Jump to content


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Ieq45 pro

  • Please log in to reply
96 replies to this topic

#76 mega256

mega256

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 956
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: N of Tampa

Posted 19 June 2015 - 02:37 PM

I have a C11HD and IEQ45 PRO......good combo..
But I made an adapter for my G11 tripod.....does a great job...
I would think ioptrons pear will do the same...
The larger tripod does seam to be much better with my C11..
Bob

Attached Files


Edited by mega256, 19 June 2015 - 02:41 PM.


#77 mega256

mega256

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 956
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: N of Tampa

Posted 19 June 2015 - 02:43 PM

one more pic

Attached Files



#78 Midnight Dan

Midnight Dan

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11899
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2008
  • Loc: Hilton, NY, Yellow Zone (Bortle 4.5)

Posted 19 June 2015 - 04:14 PM

Bob:

 

Interesting!  I'm currently thinking about moving to a larger OTA on my iEQ45 Pro, but thought the C11 would be too much for it.  Can't quite tell what kind of camera you have on there - do you use it for long exposure imaging?  Do you image at full focal length, or use a reducer?

 

-Dan



#79 Mstafforini

Mstafforini

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2015

Posted 19 June 2015 - 04:47 PM

Anyone have an opinion on whether the standard IEQ45 or the IEQ45 Dual EQ-AZ mount would be a better choice for visual observing? I'm not yet into astrophotography, and the Dual EQ-AZ, just listed on iOptron website, seems like it would handle a heavier load in AZ mode for visual observing. I have a Stellarvue 115 Apo, about 19 pounds with heaviest eyepiece and 28" long.



#80 David Rivas

David Rivas

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2438
  • Joined: 28 May 2004
  • Loc: Lima, Peru

Posted 20 June 2015 - 04:53 PM

Hi Bob, Hi everybody,

Amazing!! Your C11 on this iOptron mount does not look overkill, that's a surprise to me as to all I have read about this mount.

Do you think I can use this mount to drive my C9.25 Edge HD for f/10 Galaxies imaging? What do you think??

Best regards,

 

David



#81 Alfredo Beltran

Alfredo Beltran

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 569
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Bogota, Colombia

Posted 20 June 2015 - 05:36 PM

Hi David

 

The answer is Yes. I did M51 and M57 at f10 with my C925 EdgeHD on my former iEQ45. It will work.

 

Autoguinding was on a separate guide scope at 225 mm focal length.

 

Best regards

 

Alfredo



#82 David Rivas

David Rivas

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2438
  • Joined: 28 May 2004
  • Loc: Lima, Peru

Posted 20 June 2015 - 06:08 PM

Hola Alfredo!

 

Amazing shots!!! No flexure evident. Have you considered imaging through an On-axis guider?? Fine detail and sharpness would improve... Though it's difficult to improve those already great shots, Alfredo!!  I just can't believe you've achieved great shots at over 2 meters image scale by autoguiding that way!!!

How would you rate this iOptron IEQ 45 as to the autoguiding accuracy necessary to achieve those great shots at f/10 by autoguiding with a separate guide scope? For example, did you obtain the 100% of shots with round stars? Is it a headache to image at such large image scale? (perhaps that's the reason why you got only two images taken this way???)

 

Thanks a lot for your swift reply!!! And sorry for my so many questions!! I'm deciding the purchase of a new mount for my C9.25 Edge HD.

I'm looking forward to more of your great images at f/10 !!! They're inspiring!!

 

Best regards,

 

David



#83 Alfredo Beltran

Alfredo Beltran

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 569
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Bogota, Colombia

Posted 20 June 2015 - 07:13 PM

Thanks for your comments on my images David!

 

I haven't considered doing OAG because I mainly do my images with hyperstar and the Canon T1i on the C925 EdgeHD.

 

The iEQ45 I had was very good. In fact, the Periodic Error was low for that kind of mount as you can see here , and here after training the Periodic Error Correction - PEC with PEMPRO. As you can see the PE before correction was around 14.38 arcseconds peak to peak, and with the PEC on it lowered to 4.59 arcseconds peak to peak.

 

Mine was one of the very first models and you could guide with PEC on (then iOptron disabled that feature). Since the iEQ45 Pro has the same motors and software of the CEM60, I think that feature is back on.. Nevertheless, I never did it for my images because the guiding with PHD defaults was usually very good. And as with any mount, a very precise polar alignment helps a lot for making the autoguiding easier.

 

I don't remember how many shots were good, but the ratio was pretty high, I think around 9 of 10. Autoguiding was as simple as calibrate with PHD, select the guide star and begin.

 

This was my experience with the iEQ45. Other users might have different. But I was very satisfied with that mount. After almost four years service, I replaced it for a CEM60 which also has had very good behavior at f10, as I reported here.

 

Best regards,

 

Alfredo


  • newman likes this

#84 checkitout

checkitout

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • Posts: 38
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2014

Posted 20 June 2015 - 08:04 PM

David, do you have the Celestron "D" plate on the 9.25? if SO BE CAREFUL the C plate and Ioptron saddle do not match. I had to take some nylon reinforced box tape and run it the length of the plate in order for it to tighten so the ota would not slip when slewing. Don't know if it Celestron that made their plat a thousandth smaller or Ioptron made the saddle bigger. Anyway just m2c.



#85 Alfredo Beltran

Alfredo Beltran

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 569
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Bogota, Colombia

Posted 20 June 2015 - 08:56 PM

My C925 EdgeHD fitted with no issues on the former iEQ45 saddle, and also fits perfectly on the CEM60 saddle. The telescope has the Losmandy dovetail.

Best regards,

Alfredo

#86 David Rivas

David Rivas

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2438
  • Joined: 28 May 2004
  • Loc: Lima, Peru

Posted 21 June 2015 - 12:22 AM

Impressive job, Alfredo!!

I hadn't found many good comments about the Ieq45 so far... But your great results give me hope.

Thanks a lot for your guidance!!!

That CEM60 seems to be even better... Those stars in your tests are very round!!!! Unfortunately to me, I got a tight Budget, so I would lean to the Ieq45...

Well, it's time for deciding a new mount.

You have helped me a lot.

Thanks once more, Alfredo!!!!

Keep up the great job, your images are great!!!

 

Best regards,

 

David



#87 David Rivas

David Rivas

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2438
  • Joined: 28 May 2004
  • Loc: Lima, Peru

Posted 21 June 2015 - 12:30 AM

Hi "Checkitout"!!

Thanks. As Alfredo said -thanks one more time man!!!-  I asked OPT and I was told the scope has the Losmandy saddle, so it's compatible.

Thanks anyway!!!

Best regards,

 

David



#88 Alfredo Beltran

Alfredo Beltran

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 569
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Bogota, Colombia

Posted 21 June 2015 - 12:46 AM

David

I think you won't be dissapointed with either mount you choose.

According to my experience, any of those will be completelly capable for your C925 EdgeHD.

Regards

Alfredo

P.S. If you want post me a private message in spanish If need something else

#89 David Rivas

David Rivas

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2438
  • Joined: 28 May 2004
  • Loc: Lima, Peru

Posted 21 June 2015 - 05:04 PM

Hi Alfredo!!

In case of any doubt or problem, I'll be writing a PM to you (Spanish), Thank you very much!!!!!!

 

Clear and steady skies to you!!!! ;)

Best regards,

 

David



#90 checkitout

checkitout

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • Posts: 38
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2014

Posted 22 June 2015 - 08:22 AM

Alfredo, I was talking about the orange Celestron plate on the new pros. Losmandy plates have no problem. ed



#91 Alfredo Beltran

Alfredo Beltran

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 569
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Bogota, Colombia

Posted 22 June 2015 - 08:36 AM

Hi Checkitout

That's also the one I'm refering too. I never had a problem with the iEQ45 or CEM60 saddle to place the OTA.

Having said that, I've also read some other users have had the problem.

Best regards,

Alfredo

#92 David Rivas

David Rivas

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2438
  • Joined: 28 May 2004
  • Loc: Lima, Peru

Posted 22 June 2015 - 10:30 PM

Thanks to you both guys !!!

Then I'll make sure OPT send me the one with the correct saddle!!!

 

Best regards,

 

David



#93 blind astronomer

blind astronomer

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: 02 May 2015
  • Loc: Minneapolis

Posted 25 June 2015 - 12:00 PM

I'm currently in the process of cleaning up a mess with iOptron. I bought a new EQ45 with the tripod. My refractor with rings, mounting plate, 2 inch diagonal, 35 panoptic and red dot finder tip the scales at 29 pounds. I'm in the process of balancing everything when the knuckle (the top part of the leg that connects to the tripod head) breaks off completly. If I hadn't been right their to catch it, about $6000 worth of gear would have crashed to the ground. Looking at the broken knuckle shows an extremely poor casting. Lots of tiny air pockets in the metal. I can now also see how thin the legs are, not much thicker than the old steel pop and beer cans from decades ago. This tripod might be ok for the EQ30, provided you don't get a poor casting like I did, but anyone thinking about an EQ45, don't buy the tripod version.



#94 checkitout

checkitout

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • Posts: 38
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2014

Posted 25 June 2015 - 02:18 PM

That is freaking scary. What is iop saying? Are they going to replace it? I had to shim my tripod when I got it because it was so wobbly. Now I am having trouble with the mount being about 12 degrees off to the south. Ioptron tech said it sounded like a time issue but I changed the time several different way (PDT off, add subtract and hour) but that moved it in RA (east and west)  which is not the problem. When I do an alignment after centering the first star and slew to the second star there is no improvement on the accuracy, it is still off by 12 degrees. After centering the second star and the error screen comes up it is sometimes hours off and high and way off to the east. I have tried compensating for it in the Polar alignment of Polaris to no avail.  if I do a solar align it is VERY accurate as long as I do not cross the meridian. If I do it is no where near being in the telrad. Being about eight degrees outside the housing of the telrad. I think it has something to do with one of the boards. It's not mapping the sky right or something.

ed



#95 blind astronomer

blind astronomer

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: 02 May 2015
  • Loc: Minneapolis

Posted 26 June 2015 - 02:13 AM

I talked to iop, told them I wanted to send the tripod back and I'll spend the extra $100 to get the 48'' pier instead. There's no sign of stress on any of the tripod legs so clearly it's a bad knuckle. Makes me wonder about the other 2 since they most likely came from the same batch. But for now, iop wants me to sent an e mail with pics of the broken tripod before I ship it back so they can review it. I suspect everything will turn out fine in the end, but for the moment I feel I'm being treated like I'm "Guilty until proven innocent" I'm starting to think I should have spent the extra for a Losmandy G11, a long time proven performer that nobody complains about. Let's face it, you and me aren't the only 2 on this thread having a bad iop experience. As for your problem I would start with polar alignment and leave it in manual mode, then pick any star and let it track. If it tracks good then you can most likely rule out mechanical problems like the worm gear. If it's something with the electronics the problem is way beyond me. My other 2 mounts have manual hand turn slo mo cables. I never planned on using the goto functions on the iop. Good luck to you, and I'm not just saying that, I mean it.



#96 checkitout

checkitout

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • Posts: 38
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2014

Posted 26 June 2015 - 08:20 AM

BA,

I talked to the store that I got the mount from, they ordered me another mount and will exchange it when it comes in. As for the tracking it is OK for visual but I can only get 30-45 seconds shots with a camera. Not good at all. usually Polaris is at an angle of 0hr. and 45-56 min. and a radius of 38.8. I have even tried to compensate with Polaris in the polar scope. That didn't do anything. Well, I hope the new one is better. Good luck in getting your issues resolved.

ed



#97 Midnight Dan

Midnight Dan

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11899
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2008
  • Loc: Hilton, NY, Yellow Zone (Bortle 4.5)

Posted 26 June 2015 - 08:30 AM

 I can now also see how thin the legs are, not much thicker than the old steel pop and beer cans from decades ago.

 

This is a bit of an exaggeration.  You could easily crush one of those old coke cans with your hands.  Try that on your tripod leg.  

 

The legs are made of strong, tubular steel, just like the legs of most larger tripods.  And, like any other tripod, they keep them as thin as they can, while maintaining strength, to keep the weight down.  Otherwise people would be complaining that the tripod weighed too much.

 

Anyway, it doesn't sound like you had any problem at all with the legs.  You just got a bad casting at the knuckle.  That can happen occasionally with any casting, and there's really no way for their QA people to see that from the outside.  

 

My experience has been that iOptron has excellent customer support and I suspect they'll take care of this for you.

 

-Dan




CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.



Recent Reviews


Imaging/Sketching Contest






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics