-Roger Pitre- 1 X 7 binocular MN65, Nexstar 8SE, SV70ED, Lunt 60 PT EQ6 Pro, Vixen GP2, Canon 50D, Modified XSi, SBIG ST-2000XM, 70-200 f/4L, BackyardEOS "He's got shoulders on him like a smelt..."--Anonymous <a href="" target="_blank">https://www.facebook.com/pages/AJP-Observatory/462651307139970?ref=ts&fref=ts</a> http://ajpobservatory.is-great.org/
Quote:Hi all, for the last little while, I've been contemplating an upgrade from my EQ6 to something with less PE. I knew it had quite an error, but I never bothered measuring it. I wasn't looking at more payload, just better tracking. I've always needed to autoguide, even with focal lengths as short as 200mm.Last night, under the full Moon, I decided to finally measure what error was there. I'm going to post my findings, and tap into the extensive knowledge of the group for suggestions. How bad is it? As was suggested by one member previously, maybe an Aeroquest worm would fix it? Ring gear? Scrap it, and get a CGE/G11 that could be just as bad?At this time, a Mach 1 or EM200 isn't in the budget, so no need in suggesting one. Thanks...
Uncle Rod Uncle Rod's Astroblog: http://uncle-rods.blogspot.com/
Quote:All the mounts in this price range, and even those at the next level up (G11) will be more like your Atlas than different.
http://www.faintfuzzy.net Stuff C14, C8, Orion XX14i, Meade 8" ACF, AT6RC, AT102ED, Orion ED80, PST, AP1600GTO, CGE, CG5, ST10-XME/CFW8, QHY8PRO, Optec TCF-s, Microtouch Focuser, Pyxis LE, Hyperstar for C8.
Quote:Your PE graph looks pretty good. I agree with others that the smoothness is more important than the absolute PE.
My images: http://mtanous.wordpress.com