3.94
#...
·
 |
|---|
|
I sometimes run my HEQ5 with a Hyperstar EdgeHD 9.25 with 4 counterweights, works, but you definitely see that the mount is not made for this kind of load. The counterweight bar flexes because of the counterweights, but hey, besides this it works decent enough for 525mm focal length to give me good stars. I once used it with the EdgeHD without Hyperstar at 2350mm focal length but that was definitely too much. |
5.77
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
Hi everyone, I thought I'd contribute my experience here too ... I recently did the Rowan Belt Mod on my 2 year-old HEQ5. I was amazed at how well it performs now ! I easily get < 0.15" error, all driven by an OAG and guide camera from an ASIAir Plus. My OTA and camera only weigh about 6 kg, which no doubt makes a difference. I did a bit of tweaking with the aggressiveness setting - it seemed to work best with RA and Dec set to 85%. Of course, I'm pretty happy with this result  Gary  |
7.53
#...
·
|
|---|
Andy Wray: Hug her every day! She's a national treasure! I also did the Rowan Belt mod and did an overhaul, replacing the bearings and cleaning up old grease, and went from thinking about selling it to loving it. I run a Lunt100MT on it or RC8 and have seen great guiding at .5-.8, depending on seeing, which hasn't been spectacular lately in Western NC. |
1.81
#...
·
|
|---|
|
I bought my HEQ5 in spring and initially was pretty disappointed. It was loud, had heavy backlash in DEC and RA tracking had 2" spikes every 14s that could not be guided out. That said, it was good enough for imaging at 200mm. Did one of my best widefield images with it:  M 101 Pinwheel Galaxy Widefield Over the summer I adjusted the gear meshing which took care of the noise. I cleaned and regreased the DEC axis which helped a lot with the backlash. The 14s spikes cost me a lot of nerves, though. In the end I figured out that it cames from the teeth of the RA gear itself. I accepted the consequence and upgraded to the Rowan Belt Mod, which replaces that RA gear. Together with sensible balancing (15kg counterweights (!), two weights right at the base of the bar and the third doing the actual balancing) I now get very repeatable 0.6-0.8" RMS guiding which is good enough for round stars with my C8:  NGC 891 Galaxy So in the end, with a bit of effort I am very happy with the mount. I like that it can be so easily disassembled. And it's quite light.  Wooden Pier for HEQ5 Jesco |
0.00
#...
·
|
|---|
| I am curious. Does anyone really care about the 2 year warranty? Skip the warranty issues and just open it up for tune or mod? I know people who have done the mod brag about it but, I have read that's not always the case and replacing bearings etc may be what it actually needs. Mine is just over a year old..never opened and I have been guiding well under 1.0 for the most part. last night in the .50 - .70 range. Probably plenty good for my 80mm refractor. |
|
1.81
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
I am curious. Does anyone really care about the 2 year warranty? Skip the warranty issues and just open it up for tune or mod? I know people who have done the mod brag about it but, I have read that's not always the case and replacing bearings etc may be what it actually needs. Mine is just over a year old..never opened and I have been guiding well under 1.0 for the most part. last night in the .50 - .70 range. Probably plenty good for my 80mm refractor. Well, there’s lots of different aspects. This whole hobby tends to attract people who like to tinker around with stuff. I didn’t RMA my mount because, frankly speaking, it was difficult to find a vendor who one in stock at all. I’d rather imagine the turnaround time on returns. That’s why I decided to stick with it. Also, the tinkering made me understand the mount better which was very helpful on its own. The belt mod isn’t magic. But it’s a good idea because it improves the mount in several ways. It should be stock from the beginning - that would be awesome. But you’re right in saying that it’s not needed - the mount can perform good enough in its vanilla state. For me the mod solved a very specific issue (my 14s spikes in tracking) |
|
3.94
#...
·
|
|---|
Gary JONES: Hi Gary, I do not want to sound overly jealous but the numbers are a little too good to be correct for a HEQ-5, are you sure that the focal length in PHD’s settings is set to the focal length of your lens? If the focal length value is correct then I am totally jealous… |
|
5.77
#...
·
|
|---|
|
I know what you mean - I had to look twice myself because those numbers are sooooo-oo good Now you've got me worried ... I'll check that next time I set up - which could be a while judging by the weather we're having here at the moment. |
1.20
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
Am extremely instructive conversation. Thanks for asking the question Andy! I bought a used HEQ5 pro-mod last year from a chap in Serbia, but have been so in love with my 14 inch Dobson that I had left it dejected in the basement sans OTA for the past 18 months. Only recently did I acquire a used, very low level refractor to start playing around with it (Svbony SV48). I still need to master guiding completely, but wow, what a great mount! This prompted me to start looking around for an upgrade to the SV48. Browsing through images produced using HEQ5s on Astrobin, I´m thinking of investing in a Skywatcher 130 PDS, this is a lightweight inexpensive reflector (325 euros), well within the HEQ5 specs. As I look at other much more expensive refractors, based on the images I see on Astrobin, the 130 PDS seems to produce top class images, equal to those with top of the line refractors. I was also considering the 200 PDS, but the additional weight and the fact that its FOV is closer to my 14 inch Dobson, lead me to the SW 130 PDS. I only wish there was a SW 80 PDS refelector! Mike |
0.00
#...
·
|
|---|
Gary JONES: You said you're using the ASI Air. It sets your focal length based on plate solving so it should be accurate. |
|
5.77
#...
·
|
|---|
|
Hi Mike, Yes, the ASIAir does set the focal length based on plate-solving, but only for the main scope, not for the guide scope. AAP determined by focal length at 3% more than the manufacturer's spec, which is probably due to the extension effect of the adapters and camera setback. The guide scope doesn't plate-solve on guide stars - so the focal length has to be set manually. |
|
5.77
#...
·
|
|---|
Michael Ring:Gary JONES: Hi Michael, Well it looks like your advice was spot on ... I checked the focal length setting for my guide camera in ASIAir. It was set to more than 6.7 times what it should have been - I have no idea how that happened. So, doing sums on the back of a postage stamp, the *real* value for guiding should be more like 0.8", rather than 0.12". Not quite as good as 0.12", bit still not too shabby. The lesson : always check your assumptions ! Thanks Mike - I'm very grateful for the tip - no need for you to feel jealous now Gary |
1.91
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Andy Wray: *** It was a struggle and hit and miss until I did the Rowan belt upgrade. Since then perfect round stars with my ed80 or samyang 135 or ed 72. Please note though that I ignore the RMS figures now. I used to fret about the numbers then realised that the numbers can be misleading as sometime the numbers are 0.8 or lower and the stars not so good. Thats becuase wht you want is no spikes along the sub run. I used PSF to check my stars and since the upgrade my HEQ5 pro is near perfect every time. *** |
2.11
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
Rafał Szwejkowski: That "conventional wisdom" doesn't really apply to the S.W. mounts, as the designers of the EQ6R and HEQ5 have openly stated in the manuals and elsewhere, that the load limit that is listed for its specifications is the limit for astrophotography, not the total capacity limit. The EQ6R for example has a 44lb astrophotography limit, as stated in the manual, which even then, I've had 2 friends of mine load their 6R's up to ~55lb/25kg with 12" Newtonian and 10" RCT imaging setups and they still average <0.6" guiding. I've even got ~32lb/~14kg loaded on my EQ6R and I manage .45" average. I believe that the total capacity for HEQ5 is near 40lbs, and the EQ6R is most likely well into the high 50lbs, low 60lbs range. |
0.00
#...
·
|
|---|
| Hi All, I saw a secondhand HEQ-5 Pro, and it has the old logo on it (black/gold instead of newer black/white). Are there any differences internally between the two, or just the logo? |
