ICEINSPACE
Moon Phase
CURRENT MOON
Waning Gibbous 73.5%
|
|
09-07-2013, 08:26 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Mornington Peninsula, Australia
Posts: 3,964
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AstroJunk
I haven't told them yet, But I'm sure one will be sent in the fullness of time! I would expect the mount flanges to break well before the bolt if you seriously over tighened it, and that would be a problem...
|
And there goes my bottom bolt untightening as well ...
|
09-07-2013, 10:28 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 540
|
|
A pattern is emerging....Skywatcher/Tasco take note!
|
10-07-2013, 12:03 PM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 7,971
|
|
Some serious lack of quality control and end user testing by the sounds of it, I doubt I'd pay $4500 for a Chinese made mount, considering the EQ6 was only $1500, is this mount 3 times better
|
10-07-2013, 12:06 PM
|
|
Colour is over-rated
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Posts: 2,414
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevorW
Some serious lack of quality control and end user testing by the sounds of it, I doubt I'd pay $4500 for a Chinese made mount, considering the EQ6 was only $1500, is this mount 3 times better
|
From the PE readings being reported, and its large payload, it just might be 3x as good.....
|
10-07-2013, 12:14 PM
|
|
Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NEWCASTLE NSW Australia
Posts: 33,205
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevorW
Some serious lack of quality control and end user testing by the sounds of it, I doubt I'd pay $4500 for a Chinese made mount, considering the EQ6 was only $1500, is this mount 3 times better
|
quite simply - yes. it takes more weight which expands your scope choices. so in the end it is your choice no one is forcing you to go down this path.
|
10-07-2013, 04:14 PM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,454
|
|
In my view the plucky pathfinders who are finding their way through what is basically a brand new product have cochones of steel given their investment and this thread will end up being one of the best and most referenced threads for new EQ8 adopters for quiet a while I suspect.
On ya boys! Looking forward to seeing the results over time.
|
10-07-2013, 04:19 PM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Perth
Posts: 14
|
|
In addition, I don't see the fact it is Chinese having much to do with it. There are also examples of mounts lacking a little QC that originate from other parts.
The eq8 is up against the likes of the G11 in terms of price. So far (and admittedly its early days) I'm glad I postponed my G11 purchase. The only annoyance I see with the Synta range of mounts are their very limited connectivity options. Something that Losmandy is leading the way with.
Cheers
|
10-07-2013, 04:30 PM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 7,971
|
|
I wouldn't expect this mount to have cost 3 times more to make either, time will tell whether people have made the right choice. As to it being 3 times better than an EQ6 I have my doubts.
Personally I would have expected it to cost less than a G11 to purchase. just my opinion. I'll say no more
|
10-07-2013, 09:52 PM
|
|
Shadow Chaser
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Moonee Beach
Posts: 1,916
|
|
I'm confused guys - why would you comare the EQ8 to a puny little G11? It's a head to head competitor to the Paramount MX in function, and in fact beats it in every respect except build quality
|
10-07-2013, 11:23 PM
|
|
pro lumen
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: ballina
Posts: 3,265
|
|
Harsh Jonathan
You guys have to get this puppy up and working , the improved version will be released soon
|
11-07-2013, 12:33 AM
|
|
Shadow Chaser
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Moonee Beach
Posts: 1,916
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightstalker
Harsh Jonathan
You guys have to get this puppy up and working , the improved version will be released soon
|
My theory was that they can't afford for the first batch to be shonky, so they would be indvidually tested to perfection. As far as the drives and bearings are concerned that seems to be holding good.
The lemons are coming in the second batch
|
11-07-2013, 04:06 AM
|
|
Ageing badly.
|
|
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cloudy, light-polluted Bribie Is.
Posts: 3,699
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AstroJunk
I'm confused guys - why would you comare the EQ8 to a puny little G11? It's a head to head competitor to the Paramount MX in function, and in fact beats it in every respect except build quality
|
Let me add my two bob's worth to this discussion. I have both a Titan and an EQ8 on piers in my obs.
They have much the same weight-carrying capacity.
The Titan has no homing mechanism or encoders for maintaining position information.
The Tian relies upon a control system (Gemini) that continues to be problematic whereas the Synta hand control is virtually indestructible.
Both are capable of direct PC control but (I think) only the EQ8 can do EQMOD.
Where the EQ8 is not better is that the Titan (like the G11) can be stripped down for easy cleaning, repair and transportation.
To my mind, the EQ8 is equal to if not better than the Titan and half the price.
The other mount mentioned here is the PMX which I have also owned but sold. It occupied the same pier as the EQ8 now sits on.
I think the PMX had better design features and better build. But it was just not for me. I didn't mesh with it whereas the EQ8 is refreshingly simple and so far at least reliable and at much less than half the price.
Of the two, I much prefer my EQ8. In addition, I resented the way the PMX locked me into a software relationship that cost me ongoing annual licence fees. The EQ8 does not.
Peter
Last edited by pmrid; 11-07-2013 at 04:21 AM.
|
11-07-2013, 08:38 AM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 573
|
|
Quote:
I resented the way the PMX locked me into a software relationship that cost me ongoing annual license fees.
|
It certainly does lock you into a software relationship. You don't have to pay the yearly subscription fees if you don't want to. They're not for the license to run the software. They're for access to the updates (which I think are absolutely essential). The software will not stop running if you don't pay the fee, but lack of access to updates would likely be problematic.
|
11-07-2013, 08:39 AM
|
|
Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NEWCASTLE NSW Australia
Posts: 33,205
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmrid
Let me add my two bob's worth to this discussion. I have both a Titan and an EQ8 on piers in my obs.
They have much the same weight-carrying capacity.
The Titan has no homing mechanism or encoders for maintaining position information.
The Tian relies upon a control system (Gemini) that continues to be problematic whereas the Synta hand control is virtually indestructible.
Both are capable of direct PC control but (I think) only the EQ8 can do EQMOD.
Where the EQ8 is not better is that the Titan (like the G11) can be stripped down for easy cleaning, repair and transportation.
To my mind, the EQ8 is equal to if not better than the Titan and half the price.
The other mount mentioned here is the PMX which I have also owned but sold. It occupied the same pier as the EQ8 now sits on.
I think the PMX had better design features and better build. But it was just not for me. I didn't mesh with it whereas the EQ8 is refreshingly simple and so far at least reliable and at much less than half the price.
Of the two, I much prefer my EQ8. In addition, I resented the way the PMX locked me into a software relationship that cost me ongoing annual licence fees. The EQ8 does not.
Peter
|
exactly spot on Peter!!! I feel that a lot of the armchair astronomers out there have no idea, which makes their arguments rather moot and really just stirring the pot to get their jolly's.
It is for that simplicity that i bought mine - it will allow me to use a wide variety of scopes anywhere. I have a G11, I have a Titan, 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
|
11-07-2013, 10:15 AM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Canberra
Posts: 1,640
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AstroJunk
I'm confused guys - why would you comare the EQ8 to a puny little G11? It's a head to head competitor to the Paramount MX in function, and in fact beats it in every respect except build quality
|
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
|
11-07-2013, 11:06 AM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 9,966
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by h0ughy
No support, but they wanted me to pay for the licence yearly. and it never worked for me
|
This is not true. You don't have to pay for a license fee each year. As Ernie said it is an update fee. You don't really need to pay it in my opinion if everything works for you.
As to the EQ8 being on par with the PMX, I think that is a fairy land exaggeration. While I am more than happy to use a variety of products the EQ8 would not have the pointing capacity of a PMX. Nor would you be able to use the EQ8 for robotic operation collecting data night after night at a remote site or event setup to act remotely at home. It is just not the same level of sophistication. The PMX does require software to run and that is not that bad even if you want to travel with the mount. It is designed for use at star parties as well as being permanent.
The EQ6 was is a fine mount and I am sure that the EQ8 is now, but certainly not on par with the PMX.
|
11-07-2013, 11:35 AM
|
|
Lost in Space ....
|
|
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 4,949
|
|
EQ8 was advertised over here in NZ by a local supplier, $6499, .
Don't think I'll be buying one soon. Equates to nearly my entire astronomy budget to date.
|
11-07-2013, 12:01 PM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Perth
Posts: 14
|
|
Hi Paul
Can you elaborate on your claim that the EQ8 would not have the pointing capacity of a PMX please?
I agree about robotic operation. It badly needs a tcp interface and built in web server. Then again it appears ppl use the direct pc connection method without too much trouble.
Cheers
Rob
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Haese
As to the EQ8 being on par with the PMX, I think that is a fairy land exaggeration. While I am more than happy to use a variety of products the EQ8 would not have the pointing capacity of a PMX. Nor would you be able to use the EQ8 for robotic operation collecting data night after night at a remote site or event setup to act remotely at home. It is just not the same level of sophistication.
|
|
11-07-2013, 12:19 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ardrossan south australia
Posts: 4,918
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullockbob
Hi Paul
Can you elaborate on your claim that the EQ8 would not have the pointing capacity of a PMX please?
I agree about robotic operation. It badly needs a tcp interface and built in web server. Then again it appears ppl use the direct pc connection method without too much trouble.
Cheers
Rob
|
my question as well.
I thought that all mounts are basically just a couple of motor drives + bearings, clutches, encoders etc. They all count pulses (stepper or encoder) to keep track of where they are and the EQ8 drive has about 0.1 arcsec pulse resolution - so the ultimate pointing limit will be determined by the PE and flexing in the mount structure and bearings. The EQ8 has low PE and no-one would say that it looks flimsy - it might not be pretty, but it sure looks strong and it seems reasonable to assume that it will point well.
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
Last edited by Shiraz; 11-07-2013 at 12:34 PM.
|
11-07-2013, 12:42 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 9,966
|
|
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.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT +10. The time is now 11:39 PM.
|
|