View Single Post
  #37  
Old 01-05-2019, 11:59 PM
Atmos's Avatar
Atmos (Colin)
Ultimate Noob

Atmos is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 7,013
As Peter mentioned a lot earlier on, a lot of it has to do with moment arm more so than overall weight. Putting a 12" F/4 newt on an EQ6 may be pushing the stated weight capacity and still work perfectly fine but a similar length F/7-8 triplet refractor will have other issues due to its length. Pushing the weight means that wind becomes far more of an issue.

When I was using my 130mm F/5 refractor on my EQ6 (when I had one) even a slight breeze was noticeable against the guide graph which would impact on my overall RMS and although probably still give me round stars, they may end up larger due to more movement.

A couple of years ago I upgraded from an EQ6 to an ASA DDM60 and it is by far my best astro purchase. Was it cheap? Hell no. Was it worth it? Hell yes.
It only has a rated capacity of 25kg like the EQ6, its about the same size and weight but I have used it in 40km wind gusts out in the open without guiding for 5-10 minute exposures and still had perfectly round stars.

For me, unlike a lot of people, I spent most of 2018 photographing 30-50 targets a night and I can do that without having to guide or plate solve but also be assured that my pointing is within a couple of pixels on every target being centred across the sky.

The EQ6 is excellent value for money and I am looking at getting an AZ-EQ6 in the future for visual but it is built to a price point. I found that some nights imaging with my EQ6 (which was belt modded and hyper tuned) it would work perfectly and I'd be getting a 0.5 RMS all night but on other nights it would have sucked up a bag of gremlins and it would be a nightmare.

One of the hallmarks of good equipment, whether it be software or a mount, is that it blends into the background, you don't think about it and it does it's job. This is something said commonly about the AP Mach1.
Reply With Quote