Mount Upgrade, advice welcome!

[afoster2001]

Hi folks, Andrew here, I'm new to the SGL and hoping for a bit of advice. I've been slowly building up experience in astrophotography with my CPC800 setup, and have decided the best thing to do equipment wise is start again!

I'm looking to upgrade to a good long term system without needing to win the lottery - also, we move around a lot so need to stay portable-ish.

Now, I was thinking scope wise of keeping the Megrez 72, then getting something like the Meade 127 ED APO and a C-11 for a good combination of wide field / deep sky / planetary imaging.

This leaves the mount - I realise now this is really the heart of the system. I've looked at three so far:

• Celestron's CGEM
  
• Skywatcher EQ6 PRO
  
• IOptron IEQ45
  

Can anyone give a bit of advice on which is best - it's a big / long term investment, and I want to get it right. There doesn't seem to be much else in this range - although I'd be happy to pay a bit more if there's something else I've missed.

Thanks a lot, Andrew

[red dwalf]

i think the eq6 is the one most people would go for, they should come down alittle in price soon as a newer upgrade is due to hit the market soon,

i have the heq5 pro and can say it`s a great bit of kit.

very nice choice of scopes to use on it by the way, but i`ve heard that the 9.25 sct is just about as good as the c11 and is very good for imaging, might also save you a few pounds

[E621Keith]

C11 may be at the upper limit of EQ6, so probably a CGEM because you can get it with a C11 as a package. The ioptron looks very nice but I haven't heard many people using it yet.

As for the C9.25, people say it beats the C11 on planets, but lose on deep sky. I've never use either, so I cannot comment.

[ollypenrice]

C11 may be at the upper limit of EQ6, so probably a CGEM because you can get it with a C11 as a package. The ioptron looks very nice but I haven't heard many people using it yet.

As for the C9.25, people say it beats the C11 on planets, but lose on deep sky. I've never use either, so I cannot comment.

The Meade 127 is good. I had one for a while before upgrading to a TEC140, but I would now go for the SW MN190 for a metre fl imaging scope. Faster, flatter field and even better resolution.

The EQ6 will handle a C11 for webcamming but not DS imaging and the same would apply to the CGEM, even if Celestron do package them together. That would be my view, anyway.

I am awaiting an iOptron IEQ45 for a magazine review. It should be interesting! The quoted payload is the same as for the EQ6 but it is much lighter and should have a far quicker polar alignment routine for the mobile imager. On paper, very attractive.

Olly

[E621Keith]

I will be looking forward to reading that review, is it going to be on AN?

[ollypenrice]

I will be looking forward to reading that review, is it going to be on AN?

Yes, Astronomy Now. I'll try it visually and for imaging at a range of focal lengths.

Olly

[afoster2001]

dear all, a big thank you for your very helpful comments. I've just been thinking (I know), - we might be moving to Brunei in the next couple of years - very close to the equator, and looks like it's outside of the latitude range of the CGEM and NEQ6 (15-70 deg). So, looks like the Ioptron for me, plus very keen to go for a more convenient polar alignment to cut down setup time each session - I'll keep my eyes glued to AN for Olly's review and hope the IEQ45 does what it says on the tin.. ps (Olly), we just last week booked a gite in the south of france for this summer - then I noticed your place... curses!!!! Well, there's always next year! ☺