Does anybody have a mechanical drawings with dimensions of the pier/tripod adapter plate?
I intend to get the mount only, pier will be concrete and/or steel in my own arrangement.
I don't think there is much point spending tens of thousands on a mount if your optics and camera are only worth a couple of thousand. If I had unlimited money to spend then I'd go for it and upgrade the mount, scope, focuser and camera. Having said that, I still live in a highly light polluted suburb with extremely limited horizons so if I didn't enjoy tinkering with the gear I'd be better off hiring time on a remote scope (or just purchase Hubble images).
I don't think there is much point spending tens of thousands on a mount if your optics and camera are only worth a couple of thousand. If I had unlimited money to spend then I'd go for it and upgrade the mount, scope, focuser and camera. Having said that, I still live in a highly light polluted suburb with extremely limited horizons so if I didn't enjoy tinkering with the gear I'd be better off hiring time on a remote scope (or just purchase Hubble images).
Thanks Peter,
I quite agree.
Melbourne is not a very good place for a telescope either.
Also - there is a certain amount of pride to be had from getting great results
from equipment which is not the most expensive available.
I prefer to work on a low budget.
This is where the EQ8 becomes almost irresistible as nothing
else can handle such a heavy 50Kg payload for that price.
It means that you can get the light collecting power of a large telescope
& collect data faster.
You could even put 2 or more 10" f4 telescopes like mine on one mount
& get data from 2 or more cameras at the same time.
Thanks Peter,
I quite agree.
Melbourne is not a very good place for a telescope either.
Also - there is a certain amount of pride to be had from getting great results
from equipment which is not the most expensive available.
I prefer to work on a low budget.
This is where the EQ8 becomes almost irresistible as nothing
else can handle such a heavy 50Kg payload for that price.
It means that you can get the light collecting power of a large telescope
& collect data faster.
You could even put 2 or more 10" f4 telescopes like mine on one mount
& get data from 2 or more cameras at the same time.
cheers
Allan
Sounds like we have a similar philosophy (and constraints) although one 10" f4 is enough for me.
I also agree.
At first I was considering EQ6 as sufficient for my 10" F/5.6 Newt (mine is fully internal belt-modified, with OnStep controller), but that OTA (fiberglass) weights ~13kg... this is sort of within the claimed capacity of EQ6, but too close to upper limit to my taste (and I believe all those claims should be divided by at least 2 to avoid overloading).
I even made SerrurierTruss from rectangular 25mm Al tubing, but saved only ~1.5kg.. so I decided to abandon this approach, and go for bigger mount.
I also agree.
At first I was considering EQ6 as sufficient for my 10" F/5.6 Newt (mine is fully internal belt-modified, with OnStep controller), but that OTA (fiberglass) weights ~13kg... this is sort of within the claimed capacity of EQ6, but too close to upper limit to my taste (and I believe all those claims should be divided by at least 2 to avoid overloading).
I even made SerrurierTruss from rectangular 25mm Al tubing, but saved only ~1.5kg.. so I decided to abandon this approach, and go for bigger mount.
All I've managed to do is add weight to mine!
- Replaced original Meade rings with Parallax
- Replaced original Vixen dovetails with Losmandy
- Added a doubling plate behind the focuser to avoid flex
- Replaced QHY8 with QSI683ws8
I originally planned to replace the mirror cell with something more sturdy to help hold collimation however tighter springs seems to have worked ok with the original cell.
I had also contemplated Moonlite's new Nitecrawler rotating focuser but it is quite heavy so haven't progressed that plan (yet).
I also agree.
At first I was considering EQ6 as sufficient for my 10" F/5.6 Newt (mine is fully internal belt-modified, with OnStep controller), but that OTA (fiberglass) weights ~13kg... this is sort of within the claimed capacity of EQ6, but too close to upper limit to my taste (and I believe all those claims should be divided by at least 2 to avoid overloading).
I even made SerrurierTruss from rectangular 25mm Al tubing, but saved only ~1.5kg.. so I decided to abandon this approach, and go for bigger mount.
Hi Bojan,
My scope weighs about the same & works fine with a modified EQ6.
Did you try a better counter weight shaft with your EQ6 as I did below?:
02-01-2017, 09:29 AM https://www.flickr.com/photos/247194...in/photostream
Hi Bojan,
My scope weighs about the same & works fine with a modified EQ6.
Did you try a better counter weight shaft with your EQ6 as I did below?:
02-01-2017, 09:29 AM https://www.flickr.com/photos/247194...in/photostream
cheers
Allan
Hi Alan,
I have thicker shaft for counterweight (30mm I think), this is not the problem..
When I put the whole thing together, I simply didn't have the feeling the mount is strong&sturdy enough, there was noticeable and slow swinging of the whole thing (on tripod.. situation may be better on pier, I have yet to try that)), that made me quite uncomfortable.
Also, for EQ6 "official" useful payload capacity is 25kg (~50kg with counterweight), and I consider this as absolute, short term maximum... 18kg is too close to that limit IMO.
Hi Alan,
I have thicker shaft for counterweight (30mm I think), this is not the problem..
When I put the whole thing together, I simply didn't have the feeling the mount is strong&sturdy enough, there was noticeable and slow swinging of the whole thing (on tripod.. situation may be better on pier, I have yet to try that)), that made me quite uncomfortable.
Also, for EQ6 "official" useful payload capacity is 25kg (~50kg with counterweight), and I consider this as absolute, short term maximum... 18kg is too close to that limit IMO.
Hi Bojan,
OK - I thought your actual OTA with camera weight is about 13 Kg like mine?
13 Kg is fine for imaging with an EQ6 especially with a proper counterweight shaft screwed into the holder.
Also my 10" f4 is quite short so there is less bending moment than
a longer telescope like yours.
(Just for the benefit of others.
If you have an unmodified EQ6 - take off the counterweights &
use your hand to put force side ways & back on the counter weight shaft -
you'll see that it's really wobbly.
The easy modification linked below, fixes it & makes a huge difference)
Another mount that I have heard good things about is the Mesu200. It isn't cheap but it isn't overly expensive either considering it's 80-100kg capacity.
Another mount that I have heard good things about is the Mesu200. It isn't cheap but it isn't overly expensive either considering it's 80-100kg capacity.
Thank you!
