Which Mount for Astrophotography?

[Matty P]

Hi all, :)

After getting my feet wet with a bit of DSO imaging and crossing over to the “Dark Side”. I have decided that I want to upgrade to a new mount (when the funds allow) suitable for long exposure imaging. I want the mount to be stable enough for long exposures and have GOTO. I would also like the mount to be able handle a larger scope in the future.

I will be using my Celestron 8” SCT OTA as the main imaging scope and hopefully my 80mm refractor as a guide scope. The camera I will be using is still a work in progress, either a Meade DSI or a DSLR.

After a bit of research I have found the EQ5 mounts are good for telescopes up to 12 inches. Therefore being a total newbie to this, I have no idea what is the best mount for astrophotography on a budget of no more than $2000.

Any suggestions?

:thumbsup:

[madtuna]

There are some remarkable photos on this site, and I've witnessed many at the astro club I am a member of done using the EQ6 PRO.

Andrews have them delivered free Australia wide to your door for $1799

[dugnsuz]

If you could stretch that budget by about $500, choice would be the Losmandy GM8 new (2nd hand cheaper, but rare as hen's teeth).
https://www.bintelshop.com.au/Images/Stock/7523X.jpg

EQ5 and a 12" scope would be a pretty unstable pairing I reckon;)

I only have an ED80 and 80mm guidescope on my EQ5 for astrophotography, and I wouldn't want to add any more weight to it!

Cheers
Doug:thumbsup:

[Matty P]

Thanks Madtuna and Doug,

How does the Losmandy GM8 and the Skywatcher EQ6 Pro compare to each other?

Which one is better in terms of tracking and long exposures?

[rogerg]

The GM8 will give you better tracking but not hold as much weight.

You probably don't want to put more than a 8" SCT on a GM8. But it will hold large refractors (WO FLT110 for example) so is still very flexible.

$2000 is a tall ask for something up to 12", I would say close to impossible (depending on how much perseverance you have).

I haven't used an EQ5/6 or anything like that, but I have a GM8.

I wouldn't want to use a scope for astrophotography that doesn't have PEC and PC interface to allow autoguiding. I'm guessing to get a GM8 under $4,000 you need to get it just with steppers, no Gemini unit included, which would (I think) greatly hamper your astrophotography success.

For that reason, for under $2000 I would be considering the cheaper chinese stuff like the EQ's more than the Losmandy type stuff.

I used to do all of my astrophotography on a old EQ2 comparative mount ($300 ish). It was wobbly as anything. I got good shots, but it took a lot of perserverance to get there, and the attitude of "use what you have to the max". So you can do stuff with cheaper mounts, and smaller mounts, and similarly you could probably overload the Losmandy GM8 somewhat, but it just makes it all harder.

I do'nt have enough experience with other mounts to really comment much more sorry.

:shrug:

[dugnsuz]

Hi Matty,
Here's a recent heated debate by those in the know regarding your very question...

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=26499

Also here's a spec sheet on the GM8...

http://www.bintel.com.au/LosmandyGM8.html

and here, ($100 cheaper from peter Ward!)
http://www.atscope.com.au/losmandy.html

GM8 has both PEC and an autoguider port for imaging.

All the best
Doug:thumbsup:

[Matty P]

Thanks for the links Doug, :)

Like I said before I would like the mount to be suitable for long exposure imaging but at the same time won’t break the bank.

The GM8 is without a doubt a better mount overall in build quality etc, except when compared to the EQ6. In my opinion the EQ6 comes out on top in terms of price and functions.

The maximum weight the GM8 can carry is only 13.5kg compared to the 20kg the EQ6 can carry. Not much room for a larger OTA in future. Also for that price, the GM8 does not come with a GOTO function either.

I still need to do some more research on both of these mounts.

:thumbsup:

[leon]

Reading this post and the fores and against, to certain mounts etc, it really cames down to what it is going to carry and the amount you have in the bank, and can afford.

If money is not an issue you cannot go past the Losmandy G8 or G11, absolutely superb, however if the funds only stretch to the limit you have stated, than you are limited to the cheaper mounts, which however will do a great job as well.

leon

[Peter Ward]

This has been done to death elsewhere, but in short, the fewer guiding corrections you have to perform, the better the image.

Standard EQ5/6's typically run close to an arc minute in periodic error.

G-8 typically +/- 8 arc sec. G-11's +/- 5 arc sec.

Figures will vary if you Google various web sites, but I'd suggest the above is pretty typical.

So, the question becomes, do I want something built to a specification or a price?

[g__day]

I posted this awhile ago - might turn it into an article

* * * A definitive guide to goto mounts

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=8135&highlight=goto

[Peter Ward]

Well, depends upon what you class as definitive. :)

This is also interesting

http://www.eisystems.be/astronomy/EQ6_erik_bryssinck_PE_graph.jpg

[skwinty]

Hi Peter
I am directing this question to you as you seem to be very knowledgable with regards to all kinds of mounts and equipment.
The link you provided wrt eq6 mount was last updated in 2005. I know that there were many problems regarding finish and types of grease used. Has there been any improvement in the eq6 pro mount since 2005.
I have recently bought an eq6 pro and yes it was bought to price rather than specification.
I would have loved to spend more on a paramount but here in south africa you take the dollar price and multiply by at least 10.
So you will appreciate R12,000 for and eq6 versus R120,000 for Paramount ME especially if you do not have a permanent observatory.
As soon as my rig is operational i would like to post some of my pix for positive criticism which would help in furthering my education in this fascinating field.

Kind Regards
Steve.

[Kal]

A good website, albeit in French, that shows various mounts Periodic Error performance is at http://demeautis.christophe.free.fr/ep/pe.htm

[Zuts]

Getting back on track, and keeping your budget in mind i don't think an EQ5 would be suitable for your scope. Fortunately the price difference between a HEQ5 with goto and an EQ6 Pro with goto is less than 200 dollars and under your stated budget.

I was a bit aprehensive buying my EQ6 but i got it and it worked out fine, with guiding i can get 10 minute subs with no trailing using my F7 Televue 85. I havnt tried longer as i image with a DSLR and noise would make this pointless. Your mileage with the C8 may vary as it has a longer focal length but since you are a 'newbie' try the reverse and image through the 80mm and guide with the C8.

If you look at photo's taken by members, see EZYSTYLES and ICEMAN you will see some wonderful work all done on an EQ6.

It's not a G11; but for the price, an EQ6 pro offers great value. A 20kg load easily, PEC, an autoguiding port, upgradeable GOTO. I would say go for it :)

Paul

[Peter Ward]

Hello Steve,

It all comes down to tracking accuracy vs focal length.

With Deep Sky imaging the longer the FL, the harder it is to get nice tight round stars. You can put an camera with a 16mm lens on a garden rock, expose for 30 seconds, and it will give you needle like stars.

Now you could argue garden rocks track "really well" but at 1600mm the rock just doesn't cut it ;)

My experience it at around 1800 to +2500 mm FL tracking inaccuracy really starts to hurt image quality.

On a tight budget I'd personally choose a G-8 or Vixen without the GoTo bells and whistles as they do nothing for imaging quality.

Suffice to say they are many, many views on this. I suppose the best way to sift through it all, is look similar subject matter, comparing the image scale, focal length and depth then try and compare "apples with "apples"

Cheers
Peter

[madtuna]

don't discount the garden rock...you never see one come up in the ice trade classifieds..people tend to hang on to them :D

[skwinty]

Hi Peter
Thanks for the reply.
However I asked if you thought there has been an improvement in the eq6 pro since 2005 which was the last time your reference was updated. I did not ask for sarcastic remarks relating to garden rocks or other statements of fact.
I asked the question hoping for an informed and educated answer considering all the comments you have made previously.
Obviously I was mistaken.
Regards
Steve

[g__day]

Steve,

Why would a dealer and enthusist in high end gear (Peter) know all the ins and outs of the low end entry platform? And if he did don't you think he would have told you?

My views

A EQ5 won't cut it for a 12 inch scope - an EQ 6 will be a basic platform that with tuning and skill will produce results - provided you tune everything and master it - absolutely everything - especial if you're think long focal lenght imaging and lengthy exposures of dim objects - that's your worst case torture test.

You will live and die in your attempts at the harder end of of imaging - by focus, rigitidy of the rails and guide scope, precision of focus during the entire the exposure, Q/E (signal / noise) of the imaging camera, tracking of the mount - if it were easy - monkeys would do it.

Reduce Peter's advice down to modest mounts and large heavy optics means modest focal length targets and as you increase your focal lenght - lower your exposure time (i.e. choose brighter, easier targets) until you're really profficient.

Then there's the whole world of mastering imaging processing...

[skwinty]

Hi g__day
Had no idea that Peter was a dealer.I could tell he is an enthuisiast for high end equipment. It just that the amount of EQ6 bashing he does, I would have thought he had some experience with them.
For example he states tracking error to be up to 1 arc min. however that figure relates to the go-to pointing accuracy. The general consensus on the eq6 forum is that the tracking accuracy is about +- 10 arc secs which is not that far of the high end equipment. Quite easily guided to better handle the error.
The majority of bad reports of eq6/5 etc relates to older equipment and apparently skywatcher has taken note and made improvements. In future I will remember that Peter obviously has a vested interest in the equipment he is an agent for.
Thanks for the heads up.
Regards
Steve

[g__day]

Steve

Peter runs http://www.atscope.com.au/ - and a quick glance will show you its all very high quality gear. Peter is giving you honest and unbiased advice - a mount manufactured for $2,000 won't have the precision in its gears of one costing double, triple or alot more.

I've seen PE curves of +/-20 arc seconds of PE - will will infer tracking error for EQ6 on the French site above Kal gave you. A Takahashi mount will probably be around +/-3 arc seconds - but with no PEC - a high end Vixen can probably achieve +/- 3 arc seconds with PEC.

Interpret what Peter said - if you want to do 20 minute plus shots at 2m focal lengths you need great tracking performance. My mount seems to be running an arc second per minute fast in RA - enough to ruin 10 minute shots at 2.3 metres (I've just upgraded SkySensor2000-PC EPROMS to the latest version 2.10) so fingers crossed this helps tracking rates.

Peter can't really defend himself here - but I will say I know only one skilled person who was ever miffed with him and all his advice he has posted here has been right in the gold. He's not snowing you just read his gear choices are for folk going for shows that run to hours skies permitting. His typical client might spend $15 K on a entry level high range purchase once you add mount G11, CCD and OTA - and at the high end of what he offers - I wouldn't expect change from $70K if you play with large RCOS OTA and research grade CCDs on a PME.

[skwinty]

Hi g__day
Thanks for the info. I am not miffed with Peter in any way and he doesnt need defending. I asked a question in good faith and got sarcasm in reply.I can cope with that. I was born and bred in africa so by default have a thick skin and as every knows Africa aint for sissies.
Jokes aside I really enjoy this forum and all the active and differing perspectives and debates.
I use a canon 40DH so 60-120 second exposures are probably as much as i will be able to handle with eq6 pro unguided. So track n stack for me and i hope to produce images as good as Peter. According to the hand book of astronomical image processing and AIP4WIN software by Richard Berry and Jim Burnell the chances are pretty good that i will.

Kind Regards
Steve

[netwolf]

Steve, i think perhaps you have judged Peter a bit to harshly. I do not belive he is speaking with a vested interest. If an EQ6 could give Paramount performance then why would people spend more on the Paramount. Most people who buy and sell high end gear understadn that they are getting what they paid for "specs". The want results.

In the scheme of things the Losmandy/Vixen mounts Peter has recommended are only the top end of the bottom of a very big ladder. Still they are priced for the performance they provide. An EQ6 with effort and tuning could foreseeably produce equal results and thats well and good. But some folk want results out of the box. Even then the Losmandy's als need tuning to improve there performance to match higher end gear. So its all relative.

When and if you upgrade your mount i am sure you will be looking at specs to decide what you buy next. We all climb this ladder, we all improve with time and begin to become more demanding of our equipment. Thats what this hobby is about.

Define the problem first:
What do you want to image? And at what scale/mag?

Analyse: What is the best scope for the job? Whats the best mount for that focal length?

The answer at one end might be a rock, and on the other end the Hubble telescope. Its all relative.

I dont think Peter was being sarcastic your question left it open to judge what you did or did not understand about FL and its impact on imaging.

Regards
Fahim

[madtuna]

Actualy Skwinty, I think you may have possibly just missinterpreted it, it wasn't sarcasm it was a simple analogy for us noobs

[skwinty]

My goodness
I seem to have opened a can of worms here.
The point is, Peter had lots to say about eq6 in the last long saga of posts about the same issue.I asked a simple question about whether he thought the product had improved since 2005. I got rocks for an answer.
And now everyone jumps to defend him because i accused him of sarcasm and having a vested interest in the brands he represents. He has spent probably a hundred thousand dollars if not more on his gear and he therefore deserves a vested interest in that. I dont hold him in contempt because of that. All he had to say was yes it has no it hasnt whichever he felt. I read the whole saga previously posted and felt he was the best person to ask for an honest answer. The rock wasnt that.
I never asked about focal lengths or any of the other stuff just whether or not the product had improved in his opinion.
I thought i was wrong but i was mistaken.
Regards
Steve

PS Perhaps Peter should say something?

[dugnsuz]

If I had my time again, or hopefully next time around in the mount purchasing game...it will be a GM8 as minimum. I know what I had to do to the EQ5 to get it to operate at a level acceptable to my requirements by performing the "astroboy" improvements. And, from what I read, similar fixes may be necessary for an EQ6 too.
As you grow into the hobby you will probably come to a point like many of us where an upgrade is wanted - the GM8 would be mine!
If you bought that quality now, that upgrade could be deferred much longer.

[Zuts]

Well,

The original poster clearly stated they are a newb and had done some reading and wanted some help. An important point in the original post was the budget, $2000 and the scopes. A C8 plus 80mm guide scope and a camera and i guess a guide cam.

I am also a newb but a Losmandy G8 has a recommended load capacity of 13.8 kg. An 8 inch LX90 weighs around 7kg. So if you add the guide scope cameras etc it may be over the rated capacity of a G8. So what is the point of recommending it. Especially if the poster implies he may want to stick a 12 inch dob on it.

Correct me if I am wrong but I would of thought a proper and helpfull answer to the question would have been a discussion of the relative merits of sub 2000 AUD mounts.

For gods sake if i am in the market for a car and state my budget is X dollars and am thinking about a holden, how does it help me if the discussion is all about the relative merits of BMW's versus AUDI's with the occasion comment that while a BMW is a good car a Porsche is even better.

As far as skwinty is concerned, he was not the original poster and his post clearly stated that he had in fact purchased an EQ6 and he was asking some questions about it. Basically he got told he had a rock and to swap it for a G8.

I am afraid i just dont understand. If someone is looking at $200 eyepieces (a heap of money in my book) you could recommend a Vixen LV and probably not a Nagler or Pentax and definately not a Zeiss. If someone has an LV and says it is not quite sharp at the edges how is it polite to tell them they should sell it and get a Nagler?

Regards Paul

[Peter Ward]

Que? No sarcasm was intended. Just a little humor :)

My point being you don't need to crack a nut with a steam roller. For short FL deep sky imaging many mounts/cam trackers are more than adequate.

I'm hardly going to haul a PME west of the blue mountains if all I want to do is image a comet with a 300mm lens. A small EQ will do the job just fine.

[Terry B]

I think the important thing here is the budget of ~$2000.
I use an EQ6 with the cheap Q-guider with a guide scope.
I image with an 1800mm fl scope and have no problem achieving very good tracking. According to the data from guidemaster, with guideing I can keep the scope within ~1-3 arcsec in both directions depending on seeing and wind etc.
The less guideing that is done the better but good results can be achieved with this combination that cost about ~$2000 total.

[Peter Ward]

Most products improve over time. That includes the EQ6, Taka EM series, G-8's etc, computers, cars.

So I'm I not quite sure what the point of the question is.

I've been taking astro-photos, well, for a very long time. The only observation I'd make in this digital age is don't get too carried away with aperture...It can get costly ;)

A well matched 4-6" system is a lot easier to tame than a 12" on a mount that continues to vibrate for many seconds after you touch it or sways in the slightest breeze.

The French website referred to by Kal is a good one for comparing tracking
accuracy, but doesn't say a lot about system rigidity.

And...I often use rocks when I didn't pack a tripod. But their tracking accuracy is only about 15 arc sec per sec :)

[edwardsdj]

I've used rocks a few times too.

Tracking may not be that good but stability is awesome :)

[wasyoungonce]

Another thread on mounts I have subscribed to!:thumbsup:

[g__day]

I think there should be a rule of thumb like pay double for you mount than your combined OTAs budget.

[Peter Ward]

Nah...that's a little glib. :)

There are some pretty expensive small aperture APO's out there

I'ts more of a case of don't be tempted to put too much telescope on too little mount.

[g__day]

Don't know Peter - if you spent $8 on a 5" Televue - would you love to mate that with a Titan ($12K) a EM 400 or 500? My guess must be close to true - although too simple.

It boils down exactly as you say - start your imaging with a 12" - 14" dob on a CG5 + bailing wire and you'd be fit for American dumbest astronomers show!

PS - off topic apology

Why don't really high-end refractors use carbon fibre instead of aluminium tubes to minimise thermal change induced re-focusing?

[RB]

This thread has strayed a bit from OP's original question.



That's a topic for another thread.

[skwinty]

Hi Matty
When i first become involved in amateur astronomy i bought a 12" GSO dob.
After some time I decided to buy a mount. The eq6 pro was what i could afford. However when i tried to get OTA rings I could not get 12" rings.
Apparently the biggest i could get was 10 or 11 inch rings.
I have subsequently got an engineering company to manufacture.
According to sky watcher 12" is too much for the eq6.
Now I know that i have over loaded the eq6 but with a hargreaves strut, track and stack approach with a dlsr i am proceeding without guiding. The people with experience of eq6 tell that the mount will cope but i should not add any more load.
Obviously more expensive mounts handle a lot more weight and i suspect that that is why they are so much more expensive.
The electronics side should be more or less on par.(IMHO)
Regards
Steve

[skwinty]

Hi Peter
Thanks for the reply.
The reason I asked the question of whether the eq6 had improved since 2005 was purely one of trying to get a good cross section of opinion as there were lots of problems with this product a few years ago.
I based my decision on money and sky and telescope reports.
I suppose i am trying to allay any thoughts of buyers remorse which i suspect is also unreasonable as i have not yet used the mount.

I look forward to taking some pix and posting them for positive criticism.
Regards
Steve

[Matty P]

I totally agree with you Paul. :)

In my first post I clearly stated that I am a total newbie and would like some advice on what is the best mount for astrophotography on a budget of no more than $2000 AUD.

From what I know, the EQ6 pro seems like it is a great mount for the price and performs like a champ. Comparing it to a Losmandy or a Vixen mount is really just rather stupid in my opinion. They are all different mounts and have their own pros and cons.

For me, I still have to do a lot more research before I take plunge. Whether I decide to go with the EQ6 or one of the Losmandy mounts, I'm sure with the help of you guys. I will make the right decision. ;)

On a different matter, I hope purchase either a 0.3 or 0.6 focal reducer for my C8 resulting with between a 600mm f/3 or 1200mm f/6 focal length. Is this good for imaging?

My little 80mm refractor IMHO is not a suitable candidate for the main imaging scope. Why I say this....? The overall quality of the scope and optics are not up to scratch.

Whenever I am in this situation I like to say to myself and sometimes others,

"You get what you pay for" :confuse3:

Thanks for your help :thumbsup:

[Kal]

This depends completely on the camera.

For the DSI definately the F3 reducer is best, but the F3 reducer won't work with the DSLR because the image circle it produces will be way too small to fill the chip. In simple terms, an F3 reducer with a DSLR will give you an image inside a circle in the middle of your image, and everything around it will just fall off to black, wasting 3/4 of the image sensor.

At F6 you could use the DSLR, but imaging will be harder as longer focal length imaging puts more demands on the mount (as already established in this thread)

[Doomsayer]

Not sure if I missed a mention of this already...
The used market has some good value showing up at times - mounts with good unguided tracking. Older Non-goto Takahashi EM200 mounts can be had for less than Losmandy G11s. The EM200s have good old-fashioned accurately machined gears and housings - giving very good unguided tracking performance. The EQ6's are, as understand it, based on the EM200s to a large degree. If you are on a tight budget the EQ6's can give surprsingly good performance (perhaps with tweaking) for the money. I own a Paramount ME, a Losmandy GM8 (and an old LX200) so I have some experience with the spectrum of mount performance. I consider the Paramount to be good value for money based on its performance - close to perfect in fact - the only criticism I can direct at it is the limited travel across the meridian. On another angle it is also hard to compare a such a revolutionary mount as the Paramount with a relatively traditional mount such as the EQ6 (ignoring Q/C or budget issues etc). I also really like the GM8's performance and use it a lot - mine tracks remarkably well. The GM8 is easy to transport, but I'd say 1500mm FL would have to be its absolute ceiling for imaging. I have experienced erratic performance in a number of other Losmandy mounts. Other experiences with Losmandy mounts have been hassle free (they vary a lot it seems too). I have witnessed a humble LX75 GEM give excellent unguided tracking with 800-1000mm focal length.
Perhaps the Chinese will offer a mount which gets closer to the Paramount in the near future? They are certainly doing it other areas such as manufacturing CNC lathes, mills etc I have seen.
cheers

[Peter Ward]

Sometimes it takes me a while to sift through verbose replies.

No-where in my reply did I suggest anyone swap anything, including a "rock" for a G-8.

In fact I was careful not to mention any brand. Period. As frankly, it didn't matter in the context of my reply, and still doesn't

The point was *tracking accuracy* and at the focal lengths at which it begins to matter.

Clearly lost on some. Cheesh...



As for budgets, when I'm looking for a product and have a budget in mind, it tends to be a rubbery figure. If I see something that costs about 10% more but gives me 4x better value/performance/whatever, then I'd likely buy it.

Sure, sometimes you have to draw a line in the sand and say "can't afford it" and make an alternative choice, which is fine as well.

[JohnH]

Well I cannot quite agree with that this has been quite an informative thread in between the noise. :)

The EQ6 Pro is excellent value can take a big load, it may be the only option in your range if the load is your main concern but it can have variable build quality according to the posts I have seen and even the good ones need to be re-greased and adjusted to perfom well. Great if you are confident to do that or know someone who is - as a noob not so long ago I did not feel that way...

I think you could consider Vixen or Losmandy level if you compromise a bit, either you will have to give away load capacity or goto or both. You will gain in the portability and raw tracking ability.

To take the car analogy a bit further - you can have the top of the range Hyundai or a basic Audi or a Prius for about the same $...depends on your preferences really but I think the comparison is still a valid one...

[Bassnut]

This car analogy thing is silly, mounts are measured by 1/ load capacity, 2/ Pointing accuracy. 3/ PE. Unlike a car, which can exude "character" and a thousand other subjective qualities. Its a machine thats does a very definable job. You look at yr budget, the spec, other user recommendations and u buy, no-one cares what it looks, sounds and feels like (unless its red ;-). Sure u can fiddle with it to make it work better, but there is nothing about its operation that is subjective, it pushes the OTA around and produces round stars or it doesnt.

[Peter Ward]

Fred! That's brilliant! I may have to quote you in future :)

So in summary, if you have an optical system of focal length x, and the mount (be it a garden rock, or PME) gives you nice round stars, you've got it scummed. :) Be happy!

[Kal]

You are forgetting 4/ Price, which is just as critical, if not more critical, because it is quite often the defining limitation!

To the OP I think the EQ6 will meet your expectations to a best fit. It will handle an 8" SCT + 80mm refractor, and you will be able to image with a DSLR through the refractor, or with a Meade DSI (through a Focal Reducer) through the SCT. It has goto, and fit's your budget as it comes in at under $2000.

[Bassnut]

uumm, I did mention Budget. Anyway, NO, price in actual fact (in isolation) doesnt count, eggy stars = crap regardless. Price of the mount in itself is not the defining limitation at all!!, round or eggy stars is. Short FL, cheap mount. Long FL/heavy OTA, many $. Its not hard, duh . OK, mount is the most important item, soooo, match the rest of the rig to the mount price/spec, not the other way round!.

[Kal]

Fred, for someone who has produced some exceptional results from some rather inexpensive equipment, I'm sure you can appreciate that you can begin your journey down the astrophotography path without having to get the greatest performing equipment. Your LX90 shots (http://www.asnsw.com/photos/fxv.asp) are proof of this, you had a relatively poor performing mount with that LX90 but you still produced more than acceptable images with it.

Before you stuck a DSLR onto the back of that LX90 did you do it thinking "if I get eggy stars this will be crap" ? ;)

[Bassnut]

mm, thats a cunning response Kal, got me thar (nice research ;-). No, at the beginning, I didnt know squat, and with no knowledge of this group (or any other). An integrated system such as the LX90 and a DSLR was the best I could calculate as a start for the price. BUT in hindsight (aint that a wonderfull thing), given this thread started with asking for advice, and had I had that luxury, I may well have considered other options. I often now see the same "what mount" question over and over here, and understand the apprehension in the advice given of "mount, mount, mount", when apature and cam options can also cloud ones judgement. The mount is such a boring item in the "killer pic" dream. I just feel the regular imagers here really do know the truth of the mounts importance, but patronise and encaurage beginners into substandard gear just to make them feel good, which is really not helpfull in forefulling the dream. In fact I wonder how many are just turned off altogether by their 1st experience with a wrong gear choice.

Human nature, being the way it is, will always attempt to get the most from the least in blissfull ignorance, which is why the same topics appear time and time again. But in this hobby, there are well defined absolutes that can be extracted from groups such as this one, which, with a little thought and consideration can avoid much pain and multiple expensive short term upgrades. I think back to the LX90 days and sigh "yeah, good experience", but it came at a price. Wow, theres a question, whats more important, expensive personal experience, or trust in advice based on collective experience ;-).

[Zuts]

Hi All,

As a recent newbie (6 months) to astro-photography i offer the following observations.

I initially got a Nexstar 11 GPS (thanks Jase) and had great fun with it looking at all sorts of things. Unfortunately I live 3km from the center of Sydney and basically it's just too bright for me. After a few trips to dark sky sites I basically lost a lot of interest dragging the scope out under light polluted Sydney skies. I wont sell it though as for dark sky its great.

So, I thought i would try astrophotography and got a second hand cheap DSLR. I got some images of planets and a few DSO's but of course the DSO's on a alt az mount were horrible. So I got a wedge. Maybe I should have perservered but as an utter newbie trying to get a decent image at 2700mm on a shonky celestron wedge while learning what drift alignment was ...well forget it. Fortunately I gave that idea up.

Next purchase was a meade ed80 series 5000. The photos were a bit better but again piggy back on a Nexstar 11 with a hard to adjust wedge well.. again very difficult for a newb.

Next purchase was an EQ6. I wanted a G11 but after my previous efforts wasnt sure i could ever do astro photography and didnt want to waste 5,000 on a G11 that i wasnt sure i could use properly. I thought about a G8 but again didnt want to be limited to my 80mm refractor. The price of EQ6's dropped from 2400 AUD to 1900 AUD so i got one.

It took me ages to learn how to drift align but eventually i did. Guess what, my photo's were better. A bit of star trailing if i went over 1 minute, but under one minute no problems.

Next purchase was a 70mm achro of ebay for 70 bucks and an LPI for 100 bucks as a guider. Fantastic, now i could go for 5 minute subs with no trailing.

Still i wasnt happy with my photos. Why? Field curvature. So i got a televue reducer. Not a great match with the ED80. Field curvature gone but severe vignetting.

Next purchase was a Televue 85. For a newb i thought my photos had improved out of sight. No trailing, no field curvature, no vignetting. Was i happy. Of course not. Why? Because my camera is not modded and so i get horrible Ha response.

My next purchase will be proper astro cam. After that maybe a C9.25 OTA and after that who knows, maybe a G11 or better.

My point.

For a newb yes a mount is very very important. But on a limited budget IMHO the most important thing is a decent mount for the FL. The original poster has a C8 and may be able to stretch to an ED80. An EQ6 will be all he needs to hone his imaging skills on a C8 with 0.63 reducer. Next IMHO is the scope and a C8 is a decent scope so he has that already. Next IMHO is a better camera before a better mount; and he can always sell the EQ6.

Decent mount plus decent scope plus decent camera = decent pictures.

A better mount would not make for significatly better pictures at his focal length. If he wants to go longer in the future he can get a G11 or better. If he doesnt he would be better of getting a better camera.

At the end of the day he has a budget of 2000 AUD. For what he is attempting to do I see no problem with him getting an EQ6 and if he perserveres he will take nice photos.

For all we know he may take up planetary imaging and for that an EQ6 is definately adequate.

This will probably be my last post on this topic. I made it this long because i just cant help feeling that except for a few posters the OP is not getting serious answers to his question, with respect to his stated budget.

One poster said 'great thread except for the noise'. That is fine and i am glad he is getting something out of it. However he is not the one asking the original question.

Paul

[Hagar]

Matty P.

All the dribble aside, I have an EQ6 with Synscan and find the mount to be a great inexpensive mount which is quite suitable for imagining DSO's.
I am able to get good quality well tracked images out to 10 minutes by using a simple DSI and ED80 as my guide scope and an FS102 as an imaging scope with a Canon 40d up its rear. the goto is spot on as long as you take a little time doing your setup and use an illuminated reticle. We would all love the best gear money can buy but unfortunately a limitted budget often means some sacrifice.
The EQ6 with goto for $1700 - 1800 is an excelent mount to begin imaging with.

[Matty P]

I have decided to go with the EQ6, IMO for the price it can't be beaten. I think it will be a great way to get into imaging DSO's.

I will be autoguiding with my 80mm refractor and DMK so I should be able to get at least 10 minute subs without star trails. :)

I still haven't decided which camera I will be using. :doh:

Thanks for the help. :thumbsup:

[RB]

What will you be imaging through, (what F.L) ?

[Matty P]

I will start off imaging with my C8 with a 0.6 focal reducer = 1200mm fl.

I might also invest in a smaller scope. :whistle:

[Zuts]

Matty P

One frustrating part of the EQ6 for me was the DEC adjustment levers. I found them very awkward to use when drift aligning. Give the standard ones a go first but if you are not happy try these

http://www.starstuff.com.au/eqaccessories.html

They make adjustment during drift aligning much easier.

Paul