Best advanced telescope mount for astrophotography in 2020?

Are you looking for an affordable advanced telescope mount to take your astrophotography hobby to the next level? Do you want to capture galaxies or guide accurately with heavier telescopes? Then this blog may contain useful information for you. I have compared the specs of six mounts around the $1500 price range on four “must-haves” and some “nice to haves” that I would like to see on advanced mounts.

The short conclusion is that the Skywatcher EQ6-R pro ticks most of the boxes that I would like to see in an advanced equatorial mount. It can carry up to 20kg (44lbs) of payload, it has a direct USB 2.0 connection on the mount, the large alt-az bolts are useful to accurately polar align your mount and it is available for about $1500. It has to share its first place with the Orion Atlas 2 EQ-G mount, which has the same specifications. Below, I compare six advanced equatorial mounts on four “must-haves” and some “nice-to-haves” that I would like to see on such mounts.

What is an “advanced” equatorial mount?

That is a good question. I would define a mount as advanced when it is able to carry heavier payloads (>10kg / >25lbs) and accurately track deep sky objects which have an apparent diameter of about half a degree or less. Some famous examples are the whirlpool galaxy (M51) and Bode’s galaxies (M81, M82). In order to capture those objects, astrophotographers usually need a telescope with a long(er) focal length, which enables you to “zoom in” on deep sky targets with a smaller apparent diameter. Such scopes, along with your guiding gear and camera, will often lead to a payload of about 10 to 15kg (22-35 lbs). Popular beginner level mounts – such as the Celestron Advanced VX, or the Skywatcher HEQ5 – are less suited for those heavier payloads as the maximum payload capacity of such mounts is about 12 kg (25 lbs). You would push those beginner level mounts to their limit in terms of what weight they are able to carry, which often leads to inaccurate guiding. Hence, we then need an “advanced” mount. In this review, we will compare six mounts that have such a higher payload capacity, being the Skywatcher EQ6 pro (NEQ6), the Skywatcher EQ6-r pro, The Celestron CGEMII, the Atlas EQ-G, the Atlas II EQ-G, and the Ioptron CEM40. I have compared those mounts on four must-haves, and some nice to haves. Let’s get into it.

Four “Must-haves” I would look for in an advanced equatorial mount

I would argue that an advanced mount has to meet at least four criteria: High payload capacity, accurate tracking capabilities, portability and reliability.

Payload capacity

There is an unwritten rule in astrophotography that you should not push the mount to its maximum payload capacity. Although the mount would be able to carry the payload, it becomes difficult for the mount to accurately track objects in the nightsky when under its maximum weight capacity. Consequently, you would need a mount that can carry a bit more weight as compared to your payload, lets say 15 to 20kg (33-45lbs).

All mounts meet the payload capacity I just mentioned but there are some minor differences. The specs of the Ioptron CEM40, the Celestron CGEMII and the Atlas EQ-G show that those mounts are able to carry up to 18kg/40lbs of payload, whereas the Skywatcher EQ6 pro, the EQ6-r pro and the Atlas II EQ-G can carry up to 20kg/44lbs.

High tracking accuracy

This is of course a highly debated topic in astrophotography. A quick answer is that we need sub-arc second accuracy in autoguiding for multiple minutes to take beautiful images of smaller galaxies and globular clusters. However, this is easier said then done. Guiding accuracy depends on a lot of factors, including the weather and seeing conditions on a particular day, the weight of the payload, the degree to which you are able to balance your payload well against your counterweights, how accurate you polar align your mount and probably also the way in which you have setup your guiding software. This being said, it is useful to get at least some indication of guiding accuracy so I looked into user experiences on cloudynights and stargazerlounge, and I collected at least five users reports on guiding accuracy for each of the mounts.

Long story short, I could deduct from these personal stories that each of the mounts are able to track objects in the nightsky at subarc seconds. The CGEMII was the mount where astrophotographers reported the lowest maximum periodic error of about 0.60 arcseconds, followed by the Skywatcher EQ6-r pro at 0.63 arcseconds. The older Skywatcher EQ6 pro and the Atlas EQ-G mounts were reported to have a PE of about 0.80, and the Atlas II and the Ioptron CEM40 reported the highest PE’s of 0.83 and .90 respectively. Please take this information with a bag of salt, as these are based on user reports without knowing anything about weather and seeing conditions, the payload on those mounts, nor how well the mount was balanced and polar aligned.

Portability

This one is somewhat counter intuitive. As we are dealing with heavier mounts, the portability will be worse as compared to beginner level mounts. However, I would argue that when mounts are heavier, portability becomes even more important. This is a personal must-have for me, as I live in the city with no option to permanently setup my mount in an observatory or dome. Heck, I even lack a decent garden and perform my astrophotography from my terrace :-). If you do have a dedicated observatory, portability is less of an issue for you.

All mounts are pretty heavy. The Ioptron CEM40 is a positive outlier in this respect. The head of this mount weights only 7kg/16lbs and the tripod 8kg/17lbs. This is pretty incredible, as the other mounts are about 40% heavier. For example, the mount heads of the Skywatcher EQ6 pro and EQ6r-pro weigh about 17kg/38lbs and the tripods 8kg/17lbs. The Atlas mounts are comparable to the skywatcher mounts in terms of weight. The heaviest mount is the CGEMII with a head of 18kg/40lbs and a tripod of 9kg/20lbs. Some astrophotographers welcome the extra weight on a mount as mounts tend to get more stable with more weight. As for me, I’m pretty impressed by the low weight of the Ioptron CEM40. I should also mention that the Atlas II and the EQ6-r pro have a handle on the head of the mount. Many users reported that this handle is useful when carrying the mount outside and when putting the mount head on the tripod.

Reliability and ease of use

If you are going to spend about $1500 dollars, euros, or your local currency, you want that mount to last for years to come. I have to say that although I find this point important, some of the mounts are only on the market since about a year or two. Still, I have looked for some general user experiences on reliability and ease of use, this is what I found out.

Differences bewteen the EQ6 pro and the EQ6-r pro are similar to the differences I found between the Atlas EQ-G and the Atlas II EQ-G. I highly suspect that the designs of those mounts are made in the same Chinese factory (Syntha). As compared to the EQ6 pro, the EQ6-r pro has a belt drive. This drive makes the mount less noisy and (some say) more accurate in guiding. Another thing to like is the permanent periodic error correction on the EQ6-r pro. Periodic error corrections are useful when the gears of a mount have some minor inaccuracies, resulting in predictable variations in your guiding. PPEC will automatically monitor and correct such predictable periodic errors. Moreover, the EQ6-r has an illuminated polar scope, and the comfortable alt-az knobs on the mount make polar alignment easy to do. Note that all differences between the EQ6 pro and the EQ6-r pro also apply to the Atlas compared to the Atlas II. The Celestron CGEMII comes with comfortable, large alt-az knobs. Moreover, Celestron mounts such as the CGEMII can guide past the meridian, which may be useful when you are capturing objects that are close to the meridian. In practice, this means that you can finish capturing a frame before flipping your EQ mount. The large lock/unlock bolts on the mount and the index marks on the legs make it easier to level the mount. As for the Ioptron CEM40, this mount is sold separately and will fit on either a 1.5 or a 2 inch tripod. I suspect the 2 inch tripod will be more stable for astrophotography. Also, the CEM40 has an advanced Ipolar alignment system that uses specific Ioptron software to polar align the mount – comparable to using sharpcap – and users mention that the CEM40 has a good cable management system.

Nice to haves

Moving on to the nice to haves. I personally would like to see a USB connection on the mount, any option to connect the mount wireless , GPS, and support for both Vixen and Losmandy style tails of telescopes. I didn’t find a lot of differences between the mounts when looking into these nice to haves. Unfortunately, none of the mounts natively supported a wireless connection. However, additional hardware can be bought to enable a wireless connection. All of the mounts supported both vixen and losmandy style dovetails, meaning that most kinds of telescopes will fit on these mounts. One difference was that the standard Ioptron CEM40 includes GPS. Other mounts can also be outfitted with GPS, but you will have to buy an extra dongle which can be connected to the mount. GPS can be useful when you are observing from different locations. GPS automatically informs the mount about its latitude position which saves you some time when setting up the mount and performing polar and star alignment procedures. Another difference was that the older EQ6 pro, Atlas EQ-G and CGEMII mounts do not include a direct USB connection to the mount. This complicates the connection process in my opinion, as you first need to connect the hand-controller to the mount and then run a cable from the hand-controller to your PC or Laptop. I personally prefer a direct USB connection on the mount, as there is one piece of hardware less to worry about. The newer Skywatcher EQ6-r pro, Atlas II and Ioptron CEM40 all have a USB 2.0 connection on the mount.

Conclusion

I highly urge you to do your own research. Each of the mounts have specific pros and cons which may be more or less important to you. Don’t mind the lack of USB and a heavier mount? Then you might want to consider the Celestron CGEMII, or the somewhat older EQ6 pro and Atlas EQ-G mounts. Don’t like to carry a lot of weight? Then you may want to consider the Ioptron CEM40. Do you like USB2.0 on the mount and a high maximum payload? than the Skywatcher EQ6-r pro and the Atlas II EQ-G would win this race. I came to the conclusion that for my personal situation, the Skywatcher EQ6-r pro and the Atlas II EQ-G tick most of my must haves and nice to haves at a favorable price. So these mounts are my personal favorites, and I will look for a good deal on the Skywatcher EQ6-r pro. The Orion Atlas II EQ-G appears to be only available in the USA. Below you will find links to webshops that sell the advanced mounts discussed in this blog. You can also download a pdf of my powerpoint presentation used in the video. I sincerely hope this information helps you to find your next “advanced” equatorial mount. Clear skies!

Links to webshops

Skywatcher EQ6-r pro

OPTcorp.com

Amazon.com

Astroshop.eu

Atlas II EQ-G

OPTcorp.com

Ioptron CEM40

OPTcorp.com

Amazon.com

Astroshop.eu

CELESTRON CGEMII

OPTcorp.com

Amazon.com

Astroshop.eu

Atlas EQ-G

OPTcorp.com

Amazon.com

Astroshop.eu

Skywatcher EQ6 pro (NEQ6)

N/A