NEQ6 or CGEM?

[Sp@ce_d]

NEQ6 or CGEM?

It seems there's a wait of a couple of weeks before the next SW shipment arrives in the UK, It's given me time to have a nagging doubt about the choice of mount for imaging.

The EQ6 seems to be the workhorse used here in the UK at least but I've read that the CGEM is more accurate and is a "beefed up EQ6". Plus there's the tracking past the meridian claim. If this is the case, why shouldn't I go for the CGEM over the NEQ6 Pro?

My initial requirements for the mount are guide scope, guide cam and piggy back DSLR. Followed by 80mm scope and CCD in 6 months or so. I also may have build a shed and installed a pier by the end of the summer and remote/computer control capability of the mount is a must too.

So, what are the real pro's and cons with these choice of mounts?

[r3i]

Based upon your current and future equipment plans IMHO either should serve you well.

I had the same decision about a year ago and chose the EQ6. My reasons were:

• Tried and trusted platform
  
• Huge amount of online support
  
• The fantastic EQMOD PC software
  
• Well documented and readily available components for hypertuning the mount should I want to in the future
  
• There were too many reports of problems with CGEMs at that time. Things may be better now, hopefully.
  

From what I recall the plus points for the CGEM were:

• A more sophisticated handset
  
• Better alignment model
  
• Built in PEC
  

However if you're using the EQ6 with a PC these advantages are pretty much addressed when using EQMOD.

One year on and I've not regretted my decision. The only real gripe with the EQ6 is the infamous altitude adjustment mechanism that has been discussed extensively on this site. Like many others, I immediately swapped out the adjustments bolts for stiffer ones and so far so good. The only other mod I did was to get an ADM dual saddle plate, as at the time the EQ6 only came with a Vixen compatible saddle. Nowadays, the NEQ6s come with both a Vixen and a Losmandy one.

IRIC the vanilla CGEM & EQ6 have pretty much similar load capacities but there is a CGEM DX variant that has or is about to become available: it has a stronger tripod and an updated control system to provide more motor torque and claims to have a 50lb load capacity - is this the one you were thinking of when you said the CGEM was 'beefed up'?

If you fancy being an early adopter and want additional nagging doubts about your choice of mount, there's also the IOptron 45 available in the same price/performance ball park.

Whichever way you go, I'm sure you're won't be disappointed.

[Merlin66]

Plus there's the tracking past the meridian claim -What's the issue here? the EQ6pro will track past the meridian....

[Sp@ce_d]

Thanks for the comprehensive reply..

Ah.. No I didn't know about the DX version. Looking at the price ( nearly double!) I don't think thats really in my buget for my timescales..

So, from what you say the benefits of the (original) CGEM are catered for by using EQMod with the EQ6. As far as hardware benefits replacing the "bendy bolts" sounds like a must.

I had more or less settled on the NEQ6 but you know what it's like making decisions when you know you'll have to wait for it..

Of course if I wait too much longer the lighter nights coupled with the possibility of "Double Daylight Time" (not to mention cloud) will limit use of anything I get before the end of Summer! So, maybe I should wait till then and save a bit more for the IOptron 45? Does anyone have experience of this yet?

[Sp@ce_d]

Plus there's the tracking past the meridian claim -What's the issue here? the EQ6pro will track past the meridian....

Ah ok, it's just that Celestron seems to make this claim as if it were something "special".. I don't have experience of eq mounts, only wedging my alt-az so wasn't sure of this.. thanks

Really then, it does seem that for ~£900 the NEQ6 is the thing.. I guess I'm just trying to future proof myself.

I see the DX version is mainly the tripod upgrade. So, if I plan on using a pier later there's no point in that anyway!

[sixela]

Ah ok, it's just that Celestron seems to make this claim as if it were something "special"..

They write that because the users of the CGE mount were pretty miffed that the CGE didn't track across the meridian.

[chrisshillito]

Ah ok, it's just that Celestron seems to make this claim as if it were something "special"!

Its a feature worthy of note, but is nothing particularly special for German Equatorial mounts. Of course they could equally well have said "the mount will happily track your scope all the way into the tripod" but I guess that isn't so appealing

Chris.

[ollypenrice]

Yes, the EQ6 sails past the meridian and if you have a pier it goes on till daylight on most objects! Guiding accuracy does seem to go off when really contorted but that might just be the result of sinking into the lower atmosphere. Sometimes I slide the C/W out a bit further to wring the last drops out of it. I hate flips for the down time.

Olly

[r3i]

Its a feature worthy of note, but is nothing particularly special for German Equatorial mounts. Of course they could equally well have said "the mount will happily track your scope all the way into the tripod" but I guess that isn't so appealing

Chris.

Nice one Chris.

Yes I'd forgotten to mention the ability for tracking past the meridian and once again EQMOD comes up trumps here by allowing that and I think I'm right in stating that it enables you to define limits to prevent your precious OTAs slamming against your tripod/pier.

Just playing devil's advocate here for a moment, I suppose one could argue that the EQ6 only catches up with the features of the CGEM when a laptop running EQMOD is connected. So if you're visual only or imaging with a DSLR and guiding using a SynGuider, then the CGEM may deserve more consideration. But if a laptop is always going to be involved in your setup then the EQ6 is a good choice.

I've no idea what the IOptron IEQ45 mount is like but there's a huge thread on the Cloudy Nights forum about it (702 posts and counting):Telescope Reviews: IEQ45 - an evaluation

[Merlin66]

I think the NEQ6pro is a very capable mount with the Synscan handcontroller (sometimes better with EQAscom.)

[chrisshillito]

Yes I'd forgotten to mention the ability for tracking past the meridian and once again EQMOD comes up trumps here by allowing that and I think I'm right in stating that it enables you to define limits to prevent your precious OTAs slamming against your tripod/pier.

EQASCOM (EQMOD) doesn't explicitly allow the mount to track past the meridian - it does that all by itself, it will just keep tracking until told to stop. A mount under synscan control will do the same. EQASCOM does provide both RA and Horizon limits coupled with optional automatic park should you wish to prevent collisions - all optional.

Chris.

[RobH]

The tracking past the meridian bit comes from the fact that the CGE wouldn't do that, so I guess thay needed to tell everyone that the CGEM will.

The Ioptron 45 is supposedly a step up from both the CGEM and EQ6 in terms of engineering, but not having used one that's only hearsay.

Rob

[BlueAstra]

My Maxim DL/EQMOD controlled EQ6 tracks past the meridian with no problems. However, if you execute a goto after having tracked to the 'wrong' side of the meridian it will do a flip if the target is also on that side of the meridian. May be a setting in EQMOd to prevent this (?).

[chrisshillito]

My Maxim DL/EQMOD controlled EQ6 tracks past the meridian with no problems. However, if you execute a goto after having tracked to the 'wrong' side of the meridian it will do a flip if the target is also on that side of the meridian. May be a setting in EQMOd to prevent this (?).

If you are a member of the EQMOD Yahoo group then EQASCOM V1.23d is available for test and includes an option to force a flipped goto (i.e. a goto to a counterweights up position). However you should be aware that a pointing model built using points added from a counterweights down position will not necessarily produce accurate gotos when moving to a counterweights up position.

Chris.