Jump to content


Photo

Help selecting new mount

  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#1 Hemmi

Hemmi

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 281
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Raleigh, NC

Posted 28 July 2014 - 11:02 AM

All,

I currently have a AVX mount, but I'm tired of swapping OTA's constantly.

I have an AT6RC and a ES80mm APO that I use for imaging. I generally image wider fields. The slowest imaging will be with the AT6RC native with a DSLR or reduced with my ATIK. What I'm looking to do is mount both of these in a side by side configuration, along with a light 60mm guidescope.

Here are my guesses on overall weight:

1. RC6 = 12.9
2. ES80 = 7.5
3. 60mm = 1.4
3. various cameras = ?
4. rings, adapters, side by side mount etc = ?

I'm guessing a total about 30 lbs +/- total weight. The mounts I have looked at in my budget are as follows:

CGEM DX
EQ6
Atlas
ieq45

I have heard the 1/2 capacity for imaging rule, however is this real in practice? A mount with a 60+ lbs capacity really goes way past my budget. My budget is under 2k new or used.

Please share you opinions if what I want to do is feasible in my budget!

Regards,

Hemmi

#2 orlyandico

orlyandico

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5713
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2009
  • Loc: Singapore

Posted 28 July 2014 - 06:49 PM

I'd say go with the EQ6 or Atlas, which are the same mount.

They all cost the same, and the EQ6/Atlas seem to be the most battle-tested albeit also the oldest and with the most primitive firmware. Plus you get EQMOD.

As for the 50% rule.. it's not a hard and fast rule. But all mounts benefit from not running at their capacity.

#3 cosmo59

cosmo59

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 27 Jul 2014

Posted 28 July 2014 - 07:20 PM

Hi Emmi,
If you want to do side by side the Atlas Pro would
be a very good choice. Around $2,000.00

#4 cosmo59

cosmo59

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 27 Jul 2014

Posted 28 July 2014 - 07:22 PM

Sorry, Hemmi

#5 dragonslayer1

dragonslayer1

    Apollo

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

Posted 28 July 2014 - 09:18 PM

Hey Hemmi,
You can do side by side wit the CGEM also, I am using one with a ST 80 & C9.25 with no problem, Kasey
PS I am not side by side but know its an option with this mount

#6 Startraffic

Startraffic

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 801
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Lat. 39.143345, Long. -77.174802

Posted 29 July 2014 - 07:39 AM

Hemmi,
A used G11 with digital drive, & encoders. Gets you the load capacity you need, with the tracking you want, but you give up Goto. You "can" add that later (I did just that in fact.) but more expensive that going that way from the start. I bought a HGM-200 to replace, sold it & got it back, it now has Gemini-1 & encoders. It's my outreach mount because it can't be beaten to death by some ham handed rookie yanking it around. It is a HEAVY beast though.

I won't talk about your other mounts, I haven't used them. I would do a search on ALL of them & see what their individual quirks, gripes, & beauty marks are before I commit to one.
My $.02125" worth


Clear Dark Skies
Startraffic
39.138274 -77.168898
  • Gary Z likes this

#7 austin.grant

austin.grant

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 762
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Shreveport, LA

Posted 29 July 2014 - 07:49 AM

Get a used Atlas, add a TPI tripod spreader and you'll be golden.
  • JonM likes this

#8 Hemmi

Hemmi

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 281
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Raleigh, NC

Posted 30 July 2014 - 08:56 AM

Thanks everyone for the suggestions. I'm leaning towards the Atlas Pro.

We will see.

Thanks

Hemmi

#9 Relativist

Relativist

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4292
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003
  • Loc: OC, CA, USA

Posted 30 July 2014 - 09:35 AM

Lee, with the CGEM DX you can use starsense. The most important thing to get right will be the balance.

#10 Hemmi

Hemmi

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 281
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Raleigh, NC

Posted 30 July 2014 - 10:31 AM

Well which one will provide better imaging performance with ~30 lbs weight. I would prefer the CGEM DX just so I can use my starsense, but if the Atlas Pro will outperform the CGEM DX for imaging with my weight I will choose that.

So which of these two will perform better with my instrument weight?

Hemmi

#11 Relativist

Relativist

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4292
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003
  • Loc: OC, CA, USA

Posted 30 July 2014 - 10:55 AM

Are you ok with the G11 and giving up goto?

#12 Hemmi

Hemmi

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 281
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Raleigh, NC

Posted 30 July 2014 - 11:05 AM

Are you ok with the G11 and giving up goto?


Absolutely not! LOL. I just don't have the time.

#13 Relativist

Relativist

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4292
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003
  • Loc: OC, CA, USA

Posted 30 July 2014 - 11:51 AM

Are you going to buy used? If so make sure the company supports used equipment. As far as I know Orion does not (maybe I'm wrong)?

#14 terry59

terry59

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5250
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2011
  • Loc: Colorado, USA

Posted 30 July 2014 - 12:31 PM

Are you going to buy used? If so make sure the company supports used equipment. As far as I know Orion does not (maybe I'm wrong)?


Orion will support the original buyer only. That means a much lower price on their used equipment, IMO.

Edit: The side by side requirement makes it more challenging. Why not switch scopes instead?

#15 Relativist

Relativist

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4292
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003
  • Loc: OC, CA, USA

Posted 30 July 2014 - 01:03 PM

Is the EQ6 supported used?

#16 Hemmi

Hemmi

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 281
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Raleigh, NC

Posted 30 July 2014 - 01:44 PM

Are you going to buy used? If so make sure the company supports used equipment. As far as I know Orion does not (maybe I'm wrong)?


Orion will support the original buyer only. That means a much lower price on their used equipment, IMO.

Edit: The side by side requirement makes it more challenging. Why not switch scopes instead?


Because I want different FL options. Why is side by side more challenging then piggy backing?

Regards

Hemmi

#17 terry59

terry59

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5250
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2011
  • Loc: Colorado, USA

Posted 30 July 2014 - 02:38 PM

Are you going to buy used? If so make sure the company supports used equipment. As far as I know Orion does not (maybe I'm wrong)?


Orion will support the original buyer only. That means a much lower price on their used equipment, IMO.

Edit: The side by side requirement makes it more challenging. Why not switch scopes instead?


Because I want different FL options. Why is side by side more challenging then piggy backing?

Regards

Hemmi


I am talking about putting only one imaging scope on the mount at a time. Your weight requirement will decrease significantly.

The support structure (vixen/losmandy bar, dual saddles, etc) weigh a lot, especially if you get quality components such as ADM.

#18 dragonslayer1

dragonslayer1

    Apollo

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

Posted 30 July 2014 - 02:40 PM

There is a guy on here that does it with a CGEM and loves the set-up (dmdouglass) is his handle, really helpfull guy. Once you get it figured out should be no problem, Kasey

#19 Hemmi

Hemmi

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 281
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Raleigh, NC

Posted 30 July 2014 - 04:48 PM

There is a guy on here that does it with a CGEM and loves the set-up (dmdouglass) is his handle, really helpfull guy. Once you get it figured out should be no problem, Kasey


Thanks, I'll shoot him a PM

Hemmi

#20 Benson

Benson

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 147
  • Joined: 22 May 2010
  • Loc: -6 gmt

Posted 06 August 2014 - 02:21 AM

Losmandy mounts are a good option. They have excellent tracking. Not quite up to AstroP standards, but, also not quite so pricey. I'd give them a look.



#21 tazer

tazer

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 750
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2011
  • Loc: Central North Carolina

Posted 06 August 2014 - 07:30 AM

What's the advantage of the Atlas Pro over the Atlas for side-by-side imaging? The specs page only lists a 4lb payload difference (and some convenience enhancements) which doesn't seem to warrant the $500 cost differential. I'm not 100% sure but I'm assuming that Hemmi is not wanting to do ALT/AZ imaging.



#22 rgsalinger

rgsalinger

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 324
  • Joined: 19 Feb 2007
  • Loc: Carlsbad Ca

Posted 06 August 2014 - 10:15 AM

If ease of use is an issue for you choose the iEQ45 which will handle 30 pounds. If you are going to try to image side by side with more than 30 pounds I think you are pushing all of these mounts so if you go Losmandy, even the 4 pounds extra is worth the money in this class (certeris paribus). The instantaneous torque necessary when guiding to make small changes in the mount's position becomes an impediment getting accurate guiding. The automatic balancing, precision polar scope and multi star alignment in the iEQ45 are all superior to the older Losmandy mounts, even with Gemini 2. Also, consider that a side by side Losmandy saddle is not a lightweight proposition the Losmandy version weight 7.5 pounds and the offset nature again will stress the motor's torque capabilities, so if you go this route make sure you are really well balanced and pay attention to the front / rear offset of your scopes. 



#23 Gary Z

Gary Z

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 124
  • Joined: 26 Jan 2012
  • Loc: New Mexico

Posted 06 August 2014 - 11:13 PM

I am also considering an equatorial mount.   Lots a good advice here.  I would recommend downloading the manuals for each of the different mounts you are interested in or at least take a hard look at the specs.  I really like the load capacity of the IEQ45: 45 lbs with only a 25 lb mount head.  I have a friend that owns one and I have to admit it is a very solid mount...and this is not the latest version that's selling for over 1800.  It's a great mount that keeps getting better.  Another reason for comparing manuals is to compare the manuals.  I have an 8 SE mount and so I am not familiar with equatorial mounts, but I am impressed with the information in the IEQ45 and ZEQ25 manuals.  Yes, some of the English is funny, but I appreciate the amount of information in it.  I have a bad neck and spinal cord so weight of the mount/tripod is a strong consideration. 



#24 orlyandico

orlyandico

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5713
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2009
  • Loc: Singapore

Posted 07 August 2014 - 05:18 AM

I handled a couple of iEQ45's and by no means do I find them "very solid."  I guess if you have no point of comparison you would be led to such a conclusion.  My own opinion is that the iEQ45 is not even as solidly made as the CGEM I also once had, let alone a Losmandy or Astro-Physics.

 

The 45-lb "capacity" of the iEQ45 is in my opinion overly optimistic.  The CGEM feels far more solid than the iEQ45 and is only rated 40-lb and I still find that overly optimistic.

 

The Atlas Pro has a belt drive, compared to the regular Atlas, so should track smoother than the regular Atlas.

 

Just head over to the CEM60 "first impressions" thread and read about all the bugs and unimplemented features.

 

Why anyone would choose an iEQ45 over an Atlas or Atlas Pro is beyond me, unless they were loading it with 15lb or less and couldn't lift the Atlas/Atlas Pro.

 

30lb total payload in a side-by-side is in my opinion asking too much of this class of mounts.  A Losmandy G11 with the new high-torque motors would handle such a load much better.


Edited by orlyandico, 07 August 2014 - 05:20 AM.


#25 rgsalinger

rgsalinger

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 324
  • Joined: 19 Feb 2007
  • Loc: Carlsbad Ca

Posted 07 August 2014 - 10:20 AM

What an odd post, we are talking about the iEQ45, not the CEM60 which I know nothing about and is in a different class in any case. :confused:

 

The 45lb capacity for imaging with the iEQ45 is optimistic as I learned myself. I had no trouble at 28 pounds but 38 was too much for sub arc second tracking. Using terms like "solid" means nothing, the questions are performance, ease of use and support in that order for a mount. As far as performance is concerned, I know that mine delivered sub arc second tracking with my Televue refractor and 28 pounds of weight on the mount. Here's a nice review of the iEQ45. http://www.thewilmsl...q45_review.html which might convince some that it's "solid", whatever that's supposed to mean. Since I own an AP mount, I do get that it's not as well made as that but it costs less than a third once you add in a tripod to your AP Mach1.

 

Maybe "solid" means heavy, and awkward to set up. The iEQ is more portable than the CGEM and the customer support is excellent. Maybe Celestron support has gotten better, I don't know, but they were dreadful when I had my old CGE mount from 2005-2011. Here's a CGEM review to consider http://www.photodady...on-cgem-review/ .

 

The auto balance, built in GPS and accurate polar scope combined with light weight made the iEQ45 mount easy to use, fast to set up and take down (I bought the hard carrying case which I recommend). Personally, I never had any "bugs" in the software, but in this price range you're going to be subject to quality problems if you need a mount to use for imaging. Why anyone would opt for a heavier, harder to use mount when getting started as an imager is beyond me. The hobby is tough enough and clear skies infrequent enough to start with.

 

Rgrds-Ross








Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics