Imaging main scope & mount, budget ~£3K

[NickK]

I apologise for driving everyone crazy by agonising over what is a simple choice for an imaging / visual setup for DSO. I'm looking at the main scope and mount. So I'm looking for suggestions as £3K is large amount of money to me..

The current favourite* bill of materials is:

Vixen SXW Mount + Tripod

Vixen VC200L (comes with red dot reticle, flip mirror, dovetail)

(possibly a Baader Hyperion EP too)

Now this tidy lot will come within the budget of ~£3000 tops.

What other options are there (other than skywatcher)?

Orion Optics, although beautiful, are out of my range as this has to have a mount.

* not that I'm Vixen fanboy but I have been impressed by them so far - and I have read of the issues with the controller etc.

With the flip mirror I should be able to align my ATIK 16ic for basic imaging.

[angusb1]

Are you going to get the focal reducer as well?

[Rossco72]

There is a lovely Pentax for sale in the For Sale section??

[NickK]

Are you going to get the focal reducer as well?

Yes as the FR causes a drop from F9 to F6ish. From my understanding it's detachable so I'd have the option for imaging a small sub area of the image (F9) or a larger area in less detail (F6). The ATIK 16ic is a small sensor mono CCD.

I noticed this morning that the OMC200 has disappeared from the OO website and only the OMC140 exists. Perhaps an F20 8" is too hardcore!

[NickK]

There is a lovely Pentax for sale in the For Sale section??

I noticed when Neil put it up - definitely a thing of beauty. Probably a bit advanced for a first time imager and by the time you add a decent mount that will do it justice plus a decent camera, it's going above the 3K limit I'd imposed to keep a grip on reality!

If it all works out in a few years time I'll be in a position to invest in improvements.

A fine suggestion though!

[Rossco72]

The Pentax, plus say an EQ6, plus an ST80 guide scope and a DSLR body could be put together for less than £3k

[NickK]

The Pentax, plus say an EQ6, plus an ST80 guide scope and a DSLR body could be put together for less than £3k

Grrr.. must.. resist... no. There's something about the EQ series I don't like, just a gut feeling from reading peoples experiences with them.

[Whippy]

Grrr.. must.. resist... no. There's something about the EQ series I don't like, just a gut feeling from reading peoples experiences with them.

I'd be interested to read about these experiences. I can't think of anyone I know who's had real issues with either the HEQ5 or EQ6 and mine's been running over 3 years without a hitch.

What a lot of people do (myself included) is have two setups, one for imaging and one for observing.

Tony..

[NickK]

I'd be interested to read about these experiences.

Mainly around the gearing and the accuracy, for example:

EQ6 Tracking accuracy for Astro-Photography - Forums - Astronomy.com - Online Community, Forums, Media Galleries, Blogs

Also the issue with cheap clamping bolts that an SGL member (Astrobaby?) created a thread about.

[Rossco72]

Like many others I have made a few BASIC mods to my EQ6PRo, but basically it just does what it says on the tin. Any accuracy errors can easily be guided out. If you want a mount which can track for AP without a guidescope then you really are into Astro-Physics and Paramount territory at say £12-15k for just the mount!!!

I have nothing against the Vixen scope, but the Pentax would be in a whole other league as an imaging scope.

[MartinB]

The VC200L is a great choice for imaging especially with the reducer. 1200mm is quite long for your camera, great for smaller galaxies, planetary nebs and the like but you may feel a little frustrated by missing out on larger nebulae.

I've never used a Sphinx but from what I understand it is a modern version of the GPDX. It should cope with your set up ok but won't be as solid as an EQ6. This won't matter in calm conditions but if the wind picks up you might be wishing for a little more heft. I had a GPDX and then changed to an EM200 (which is identical in size to an EQ6) there is a big difference in stablity. I'm imagine the Sphinx will have lower PE than the EQ6 which might help things along.

Although I've heard of people grumbling about EQ6s, there are a lot of them around so it would be surprising if there weren't some gripes but generally people are very happy with an EQ6 and hang onto them.

If I was starting out on the imaging road with £3000, weighing down my pocket, and my camera had a small chip, I would probably go for an EQ6 and a Borg 77ED. You might even have a bit of change for a side by side bar and a cheap guide scope. This set up would have you up and running and producing quality images in no time. You won't outgrow the Borg, even when you have your AP1200, 16" Richey Cretien and super massive CCD you will still be using the Borg for wonderful widefield pics.

Of course, you'll need a dob for visual

Alternatively, save a grand and buy an ED80

[NickK]

Like many others I have made a few BASIC mods to my EQ6PRo, but basically it just does what it says on the tin. Any accuracy errors can easily be guided out. If you want a mount which can track for AP without a guidescope then you really are into Astro-Physics and Paramount territory at say £12-15k for just the mount!!!

I have nothing against the Vixen scope, but the Pentax would be in a whole other league as an imaging scope.

Do you have a pointer to more information for the EQ6 mods?

I understand that they're similar in PE. One annoying thing is that there's no real standard measurement for accuracy for movement. The information on the EQ6 states 0.124 arcsec which for some reason I find hard to believe. Vixen don't quote figures really either!

One concern I did have is that many have felt that the EQ6's payload capacity is optimistic whereas the Vixen's are more realistic (but not as realistic as the top-flight mounts).

The VC200L is a great choice for imaging especially with the reducer. 1200mm is quite long for your camera, great for smaller galaxies, planetary nebs and the like but you may feel a little frustrated by missing out on larger nebulae.

I've never used a Sphinx but from what I understand it is a modern version of the GPDX. It should cope with your set up ok but won't be as solid as an EQ6. This won't matter in calm conditions but if the wind picks up you might be wishing for a little more heft. I had a GPDX and then changed to an EM200 (which is identical in size to an EQ6) there is a big difference in stablity. I'm imagine the Sphinx will have lower PE than the EQ6 which might help things along.

Although I've heard of people grumbling about EQ6s, there are a lot of them around so it would be surprising if there weren't some gripes but generally people are very happy with an EQ6 and hang onto them.

If I was starting out on the imaging road with £3000, weighing down my pocket, and my camera had a small chip, I would probably go for an EQ6 and a Borg 77ED. You might even have a bit of change for a side by side bar and a cheap guide scope. This set up would have you up and running and producing quality images in no time. You won't outgrow the Borg, even when you have your AP1200, 16" Richey Cretien and super massive CCD you will still be using the Borg for wonderful widefield pics.

The idea over time is that faster scope is added as a guide scope, along with a filter wheel and better camera. The 16ic would then move to guiding duties. This is the reason I'm was looking at a longer focal length. With a decent scope as a guide scope, I'd have the option to use the VC200L as a guide and vice-versa.

I guess you're right, the myriad of EQ5/6 mounts out there you're bound to get a proportionately larger number of bad comments. I know of some mods for the Sphinx too.

One other point and I know it's possible with both - naturally I want to be able to computer control the mount (forgot to mention that!).

The jury is still out.

[Rossco72]

Just thing like replacing the ALT-AZ bendy bolts with Astro-Developments stainless steel ones, adding a half pier between the mount and the tripod to improve refractor clearances etc.

Many others use EQMod to bypass the handset and use their laptops for full control (In this instance I think I'm right in saying you only need the Syntrek Version and not the full Synscan version, saving a few quid if you are getting it new)

I have a £3000 CGE mount as well, is it more accurate? Maybe a little but it is a lot more tempramental, The EQ6Pro has been bulletproof since I got it a couple of years ago.

[dmahon]

Theres something on Astro Buy/Sell at the minute which may be of interest.

[Whippy]

Mainly around the gearing and the accuracy, for example:

EQ6 Tracking accuracy for Astro-Photography - Forums - Astronomy.com - Online Community, Forums, Media Galleries, Blogs

Also the issue with cheap clamping bolts that an SGL member (Astrobaby?) created a thread about.

Have a word with Steppenwolf on here, it's his thread!!

TBH, that thread is 6 years old and things have moved on a bit since then. Even so, it appears Steve was happy with the performance anyway.

The cheap ALT bolts are an issue for some, but again if you're careful they don't break. I've still got the original ones on mine.... I use a variety of scopes on mine (current longest focal length, 900mm) and it's done what I've asked of it without any fuss.

Of course there are better mounts, including the Vixen range but in terms of value for money it's hard to beat the HEQ5/EQ6.

Tony..

[NickK]

I'll think I'll go and see them in person

[nightfisher]

Yes as the FR causes a drop from F9 to F6ish. From my understanding it's detachable so I'd have the option for imaging a small sub area of the image (F9) or a larger area in less detail (F6). The ATIK 16ic is a small sensor mono CCD.

I noticed this morning that the OMC200 has disappeared from the OO website and only the OMC140 exists. Perhaps an F20 8" is too hardcore!

There is an omc200 deluxe on uk astro buy

[NickK]

There is an omc200 deluxe on uk astro buy

It's often stated that the maximum magnification in the UK is about x275, limited by seeing. Unfortunately the OMC200 at F20 means x200 (20mm EP) and x666 (6mm) and long exposure times. So it's unsuitable for the UK if you want to use the common sizes of eye pieces.

When observing, the A80Mf currently gives me x45-x151 (20-6mm EP) at f11. The VC200L would give x90-x300 (20-6mm) at f9. I've read that the FR doesn't work well with the flip mirror as eye pieces fail to give a clear image (would need to verify that).

So with UK seeing, it's likely that I'll need a mid-mag quality EP with any scope. From experience I think a 12mm would fit the A80Mf perfectly as the 6mm suffers unless the target is bright (ie orion nebula). If I got the VC200L, then x300 would be too high and a 12mm would give x150, so it's probably more likely to be a 8mm (x225) or 10mm (x180) EP.

I think people already know I've pretty much talked myself into the VC200L...

[Rossco72]

You seem to be talking a lot about visual requirements tho?

Your initial thread was for an imaging scope, for that you want faster than f6 or at worst f7 and if you have a focal length over 1000mm then your guiding will become almost impossible.

If it's a visual scope then that's fine but if it is for imaging then f9 is really too slow and the focal length just too long for accurate guiding without a VERY expensive mount and guide system.

[NickK]

You seem to be talking a lot about visual requirements tho?

Your initial thread was for an imaging scope, for that you want faster than f6 or at worst f7 and if you have a focal length over 1000mm then your guiding will become almost impossible.

If it's a visual scope then that's fine but if it is for imaging then f9 is really too slow and the focal length just too long for accurate guiding without a VERY expensive mount and guide system.

My expectation is that the scope, although for imaging, would be capable of visual. From my understanding the F9 for visual and f6.3 with the focal reducer for imaging will be fine. The only reason for the focuser-flip mirror comment was that initially I'd have preferred a through-scope alignment at f6.3. Ie finder scope to the location, check visually then flip to imaging, at least for the brighter objects when learning.

My initial guiding will be limited to mount based tracking initially (naturally limiting the exposure times), however over time I want to add guiding to it.

I can see why people have two separate setups - one for imaging and one for visual. Maybe I'm missing the point but I want to use my A80Mf as a visual low-mid power (f11) then use the new scope for imaging (f6.3) and visual higher-power (when conditions allow at f9).

[brianb]

For imaging I think you should be concentrating on the mount not the OTA ....

[NickK]

For imaging I think you should be concentrating on the mount not the OTA ....

Hehe, I think the thread has got a little side tracked by OTA discussions. I agree in advocating the mount rather than the OTA for imaging (as Olly could probably confirm). My only issue is that if I just use 3K on a mount, it's a bit daft with just an A80Mf sat on it!

The mount had really got narrowed down to the EQ6 and the SXW. I'll pop along at the weekend to a local shop to have a look at these in person.

Between the two, it boils down to load capacity vs. accuracy judging by the comparisons on the web. Guiding is all well but if the movements aren't accurate or precise enough then it's wasted.

I couldn't see if the EQ6 came with a tripod? The SXW doesn't.

[ollypenrice]

I've had a good few Sphinxes visit and seen no great enthusiasm for them amongst their owners, certainly from an imaging point of view. Lots of grumbles, in fact. One I remember was a refusal to track properly past the meridian. On the other hand the EQ sixes are not at all bad. I have two in heavy use and they consistently deliver. The inherent PE is huge but that is not the issue. The issue is, does it guide out? The other night the EQ6 was out guiding the EM200 with its PE of +/5. Usually the Tak does guide a little better especially in bad seeing where the low PE allows longer guide subs. Oh, another Vixen grumble I have heard repeated is the impossibility of communicating with the firm, that from two different guests.

By going for a longer FL you make far more demands on guiding and polar alignment and you do have a small chip, as Martin points out. You can't really separate the purchase of the mount from the OTA unless you are buying a mount that really can handle anything, and that means 10K or so.

For me the Pentax on an EQ6 would be a straightforward no brainer. A truly incredible setup, futureproofed, world class optically, tolerant, plug and play, sellable, low risk.

The EQ6 has a tripod. I know lots of people like the EQmod computer control but I like to have as little as possible controlled by the PCs because they are always the source of lost time. Device not recognized... etc etc But that is just me.

Olly

[brianb]

I couldn't see if the EQ6 came with a tripod?

Yeah it does, it's not bad but replacing it with a Berlebach Planet wooden tripod is an improvement - if installation on a permanent pier can't be considered. The issue with the standard tripod is that the metal legs have a tendency to "ring". Stuffing them with sand or foam would probably also be effective - at the cost of extra weight & loss of height adjustment.

[angusb1]

If you are keen to get a Vixen scope and mount for imaging DSOs have you considered the R200SS? It has very good quality optics and offers some advantages over the VC200L for imaging. You can get a coma corrector for it and it is 800mm focal length at F4. It would be a lot easier for guiding due to its shorter focal length and faster F ratio, would give you a wider range of targets, and would cool down quicker than a VC200L. I expect it would be no slouch for visual observing either.

You can pick them up from astrobuysell for around £800.