Higher FL scope for travel? Strain vs EQ mount?

I live in B7 area and regularly shoot galaxies and dim ones too. If you get significant wind gusts then the smaller scape will be favoured. In both cases I’d think they are too small in aperture and rather slow but with a very dark sky then they might be viable.

andrea tasselli · Jul 17, 2026 at 07:34 PM

I live in B7 area and regularly shoot galaxies and dim ones too. If you get significant wind gusts then the smaller scape will be favoured. In both cases I’d think they are too small in aperture and rather slow but with a very dark sky then they might be viable.

I’ve done some broadband from b7 but it just doesn’t compare… unfortunately we used to have sodium lamps in my neighborhood that could be remediated with Optolong L pro but now they are all bright white LED…

I would go for an 8” f/4 carbon tube newton. A lot lighter than the 130mm refractor and with the right coma corrector would achieve an acceptable sampling at a lot faster rate than the alternative. And, yes, with a good mount you can take some whacking from the wind too and not suffer the consequences.

Eric Miller · Jul 17, 2026, 08:06 PM

any newt scopes you recommend for FF cameras besides Tak 160 ed? correction, actually the tak is too low FL. Let me know what else you would recommend"

I think that the CarbonStar is available in the US: Apertura CarbonStar 200 Imaging Newtonian

As a coma corrector you’d need the Televue Paracorr type 2 with the photo adaptor. This will yield a focal length of 920mm.

Hi Eric, I shoot in the Prescott area, Bortle 4-4.5ish. If I were traveling, I would want a refractor. I shoot galaxies with the Askar 103apo which is too small, but I make do. I wanted the 107PHQ but settled for the 103apo at the time. I also have an Askar 65PHQ and it is a gem as I believe the 107PHQ is. Prescott can be pretty windy in the spring galaxy season. Days 14-23mph, but the nights usually die down to 4-8mph. I don’t shoot if it gets above 10mph. For the mount maybe also consider the SAL-33 or one of the Proxisky models. If you can deal with a newtonian for traveling I agree with Andrea the Carbonstar 200 or even the Apertura 8” RC.

CS, Bob

If you do go strain wave… i recommend adding the counter weight. It will help with the wind.

Alex Nicholas · Jul 18, 2026 at 04:46 AM

All else being equal, a harmonic mount should be better in wind due to the constant engagement of the gears at opposing sides of the gear wheel, as opposed to a worm that will invariably have ‘some’ backlash inherrently.

That said, I have run a 4” APO on a belt modded HEQ5, and honestly, it performed brilliantly. I’ve run a 4.5” APO on a harmonic mount, it performed brilliantly. The Askar 120APO on my Emcan EM31 Pro would average 0.5” RMS, as low as 0.32” and as high as about 0.75”. Given the 0.92”/px resolution, I lost almost no subs to guiding issues. I did however lose subs in a good gust of wind on either the HEQ5 or the EM31 Pro… This is the nature of a big scope with a long tangent arm… You get a good gust that catches the dew shield, then you get an oscillation as the scope settles… Balance (despite it not being necessary on a harmonic mount) matters here, because a strong front or rear imbalance will causes that oscillation to resonate…

Moving to the 107 from the 91 is going to make little difference to wind issues, the difference between a 91mm and a 107 is not so great. Going from the 91 to the 130, however, is a whole different thing. You need to realise too that the 130PHQ is massive compared to the 107PHQ. Considerably longer, considerably thicker, considerably heavier. You will have clearance issues on either the HEQ5 or the AM5 with a 130PHQ, both mounts requiring a long pier extension to clear the tripod, and even with that, you’re gonna want to watch it like a hawk and certain declinations…

The key to wind resistance is a small scope, heavily over-mounted.

I had my 65PHQ on a Losmandy G11 Gemini. Mount/Tripod/Counterweights weighed about 41kg, scope/camera/ancilliaries weighed about 7kg. I imaged with this rig in 20~30km/h wind gusts maintaining a 0.7” RMS, and in calm conditions, I could run 5 minute unguided subs, or guide at 0.25~0.35” RMS.. Its sub-ideal for a travel rig, but any configuration where your mount/tripod are considerably heavier than the scope/attachments is going to provide much better wind resilliance.

Hmm so it sounds like a shorter, imaging newt might be the better option?

Eric Miller · Jul 17, 2026, 07:17 PM

1) I’ve heard strain wave mounts don’t deal with wind as well. Is this true or nonsense? Largely due to the fact that they are lighter. Should I consider the eq6r instead of am5n?

The main problem with a strainwave mount on a CF tripod is that they are so light, a heavy wind gust can tip the whole rig over. It’s common for people to fill that little tripod bag thing with rocks, water bottles, anything to give the thing more mass and lower the CG. As a guard against that the counter weight would be more effective in the bag rather than on the dec. shaft.

Eric Miller · Jul 17, 2026, 07:17 PM

Currently using a Cat 91 with 448mm FL with an image scale of 1.78. I know it’s nebula season where I live but here in Arizona I’m planning my budget ahead of galaxy season. I regularly get .2-.7 guiding with my modded heq5 pro.

The question I have: I live in a Bortles 7 zone. I need to travel to Bortles 1-2 up in flagstaff Arizona to shoot galaxies. I was thinking of upgrading my mount to the AM5N with my end of year bonus and considering the Askar 107phq (750mm fl) or Askar 130PHQ (1000mm fl). I would obviously prefer the larger scope, but my main concern is wind, which is frequent in the mountains.

1) I’ve heard strain wave mounts don’t deal with wind as well. Is this true or nonsense? Largely due to the fact that they are lighter. Should I consider the eq6r instead of am5n?

2) knowing wind can be a factor, maybe I’d be better off with the 107phq 750mm to give my setup more forgiveness? It would be a 1.03 image scale with my setup compared to .78 for 130phq. I understand that to maintain sharp stars, you should keep your RMS roughly 50-70% of your image scale.

Mostly trying to shoot the messier globulars and galaxies.

I also stay in Bortle 7/8 city and often travel to country house which is Bortle 4 for imaging. I have a AM5N Mount which I use along with Askar SQA55 (f/4.8) and Skywatcher 150P (f/6) . The conditions in countryside are windy but since I have a pier mount, it does not matter.

However even with TC40 Tripod, AM5 is quite stable and if you have considered the weight of your scope, camera, Guiding etc and incase it is within limits should not matter. Have not yet seen impact of wind on AM5N performance sofar

TC40 Tripod also comes with special metal spikes to ensure stability of the setup for such terrain usage.

For smaller and distant galaxies you may want to consider a scope with larger f ratio. Askar 130 PHQ may be more suitable as I understand.

Hope this helps

All the best !

TiffsAndAstro · Jul 18, 2026 at 03:15 PM

How about a C6 with reducer?

I can pick my entire rig up on one hand, sw GTi steel tripod included. Just about :)

I was considering that too did you get .63 reducer or starizona .7?