Damn it!!!! Decision up the creek -help please

[Mav359]

Help peeps please

After 2 months of research and decision making I have set mind on buying a CPC 925, by all accounts a great scope. However I continued to do as much research as I good and the idea of astro-photography really appeals to me so if I'm going to do it properly that means EQ mount.....

So no I'm thinking CGEM 925, from FLO it's an extra £400 but is the CGEM as good or better/worse scope??? For the extra £400 now or is the CPC 925 plus a separate EQ mount a better option?????

Cheers everyone, hope you've had a good Christmas...

[CGolder]

hello,

I cant really offer you much advice in the way of astro photography... but i do think that in terms of visual use nothing beats a fork mounted SCT. the viewing position is spot of on pretty much all the time.

A eq mount can get awkward with visual even with a SCT

for imaging i think most would think most will say 100% you need a eq mount... they would probably also say that a SCT is probably not a great idea for a unguided scope and would say a small ED refractor will serve you better..

If you can afford both then i would get both

[rowan46]

the neq6 has a larger payload capacity and is slightly cheaper i have seen the 925 advertised for £1114 and with the neq6 at £880 thats a little cheaper than the celestron package

[Mr Spock]

I have a C9.25 on a NEQ-6 Pro and it's a perfect combination.

[brantuk]

For snapping dso's it is generally acknowledged that an accurately polar aligned eq mount tracks better because it follows the natural movement of the stars (relative to earth's axis) and only needs to move in one plane (right ascension).

A fork mount however requires movement in two planes (altitude and azimuth) reducing the accuracy and length of exposure.

Also SCT's and MAK's have long focal lengths and slow focal ratios, which makes them great for sharp and contrasty snaps of planets. Whereas for dso's a fast focal length and wider field of view produces better results (dso's are large and faint). You'll often find an SCT being used for guiding with a small apo strapped onto it taking the pictures for example.

Hope that helps

[Capricorn]

The CPC 925 is an SCT and f/10. It comes on an Alt/Az mount.

Neither are the best for astrophotography so as a combination it is not the best.

If you are going to look into astrophotography then before buying a scope of any sort go look at the equipment that people use.

Be aware that what is used for astrophotography is not always appropriate to visual use. You are getting into the area where you do one or another but not both.

Also the cost of a good astrophotography set up can easily double the cost of a CPC 925.

[Tim]

I should think a C9.25 OTA with EQ6/NEQ6 would serve you well. I sometimes still use that combination. You will have a scope that will be on the nail for lunar and planetary viewing and photography, and by adding a focal reducer, pretty good for DSO's as well.

I would avoid a fork mount as it will limit you later on, whereas a good EQ mount will serve you well no matter what kit you add to your collection in the future. Add in a C9.25 and you will have a very useable combination that will likely always form the heart of your setup, and can be upgraded and added to at a later date without major reworking.

Hope that helps

Tim

[Psychobilly]

Agree with TJ...

If Astrophotgraphy is going to be your thing avoid the fork mount and get teh best GEM you can afford... I didnt

Billy...

[Mav359]

Cheers guys

Thanks for the advice, I think I'll def go with the EQ mount after that, I don't want to pay twice...

[Wobbly Bob]

A c9.25 on an EQ6/Neq6 add an ED80 mounted on the C9.25 and you will have the best of both options.

[Mav359]

Everyone keeps mentioning the NEQ6, is the CGEM mount no good then? or just not worth the expense?

[Mav359]

Ok So....

the plan is to buy a c925 (CGEM or NEQ6 Mount) with a set of Baader Hyperion 68deg EP's..

what then am i using the ED80 for ???

[Helen]

Ok So....

the plan is to buy a c925 (CGEM or NEQ6 Mount) with a set of Baader Hyperion 68deg EP's..

what then am i using the ED80 for ???

Astrophotography

Helen

[Mav359]

Ah! so view with c925 and AP with the ED80...

I'd assumed i'd get better photos with the 925 being the bigger scope..

Much to learn have i (typed in short yoda voice)

[Helen]

The two scopes will give you options. To start with, use the E80 and do wide field shots, as its faster (gathers light more quickly) and more forgiving for tracking etc. Once you've got the hang of it, you can progress to smaller targets where the longer focal length of the c925 will come into its own (probably with a focal reducer though). You can also use the c925 for planets and the moon. So you'll have a really versatile set of kit.

Helen

[Tim]

We should make this thread a sticky, people actually listening to advice

For examples of what can be achieved with a C9.25 with a decent camera on, look out for member PauloBao. His images are usually posted in the Imaging - deep sky section of the forum.

[Mav359]

Cheers for all the advice guys, really appriciate it.

Now for the longest two weeks to pay day ever!!!!

:icon_salut:

[ollypenrice]

I'm going to go slightly against the grain (other than the grain according to Helen) and say that I would consider the C9.25 a difficult first scope for DS photography. The experts can work round the difficulties, sure. But the long focal length means very accurate autoguiding is needed and very accurate polar alignment. Focus is difficult without an after market Crayford. Mirror movement means an off axis guider would be best. Etc etc. I think those of us who are doing this all the time should remember how tricky it all is at first.

Big scope for imaging? Simply not necessary. With a small refractor you get a wide field of view, easy focus, tolerance of guiding error and first rate optics. These add up to good pictures.

Avoid a fork mount like the plague, but that has been covered.

Olly

[rowan46]

The reason people keep saying the neq6 is because it has a bigger payload and is slightly cheaper consequently its better value I know the cgem is designed for the 9.25 but in the world of astrophotograpy. the bigger and more stable the mount the better the cgem has a rated payload of 40lbs and the neq6 25kg (55lbs)

[moocher]

The CGEM is a wonderful mount. I know 3 people who use one, i hear nothing but praise about it!! Just my opinion but i think the fit and finish of the CGEM far exceeds the NEQ6 (and i`ve owned 3!!!). If i had the money atm (which i don`t or a job currently) i`d buy one in a heartbeat...

Alan:D

[rowan46]

I quite agree its a lovely mount I like the celestron mounts better than the skywatcher ones myself although i don't own either its just that anybody I've met who images with these mounts claim the skywatcher ones to be more cost effective as they take a bigger load for a smaller price

[ollypenrice]

There is another mount option which is as yet an unknown, the iOptron IEQ45.

This is a newer design than any currently out there amongst the 'budget' mounts ('budget' being a relative term where mounts are concerned! I mean less than the 4000 pounds you need for a Tak, G11 and upwards.) For the long focal length of a C9.25 I would not want to be messing about with anythinig even slightly questionable in terms of accuracy. I am expecting an iOptron for a magazine test in the new year and am very keen indeed to see what it can do.

Their alt-az mount was favourably reviewed by Ian Morrison (who ought to know!) in Astronomy Now.

Olly