Jump to content


Photo

CGEM DX for imaging

  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 hickeydp

hickeydp

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 543
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2009
  • Loc: Ireland

Posted 25 April 2013 - 02:29 PM

Hi guys,

Simple quick question. How far do you reckon you an push a CGEM DX for imaging? Will it go to the rated 50lbs?

#2 gmartin02

gmartin02

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 870
  • Joined: 11 Apr 2005
  • Loc: Santa Clarita, CA

Posted 25 April 2013 - 03:32 PM

I doubt it. I have a CGEM (which has the same moving parts as the CGEM DX), and with my heaviest imaging load, which is about 30 lbs (not including counter weights), I wouldn't feel comfortable going much higher than that. I don't think I would go over about 35 lbs for imaging.

For a 50 lb imaging load (without counter weights), I would step up to a mount with a significantly higher load capacity, such as: Losmandy HGM Titan, CGE Pro, Takahashi EM-400, Astro-Physics 900/1100, Software Bisque Paramount MX, etc. I think 50 lbs on a GM-11 may be too much for that mount for imaging.

#3 chicot

chicot

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 363
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2008
  • Loc: Liverpool, UK

Posted 25 April 2013 - 06:21 PM

You could probably get away with 50lb on an AP Mach 1 as well. I know the stated capacity is 45lb but Astro Physics are very conservative with their capacity estimates.

#4 orlyandico

orlyandico

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5720
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2009
  • Loc: Singapore

Posted 25 April 2013 - 07:38 PM

Someone around here claims that there are people out there using Mach1's with 100lb loads... probably for visual though.

#5 WarmWeatherGuy

WarmWeatherGuy

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1914
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2011
  • Loc: Orlando, FL 28° N, 81° W

Posted 26 April 2013 - 12:30 AM

I doubt it. I have a CGEM (which has the same moving parts as the CGEM DX), and with my heaviest imaging load, which is about 30 lbs (not including counter weights), I wouldn't feel comfortable going much higher than that. I don't think I would go over about 35 lbs for imaging.

For a 50 lb imaging load (without counter weights), I would step up to a mount with a significantly higher load capacity, such as: Losmandy HGM Titan, CGE Pro, Takahashi EM-400, Astro-Physics 900/1100, Software Bisque Paramount MX, etc. I think 50 lbs on a GM-11 may be too much for that mount for imaging.


:like:

This is also my estimation based on my CGEM which is also loaded to 30 pounds when imaging.

#6 hickeydp

hickeydp

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 543
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2009
  • Loc: Ireland

Posted 26 April 2013 - 05:54 AM

Cheers guys. I actually have a G11 right now that would probably handle the 50lbs. I've decided to downgrade with a part exchange deal for it as I want to put the money into my day time photography. Have a opportunity to get my hands on a Nikon D3 for a song.

Right now I have a guy selling a DX and another selling a hyper tuned regular CGEM. 90% of the time my imaging requirements wouldn't weigh in at more than 20lbs but my 16" newt rebuild will probably hit the 50 mark. Ultimately once I have the money saved, I'll be looking at a CGE Pro or EQ8 class mount. I just want something to tide me over in the meantime.

#7 EFT

EFT

    Vendor - Deep Space Products

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 2566
  • Joined: 07 May 2007
  • Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Posted 26 April 2013 - 10:30 AM

Cheers guys. I actually have a G11 right now that would probably handle the 50lbs. I've decided to downgrade with a part exchange deal for it as I want to put the money into my day time photography. Have a opportunity to get my hands on a Nikon D3 for a song.

Right now I have a guy selling a DX and another selling a hyper tuned regular CGEM. 90% of the time my imaging requirements wouldn't weigh in at more than 20lbs but my 16" newt rebuild will probably hit the 50 mark. Ultimately once I have the money saved, I'll be looking at a CGE Pro or EQ8 class mount. I just want something to tide me over in the meantime.


I would say no to the 16" newt on the CGEM DX. 50 pounds is not the practical imaging load. It's not impossible, but the mount will have to be tuned and working very well to even have a chance at imaging with an instrument that large and heavy. If you are usually imaging with 20 pounds and the CGEM was professionally HyperTuned, then I would go with that over the CGEM DX and save the extra money for the bigger mount later.

#8 hickeydp

hickeydp

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 543
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2009
  • Loc: Ireland

Posted 26 April 2013 - 12:48 PM

Cheers for that Ed. I will have to find out who hypertuned it. That CGEM is the more attractive one to me right due to the fact it has been hypertuned.

#9 neilson

neilson

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 538
  • Joined: 22 Aug 2010

Posted 27 April 2013 - 10:20 AM

The CGEM DX can handle more than the CGEM for imaging because of the heavy duty tripod. It uses the tripod from the CGE Pro. The electronics on the DX are upgraded to handle heavier loads. Hypertuning does not do either of these. I would recommend the CGEM DX then get it Hypertuned or Hypertune it yourself. But imaging at 50 lbs would be pushing it.

neilson

#10 starbob1

starbob1

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1079
  • Joined: 11 Mar 2007
  • Loc: IN

Posted 27 April 2013 - 11:05 AM

The cgem in any fashion will not work with a 50lb load for imaging. 30lb is pushing it.

#11 hickeydp

hickeydp

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 543
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2009
  • Loc: Ireland

Posted 27 April 2013 - 11:31 AM

It looks like I'll probably go with the CGEM. Until I upgrade to a larger mount, my imaging loads won't get beyond 20lbs or so. This makes the DX advantage moot for me, hence the hypertuned mount becomes more attractive.

It looks like the guy would will buy my G11 will be throwing his CGEM in as part of the deal so buying the DX probably won't be an option. I just hope I don't regret this downgrade as I'll be living with it for at least a year.

#12 foggylenses

foggylenses

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 9
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2011

Posted 28 April 2013 - 11:16 AM

Prof, I have
both in my observatory. When I got the CGEM I was very impressed having moved up from the CG5. When I got the DX I was very impressed by the robust nature of the mount. The DX go to is definite upgrade. I can see the difference in the way the two approach a target. The DX locks in to the selected coordinates in a more precise manner.I lack the technical expertise to adequately put into the words but I do have them both. They have both been trouble free and very easy to operate. Once again the DX mount is very robust albeit heavy and tracks accurately with no vibration. It is quite reasonably priced I might add

#13 hickeydp

hickeydp

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 543
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2009
  • Loc: Ireland

Posted 28 April 2013 - 12:06 PM

Thanks for chiming in Foggylenses. So would you say there is a definite (major?) improvement in performance between the CGEM and the DX?

#14 EFT

EFT

    Vendor - Deep Space Products

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 2566
  • Joined: 07 May 2007
  • Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Posted 28 April 2013 - 01:17 PM

Thanks for chiming in Foggylenses. So would you say there is a definite (major?) improvement in performance between the CGEM and the DX?


There is a noticeable difference between the two mounts that is related to the motor board. The DX motor board does seem to drive the motors more smoothly and quietly than the standard CGEM board. The motors are of course identical. Whether this results in actual improvement to imaging operation is hard to say. Realistically, the performance should be very similar.

#15 foggylenses

foggylenses

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 9
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2011

Posted 28 April 2013 - 06:30 PM

Yes I would. The Dx does seem to go to its target in a smoother snappy fashion. I only do viual observing but I noticed that with both mounts that they very accurate. I always use the two star align and pick 4 callibration stars. I have found this a great way to get to know the skies better as I frequently pick alternate less bright calibration stars to find out where they are in the light pollution. Picking four calibration stars really isn'T really necessary for accurate alignment. I use illuminated finders and eye pieces. All things considered the DX can handle a variety of scopes. Try and find one to look at up close and you will be impressed with how solid it is. I bought mine because it can handle my larger 12 inch sct as well as my heavier refractors with less vibration. It is not a mount you want to move often. I have mine in a observatory.

#16 davidh1979

davidh1979

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2013

Posted 28 April 2013 - 11:12 PM

Yes I would. The Dx does seem to go to its target in a smoother snappy fashion. I only do viual observing but I noticed that with both mounts that they very accurate. I always use the two star align and pick 4 callibration stars. I have found this a great way to get to know the skies better as I frequently pick alternate less bright calibration stars to find out where they are in the light pollution. Picking four calibration stars really isn'T really necessary for accurate alignment. I use illuminated finders and eye pieces. All things considered the DX can handle a variety of scopes. Try and find one to look at up close and you will be impressed with how solid it is. I bought mine because it can handle my larger 12 inch sct as well as my heavier refractors with less vibration. It is not a mount you want to move often. I have mine in a observatory.




i would have to agree with foggylenses i have a cgem
that was hypertuned when my friend gave me his cgem-dx
until it was ready i did not want to give it back even
after my cgem was ready the slews are much stronger
and quiter the tripod plays a part in it too if i were
you i would take the cgem-dx if its going for the right
price of course.

#17 orlyandico

orlyandico

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5720
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2009
  • Loc: Singapore

Posted 29 April 2013 - 01:16 AM

it may be just newer firmware in the DX motor board that makes it sound nicer.

Derick has been doing a lot of tweaking of the motor board firmware (including the DEC cogging fix). Firmware updates to the handpad have also changed the GoTo approach strategy, this would change the behavior and noise-making of a newer DX vs an older CGEM.

#18 davidh1979

davidh1979

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2013

Posted 29 April 2013 - 06:47 AM

it may be just newer firmware in the DX motor board that makes it sound nicer.

Derick has been doing a lot of tweaking of the motor board firmware (including the DEC cogging fix). Firmware updates to the handpad have also changed the GoTo approach strategy, this would change the behavior and noise-making of a newer DX vs an older CGEM.


no both at time about a year ago were 4.21 and 6.17
with the newest firmware the cgem-dx is a more powerful
mount and more stable.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics