[bluesilver (Peter)]

Will also be interested to here a bit more on this also.
I have been looking and doing some research now for the last few months for the same similar reasons,

I could be incorrect here, but so far this is my understanding on both Skywatcher EQ8 mounts and Ioptron CEM120 mounts.

I was originally looking to go with the EQ8 line until just recently after talking to a few people and a few dealerships that supply and both Skywatcher and Ioptron mounts.
They say if you guide with PHD2, you might only see a slight improvement guiding with the encoder versions, and if using the versions with both encoders, it is not worth using PHD2 at all, it just plays up too much with them due to the setting time of the encoders.

They are saying that encoders don't play well with PHD2 in general, though some are having luck with just the single encoder versions with PHD2

If you were to go with twin encoder versions, you are just better of with the more expensive mounts like 10 micron and the like as they are designed to run without guiding with PHD2, but the Skywatcher and Ioptron encoders are not quiet up to the quality as the 10 micron line up.

With the Ioptron CEM120 line up, with backlash gears are all spring loaded, so help eliminate a bit of the backlash compared to the Skywatcher EQ8 which isn't spring loaded.

There were comments made about the USB3 hubs not working correctly or not running as USB3,
But as you mentioned, I am not sure if the Ioptron works with EQMOD, but all the other programs, APT, Satllerium PHD2 all work with Ioptron.

At the moment for myself, I am leaning more towards the Ioptron CEM120 non encoder version and just guide with PHD2, but i am not in a permanent observatory, I put my gear up and take it down each night.

I wasn't aware that Skywatcher were or had made any more changes to current EQ8 line.
Bit of a long reply, but just my understanding of these two mounts