EQ6-R vs CEM60 for an 8" Newtonian - Forums

Topic starter

Oct 17, 2019

Hi,

so it's that time of year again, the nights are getting longer (in the Northern hemisphere anyway) and I am thinking about buying astro gear

At the moment, I am using a 4" APO on an older NEQ6 - which works fine'ish, although I am getting the impression that the mount is starting to show its age a little bit (weird guiding errors on rare occasions). In any case, I recently bought a new F4 Newtonian (200/800) and am thinking about putting together a second setup to use in parallel with the APO/NEQ6.

Two mounts caught my eye here - the "new" EQ6-R as well as the iOptron CEM60. These are not in the same weight class, exactly, as the CEM60 can carry up to 27kg/60pound - whereas the the EQ6 is probably maxed out at just under 20kg/40pount. For the Newtonian, which should come out at >13kg with camera and guide scope attached, the EQ6 seems to be "ok", but with little headroom left for windy nights and such.

Anyway, I guess I am looking for a justification to go for the CEM60 even tho it costs around 70% more (would be getting the tri-pier too, which adds another couple hundred bucks…

.

Any thoughts/experiences?

Cheers,
Marc

Luca Marinelli

Oct 17, 2019

I use a EQ6R Pro mount with a FSQ106 and accessories (just shy of 30lbs load). It's a good mount and on most nights it is seeing limited with my setup, imaging between 1 and 2 arc-sec/pixel. A 8in f4 Newt starts being a bit of a sail. The EQ6R will not have any problem with weight but if wind is a concern. my guess is that neither of the two mounts you are considering will offer usable performance in windy conditions. For reference, I also image with a 10in f4 Newt on a AP Mach1GTO mount. Even the Mach1 struggles with the Newt in windy weather.

I think under realistic imaging conditions both mounts will handle your planned OTA fine. The CEM60 is a more refined mount. I believe it can achieve more precise balancing of the OTA due to reduced stiction. You should consider not only the weight and length of the OTA but also what imaging scale you are targeting. The requirements on the mount are more stringent, the higher the spatial resolution you are trying to achieve.

I believe both mounts you are considering are appropriate and under realistic sky conditions, you are unlikely to see profound differences in the quality of the data. If you have the money to spend, you can never have too much mount. If you don't, you will be able to create wonderful images with either piece of equipment.

Helpful Insightful Respectful Engaging

Marc

Topic starter

Oct 18, 2019

Thanks Luca, this was helpful. My concern was mostly that my setup might be pushing the capacity of the EQ6-R beyond what I thought was reasonable for long-exposure astrophotography. I was always told that a good rule of thumb is to take the theoretical capacity of a mount and divide it by 2 - so ~20lbs for the EQ6.

Fortunately, both the CEM60 as well as the tri pier are currently out of stock in these parts, so I have a few more weeks to think about it

It would be an easier decision if the CEM60 was a lot harder to handle/carry around, but it seems the opposite is true. So as you said, it's a better mount, but wether it's '1000$ better' is subjective, at the end of the day.

Well Written Respectful

Alessio Pariani

Oct 18, 2019

I must suggest you for the CEM60. CEM's axis seem to be suspended in the void!
I actually own a CEM25 and I mount on it more than 22lbs (max visual payload 25lbs) made of TS100Q with its 14inch Losmandy bar and motorfocus, CCD KAF8300 and its 7 filters, 50mm guide scope with ASI120, cables and accessories. Balancing it at my best, I can shoot 30mins subframes without problems. You can see in my gallery I only had 1800s subframes in the last year.

Helpful

Bogdan Borz

Oct 18, 2019

Hi Marc,

I am using an AZEQ6 pro with a 10inch Newtonian (carbon) and it works fine. I would say that dividing the capacity by 2 is an underestimation, you have to subtract 5kg from the 20 announced for the EQ. I agree that windy nights can represent a problem with a big newtonian. Another advantage can be obtained by using OAG guiding less weight than a Losmandy + a guidescope . An 8" should be ok for a EQ6R imo.

Helpful

Jim McPherson

Oct 18, 2019

I ran the CEM60 with an 8" imaging newtonian for a long time and it handled it with ease. I'm currently running my CEM60 with a C11 @2000mm which is much heavier and requires much better tracking. So far so good.

Jim

Helpful

Lars Stephan

Oct 18, 2019

I also recommend the CEM60. When setting the pole heigh, the mount rotates in the center of gravity ;-)
I use it with a refractor 130/1000. The guiding works fine.

Ivan Nair

Oct 19, 2019

I just got a ONTC 8" F4 and it works amazingly well on the CEM60. I used to have an older Orion Atlas with a 6" f5 and it was always hit or miss. The CEM 60 is slightly lighter so tearing down and setting up is a breeze. Some big pro's for the CEM60 include the internal usb and power for your camera and accessories and the design makes it very easy to balance. I think the CEM60 could still easily handle a 10" newt or an 11" SCT if you really want to push it. The atlas/EQ6 would be at its limit with an 8" scope.

Helpful Concise

Luca Marinelli

Oct 19, 2019

I am not saying the CEM60 is not a more capable mount than the EQ6R Pro, but before making categorical statements about the limits of the mount take a look at the work by Jarrett Trezzo, for example, including his IOTD today with a RASA 11in in the Atlas.

Jim McPherson

Oct 19, 2019 · Edited: Oct 19, 2019

Luca Marinelli:
I am not saying the CEM60 is not a more capable mount than the EQ6R Pro, but before making categorical statements about the limits of the mount take a look at the work by Jarrett Trezzo, for example, including his IOTD today with a RASA 11in in the Atlas.

The RASA 11” has a 620mm focal length and is shorter than an 8” newt. It’s easier all the way around.

-Jim

Luca Marinelli

Oct 19, 2019

Jim McPherson:
Luca Marinelli:
I am not saying the CEM60 is not a more capable mount than the EQ6R Pro, but before making categorical statements about the limits of the mount take a look at the work by Jarrett Trezzo, for example, including his IOTD today with a RASA 11in in the Atlas.
The RASA 11” has a 620mm focal length and is shorter than an 8” newt. It’s easier all the way around.

-Jim

take a look at the weight and length of the RASA 11.

Jim McPherson

Oct 19, 2019 · Edited: Oct 19, 2019

Luca Marinelli:
Jim McPherson:
Luca Marinelli:
I am not saying the CEM60 is not a more capable mount than the EQ6R Pro, but before making categorical statements about the limits of the mount take a look at the work by Jarrett Trezzo, for example, including his IOTD today with a RASA 11in in the Atlas.
The RASA 11” has a 620mm focal length and is shorter than an 8” newt. It’s easier all the way around.-Jim

take a look at the weight and length of the RASA 11.

Ok.

Marc

Topic starter

Dec 2, 2020

Hi, I just wanted to update this post as the CEM60 has been replaced by the new CEM70(G).

Since writing the original post, I bought a house, moved around and haven't had much opportunity to image anything

Well, there is the ITOD from May - which incidentially was shot using the old NEQ6.

But that mount is now 7 years old, went through a rebuilt 1,5 years ago (changing gears) and still has the old vixen-style mounting plate with the screws that eat into the dove tail bar. It's just…old.

So I am back on the subject of mount upgrade - and am now leaning towards the CEM70. I would, eventually, like to add another scope to my collection with the goal to do planetary imaging, and galaxies. So something like a C11 probably. So that would -if not rule out flat - make the EQ6-R a less-than-deal choice. But it is still a fairly significant investment to me, especially since I am hearing mixed things about the CEM70 - like guiding issues and such. Would hate to drop 4000€ on it only to have to fight each night to get good guiding

Nadir Astro

Dec 2, 2020

You can also consider EQ8R, it will be much more stable for C11.

Marc

Topic starter

Dec 2, 2020

Nadir Astro:
You can also consider EQ8R, it will be much more stable for C11.

Very true, although the EQ8 is a monster, just the weight of the mount head is twice that of the CEM70, I think.

Randy Roy

Dec 3, 2020

Here’s another datapoint. I really like my EQ6R Pro and imaged with an 8”F4 newt for about 2 years. I get excellent performance from mine, but the comment about the newt becoming a sail is true for any wind over about 5mph. Any gust above that was very problematic. I now image with a 72mm riding on top of a 6” RC and it handles wind to 10mph with relative ease. I would go for the CEM60/70.

Helpful Concise

AstroGeek

Jan 20, 2021

I’ve imaged with a 8” f/5.9 Newtonian on a EQ6-R Pro and did not have issues. I think the comments about the wind are accurate, but this depends on your situation.

For me I image in my backyard which is decently protected from the wind. So I very seldom would have nights where I would need to avoid the newt.

I also just picked up a RC8 which will also be used on the EQ6. I do not have any experience with iOptron mounts to compare with.

Good luck.

Helpful

Adrian Criss

Feb 2, 2021

I have CEM 60 with RASA 11!!! and works great.