eq8 is here

[rustigsmed (Russell)]

Originally Posted by AstroJunk

I haven't told them yet, But I'm sure one will be sent in the fullness of time! I would expect the mount flanges to break well before the bolt if you seriously over tighened it, and that would be a problem...

And there goes my bottom bolt untightening as well ...

[OneCosmos (Chris)]

A pattern is emerging....Skywatcher/Tasco take note!

[TrevorW]

Some serious lack of quality control and end user testing by the sounds of it, I doubt I'd pay $4500 for a Chinese made mount, considering the EQ6 was only $1500, is this mount 3 times better

[Lee]

Originally Posted by TrevorW

Some serious lack of quality control and end user testing by the sounds of it, I doubt I'd pay $4500 for a Chinese made mount, considering the EQ6 was only $1500, is this mount 3 times better

From the PE readings being reported, and its large payload, it just might be 3x as good.....

[h0ughy (David)]

Originally Posted by TrevorW

Some serious lack of quality control and end user testing by the sounds of it, I doubt I'd pay $4500 for a Chinese made mount, considering the EQ6 was only $1500, is this mount 3 times better

quite simply - yes. it takes more weight which expands your scope choices. so in the end it is your choice no one is forcing you to go down this path.

[DJT (David)]

In my view the plucky pathfinders who are finding their way through what is basically a brand new product have cochones of steel given their investment and this thread will end up being one of the best and most referenced threads for new EQ8 adopters for quiet a while I suspect.

On ya boys! Looking forward to seeing the results over time.

[Bullockbob (Rob)]

In addition, I don't see the fact it is Chinese having much to do with it. There are also examples of mounts lacking a little QC that originate from other parts.

The eq8 is up against the likes of the G11 in terms of price. So far (and admittedly its early days) I'm glad I postponed my G11 purchase. The only annoyance I see with the Synta range of mounts are their very limited connectivity options. Something that Losmandy is leading the way with.


Cheers

[TrevorW]

I wouldn't expect this mount to have cost 3 times more to make either, time will tell whether people have made the right choice. As to it being 3 times better than an EQ6 I have my doubts.

Personally I would have expected it to cost less than a G11 to purchase. just my opinion. I'll say no more

[AstroJunk (Jonathan)]

I'm confused guys - why would you comare the EQ8 to a puny little G11? It's a head to head competitor to the Paramount MX in function, and in fact beats it in every respect except build quality

[GrahamL]

Harsh Jonathan

You guys have to get this puppy up and working , the improved version will be released soon

[AstroJunk (Jonathan)]

Originally Posted by nightstalker

Harsh Jonathan

You guys have to get this puppy up and working , the improved version will be released soon

My theory was that they can't afford for the first batch to be shonky, so they would be indvidually tested to perfection. As far as the drives and bearings are concerned that seems to be holding good.

The lemons are coming in the second batch

[pmrid (Peter)]

Originally Posted by AstroJunk

I'm confused guys - why would you comare the EQ8 to a puny little G11? It's a head to head competitor to the Paramount MX in function, and in fact beats it in every respect except build quality

Let me add my two bob's worth to this discussion. I have both a Titan and an EQ8 on piers in my obs.
They have much the same weight-carrying capacity.
The Titan has no homing mechanism or encoders for maintaining position information.
The Tian relies upon a control system (Gemini) that continues to be problematic whereas the Synta hand control is virtually indestructible.
Both are capable of direct PC control but (I think) only the EQ8 can do EQMOD.
Where the EQ8 is not better is that the Titan (like the G11) can be stripped down for easy cleaning, repair and transportation.

To my mind, the EQ8 is equal to if not better than the Titan and half the price.

The other mount mentioned here is the PMX which I have also owned but sold. It occupied the same pier as the EQ8 now sits on.
I think the PMX had better design features and better build. But it was just not for me. I didn't mesh with it whereas the EQ8 is refreshingly simple and so far at least reliable and at much less than half the price.

Of the two, I much prefer my EQ8. In addition, I resented the way the PMX locked me into a software relationship that cost me ongoing annual licence fees. The EQ8 does not.

Peter

[frolinmod]

I resented the way the PMX locked me into a software relationship that cost me ongoing annual license fees.

It certainly does lock you into a software relationship. You don't have to pay the yearly subscription fees if you don't want to. They're not for the license to run the software. They're for access to the updates (which I think are absolutely essential). The software will not stop running if you don't pay the fee, but lack of access to updates would likely be problematic.

[h0ughy (David)]

Originally Posted by pmrid

Let me add my two bob's worth to this discussion. I have both a Titan and an EQ8 on piers in my obs.
They have much the same weight-carrying capacity.
The Titan has no homing mechanism or encoders for maintaining position information.
The Tian relies upon a control system (Gemini) that continues to be problematic whereas the Synta hand control is virtually indestructible.
Both are capable of direct PC control but (I think) only the EQ8 can do EQMOD.
Where the EQ8 is not better is that the Titan (like the G11) can be stripped down for easy cleaning, repair and transportation.

To my mind, the EQ8 is equal to if not better than the Titan and half the price.

The other mount mentioned here is the PMX which I have also owned but sold. It occupied the same pier as the EQ8 now sits on.
I think the PMX had better design features and better build. But it was just not for me. I didn't mesh with it whereas the EQ8 is refreshingly simple and so far at least reliable and at much less than half the price.

Of the two, I much prefer my EQ8. In addition, I resented the way the PMX locked me into a software relationship that cost me ongoing annual licence fees. The EQ8 does not.

Peter

exactly spot on Peter!!! I feel that a lot of the armchair astronomers out there have no idea, which makes their arguments rather moot and really just stirring the pot to get their jolly's.

It is for that simplicity that i bought mine - it will allow me to use a wide variety of scopes anywhere. I have a G11, I have a Titan, I had a EQ6 and still own a heqpro5. I bought the sky6 from an IIS member and loaded it in the hope to use AUTOMADOME. No support, but they wanted me to pay for the licence yearly. and it never worked for me

[Logieberra (Logan)]

Originally Posted by AstroJunk

I'm confused guys - why would you comare the EQ8 to a puny little G11? It's a head to head competitor to the Paramount MX in function, and in fact beats it in every respect except build quality

Interesting comparison. Have you owned or used both mounts? It's more like Hyundai vs. Toyota. Yes. Both are cars, have engines and roll! Differences? You'd hope so for the price. Owners of older-style AP, SB and HGM mounts are still rolling years later. Can the same be predicted for the 8? Time will tell. They sure got something right with the EQ6

[Paul Haese]

Originally Posted by h0ughy

No support, but they wanted me to pay for the licence yearly. and it never worked for me

This is not true. You don't have to pay for a license fee each year. As Ernie said it is an update fee. You don't really need to pay it in my opinion if everything works for you.

As to the EQ8 being on par with the PMX, I think that is a fairy land exaggeration. While I am more than happy to use a variety of products the EQ8 would not have the pointing capacity of a PMX. Nor would you be able to use the EQ8 for robotic operation collecting data night after night at a remote site or event setup to act remotely at home. It is just not the same level of sophistication. The PMX does require software to run and that is not that bad even if you want to travel with the mount. It is designed for use at star parties as well as being permanent.

The EQ6 was is a fine mount and I am sure that the EQ8 is now, but certainly not on par with the PMX.

[ZeroID (Brent)]

EQ8 was advertised over here in NZ by a local supplier, $6499, .
Don't think I'll be buying one soon. Equates to nearly my entire astronomy budget to date.

[Bullockbob (Rob)]

Hi Paul

Can you elaborate on your claim that the EQ8 would not have the pointing capacity of a PMX please?

I agree about robotic operation. It badly needs a tcp interface and built in web server. Then again it appears ppl use the direct pc connection method without too much trouble.

Cheers
Rob

Originally Posted by Paul Haese

As to the EQ8 being on par with the PMX, I think that is a fairy land exaggeration. While I am more than happy to use a variety of products the EQ8 would not have the pointing capacity of a PMX. Nor would you be able to use the EQ8 for robotic operation collecting data night after night at a remote site or event setup to act remotely at home. It is just not the same level of sophistication.

[Shiraz (Ray)]

Originally Posted by Bullockbob

Hi Paul

Can you elaborate on your claim that the EQ8 would not have the pointing capacity of a PMX please?

I agree about robotic operation. It badly needs a tcp interface and built in web server. Then again it appears ppl use the direct pc connection method without too much trouble.

Cheers
Rob

my question as well.

I thought that all mounts are basically just a couple of motor drives + bearings, clutches, encoders etc. They all count pulses (stepper or encoder) to keep track of where they are and the EQ8 drive has about 0.1 arcsec pulse resolution - so the ultimate pointing limit will be determined by the PE and flexing in the mount structure and bearings. The EQ8 has low PE and no-one would say that it looks flimsy - it might not be pretty, but it sure looks strong and it seems reasonable to assume that it will point well.

Surely the sophistication of high end mounts resides in the associated software? As far as I can tell, the EQ8 should happily run with TPOINT, TheSkyX, anything ASCOM or whatever else you care to use, so it should be just as sophisticated as the high end mounts if you want to go down the automation route. If I have got this wrong, would appreciate feedback since I had been planning to place an order for an EQ8.

regards ray

[Paul Haese]

Guys if you can run the EQ8 under Tpoint it might compete. However, I don't see that happening yet at all. With Tpoint my mount can point at 12 arc seconds. If the EQ8 can point at 12 arc seconds at present it would present a coupe, but I don't see that happening.

The more high end mounts have integration ports which allow for automation. All I see on the EQ8 is a guide port and an hand controller port. I might be wrong here but I don't think it will be useful for automation at present. It really needs a USB port (USB2) for automation. In time it might have the necessary ports but for now I cannot see it happening.

The PE graphs I have seen so far look incredibly flat and this makes me wonder if the PE is being taken correctly (not saying anyone is stupid here but it can be taken incorrectly). The PME has a sine wave graph and even the AP mounts do. Nearly flat graphs indicate that the camera is not orientated correctly. Happy to be wrong but at this stage I am cautious about any claims being made.

Don't get me wrong I am happy to see more competition and maybe provide a different price point, but assertions of this mount being equal to an AP or a PMX is really over reaching. Ray come down to my place sometime and see a PME and then you will see what I am talking about.