“I am the only person to ever ace a 1951 USAF resolution test. My 'to observe' list says 'done'. I do not use charts or atlases when I starhop; men do not use maps. One of my sketches won an SBIG deep sky imaging contest. I am the life of star parties I have never attended. I never say anything looks like a faint fuzzy - not even a faint fuzzy. Pilots aim green laser pointers at me. Don Pensack proofreads my CN forum posts.” - The Most Interesting Astronomer in the Universe
Time spent looking at the stars is added to your life
Bashful, Misty, and little Ralphie - my heavenly stars
A-P 105 Traveler ~ TEC 140 ED ~ TEC 6 MCT
A-P Mach1 GTO ~ Losmandy GM-8 ~ TV Gibraltar
Terry Danks Photography: Birds, Scenery, a little astrophotography too. http://danks.netfirms.com/home.htm Equipment List: Too embarrassed to list it all. Roll-off-roof Observatory Constructed Fall, 2013
Quote:Okay, I'm about to bite the bullet on an Astro-Physics mount.I am bouncing back and forth between the Mach 1 GTO and the AP 900. Each has pros and cons for me. The Mach 1 is small and light, with decent capacity for its mass, and would be the better traveler. The AP 900 has a higher payload capacity and analog setting circles (I'm a big fan of accurate engraved setting circles). But it's heavier and bulkier, not to mention more costly.I understand that in addition to the basic mount bundle, I'll need to add a saddle, counterweights, potentially a pier adapter and some form of pier or tripod. Costwise, I'm flexible. That is, the extra cost of the AP 900 is not a deterrent. However, the extra bulk and mass isn't so desirable and the extra capacity isn't needed *at present*.I'm 100% visual only - no imaging, and none planned - and my reason for looking to move to an AP mount from my less costly mounts (CG5-GT, CGE and Atlas) are (a) reliability at (very) remote sites in the field and (b) high payload capacity per unit of mount mass.The biggest payload initially will be a TEC 140 or perhaps a C9.25 or C11. I can see it needing to carry a 160mm refractor at some point, and have seen an APM/LZOS 152/1200 on a Mach 1 and felt that it was pushing what I would feel comfortable with as the mount limits.One thought I had was this - get a used 900 or 1200 QMD for home use/higher payload needs, and the Mach 1 for travel. Of course, getting just one mount would be simpler. Whacha think?Also, if anyone is using a Pelican case for either a Mach 1 or AP 900, let me know which one and how you like it.Regards,Jim
Money can't buy happiness, but it sure makes living with misery a lot easier!
Quote:IMHO, the Mach1 is simply the best mount in its class that you can buy. Mine is mated to an Eagle and an 8" pier extension. It sets up quickly and is extremely stable. The Mach1 and Eagle seem to literally blend together. Jim, the only 'problem' you might have is the lack of a pointing model in the GTO firmware. For imaging, it's not needed. For visual it would be a big plus.
How demanding are the A-P mounts in the polar alignment department for purely visual use?
I'm used to sighting Polaris through the bore hole being "good enough" in other GOTO EQ mounts. Can I get away with that with an A-P mount?
Quote:Follow-up question:How demanding are the A-P mounts in the polar alignment department for purely visual use?I'm used to sighting Polaris through the bore hole being "good enough" in other GOTO EQ mounts. Can I get away with that with an A-P mount?Thanks!- Jim
David Cotterell Toronto, Ontario "If an observer actually sees an object, there is no point in referring to a formula to find out whether he ought to see it; and if he fails to detect it, no formula will ensure his success." - W.H. Steavenson 8" f/15.5 TEC Maksutov 16" f/5 Teeter/Zambuto Dob 66mm WO SD AT 65EDQ APO Refractor Astro-Physics Mach 1 GTO Mount iOptron ZEQ25 mount Canon 60Da
Uncle Rod Uncle Rod's Astroblog: http://uncle-rods.blogspot.com/
14.5" Starmaster with ServoCat and Argo Navis 1966 Unitron 4" Model 152 EQ Tec 140 TV NP101 f/5.4 APO Telvue .8 Focal Reducer FLI ML8300 and CFW-2-7 filter wheel Astrodon Gen2 RGBL 2" filters Baader 2" Narrow Band Filters Borg 50mm Guide Scope/ATIK Titan Guide Camera AstroPhysics AP900 Losmandy GM-8 Gemini
Quote:I've had Losmandy mounts. Not a fan, though a non-Gemini G-11 would be a tolerable home-use mount. I'd not like traveling with it though, and hate having to continually adjust the worm gear mesh to control backlash.Regards,Jim
Quote:Quote:I've had Losmandy mounts. Not a fan, though a non-Gemini G-11 would be a tolerable home-use mount. I'd not like traveling with it though, and hate having to continually adjust the worm gear mesh to control backlash.Regards,Jim You should try to get a chance to try a Gemini II. Might change your mind.As for "adjusting," you probably never would need to do a thing as a visual user. Hell, most imaging folks rarely have to mess with their mounts. It is a hell of a mount for a hell of a price, but, again, that is just me. If you are settled on an AP, good on you. As long as you realize the go-to performance with an SCT, especially, will be less than...uh..."stellar."
Quote:Hi Rod, I'm contemplating a similar setup as Jim however, my choice will be primarily for imaging. You caught my attention stating that the AP mounts will have "less than stellar" go-to performance. Would you care to elaborate on this please? Eventually I may purchase a C14 for visual use.ThankFaron
Quote:Rod, if you're going to use a long focal length scope with mirror flop, couldn't you use syncing/platesolving to correct for any error in the initial point model?
Tak AP QSI Canon
Quote:I won't say "never" but I'm more likely to go for a used AP-900 QMD if one pops up than a new A-P mount. I like analog setting circles and paper observing lists with RA and Dec coordinates printed on them. It's not a race, after all.Regards,Jim
Takahashi FS128, TSA 102, FSQ106N, Losmandy GM-8, Baader Mark V, Leica ASPH, Takahashi, Ethos and Panoptic eyepieces.