Fork Vs Eq

mick pinner · #1 06-03-2005, 08:46 PM

After reading differing opinions on the question of EQ mounts vs fork mounts l was wondering what fellow LX owners have to say on the matter regarding viewing positions etc, especially when mounted on a wedge.
l'm thinking about upgrading to either a 16" LX 200 or a RCX 14" but before l do anything l need to resolve this question, whether to go for another fork or just get the OTA and put it on an EQ.
All opinions gratefully accepted.

mick pinner · #2 06-03-2005, 08:47 PM

p.s, no l won't sell the lot and buy a dob.

[1ponders] (Paul) · #3 06-03-2005, 09:19 PM

EQ, without a doubt. I'm finding it quite frustrating polar aligning with the wedge. Plus there is a whole lot of sky that is just not available to image on a wedge, ie the south polar region at certain times is inaccessable using a 300D. I'm seriously considering selling my LX200 8" and getting a 10" ota and a Losmandy or similar. As a viewing scope I love it, as a imaging scope I find it too restrictive.

MHO

Dave47tuc (David) · #4 06-03-2005, 09:48 PM

Hi Mick,
German EQ mounts are the best way to go. The bigger the better.
Try some of these sites, hope you have a good bank accountent

http://www.mathis-instruments.com/

http://www.astro-physics.com/index.h...200gto/1200gto

http://www.parallaxinstruments.com/

http://www.losmandy.com/eq-mounts.html

There are plenty more but some of the above are some of the best.

RAJAH235 · #5 06-03-2005, 10:22 PM

Mick, do you have an Observatory for the 16", or is it going to be used at diff. sites? An EQ is the better choice. If you have a permanent Ob. site, put in a pier cut to your latitude. L.

mick pinner · #6 06-03-2005, 10:28 PM

RAJAH235 check out astrolounge ob in this forum

RAJAH235 · #7 06-03-2005, 10:39 PM

Sorry, must have missed the thread. Nice set-up. You could still angle the top to your lat. tho. Don't need the wedge then. A 16" eh! mmmmm. L.

beren · #8 07-03-2005, 11:37 AM

For visual observing my experiance with my fork mounted wedged LX has been good, i find the viewing positions comfortable right around the scope except near the SCP region . I gave up on the alignment procedures where you centre sigma octanis etc , instead now i just do a drift align which takes 20 mins on average and sync on two stars and im on my way . I like with the wedge how the OTA clears the base when pointed at zenith on the meridan . On a wedge though dampening time for vibrations is a little longer , i always leave my dew cap on so that may contribute to .For imaging i have no experiance yet .
Id think to get a eq mount to suit those two larger meade OTAs the size would have to be substantial and the cost likewise , the fork mount would be the cheaper option , somthing to weigh up i guess

rumples riot · #9 08-03-2005, 10:34 AM

Have to agree that polar imaging is hard but not impossible. With a focal reducer on and just the camera in place. I can clear the mount all the way round. However what make it hard is being able to see the target at the pole. This is where a right angle viewer comes in handy for DSLR's.

With a fork mount the vibration element can be an issue. It does take a long time for it die down. Stabilising the mount is a good thing and you have done that to the pier.

Personally, there are positives and negatives for both. A fork mount takes up less space. EQ mounts have the nasty counter weight ever present and ready to get you it you forget where you are. Been hit between the legs on more than one occassion when I owned a German EQ. However, for stability, you can't go past the EQ.

I like the fork, but there are always limitations to its use.