EQ6 V's EQ5

[DobDobDob]

Hi :P

In real terms apart from the cost, is there a noticeable and real advantage to upgrading from EQ5 to an EQ6, if so, what are the basic points?

If not, i.e. the difference would be so slight that you could only detect it in perfect conditions (which I will never have where I live), what would the next substantial improvement in mount be, given I have a 6" refractor on an EQ5, which has clock drive in both axis, but seems to struggle under the load, not sure if this is a battery low issue or not.

Finally, can I assume that with the best mounts, that the type and size of telescope won't really be an issue because you can counter balance almost anything, within reason....or is there a whole world of matching mounts to telescopes of which I am not aware of yet?

[janoskiss]

eq6 is a *lot* sturdier and stronger. hatchback vs full size 4WD sort of difference.

[DobDobDob]

Right, thanks, there has to be some noticeable difference, otherwise no one would sell or buy them. Essentially they are still a mount, and as I have read (yes I am paying attention), vibrations are very undesirable, thus a better mount should equal a more pleasing observational experience ('me thinks) :whistle:

[ving]

have kyou considered a heq5 if cost is an issue?

[DobDobDob]

No, but this looks nice: http://www.skywatchertelescope.net/EQ6SkyScan.html (http://www.skywatchertelescope.net/EQ6SkyScan.html) :whistle:

I haven't even bothered to find out a price yet :doh:

[g__day]

From memory the EQ5 had better PEC, given both where lightly loaded versus their respective carrying capacity. But the EQ6 is designed to carry alot more weight than a EQ5.

So its fit for purpose. If you want to mount heavy gear, or image successful you need the right mount.

Anyone remember this thread comparing each EQ mounts capabilities?

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

[DobDobDob]

Thanks for the thread, I should have searched first (sorry basically lazy), I'll read this tomorrow :thumbsup:

[ballaratdragons]

Ron, That link you supplied (EQ6) is the same one I have and it is a great mount.

The EQ5 is a tad small if you want to throw a bit of weight on it (and GoTo isn't standard. You have to fit your own if you can find one).

The HEQ5 is somewhere in between the 2 and has GoTo. They are all popular, but for different sized scopes.

[DobDobDob]

Hi again, as promised I went and ready that thread, it seems that there are two profound points:

1. Astrophotography requires a far greater degree of stability due to the long exposure times.

2. The basic difference of all mounts is the load bearing capability.

Assuming I have that correct, and trying to ignore 'Goto's that tend to enter the equation but I have purposely left out of my thinking at this point, because from all the advice I have been given, by far one of the main tenants seems to be, learn the Sky first the old fashioned way.

So, now I have to come to terms with the pricing, there seems to be absolutely no consistent theme, each manufacturer prices according to their own criteria, and as expected each subsequent better model costs more, however sometimes it's hard to see that the price rise from model to model is justified compared to the increased quality.

Having said all that, I want one of these below, but can't see it happening anytime soon in this millennium :whistle:

"Mountain Instruments (+ Losmandy Gemini Go To) http://www.mathis-instruments.com/ (http://www.mathis-instruments.com/)

MI 1000 $52,000"

or even better, one of these:

"Takahashi http://www.telescopes.com/specialty_...s--Mounts.html (http://www.telescopes.com/specialty_v2/Tripods--Mounts.html)

EM-3500 $118,000"

Thanks again for the great work that has gone into that thread previously. :thumbsup:

[DobDobDob]

Thanks Ken, yes all that you have said corresponds to what I have read around various sites and threads. I think I should have actually named this thread differently, it should have been:

"Clock drives V's Goto"

I am convinced that the mount for me is not an issue, I have a 6" Synta Refractor on the EQ5 mount, and as far as I'm concerned, it is weighted beautifully, it balances perfectly if you play with the counterweights in the beginning of a session.

However I don't like the nature of the clock drives, they seem 'poor' to me, I don't know if I am confusing low battery power for performance, but until Saturday when I can go to Dick Smiths and buy a battery recharger with a built in power meter, I have no way of knowing the state of the batteries.

However if the batteries are okay and the performance of the clock drives is as good as it gets, then I really will think of upgrading to a Goto, even though conventional wisdom dictates that I learn the sky first, the old fashion way.

My dilemma is this, if I want to just replace the clock drives on both axis for a Goto, taking into account the price, will I be smarter in the long run, seeing I intend to get different telescopes as I progress, to get the Goto and better mount all in one go, it will probably work out cheaper that purchased individually.

I know I don't really need it now, but seeing I have a clear picture of the end game, why not work towards that from the start rather than taking the same old intermediate steps that all beginners go through....or is this necessary to teach valuable lessons?

Why is making costly financial mistakes such an important part of learning astronomy? That's what this forum is best at doing, short circuiting those mistakes, making the hobby cheaper generally, so that more people can be encouraged to participate beyond a certain start-up level.

On the surface, from a manufacturers point of view, it's very much an elitist hobby where money is king, this is a bad message to be sent out IMHO. I have as much money as the next bloke, but I don't necessarily like blowing it buying equipment that I will outgrow quickly and consistently.

Ahhhh it's such an intriguing side issue, the astronomy is straightforward, the sky is there, you point and look and wonder. But the peripherals are fraught with danger and many twists and turns, complete with it's own language and idiosyncrasies that could take a lifetime to learn.

This certainly is a wonderfully engrossing and engaging hobby, certainly the last great adventure I will embark on in this lifetime. :thumbsup:

[g__day]

Yes and yes on the points about mounts, but if you want shots over 3 minutes it better be very well balanced, protected, polar aligned and/or either have brilliant Periodic Error (PE) or a brilliant auto-guide system.

I'm really pushing it with my gear on a CG5. Its not fullly polar aligned yet, I'd say its less than 18 minutes off the SCP (say around a quarter of a degree). So for 20 - 40 minutes visual its fine - little observable drift, but for 5 minutes photography - huge pixel shift (say 5 - 20 pixels off if unguided).

So the better I can align, the less guiding I have to do, until if its perfectly aligned then its only PE I am correcting for. I notice sometimes in my longer shots if my auto-guiding is off (or poorly set) double stars or budgles appear. I am still learning the optimal settings for PHD - by this I mean how aggressive vs passive corrections are (I use 85%), also you have to determine how long vs short correction pulses are (I use 300 ms), how frequent or infrequent the corrections are sent (I use 0.5 ms - 1.5 secs, but on a really good, low PE mount I might only need to do 5 secs or longer adjustment checks), and lastly I've set my corrections to be triggered when the point error appears to be 1/4 of a pixel, and how much of the last correction it remember to better adjust the shot (I use 80%)!

So Autoguiding trying to fixing or at least minimise the consequences of any polar mis-alignment or PE errors in my mount, which will be really noticeable if not addressed in longer shots. The fixes will be slightly noticeable on long shots, especially if alot are needed, so a well aligned mount with low PE is ideal. That is why a paramount is designed to have a 1" PE before training. With that you'd only be doing very small corrections, very infrequently - so a 8 hour shot would be totally realistic. It might do that sort of shot with < 20 corrections say, for me in the same period I might hit 8,000 corrections or more; that will be noticeable.

Better quality mounts have much lower PE - that is the third factor that really has to be considered carefully in this thread.

* * * * * *

Later this year I'd like to go to a real mount, but one up from an EQ6. So my choices are four or five-fold in the next price category (which is just begining to touch on the high-end quality range) for the amount of gear I have to plan to carry:

1. Losmandy G11 and Gemini Goto $5,000 - $5,500

+ = high precision gear, great PE +/- 7"
- = I hear there is a high rate of motor burnout :( and PE jumps occassionaly (up to 6" every 30 secs have occurred, e.g.)

http://astroshed.com/observatory/g11saga/g11saga.htm

2. Celestron CGE $6,000

+ = simple to operate, massive load capabilities, simple to operate, kinda foolproof and very, very rugged
- = lesser pointing and tracking ability +/- 11" (PE) than the G11 due to lower quality gears and bearings, and a bit pricey

3. Vixen Atlux $7000 - $7,500

+ = Brilliant PE (I believe the new model targets +/- 5", and +/- 3" with PEC training) and goto, superb build quality (so its above a EMM200 in quality and capability)
- = pricey and lower weight bearing capacity than its competitors (sufficient but not much head room)

4. Takahashi EMM200 $6,700 or NJP $9,000

+ = NJP has best PE in its class (3.5 untrained, EMM200 is +/- 5"), brilliant build quality
- = Extremely pricey for the improvement in PE

At present I'm thinking the Atlux might be the best call.

Now I may want to one day put a 14" scope on this rig, with a moderately heavy refractor as a guidescope. If I want my targeted gear to have head room to cater for this, then the Atlux may well be overloaded. Then it falls down to getting a NJP. So if your toucking the $10K mark, why not say what stuff it, go high end - a Losmandy Titan, a high end TAK EM-400 or EM-500, a Mountian Instruments MI250, a 900 or 1200 AstroPhysics or the king of the hill the Paramount ME. Sure if I won the lottery a ME would be for me! But that makes sense when you have $10K to $50K of OTA and $5K - $10K of CCD to place on it. My budget isn't $50K

[DobDobDob]

The 4 examples you have given further illustrate that mounts aren't cheap, especially at the top end. When I first read the prices I thought it was outrageous, of course this was just a typical knee jerk reaction until I stopped to think about it and compare it to other hobbies and interests.

If we were racing car enthusiasts and wanted to exceed at it, the costs of astronomy mounts would pale into insignificance compared to racing car engines, gearboxes and so forth.

Perhaps car racing is too extreme an example, let's look at a women's knitting machine, they can run into many thousands of dollars.

Even a good walking machine can cost as much as $16,000.00 and it's little more than a motor :(

Everything you look at must be put into the right context, how it has been engineered, it's quality, reliability and how many of them sell. If every house in Australia had a telescope setup (wouldn't that be great :thumbsup: ), then the price of mounts would be very low, the demand would exceed the supply.

The opposite of course is the case, there is not a grand demand for these highly precision and engineered pieces of equipment, therefore to have one, you have to pay the price - simply economics I guess.

Having drifted off the subject somewhat, I just want to make the point that I understand the highly critical importance that is placed on the mount, I didn't before, but I do now :thumbsup:

[norm]

Hi Ron,

You've made some excellent points in your posts. It can certainly be an expensive hobby. It would be interesting to hear other responses.

I'm a bit like you any many ways, I want it all, but something tells me I should grow the hobby at a steady pace. That said, I don't really want to spend money on upgrades whenm as you say 'have a clear picture of the end game'.

On your comment many people on the thread have advised by purchasing a DSC (eg, argonavis) they have appreciated the nightsky as much as learning it the old fashion way. When I eventually make my purchase of a dob, the Argonavis will definitely be on the agenda. Therefore if going down the 'goto' path will improve the experience, not to mention probably cost effective, then its the way to go.

too true.

I guess the great thing about this forum is once you know your objectives, it gives a great source of information of what to do next. Hopefully we all end up spending our money wisely.

Funny thing, being on a member for a while I still haven't purchased a scope, yet the better 1/2 still thinks I should go and buy a $5K SCT, but my heart is still with a dob.:shrug:

[xelasnave]

Ron I have the eq6 and the same refractor as you have. I have not been able to foto with the 150ar on its original mount (other than very short exposures) however in the short try out with the 150ar on the eq6 it seems that it handles it without any problem...and that is saying something..6inches is a lot to mount for fotos. I am so very impressed with the eq6 to go on would sound as though I have shares in the company.. but it is a great mount from the little time I have had on it... got it last Nov and its been cloudy or I have been busy every since... still had one really good noight usinf the 150ar and it was excellent.
Before getting another mount I suggest doing widefields with the mount you have..use the 150ar as a guide scope and foto thru the standard lens on the camera..very useful work and almost a necessity before progressing in my view... if you have sky glow probably the mount you hqave will do the job..I tried some work the other night and sky glow saw me give up before the old mount would have played up..I could get 200 seconds unguided after I "tweaked it" so whats the point of having a mount to track longer if sky glow beats you.I cant get 200 seconds in Sydney because of sky glow... Be patient grasshopper and remember when the Sun sets in the sauser of milk the cat will sing to the cuckoo clock...
alex

[DobDobDob]

Thanks Norm, btw your location is showing you are from Sydney and more than 700 k's away which means you may have entered the right coordinate numbers but the wrong cardinal point (direction), or then again, simply entered the wrong numbers. Use this link to find out your exact coordinates and enter them into your user details again :whistle:

http://life.csu.edu.au/geo/nswfind.html (http://life.csu.edu.au/geo/nswfind.html)

[DobDobDob]

Wow :scared: that's a scary coincidence :doh: perhaps there is some dark force (no not that one) at work here:rofl:

Okay, seriously, I haven't started my foray into astrophotography yet, mainly because the weather has stunted my normal visual astronomy growth rate. I should have been more advanced than I am if only I could go outside and observe 7 nights per week as is my want.

However, a very firm concept has developed in my brain (leave that one alone Alex), which states that "there seems to be a natural evolution to wanting to record for posterity, via an image, what one see's in the sky".

There is no law of course, and this is only my observation, but after several months on this forum, I can see that there is a massive astrophotography subset which yearns for self improvement and the continual desire for perfection.

There is a strength of purpose, no a unity of desire for excellence and a genuine goodwill which the like I have not seen before.

Therefore it seems inevitable that I too will follow the example of my peers and look towards astrophotography, the fact that I have the camera already is a head start :whistle:

BUT....I still have so much to see, I have not begun to see all the myriad of fantastic scenes and distant astronomical pantomimes yet to be played in the night sky. There is much to see and so little time, and alas, there is the Demon clouds that haunt me :(

[norm]

Thanks Ron,

I forgot the - in the lat. How does it look now?

[DobDobDob]

Excellent, only 32 k's away now :thumbsup:

[g__day]

Here's another question one should ask. If you wish to do long duration atsrophotography with a large SCT, then what is the most PE you can accept?

Even with a smaller refractor piggybacked and auto-guiding, it will have lower magnification, and so the jitters its sees and tries to address may be 5 - 10 times less than that of the larger SCT. So its going to be challenging?

Anyone doing longer duration snappies on a large SCT have a feel?