Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

Another newbie needs first scope advice.

Ben Cole

By Ben Cole
in Welcome

Recommended Posts

Ben Cole

Ben Cole

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I think you are TBH Ben. Gordon was making the point that comparing the two on price alone is dangerous because the two are so different. The HEQ5 has a higher weight capacity than the CG5, and if you are not used to these mounts, huge.

Buying the drives for the CG5 will not increase it's payload capacity, and that is what you need to be careful of.

So comparing the two is difficult.

Thanks Daz...somebody explaining the point to me is what I needed. Just saying "different" really was not of any use to me as a new member.

Gaz....I apologise if you took it the wrong way. It's difficult to articulate ones frustration in the typed medium. I really didn't know what they were getting at and I felt perhaps people had assumed too much knowledge on my part.

With the difference between the two mounts in mind and the fact that I'll be moving the scope from garage/house to garden or observing site perhaps even by car is the HEQ5 not suitable or just a bit more of a handful?

EDIT: Is the bonus of the HEQ5 going to be big for photgraphy etc?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply
daz

daz

Posted
Posted

Assuming you are reasonably fit, it is just more of a handful. It weighs in at around 10kg, plus the counter weights (2 x 5KG), so it's a couple of trips in and out.

That said, I think (and so do many) it's a great mount, and if you are thinking of starting with a smaller scope and then upgrading later, you won't need to change the mount as well. If you can afford it, I'd even say go for the EQ6 (higher payload capacity) and you'll have no need to change mounts at all - all depends on your budget and what you want to do with the hobby really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GazOC

GazOC

Posted
Posted

Gaz....I apologise if you took it the wrong way. It's difficult to articulate ones frustration in the typed medium. I really didn't know what they were getting at and I felt perhaps people had assumed too much knowledge on my part.

No worries Ben, I always find liberal use of the smilies can help get a point across.. :lol:

The HEQ5 is easy enough for the average adult to move, unless you have back problems etc I wouldn't let the size of the mount put you off. It's more solid and can carry larger scopes than the EQ5, it does cost more but thats a decision for you and your wallet.... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ben Cole

Ben Cole

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Yes cheers Gaz. Smileys do help but I tend only to use them when trying to be funny. (I'll have to work on that :lol:)

Sorry folks. 8)

So I'm thinking Skywatcher Explorer 200 with the HEQ5 mount. Then I believe all I need is the camera adapter and I'm away. :)

Let's see what Steve can do for me!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GordonCopestake

GordonCopestake

Posted
Posted

I don't quite see your point there Gordon.

A more useful input from you would have been= The Skywatcher mount is better than the Celestron or vice versa.

I have a feeling that there are components of shared origin between Skywatcher and Celestron but I haven't a clue which as I'm only a beginner.

Opinions comparing the two is what I'm after.

My point is that most people compare telescopes based on the optical specs and ignore the mount. Comparing 2 8" newts when they look the same on face value is difficult. The 2 OTA's are probably identical, as you've found out. So you have to look to other criteria to base your decision on.

As to which mount is "better" there is no "better" in this game. It completely depends on what you want and how important different criteria are to you. If stability and load capacity are more important then go for the HEQ5 (or EQ6) but if portability is important to you (and these things are HEAVY) then go for the EQ5. Also there is a considerable price difference and budget is important to many people.

I appreciate your frustration but not your attitude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ben Cole

Ben Cole

Posted
  • Author
Posted

In fairness Steelrat you did state that the HEQ5 was "massive" so fair enough....so I'll point you also to the earlier apology.

I just think I'm used to "boyracer" car forums where people are a bit more aggressive in general.

Now I have to figure out what "massive" means....LOL

10kg plus 2x5kg for counterweights...if I thought that was massive I wouldn't make much progress down at the gym would I? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GazOC

GazOC

Posted
Posted

I just think I'm used to "boyracer" car forums where people are a bit more aggressive in general.

I know what you mean, two of the other forums I spend time on are football and boxing forums and you either sink or swim. You don't need to be as 'assertive' around here to get people to listen to what you have to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Andrew*

Andrew*

Posted
Posted

interesting stuff here. I'm hoping my EQ5 will be comfortable with the 8", but when you say "mount" are you referring only to the actual mount, or is the tripod it sits in also an important thing to consider? My EQ5 has the 1.5" thick steel legs and is truly a tough monster, that seems like it could hold up anything. Is an EQ5 with steel legs superior to one with aluminium ones, and is it's load capacity any higher?

Andrew

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GazOC

GazOC

Posted
Posted

The steel legs are much steadier then the alluminium ones, but the EQ5 is still at its limits with a 8" Newt. You have the scope, counterweights and whatever extra gear is attached to the scope, added to that every vibration is magnified by up to x300 times (or whatever power you are using).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ben Cole

Ben Cole

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Think I'll go for the Skywatcher Explorer 200 with HEQ5 bearing in mind the comments in this thread (thanks everyone)

Just waiting for Steve to come back to me with some prices so I can compare it to just driving to D.Hinds and handing over a wad of cash for the all the Celestron goodies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SteelRat

SteelRat

Posted
Posted

Is an EQ5 with steel legs superior to one with aluminium ones?

Hi Andrew. I think that the legs of the aluminium tripod have a tendency to 'twist' as they are made up of so many parts. Wooden legs tend not to so much. Your steel tube legs should be tough as h#ll and more stable than the older legs but as it's been mentioned the EQ5 itself probably won't be happy with anything more that an 8" tube on it. A tube legged CG5 (same mount but with better bearings) with a 10" on its back is NOT a happy bunny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • 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.