Jump to content


Photo

Are savings on a CG-5 ASGT worth not getting AVX?

  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 Seanem44

Seanem44

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1324
  • Joined: 22 Sep 2011
  • Loc: Woodbridge, VA

Posted 27 August 2013 - 05:55 AM

I have a decision coming up soon. I need a mate for my AT65EDQ in the form of a mount. I have posted questions about the AVX vs. the ZEQ25. They seem pretty evenly matched. Now I have a different question.

The CG5s are at a very very enticing price. Am I missing out on much if I take one of those over the AVX (or ZEQ)? I have seen spectacular results with the CG5.

The bottom line is I am a noob in imaging. Well, not a complete noob. I do widefield milky way, have gone as far as I can, and am moving on up. Does the AVX offer anything to a noob in DSO imaging that the CG5 will not that is make or break or will significantly help my learning curve?

Thanks.

#2 orlyandico

orlyandico

    Fly Me to the Moon

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

Posted 27 August 2013 - 07:07 AM

AVX. Because of integer gearbox and permanent PEC.

ZEQ25 doesn't have permanent PEC.

For these reasons, for imaging I'd spend the extra bucks for the AVX unless weight was the main priority in which case the ZEQ25 would be my choice.

#3 Seanem44

Seanem44

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1324
  • Joined: 22 Sep 2011
  • Loc: Woodbridge, VA

Posted 27 August 2013 - 07:18 AM

Weight is not an issue at all. I'm 32 and in relatively good shape.

I also like the 2 inch legs over the ZEQ which charges more.

I guess I will have to wait a bit, as funds are available yet and the AVX goes back up to full price with the sale ending at the end of August.

Thanks for the insight though. I am 80% leaning towards the AVX right now. Hopefully some more of those one-off issues don't crop up on this forum.

#4 A. Viegas

A. Viegas

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1094
  • Joined: 05 Mar 2012
  • Loc: New York City/ CT

Posted 27 August 2013 - 10:22 AM

Sean if you are going to use it for your small refractor I think the CG5 will be fine. I used to own one and using it with my C8 and auto guiding I easily could get 2-3 min exposures. Using just my C80ED I could go almost 60s with no auto guiding and passable polar alignment. If I auto guided with the small refractor I bet I probably could get 5 mins....

I moved up to the cgEM for the weight... But I liked how lightweight and easy to move the CG5 was. There are decent deals on this used... I sol mine for $450. I think around that price you can find a decent one... I can not argue that it's better than the AvX but I don't think the AVX is 200% better either...

Just my 2c

Al

#5 frito

frito

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1183
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Fremont, CA

Posted 27 August 2013 - 01:16 PM

i get 2 minute unguided exposures at very high sucess rate with my WO 66SD (388mm fl) on my CG-5 just using the all star polar alignment. for that scope it will work fine. the AVX is a better mount but if you compare ~400 for a used CG-5 vs 700-800 for a new AVX if i was spending that much i'd go for a used Sirius or Atlas class mount, something that is better than the AVX and costs around the same used as the AVX does new.

#6 dragonslayer1

dragonslayer1

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1030
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2012
  • Loc: SLC, UT

Posted 27 August 2013 - 02:18 PM

I am using a CG-5 ASSGT with a C9.25 and video A/P. Is a lot of weight but am happy. Use it unguided and eye ball polar align. Kasey

#7 Madratter

Madratter

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2013

Posted 27 August 2013 - 05:05 PM

For AP, if you are never going to upgrade that AT65EDQ then the CG-5 is adequate. However, if you are going to get into anything with longer focal lengths down the road, I would hold out for at least something as capable as the AVX or ZEQ25.

Now for visual, the CG-5 is good even with a C8 on it. I did AP with a C8 on my CG-5 at f/6.3, but it was an exercise in frustration.

#8 cn register 5

cn register 5

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 760
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2012

Posted 27 August 2013 - 05:17 PM

I find the AVX much easier to set up for guiding and imaging than the CG5.

People have been saying that they would like things such as RTC, integer gears and PEC added to the CG5 and saying they would pay for this.

Now they have the option to have these things they go for the CG5 because it's cheaper.

Chris

#9 orlyandico

orlyandico

    Fly Me to the Moon

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

Posted 27 August 2013 - 06:20 PM

Well you know what Roland says...

The three most important things for astrophotography are the mount, the mount, and the mount. :)

I would disagree about used Sirius or Atlas vs AVX. The Celestron mounts have better software. Also there is the weight. You say its not an issue but weight will weigh you down (pun intended) and can be demotivating.

#10 Raginar

Raginar

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6138
  • Joined: 19 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Rapid CIty, SD

Posted 27 August 2013 - 07:11 PM

If you want to dip your feet in, a CG5 gives you everything you could ever want as long as you don't try to stack a 12" SCT on it.

Frankly, the other mounts close really offer very little reason to get them. The late model cg5 is a beast. There is nothing on an AVX that isn't on a CG5.

#11 Bill McNeal

Bill McNeal

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 337
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2007

Posted 28 August 2013 - 12:38 PM

Also remember the AVX is rated 5 lbs. less in payload capacity than the CG-5, 30 vs. 35 lbs. Could be a dealbreaker depending on your setup.

#12 FacEngRet

FacEngRet

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 18
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2013

Posted 28 August 2013 - 12:56 PM

I have both mounts and have used both with 6", 8" and 11" SCT. My experience tells me that the 30 pound weight rating on the AVX is a conservative rating and the 35 pound rating on the CG5 is optimistic.

#13 Moromete

Moromete

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 684
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2012
  • Loc: Romania

Posted 28 August 2013 - 03:58 PM

I have both mounts and have used both with 6", 8" and 11" SCT. My experience tells me that the 30 pound weight rating on the AVX is a conservative rating and the 35 pound rating on the CG5 is optimistic.


Is AVX much better than CG5 for AP and GOTOs with a C8/ C11 at F6 on it or not really? If yes, why?

#14 Seanem44

Seanem44

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1324
  • Joined: 22 Sep 2011
  • Loc: Woodbridge, VA

Posted 28 August 2013 - 08:10 PM

I plan on using the AT65 with a guider. That's it. At this point in my life, hard core AP will have to wait a while. Ill stick with the CPC 925 for viewing. No more upgrades for at least a decade after I get the mount. No new scopes for that same time.

#15 Ranger Tim

Ranger Tim

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 906
  • Joined: 25 Mar 2008
  • Loc: SE Idaho, USA

Posted 28 August 2013 - 09:45 PM

"No more upgrades for at least a decade after I get the mount."

This is heresy!

#16 bunyon

bunyon

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3324
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Winston-Salem, NC

Posted 28 August 2013 - 09:53 PM

I sold a CG5 to get the AVX for imaging with a C8 and it helped a lot. With that said, the CG5 did work and with a 80mm refractor was more than adequate. The capacity of the AVX is higher than the CG5 - I don't care what the published specs say. But it's close and your scope and guider are well within limits. The only downside of the Cg5 is that, on a lot of thme (and mine), there was a ton of backlash in Declination which inhibited guiding in Dec. But with good polar alignment and guiding in RA (essentially PEC), I got up to 10 minute exposures at 400mm.

If money were no object, I'd go with the AVX for sure. But you say money is an object, and it most certainly is. From what you've said, go with the CG5 on sale and enjoy it.



-Oklahoma State, class of 1993

#17 orlyandico

orlyandico

    Fly Me to the Moon

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

Posted 28 August 2013 - 10:36 PM

But... 10 years of no upgrades argues for the best you can afford now...

#18 frito

frito

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1183
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Fremont, CA

Posted 29 August 2013 - 12:30 AM

I sold a CG5 to get the AVX for imaging with a C8 and it helped a lot. With that said, the CG5 did work and with a 80mm refractor was more than adequate. The capacity of the AVX is higher than the CG5 - I don't care what the published specs say. But it's close and your scope and guider are well within limits. The only downside of the Cg5 is that, on a lot of thme (and mine), there was a ton of backlash in Declination which inhibited guiding in Dec. But with good polar alignment and guiding in RA (essentially PEC), I got up to 10 minute exposures at 400mm.

If money were no object, I'd go with the AVX for sure. But you say money is an object, and it most certainly is. From what you've said, go with the CG5 on sale and enjoy it.



-Oklahoma State, class of 1993


It's not exactly hard to adjust the mechanical backlash on the CG-5, i've adjusted the backlash on my club's Sirius mount and my CG-5 the Sirius had much worse backlash and was harder to adjust, the CG-5 was pretty easy to adjust. there are guides out there on the net but if you need help or have a question feel free to ask. i would not dare say it has zero backlash, thats impossible esp on a design like this but the vast majority of my backlash on my CG-5 is from the motor's interal gearboxes post adjusting mine.

#19 frito

frito

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1183
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Fremont, CA

Posted 29 August 2013 - 12:33 AM

I plan on using the AT65 with a guider. That's it. At this point in my life, hard core AP will have to wait a while. Ill stick with the CPC 925 for viewing. No more upgrades for at least a decade after I get the mount. No new scopes for that same time.


if that is all you plan to use the mount for for now the CG-5 will suffice, a 9-1/4" SCT visual is starting to push the mount but it will handle it and for AP you can easily get by on it with your AT65 with or without a guider, in fact i'd recommend starting off without one because it will make setup more simple with setup and software stuff until you get some time in to learn your setup.

#20 cn register 5

cn register 5

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 760
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2012

Posted 29 August 2013 - 02:49 AM

If you want to dip your feet in, a CG5 gives you everything you could ever want as long as you don't try to stack a 12" SCT on it.

Frankly, the other mounts close really offer very little reason to get them. The late model cg5 is a beast. There is nothing on an AVX that isn't on a CG5.


Not true.

the AVX has a RTC, PEC, integer gearboxes and drive software that avoids the cogging issue. It's also more sturdy.

Chris

#21 RTLR 12

RTLR 12

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4577
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2008
  • Loc: The Great Pacific NorthWest

Posted 29 August 2013 - 03:15 AM

integer gearboxes and drive software that avoids the cogging issue


Chris,

It's 'integer gears' not gearboxes. The integer gears only matter with PEC, so PEC and integer gears go together. Also, I wasn't aware of a cogging problem on the CG-5. These are only issues if you are doing AP. I do like the RTC thing though. I use my CG-5's for visual mainly, but I much prefer to use them over my CGEM's. I'm just wondering if I need to get an AVX or not.

I know you have both mounts, but why do you say the AVX is sturdier than the CG-5? I know the AVX weighs about 5 lbs more, but they both use the same tripod (Similar).

Stan

#22 cn register 5

cn register 5

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 760
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2012

Posted 29 August 2013 - 03:40 AM

I know you have both mounts, but why do you say the AVX is sturdier than the CG-5? I know the AVX weighs about 5 lbs more, but they both use the same tripod (Similar).

Experience...
Looking at the two mounts side by side.
Using them both. I find the AVX much easier to set up for guiding and imaging. It also feels more sturdy, both in operation and set up.

I have, to some extent, put my money where my mouth is and bought a RC6 for the AVX. By the time I've added a guide scope, cameras, focuser and filterwheel that comes to around 25 lbs, more if I add a rotator. The AVX handles that well. I haven't tried the CG5 with it but don't think it would.

There's not been much imaging this summer, I ended up spending the whole time playing with the StarSense.

Chris

#23 orlyandico

orlyandico

    Fly Me to the Moon

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

Posted 29 August 2013 - 04:04 AM

There are stories out there that the CG-5 also suffers cogging.

But see - the thing is cogging looks exactly like stiction. And, thanks to the lack of ball bearings on the DEC axis, the CG-5 generally has a good dosage of stiction. Which would mask the cogging...

But I digress.

If I had only one mount for 10 years, and the choice was the CG-5 and AVX, the latter would be a no-brainer.

#24 Seanem44

Seanem44

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1324
  • Joined: 22 Sep 2011
  • Loc: Woodbridge, VA

Posted 29 August 2013 - 04:20 AM

We'll see what I can cough up. I still have some toys I can sell. Most likely the astrotrac. Just need to hope the wife or I do not get furloughed in the coming fiscal year.

#25 RTLR 12

RTLR 12

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4577
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2008
  • Loc: The Great Pacific NorthWest

Posted 29 August 2013 - 07:31 AM

Chris,

Thanks for the answer. I guess I'll just have to jump in and get an AVX and see for myself. I'm guessing the extra stability must be due to the extra weight. Why is the AVX easier to set up?

Orlando,

Don't both the AVX and the CG-5 share the same "no bearings' design. If I remember correctly, I think I saw a disassembled AVX axis shafts looking exactly like a CG-5.

Stan






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics