EQMOD vs SynScan Pro

[mattadams]

Hi All...It seems that EQMOD gets suggested / recommended often to control Skywatcher mounts on PC instead of SynScan Pro. I'm curious why people go down this route when (on the surface) it looks like the current version of SSP can do just about everything EQMOD can (or better)? A few exceptions I can see where EQMOD outperforms is PEC on any mount (not just ones Skywatcher enable this on) and gamepad control. Apart from these things they are relatively the same and given that Skywatcher is actively developing it's control software I am thinking it would be better to go down that route.

There's only one bug that is pushing me away from SynScan Pro at the moment which is park in NINA - only EQMOD sends the mount to the home position, SSP just parks at the current location. Odd though as in SSP you can park at home.

Am I being naive? Are there better reasons to go with EQMOD?

Thanks,
Matt

[Stuart1971]

33 minutes ago, mattadams said:

Hi All...It seems that EQMOD gets suggested / recommended often to control Skywatcher mounts on PC instead of SynScan Pro. I'm curious why people go down this route when (on the surface) it looks like the current version of SSP can do just about everything EQMOD can (or better)? A few exceptions I can see where EQMOD outperforms is PEC on any mount (not just ones Skywatcher enable this on) and gamepad control. Apart from these things they are relatively the same and given that Skywatcher is actively developing it's control software I am thinking it would be better to go down that route.

There's only one bug that is pushing me away from SynScan Pro at the moment which is park in NINA - only EQMOD sends the mount to the home position, SSP just parks at the current location. Odd though as in SSP you can park at home.

Am I being naive? Are there better reasons to go with EQMOD?

Thanks,
Matt

Just to open your options even more, there is one better than both of those, Green Swamp Server, or GSS, it’s the modern, better EQMOD with many more features…

https://greenswamp.org

[mattadams]

Well that's my sunday gone reading up and trying something new 😅. I've only got a SA GTi at the moment so I'm guessing the feature set would likely be wasted on a mount like this? At the end of the day, I just want something reliable which is what drove me to EQMOD in the first place (SSP at times pointed in the complete wrong direction, though I think I've sorted that now with firmware updates). I think a fair comment would be for basic operation and safety features all 3 probably would be fine? Then it's just down to preference / how much further control you want?

[malc-c]

Whilst a great application EQMOD is now somewhat outdated.  GSS is (as mentioned above) the modern alternative, but both are great at doing the main task which is to slew a scope to target, track it and accept guiding instructions from an application such as PHD2.  Both work well with EQDIR cables for reliable hard wired connections. Both have a fairly active support groups and both are easy to configure.  GSS has some more fancy bells and whistles such as a 3D animation to demonstrate the scopes position, which is useful if your scope is out of sight.

Some people report issues with both applications, from incorrect slewing, to issues with limits or flips.  Personally having used both, I've stuck with EQMOD as at the time GSS didn't support custom gear ratios where EQMOD had this from 2011 as the developers worked with me when I was experimenting with a belt drive conversion of my HEQ5 long before Rowan engineering came along.  I've not used SSP so can't comment on how it compares or differs from the other two, but no doubt it too offers the same functionality of being able to control a mount from a PC/Phone/tablet so it slews and tracks a target.  The other functionality, or the cosmetics of the GUI is down to personal tastes and prefrences. 

[mattadams]

Thanks Malcolm, that's hugely useful! As for SSP, it's night and day how much better it is from mid last year to now, mainly just stability and quality of life improvements. I think like you say though, it's those highly specialised inclusions that make the alternatives appealing to some. Going to try out each for a little while and see what I like though I haven't had a clear night and been free since mid-Jan so may take some time to figure out what works.

[malc-c]

No worries, whatever suits your needs.  My line of thinking is that you only really need the basics covered.  I use EQMOD as my "driver" of choice.  I probably don't use half the functionality it has, let alone the bells and whistles GSS has to offer.  I also use Cartes du Ciel as my planetarium application as it's main function is to connect to the mount (via EQMOD in my case) and send the command once I've selected the target.  Both get minimised once the target is in the FOV of the telescope.  I used APT to control my old Canon D400 SLR, and again, only use a fraction of what it has to offer as all I'm interested in is having it control the exposures and run the plan to take 20 or 30 subs.  Likewise with PHD2, all I need it a tool to guide the mount with the least amount of hassle.