I agree with Bob, that the iEXOS-100 is insufficient for AP with a telescope; it could be OK for a DSLR and camera lens.
ES says its total load for up to 19#, including counterweights. Most load limits for mounts do not include counterweights, and most stated loads should be <50% for AP. This mount comes with ~5# of counterweights, which is not much to offset a scope, camera, etc.
A MUCH better choice for an extreme budget would be the ES EXOS2 w/ PMC8, currently $700 on sale. This has a much more substantial mount head, tripod, and the full blown PMC8 controller (like on my G11). The PMC8 works well and is MUCH better than the earlier hand controller unit on older Bresser EXOS units, and smoother belt drive gear system. This has about twice the load capacity of iEXOS-100, though you should keep the entire load (excluding counterweights) to no more than 14#, which will be OK for the gear you are looking at. The issue is that it cannot handle much more. A better budget choice with significantly more future proofing is the SW EQ6R-Pro at $1595; this is the budget mount king.
I wholeheartedly disagree
I use my iExos100 with 3 x1kg(+1 diy 300g) counterweights and have an ED80 weighing in at ~4.5kg on the other end. I've guided it successfully to 12min, pretty sure I can go longer as well. I'm shooting at the native 600mm with an aps-c sized sensor and the stars are pinpoint in 90-95% of my shots(at 10min subs).
OP's suggested scope also has a much lower focal length... Just because it's cheap, doesn't mean it's bad.
I do understand that cheap mounts USED to perform poorly, but as technology and human ingenuity are advancing, so are the products. Just look at Chinese phones... 10 years ago they were regarded as cheap and bad products. Now look at what for example xiaomi has become.
And especially when products such as the iExos100 are coming from a company with existing, well made products, judging them by their price, in my opinion, would be foolish.
To OP: I think you have chosen a great setup, the only thing I would perhaps reconsider is the scope. Before buying one, you should take into consideration what you want to be imaging in the future. The setup you chose is fairly wide, meaning it's great for large nebulae.
Not so good for galaxies or planetary nebulae. However large nebulae are by far the best objects to start out with and there are a LOT of them, so you will probably never run out of targets to shoot with that scope.
In my case I went with a slightly larger and longer focal length scope because I planned on imaging galaxies as well. And while you ideally would want a way longer focal length for galaxies, I found this one to be affordable and flexible. With a Reducer I can fit most nebulae in it, while being able to image galaxies when I use the Flattener.
Just my 3 cents
Small add on:
Don't forget about software. For Polar alignment, you will definitely want to purchase a sharp cap license (like 10€ a year) and you'll need something to process your images with.
If you have experience with Photoshop I'd suggest using DeepSkyStacker(free) to stack the images and Photoshop to process them.
If you do not own/know Photoshop I'd suggest taking a look at specialized astrophotography processing programs such as Astropixelprocessor or PixInsight. From what I've seen, all of those programs have a steep luring curve (like anything in AP), but the specialized programs will outclass Photoshop at some point.
Edited by Huangdi, 27 January 2020 - 01:41 PM.