Jump to content


Photo

New mount! Synta AZ4

  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Megawatt

Megawatt

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 415
  • Joined: 02 May 2009
  • Loc: Flamborough, Ontario

Posted 17 June 2009 - 08:49 PM

I'm not going to give a crazy in-depth review of this thing, but I thought I'd share some thoughts for anyone who is interested. Initially my scope (Skywatcher 1206) came with an AZ3 but that mount was too light for it, and besides I didn't care for the action on it, particularly the altitude adjustment.

So I ordered an AZ4 instead. Construction seems really nice. I opted for the 1.75" tubular steel tripod instead of aluminum. The whole setup is quite solid with some good weight to it.

I've had limited use of it so far but it seems to be just what I was looking for. I wanted a tripod mount that would offer the same smoothness, stability, and simplicity as my Dobsonian mount. The AZ4 fits the bill. Like my Dob, it glides on teflon bearings so there is no sticky grease to contend with. Tension is controlled by a large knob on each axis. I keep the altitude tightened all the way and it works perfectly. Very easy to move but it stay right where I point it, even after switching to a heavier eyepiece. The pan handle can be fixed in two positions. I have mine in the lower position because it's easier to reach, but it this position the tripod legs get in the way a bit, so that's a small drawback.

Not much else to say right now. Once I try it with higher power I'll have a better idea of its stability. I'm really liking it so far, though.

Attached Files



#2 Megawatt

Megawatt

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 415
  • Joined: 02 May 2009
  • Loc: Flamborough, Ontario

Posted 17 June 2009 - 08:50 PM

Another pic:

Attached Files



#3 Sky Captain

Sky Captain

    Metal Whisperer

  • *****
  • Posts: 11333
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2004
  • Loc: Loc: Loc:

Posted 17 June 2009 - 11:04 PM

I opted for the 1.75" tubular steel tripod instead of aluminum.



Congrats on the new AZ mount. Good choice on the tripod upgrade, those aluminum ones are a real weak link for sure.

#4 vegasMike

vegasMike

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 646
  • Joined: 24 May 2004
  • Loc: Las Vegas

Posted 17 June 2009 - 11:29 PM

ditto on the tripod. The mount arm looks familiar - maybe Versago :question:

#5 mathteacher

mathteacher

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2782
  • Joined: 13 May 2007
  • Loc: Oakland, CA

Posted 17 June 2009 - 11:55 PM

Megawatt, thanks for posting. I'd like to hear more impressions on this mount. It seems like an inexpensive but effective mount.

#6 drshr

drshr

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 965
  • Joined: 09 Jun 2008
  • Loc: Darwin, Australia

Posted 18 June 2009 - 02:20 AM

Looks good!
What is the weight limit of the mount?
I have a spare tripod like the one you mention. I wonder if they sell the head separately?

#7 Megawatt

Megawatt

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 415
  • Joined: 02 May 2009
  • Loc: Flamborough, Ontario

Posted 18 June 2009 - 11:17 AM

The mount head is only superficially similar to the Versago. Judging by pictures, the Versago head is not as solid and probably a good deal lighter. It is the same idea, though.

Not sure what the capacity is. Recommended for 6" scopes and under, if that helps at all.

As far as I know there are no plans to make the head available separately.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics