, watch telesvision, and when you return the object will still be in the centre of the view.

Equatorial mounts are good for that sort of thing, to observe an object for a long span of time.  Not to simply glance at an object, but to study it, to discern and note its details, to sketch the object even; or these days, to photograph it.