I haven't imaged with the AZ-EQ5 until now as I've been worried about wasting one of the rare clear opportunities available. It mostly went well although I do have to adjust the worms - lost several frames with big tracking jumps, I think due to interaction between backlash and dithering.
I did get an improved California nebula due to better conditions. Fading conditions limited how much I could get on the Xmas Tree. Both images are 45 minutes.
Good to see the AZEQ5 is working out for you.
Any feeling for how it compares in accuracy with the HEQ5
I have yet not unpacked my AZ-EQ5 under my smoke filled skies, but your (relative) confidence in it was one reason I bought mine at the recent sales at Andrews. For me a very mobile but (hopefully) not too fiddly mount that could do EQ tracking (and imaging with small scopes) but was not limited to that for when I get back to spending more time as a visual observer seemed an attractive combination.
Since I am not skilled at mount debugging I may pick your brains on how to deal with any issues as I recognise them as arising.
Andrew's sales info also seem to suggest a new version of the EQAZ6 was going to be released in Jan. Anyone heard any details on that? A bit of modernization of the interface would be good.
Hi Ross, the AZ-EQ5 is lighter weight and lighter duty than the HEQ5. The only issue I've seen with the AZ-EQ5 is that the worm mesh needs adjusting, but that goes for most new Skywatcher mounts.
If you're not confident in adjusting worm mesh you can get it done by Skywatcher Australia under warranty, assuming there is a little backlash in your mount. The main thing to avoid is having the worms too tight causing binding.
Basically the motor cover and motor is removed, then the mesh is adjusted and you do a full 360 degree rotation looking for binding.
The EQ6 family of mounts are simpler to adjust but probably equally finicky in terms of getting the adjustment just right.
Thanks for that Tony. I will see how it runs before I try any adjustments
And I hope making a small tension adjustment, for better or worse does not effect warranty.
I will be starting off with a Redcat so I trust imaging at a few minutes per exposure will be fairly forgiving at such short focal lengths and easier to change targets without losing some accuracy of alignment compared to star adventurer
And I hope making a small tension adjustment, for better or worse does not effect warranty.
I asked Earl from Skywatcher Australia if adjusting worm mesh would affect warranty and he said it would be ok. I imagine all imagers are likely to make such adjustments at some stage.
Hi Ross, the AZ-EQ5 is lighter weight and lighter duty than the HEQ5
That's interesting Tony, I was just on Skywatcher's website & they seem to claim 10kg payload capacity for HEQ5 Pro & 15kg (Astrophotography) payload capacity for AZ-EQ5 on either EQ 5 Tripod or Pier/tripod setup...
This seems to suggest Skywatcher think this is a heavier weight mount, do you not agree? Honest question mate... It's one of the options I'm considering to replace my CG5 if it dies or.... I find money..
For imaging the AZ-EQ5 is suitable for up to a 4" refractor IMO. I might be able to make my TS115 work on it but that would be near the top of it's capability.
I bought it as a lightweight, portable companion to the AZ-EQ6.
Might not some of the payload 'confusion' for this less commonly used mount be the difference between using the mount for visual purposes in ALT-Az mode versus imaging in equatorial mode.
In visual use there is considerable variation among users on how steady a mount must be to satisfy the user and it would also vary whether you were using a short tube or a long tube etc.
I have assumed the HEQ5pro would be the sturdier mount in general, but I would hope that the belt in the AZ-EQ5 would mean that it was a little smoother if used in its comfort zone for scope size. Oops..read the offline comment now, I do not men to extend any arguments..
Might not some of the payload 'confusion' for this less commonly used mount be the difference between using the mount for visual purposes in ALT-Az mode versus imaging in equatorial mode.
In visual use there is considerable variation among users on how steady a mount must be to satisfy the user and it would also vary whether you were using a short tube or a long tube etc.
I have assumed the HEQ5pro would be the sturdier mount in general, but I would hope that the belt in the AZ-EQ5 would mean that it was a little smoother if used in its comfort zone for scope size. Oops..read the offline comment now, I do not men to extend any arguments..
Nah, not an argument Ross...just a discussion. I'm just going off the SW page (which doesn't mean it's right)... I've only asked to move it offline so that Tony & I can hopefully back & forth a bit easier without tying up an entire thread...l
SW states that the payload of 15kg for the AZEQ5 is (Astrophotography) so, I assume they mean in EQ mode but, I don't own one so... totally respect Tony's views since he has one...
Andrew's sales info also seem to suggest a new version of the EQAZ6 was going to be released in Jan. Anyone heard any details on that? A bit of modernization of the interface would be good.
That's probably just referring to the updated hand controller (having a usb port).
Regarding the 15kg astrophotography payload for the AZ-EQ5, at best that includes the counterweights. An enquiry sent to Skywatcher Australia would clear things up.
That's interesting Tony, I was just on Skywatcher's website & they seem to claim 10kg payload capacity for HEQ5 Pro & 15kg (Astrophotography) payload capacity for AZ-EQ5 on either EQ 5 Tripod or Pier/tripod setup...
The heaviest load I put on mine comes in at 11.2kg, and it handles that just fine. I did need some new counter weights though; the two it come with were practically hanging off the edge to balance it, so a new EQ6 counterweight has been added.
However, that setup is pretty squat, based around an Esprit 100 with extras strapped on top, so the weight is nicely distributed and easy to keep over the centre of gravity. It’s more temperamental when I use the Vixen VC200l, but it’s weight is poorly distributed and quickly becomes a wind sail in anything more than a very light breeze - but weighs less then 9kg all up. A big solid tube newt would be asking for trouble I think!
I think the advertised weight limit is ‘right’, but in common practice for these consumer mounts, apply the rule of two-thirds and keep weight to about 10kg. Over that and it’s down to things are built and distributed. The mount is a good performer though, from my backyard in Brisbane, where seeing is rarely better than ok-ish, I get 0.7 to 1” total RMS error per PHD2 in otherwise good conditions. It’s no AP or Paramount killer, but I’m pretty happy with that for a small, light and easy transported mount.
The heaviest load I put on mine comes in at 11.2kg, and it handles that just fine. I did need some new counter weights though; the two it come with were practically hanging off the edge to balance it, so a new EQ6 counterweight has been added.
However, that setup is pretty squat, based around an Esprit 100 with extras strapped on top, so the weight is nicely distributed and easy to keep over the centre of gravity. It’s more temperamental when I use the Vixen VC200l, but it’s weight is poorly distributed and quickly becomes a wind sail in anything more than a very light breeze - but weighs less then 9kg all up. A big solid tube newt would be asking for trouble I think!
I think the advertised weight limit is ‘right’, but in common practice for these consumer mounts, apply the rule of two-thirds and keep weight to about 10kg. Over that and it’s down to things are built and distributed. The mount is a good performer though, from my backyard in Brisbane, where seeing is rarely better than ok-ish, I get 0.7 to 1” total RMS error per PHD2 in otherwise good conditions. It’s no AP or Paramount killer, but I’m pretty happy with that for a small, light and easy transported mount.
Thankyou, good to know..
Won't be putting a big solid tube Newt on it.. my Vixen R130SF is only 650mm long & quite light.. Would carry that or Meade 80mm triplet for AP duties in EQ mode & an Intes M715D for visual & planetary in Alt/Az mode so, pretty happy it would do the job I need after chatting with Tony & from what you have posted...
Be keen to know if anyone has experience with the pier/tripod setup; I live in Cairns & with no moveable azimuth peg (ala the Celestron tripods) I will need either the pier/tripod mounted version or an extension pier on the full tripod model in order to not hit a tripod leg with the counterweights...
Now, just need my CG5 to break () or come into some money or sell more body parts...
)
