Just so I understand (completely), and assuming the EQ8 doesn't have a pointing accuracy of 12, why is that so critical to you? Just for robotic operation?
In terms of automation, surely a tcp interface (ala Losmandy) is far better than USB?
Comparisons of mounts, like most things, should surely be based on price first. Therefore as I mentioned in a previous post the eq8 is right at the G11 price point. However, it may well be the case that its punching higher than that, closer to (but not the same as) the PMX in terms of load carrying and PE. If that is the case then it will surely prove to be excellent value.
Cheers
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
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.
exactly what I wanted to find out thanks. TheSkyX can run any of the Skywatcher mounts and my understanding is that TPOINT runs in that environment, so it should be possible to run TPOINT/EQ8. All the Skywatcher mounts can run USB with an adapter.
All of the EQ8 PE curves I have seen suggest about 6-8 arc sec pp and smooth, which seems reasonable for a system with 8 inch gears and direct drive to the worms. I used phd for getting pe data from my EQ6 and that automatically corrects for camera orientation - pecprep takes care of scale and Dec. don't know about other software, but it isn't too hard to get reliable PE data and I would assume that most published data is OK.
Prefer not to see a PME in action who knows, I might want one. My philosophy is to wring the last ounce of performance out of the gear that I have and I haven't quite got there yet with my EQ6. But thanks very much for the kind invite.
Regards Ray
... 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
C'mon mate, no support?! That's not fair. I remember that thread - it was you who gave up, not SB and now you're bagging them? You had 2 Bisque brothers respond - starting the day after you posted (ie pretty much instantly). At no point in that thread (that I was following - because I wanted to help too) do I recall them saying "pay up". You probably need to move on ... or buy TheSkyX
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiraz
...
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
That's a good question Ray. The sophistication of high end mounts resides in their mechanical accuracy. Software, no matter how sophisticated, doesn't count for anything unless the mechanics can keep up. I don't own an EQ8 or a PMX but I can speak to the mechanical accuracy of a PME. My RMS pointing with a TPoint Supermodel is 9 arcseconds RMS with a peak error of 20. When the mount is asked to move 5 arcseconds, it moves 5 arcseconds. I use CCD Autopilot for automation. When it goes off to a focus star and comes back, my target is between 0.5 and 1.5 arcseconds away from the requested coordinates - every time and with only one iteration plate solve and correction. My raw PE is 1.6 arcseconds peak to peak. That's what sophistication means .
If an EQ8 can match that or even get close I'd say Software Bisque is in trouble. But I wouldn't lay bets on it.
C'mon mate, no support?! That's not fair. I remember that thread - it was you who gave up, not SB and now you're bagging them? You had 2 Bisque brothers respond - starting the day after you posted (ie pretty much instantly). At no point in that thread (that I was following - because I wanted to help too) do I recall them saying "pay up". You probably need to move on ... or buy TheSkyX
..............................
Marcus,
i had sent of several requests for help, yes they replied in the first instance but after that they didn't, especially after i had followed what they had said to do to the letter, if you remember i rebuilt the software on that PC 3 times. I then got a reminder email stating that i had to pay the upkeep for the Automadome - at which point i was very very frustrated and angry as the level of support and the quality of the software seemed on very different levels. There were no more replies, you can only kick a dead horse so many times. Someone else had the exact same question as me on their website, to which i replied - still no response. I did thank you at the time for your help, your advice seemed a lot better than theirs. I think getting theskyX and the maintenance would be another mistake, especially after a $900 investment in software that is non functional. yes i am bitter and twisted on this one and yes i will bag them, I have that right, especially after they didn't fix the problem or respond further and for the record i gave up after 12 months of trying to get the thing to work and no further support apart from the first responses - i was just wiped. if it all had worked as it was supposed to then you would probably find a different answer.
but the eq8 is for the field, only need it to point and track and find the objects
... I think getting theskyX and the maintenance would be another mistake, especially after a $900 investment in software that is non functional. ...
Wow, $900?!!!! that would buy you practically the whole s/w suite these days!! Did you buy it all second hand? For me at least, that kind of money would have been a strong incentive to persist in getting it working! Which you would eventually have done I think. After all, the software was indeed functional for the vast majority of users and as I recall it was only the scripting (vbs) for dome slaving that wasn't working for you - even after I gave you my version - very strange. I was using the same s/w and h/w combo as you for years out of the box through 2 different lappies. Same with TSX - no fiddling, it just works. Oh well.
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
I've owned BMW's and Mercedes. I always prefered my VWs. They are cheaper to buy, cheaper to run and do exactly the same job (and no one ever keyed my Golf, but that's a different analogy...)
Both the EQ8 and PMX have set out to properly accommodate the largest consumer SCT's ie the 14" Celestron or Meade. That requires a payload capacity of 40+ kg. Other mounts that weigh in are the AP1100, Losmandy Titan and the latest GGE Pro mount from Celestron. My post was mainly to stop the silly notion that a G11 was even comparable - I have used one of those and it has litrerally half the capacity.
And there is no doubt that those top end mounts are beautiful in a way that the EQ8 can never be with machined and anodised parts. But Skywatcher have done exactly whay they set out to do - use mass production techniques to create a mount just as capable at a fraction of the price.
As I have said before, I cannot compare directly, but I have yet to see a test it hasn't passed. It has low PE, it can point too and with EQMOD, integrates perfectly into my remote observatory and is already sucessfully gathering scientific data more acurately than my previous fork mount. The best bit for me is simply to be able to open up the clutches and swing the scope to the best position to be able to change cameras, collimate etc, then slew back to target without loosing alignment. It comes in very handy.
That's a good question Ray. The sophistication of high end mounts resides in their mechanical accuracy. Software, no matter how sophisticated, doesn't count for anything unless the mechanics can keep up. I don't own an EQ8 or a PMX but I can speak to the mechanical accuracy of a PME. My RMS pointing with a TPoint Supermodel is 9 arcseconds RMS with a peak error of 20. When the mount is asked to move 5 arcseconds, it moves 5 arcseconds. I use CCD Autopilot for automation. When it goes off to a focus star and comes back, my target is between 0.5 and 1.5 arcseconds away from the requested coordinates - every time and with only one iteration plate solve and correction. My raw PE is 1.6 arcseconds peak to peak. That's what sophistication means .
If an EQ8 can match that or even get close I'd say Software Bisque is in trouble. But I wouldn't lay bets on it.
Pretty much my experience too. Incredible to watch it point and then just one minor adjustment to put me back in the same spot.
Bob, pointing for imaging big runs (10-100 hours of data) requires that you put the scope back in the same spot and pointing accuracy needs to be tip top to get repeatable results. If the mount cannot point quite accurately it takes several iterations to get the scope back in the same position. That can add up to lots of time you are not imaging and collecting data. That's why good pointing is so necessary.
Pretty much my experience too. Incredible to watch it point and then just one minor adjustment to put me back in the same spot.
Bob, pointing for imaging big runs (10-100 hours of data) requires that you put the scope back in the same spot and pointing accuracy needs to be tip top to get repeatable results. If the mount cannot point quite accurately it takes several iterations to get the scope back in the same position. That can add up to lots of time you are not imaging and collecting data. That's why good pointing is so necessary.
Well Paul, a picture is worth a thousand words.
Your image of The Wolf - SL17 Dark Nebula is simply superb (see image of the week folks).
If I win lotto it will be a MX for me but reality says this time next year its an EQ8 but then I'm only after 30 sec images. And this will be more than adequate for the LX200.
Great thread, great responses and discussion & all FIRST here on IIS, the others can but follow.
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.
Paul, I guess you are talking about this result. I suppose you have never used this version of pempro else you would know that what you are seeing is the correction curve not the error curve. Please note the eqmod tab, you won't see that visible on yours as your mount is not ascom compliant. I guess if you had a technical background instead of a legal background, this wouldn't need to be pointed out.
I have 35 plus years experience dealing with electronics and complex technical entities and hold a degree in software engineering. I'm pretty sure sure I can capture data from a guide camera
And, it does work with TPoint. Although I don't need or use it. As with the eq6, I just use maxim to slew to target, pinpoint, sync and correct and it's there. I have slewed from the SE to the NW and it pinpoints in seconds. That is where the eq6 used to get lost, this one doesn't. I drive it remotely except I still need to fit the robofocus to the scope.
I'll add that a lot of people use automation software to drive skywatcher mounts, ap mounts, etc etc as robotic mounts.
Apart from the advertising, what makes a Bisque mount the robotic mount ?
As ray said, they are all just gears and motors + software.
Pempro's camera orientation and calibration setup for PEC is a beautiful thing isn't it! It's fool proof with, 'what shape is the L?'
Users of TheSkyX (and now retired CCDSoft) don't have it so easy (well, not as of the latest daily build anyway) and we often read about mis-orientated cameras. I've been there myself. The PE graphs produced on those nights appear pancake flat; as you'd expect when a camera is off by 90deg and thereby lowering the RA's peak to peak error
I've been at it again - forgive the pom narrating....
Make with it as you will. The separation wasn't far, only half a degree or so, but the aquisition of the target is just as reliable over a much greater distance.
I still haven't sorted my cone errors out or done any pointing runs to give a better pointing precision, this test is simply to see if the scope is consistant between slews from one object to another based on Pauls need to slew off to a star for refocussing and back. Spoiler alert. It is.
I forgot to slip the clutches and then have it go exactly to the same point again. Great party trick
Heck, if you're going to be setting up an automated remote observatory, an extra $5-$10k for the mount is likely to the be the least of your financial worries. The EQ8 is very much looking like the first industrial strength chinese mount with great carrying capacity, ease of use and price <$5k. For a long time the standard advice for people that know they're getting serious about astrophotograpy has been "don't buy anything less than an EQ6". If you have space for it, the EQ8 is looking like the new entry benchmark for top end performance.
I'm inclined to agree with Peter - when/if I can afford a Bisque mount I'll happily use and look after it. Until then, I just might be able to find a few thousand extra to upgrade to an EQ8.
I think a lot of people would be grateful to see more PE curves getting posted as people get their mounts, so we get a better idea of population spread. Certainly looking very encouraging to date.
Paul, I guess you are talking about this result. I suppose you have never used this version of pempro else you would know that what you are seeing is the correction curve not the error curve. Please note the eqmod tab, you won't see that visible on yours as your mount is not ascom compliant. I guess if you had a technical background instead of a legal background, this wouldn't need to be pointed out.
I have 35 plus years experience dealing with electronics and complex technical entities and hold a degree in software engineering. I'm pretty sure sure I can capture data from a guide camera
And, it does work with TPoint. Although I don't need or use it. As with the eq6, I just use maxim to slew to target, pinpoint, sync and correct and it's there. I have slewed from the SE to the NW and it pinpoints in seconds. That is where the eq6 used to get lost, this one doesn't. I drive it remotely except I still need to fit the robofocus to the scope.
I'll add that a lot of people use automation software to drive skywatcher mounts, ap mounts, etc etc as robotic mounts.
Apart from the advertising, what makes a Bisque mount the robotic mount ?
As ray said, they are all just gears and motors + software.
No need to get narky Robin. Don't simply assume someone who has a background in law is an idiot mate. Setup this rig for imaging night after night and show me the subs I want to see if you can get subs that are 2 pixels different from one night to the next. I will be very happy for you to get reliable pointing data. Like I have said I am an adopter of lots of different gear, but night after night operation is another matter. Until I see it happen I will assume it is vapour ware. Like I said happy to be wrong.
Jonathan, slew to the zenith do a focus run and then slew back to the target again and then do that night after night every hour. 3 star alignment will not give reliable results night after night.
Anyway you guys are happy with what you are working with, when you get it robotic please let me know.
Paul,
I understand your discussion, but I'm having difficulty, even with a remote automated set-up as you why you really need pixel to pixel registration for your observering runs....
That's equivalent to positioning a known target star on a 12 micron slit, using a camera with 6.4 micron pixels, everytime, night after night...I haven't seen many observatories with that spectroscopic capability.
These things have encoders and home as well, but not via eqmod yet.
I just slew to star from park and it instantly does a pinpoint, same thing ?
OK, yes, it does have home sensors, thats very good.
Slewing from park and plate solving is fine..... until one day you loose power when its not parked.I think that means a trip to the remote site?. Although I suppose you could do a very intensive plate solve to see where it is. I used a fancy plate solve service with a pic on the web once, and it worked a treat.
Anyway, it has home sensors, thats the main thing. Im sure the software you have will be sorted eventually and itll all be good.
OK, yes, it does have home sensors, thats very good.
Slewing from park and plate solving is fine..... until one day you loose power when its not parked.I think that means a trip to the remote site?. Although I suppose you could do a very intensive plate solve to see where it is. I used a fancy plate solve service with a pic on the web once, and it worked a treat.
Anyway, it has home sensors, thats the main thing. Im sure the software you have will be sorted eventually and itll all be good.
Fred, not only does it have home sensors, it has encoders too. You can switch the EQ8 on from dead and it knows where it is. Never thought we'd end up with EQ8 deniers out there
because of the weather and being crook i have placed myself in a position of not putting this up yet and testing. probably still wont get a chance until astrofest, but there is one thing that is bothering me and that it how it will work with tandum saddle bars? with the eq6 you could spin it around and it didnt matter, but noiw with the encoders and the home position i am not so sure? I am looking to setting up a c11 and solar scope side by side?
who knows, I might want one. My philosophy is to wring the last ounce of performance out of the gear that I have and I haven't quite got there yet with my EQ6. But thanks very much for the kind invite.
.
