skyler
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 08/16/06
Posts: 1184
|
|
I am looking into a replacement mount for my Atlas EQG and looks like the next step up in quality that I am interested in would be an EM200 or NJP.
Can both mounts be setup for GOTO use inexpensively? I am not sure I have seen the goto hand controller for them; maybe because they need a PDA type device??
I think I read that you need a PC for this function but what programs are being used with it successfully?
What is needed if I want to autoguide?
Also, my guess is that the imaging capacity it about the same between the EM200 and my Atlas. What is the imaging load capacity of the NJP?
Thanks,
S
|
tim53
sage
Reged: 12/17/04
Posts: 287
|
|
I have an EM-10 for light stuff (moderately beefier than my Super Polaris), and an NJP for the heavy stuff.
Love both mounts.
I've never tried the EM-200, but it should be a good upgrade from the Atlas. You'll particularly like the accuracy of the Tak polar finders and their drives.
Both my mounts have the standard hand paddle, so they need a computer to run them. The Temma mounts come with Pegasus/Tracer 2000 software to goto with a PC. It works well but is pretty basic. Most people buy a third-party scope control software package. I have TheSky6 on my PC and EquinoX 6 and Voyager 4 for my Macs. I'd give the edge to TheSky6, though I'm a Mac person.
You can buy autoguider cables for SBIG to the Tak mount, but they're kind of expensive (over $100 IIRC). Alternatively, I use a Shoestring Astronomy GPUSB with a Firewire camera and Astro IIDC to guide using a Mac. The GPUSB and cable for the Tak is quite a bit cheaper than the other cable was for me, and it should work with a PC and other cameras/software. I don't recall the price I paid, though.
I've heard others run their Taks using PDAs, but I've not tried this (even though I have one). Tak makes a goto gizmo, but it's a few hundred additional bucks, IIRC.
The NJP is somewhat beefier than a CGE or G-11 mount. Possibly comparable to an MI-250 in load capacity and accuracy.
I use it to hold up to my 12.5" f/23 Cassegrain with teak plywood tube about 5' long, for planetary imaging. That's probably overdoing it slightly, though. The mount can handle a Casady triad bar, guidescope mount, three dovetail saddles, a C-8, 6" f/5 Jaegers, and Megrez 80mm fine. It also is way more than enough for my 6" f/10 Jaegers with a birdseye maple tube. I would think it would hold a C-14, which is about the weight of my Cass, but more compact.
Others may have more thoughts...
-Tim.
--------------------
"We`re just waiting looking skyward as the days come down.
Someone promised there`d be answers, if we stayed around."
-Orchestral Maneuvers in the Dark, "The Romance of the Telescope"
|
Dan G
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 06/27/06
Posts: 978
Loc: Minisink, NY, USA
|
|
S -
Tim gave great advice and insight. the NJP can carry around 65 lbs while the 200 is in the 40 lb range. A long OTA will lessen the wiehgt you can carry on the 200 in my experience.
I have only ever used theSky6 on a PC to control my mounts. This doesn't bother me but the lack of a hand controller does bother some. The great thing about a Tak mount is it just works and is an after thought in my efforts. Polar alignng is a breeze and very accurate. PE is minimal which makes autoguiding a breeze.
Dan in NY
--------------------
TV 76, Vixen VC200L, TV NP-127is
EM-200, NJP
ST-2000xm and ST-402
Tranquility Base Observatory aka "The Shed" by non-tranquil members of the house
www.nyskies.com Still a work in progress!
|
skyler
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 08/16/06
Posts: 1184
|
|
Thanks for the great info from both of you.
I think the EM200 can work with the loads I have. I am looking for a mount that is not too big to tote around as well.
Realize I have heard it many times but to be sure, are those lbs. figures for imaging or visual in your opinion(s)?
Are there any good alternative tripods available too? I want it to be steady but the load would be in the 30lbs range for imaging.
Thanks,
S
|
blueman
professor emeritus
Reged: 07/20/07
Posts: 512
|
|
How about a Losmady G-11?
They are a pretty good mount with a 65 lb load capacity, a very strong tripod and with the Gemini, great Go-To and tracking as well as good PE. All for $3,300.
Blueman
--------------------
WO 80mm f/6 APO
DSI III Pro Televue .8 focal reducer
Atik filter wheel Astronomik filters
Losmandy G-11 Gemini Auto-guided
|
tim53
sage
Reged: 12/17/04
Posts: 287
|
|
I agree. If you're looking for something in the range of the EM-200, you should probably also look into the G-11 and possibly the CGE as well. These mounts will most likely be less expensive new than an EM-200 used.
As for tripods, I think the EM-200 uses a very similar mahogany tripod to the one under the NJP, which is astonishingly solid.
-Tim.
--------------------
"We`re just waiting looking skyward as the days come down.
Someone promised there`d be answers, if we stayed around."
-Orchestral Maneuvers in the Dark, "The Romance of the Telescope"
|
tim53
sage
Reged: 12/17/04
Posts: 287
|
|
When I'm running my 12.5" Cass, or the triad bar and scopes listed in my post above, I'm using 4 of the Tak 14 pound counterweights.
-Tim.
--------------------
"We`re just waiting looking skyward as the days come down.
Someone promised there`d be answers, if we stayed around."
-Orchestral Maneuvers in the Dark, "The Romance of the Telescope"
|
TxStars
sage
Reged: 10/01/05
Posts: 388
Loc: Lost In Space
|
|
If you want to get serious with your imaging get the NJP.
You should be happy, but if you don't like it you can find a buyer real easy. And you will find they just keep working.
I just realized one of my Tak mounts is eighteen years old and it still works great.
--------------------
http://txstars.org
Tak FC-50
Tak FCT-65
Tak FC-100
"SCUZZO" 300/1.1
Camera Nikon F2 / Mamiya press 6x7 ,6x9 yay Film
Lenses Yes Many - lol
Mount - GoTo by hand and eye
|
Dean
Post Laureate
Reged: 12/31/04
Posts: 4232
Loc: Bailey Co Elev 8780 feet
|
|
Quote:
Realize I have heard it many times but to be sure, are those lbs. figures for imaging or visual in your opinion(s)?
The rated capacities for Taks (and other high end mounts) is considered for imaging while the capacities for the mid-level mounts like the G-11 is considered for visual use and the rule of thumb for these mounts is that the imaging capacity is about 1/2 the rated capacity.
What that means is that while the EM200 is rated at something like 35lbs and the G-11 is rated at something like 60 lbs, for imaging they are really in the same weight class (and I'd take an EM200 over a G11 in a second). That also means that while the NJP with a rated capacity of 65 lbs is really about twice that of the G-11.
Both mounts should come with an autoguider cable standard. If not, you can get an OEM one for lots of $, but I think ShoeString Astronomy has a cable (or cable & adapters) for much less.
As for tripods, there are mahogony ones in various heights that are very nice. There's also a heavy duty metal one for the NJP that I've heard good thing about (but I've never used one).
--------------------
deanrowe.net/astro
FWHM Imaging Forums
Whats with that avatar?
|
skyler
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 08/16/06
Posts: 1184
|
|
Thanks for the great info so far.
I am leaning a bit towards portability so that might mean the EM200 is the better choice for me.
I owned a stock CGE and it was good, but I know that I want to make a move to a higher standard like the Taks since imaging is a priority.
Sounds like the Atlas imaging load capacity would be equivalent to the EM200 so that sounds great.
Maybe a tripod like the one offered by TSS could be a good stable option too. Have not looked at the Tak wood tripod pricing but I assume it is much less than $1K.
Is there any other accessories or equipment I need to be aware of that should be considered if this is used for AP work?
Thanks,
S
|
Bees
member
Reged: 12/28/07
Posts: 80
Loc: Saskatchewan, Canada
|
|
The NJP has recently been discontinued so it will be difficult to find one unless it is used (and even then...).
The EM200 has +/- 5 arc sec error and the NJP has +/- 3 arc sec error. NJP weighs more but apparently breaks into three pieces which are manageable (can anyone confirm?). The load capacity is also much larger for the NJP.
I just ordered a new EM-200 but I have seen them and used them before and they are fabulous. Either way you can't lose. Just be prepared to buy an expensive hand controller if you want one from Tak (~$600) and the number of items isn't as good as you would probably like it to be. That is why I am using an old portable laptop specifically for the field with a program to control the telescope and keep the screen from ruining my night vision.
|
tim53
sage
Reged: 12/17/04
Posts: 287
|
|
The eq head of the NJP doesn't come apart, though the counterweight shaft comes off, so it's about a 55 pound monster to put up on the tripod. Still, I find the Tak tripod height is pretty comfortable for simply slightly lifting the head up to and setting it on - where it stays put by gravity while I go get the screws to bolt it in place.
I think I have the tall tripod, too. It came with the mount, used, for a total of $4600 a few years ago. It's the Temma PC version, not Temma II, but other than a purr while it's running, I don't find it objectionable. It slews fast enough (sounds like a starship accellerating when it's spinning up), and seems to work with all the software I've used on it: Pegasus/Tracer 2000, TheSky6, EquinoX 6, Equinox Image (guiding the mount while imaging with an ST2000XM), and Astro IIDC (guiding the mount with a firewire camera via a Shoestring Astronomy GPUSB and appropriate cable). Oh, and I had a prototype Starfish guide camera that also guided both my Tak mounts well. I also use Voyager 4 software to drive my Nexstar mount, and I've been bugging them to add Temma drivers, because I like their program. They say they're working on it.
I think the EM-400 has replaced the NJP. It's got a higher load capacity and so is a heavier mount as well, but I believe the Eq head breaks down into two pieces.
Any of these mounts should have something like a Scopeguard case with wheels for moving them around for trips to dark sky sites, et al. My EM-10 doesn't, but it doesn't weigh anything like the NJP, either!
Interestingly, except for the weight, it's no more work for me to take the NJP to a dark sky sight than it is for the EM-10 (I have a van, so room isn't usually a problem). Primary setup time difference is due to more stuff I can hang on the NJP than the EM-10. Setting up either mount is very fast, and consists of the same steps:
*set up tripod.
*Put equatorial head on tripod.
*Screw on dec shaft.
*add counterweights.
*add OTA(s), cameras, licorice whips (aka cables).
Polar align with polarfinder (when you get familiar with this, it takes only a couple of minutes to get accurate enough for imaging).
-Tim.
--------------------
"We`re just waiting looking skyward as the days come down.
Someone promised there`d be answers, if we stayed around."
-Orchestral Maneuvers in the Dark, "The Romance of the Telescope"
|
tim53
sage
Reged: 12/17/04
Posts: 287
|
|
Also, if you do look at NJP-size mounts, you might want to give a look at the MI-250. Comparable capacity to the NJP, maybe a bit more. Uses Gemini motors and control, so familiar if you're familiar with Losmandys.
Probably one of the prettiest mounts around, too.
-Tim.
--------------------
"We`re just waiting looking skyward as the days come down.
Someone promised there`d be answers, if we stayed around."
-Orchestral Maneuvers in the Dark, "The Romance of the Telescope"
|
Dean
Post Laureate
Reged: 12/31/04
Posts: 4232
Loc: Bailey Co Elev 8780 feet
|
|
Quote:
The NJP has recently been discontinued so it will be difficult to find one unless it is used (and even then...).
I'm not so sure - there was an announcement that JP-Z was discontinued, but apparently there are some differences between it an the NJP - see this thread . The EM400 is pretty close to the NJP, so it wouldn't suprise me.
Quote:
NJP weighs more but apparently breaks into three pieces which are manageable (can anyone confirm?).
No, it's one piece - just the CW shaft comes off.
--------------------
deanrowe.net/astro
FWHM Imaging Forums
Whats with that avatar?
|
Dean
Post Laureate
Reged: 12/31/04
Posts: 4232
Loc: Bailey Co Elev 8780 feet
|
|
Quote:
I am leaning a bit towards portability so that might mean the EM200 is the better choice for me.
I had an EM200 and upgraded to an NJP for the capacity.
One thing I liked about the EM200 is I could carry the EQ head with counterweights attached out and set the whole thing on the tripod. The NJP takes an extra trip or two - take the EQ head out, then CW shaft & weights and put them on. The NJP head weighs about as much as I'm comfortable carrying, mainly because it's rather clumsy to carry.
--------------------
deanrowe.net/astro
FWHM Imaging Forums
Whats with that avatar?
|
blueman
professor emeritus
Reged: 07/20/07
Posts: 512
|
|
According to Losmandy, the rated weight limits is for anything, including photography.
Blueman
--------------------
WO 80mm f/6 APO
DSI III Pro Televue .8 focal reducer
Atik filter wheel Astronomik filters
Losmandy G-11 Gemini Auto-guided
|
lineman_16735
3.14159265
Reged: 12/04/04
Posts: 1492
Loc: At home
|
|
Hi Floyd,
I've owned both the NJP and the G-11. The NJP is a much beefier mount. So regardless of rating the NJP IMHO can probably take twice what the G-11 does for imaging. I wouldn't be concerned at all putting 85lbs+ on the NJP assuming it is a short scope...maybe not to image with but I would not be suprised if it handled it.
--------------------
Chris
Meade 2080 ALT/AZ Goto Autostar 494
"quidquid Latine dictum sit altum videtur"
|
Dean
Post Laureate
Reged: 12/31/04
Posts: 4232
Loc: Bailey Co Elev 8780 feet
|
|
Quote:
According to Losmandy, the rated weight limits is for anything, including photography.
Blueman
The problem is that there isn't a standard as to what the manufacturer's rated capacity means. Losmandy rates the G11 at 60lbs and Tak rates the NJP at 65lbs. That would imply that the G11 is in the same weight class as the NJP, but it isn't. Consider this - the G11 EQ head weighs 36lbs but the NJP EQ head is much heavier at 55lbs - that alone should indicate that the NJP is much beefier while the EM200's EQ head weighs 33lbs - more in line with the G11. Another example - the AP900 EQ head weighs 54lbs - comparable to the NJP and has a rated capacity of 70 lbs (considered for imaging like the Tak) - also comparable to the NJP.
--------------------
deanrowe.net/astro
FWHM Imaging Forums
Whats with that avatar?
|
David Pavlich
Postmaster
Reged: 05/18/05
Posts: 6115
Loc: Mandeville, LA USA 30.38 X 90....
|
|
You could look at one of these if you can find one. Rumor has it that there will be some available in 6 or 8 weeks.
It breaks down into two 37lbs pieces. 100lbs imaging capacity according to Losmandy.
David
--------------------
A few scopes and mounts.
Proud Member; PAS NOLA,
Life expectancies would go WAY up if green vegetables smelled like bacon...
|
Eddy
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 09/30/04
Posts: 1124
Loc: Aix-en-Provence, France
|
|
Hi Skyler,
I have an EM-200 for 18 months now and I went through the same "dilemma" as you did, but would buy it again without hesitating a second. It is really portable. I can carry it outside attached to the tripod. Scope(s) and counterweights are carried out separately.
Since my CG5 broke down completely, I use the 2" steel tripod from that mount. I just had to drill "the mount attaching hole" out a bit. It fits really nice and is stable.
Now, if I would have a permanent setup, I would have probably gone for the NJP or EM-400. Mainly for its weight capacity.
But the EM-200 performs just fine for my needs. The polar scope is fantastic. Setup (= polar alignment) takes around 5 min. and I already made 30 min. exposures without any sign of star trailing.
--------------------
Cheers,
Eddy
C8 XLT, W.O. ZS80-FD 10th anniv. ed. with MoonLite D/S focuser, Tak TSA102N
Tak EM-200 Temma II, Vixen PortaMount
SXV-H9, SXV guider
SBIG CFW-10 SA filter wheel, Astromik Type2 LRGB and Astronomik 6nm H-α, 13nm SII, 13nm OIII
Taurus Mini Tracker OAG
http://www.astrophotogallery.org/showgallery.php?cat=580
|
blueman
professor emeritus
Reged: 07/20/07
Posts: 512
|
|
I am not saying that the NJP is not a heavier mount or that it does not support more load. I am just saying that the rated capacity of the G-11 is based on Photography and Visual and that is according to Losmandy.
So, yes, the NJP would be a better mount for 60+ lbs, no doubt. But the G-11 will work with 60 lbs as stated by Losmandy. I have seen it done, though I do not load mine that heavy by any means, about 35-40 at the most, but that is because that is all my equipment weighs. 
But to say the G-11 will not do photography with more than 30 lbs is ridiculous.
The AP900, NJP, MI-250 all would be better suited for the 60 lbs load.
Blueman
--------------------
WO 80mm f/6 APO
DSI III Pro Televue .8 focal reducer
Atik filter wheel Astronomik filters
Losmandy G-11 Gemini Auto-guided
|
lineman_16735
3.14159265
Reged: 12/04/04
Posts: 1492
Loc: At home
|
|
Quote:
But to say the G-11 will not do photography with more than 30 lbs is ridiculous.
Blueman
That is true Floyd, but at what pixel scale, and with what results? I'm not saying that it isn't possible to obtain good results at over 30lbs but for the most part the "higher end" mounts are going to track at a precision that is only limited by atmospheric conditions. From the two G-11's I've owned that were both purchased new I don't think that is the case. Are there excellent specimens of the G-11 out there? Yes are there duds...well I know of at least a few. The G-11 is a great mount in it's price range and IMHO the best sub $3500 mount out there. That being said the EM-200 outclasses it in the sense of out of the box performance and smooth PE. The EM-200 will do photograpy at over 30lbs as well but it will suffer at a given point even though they are nearly the same physically...size wise. Just my 2 cents no need for change
--------------------
Chris
Meade 2080 ALT/AZ Goto Autostar 494
"quidquid Latine dictum sit altum videtur"
|
blueman
professor emeritus
Reged: 07/20/07
Posts: 512
|
|
Here is a shot of my guiding graph for the G-11, typical graph for a giving night. 22 lb load plus 22 lbs of weights.
Blueman
--------------------
WO 80mm f/6 APO
DSI III Pro Televue .8 focal reducer
Atik filter wheel Astronomik filters
Losmandy G-11 Gemini Auto-guided
|
blueman
professor emeritus
Reged: 07/20/07
Posts: 512
|
|
Here is a graph from my friends EM-200, same amount of time and weight (approximate) but with a slight difference in pixel resolution, mine 2.37uMM and his 3.15uMM.
You can see there is little difference between them.
The PE corrected by guiding is very close to the same, with my +- max being slightly better than his.
My mount was not using PEC, but I am not certain whether his was or not, I will ask.
Blueman
--------------------
WO 80mm f/6 APO
DSI III Pro Televue .8 focal reducer
Atik filter wheel Astronomik filters
Losmandy G-11 Gemini Auto-guided
Edited by blueman (07/17/08 06:22 PM)
|
Dean
Post Laureate
Reged: 12/31/04
Posts: 4232
Loc: Bailey Co Elev 8780 feet
|
|
Quote:
I am not saying that the NJP is not a heavier mount or that it does not support more load. I am just saying that the rated capacity of the G-11 is based on Photography and Visual and that is according to Losmandy.
So, yes, the NJP would be a better mount for 60+ lbs, no doubt. But the G-11 will work with 60 lbs as stated by Losmandy. I have seen it done, though I do not load mine that heavy by any means, about 35-40 at the most, but that is because that is all my equipment weighs.
But to say the G-11 will not do photography with more than 30 lbs is ridiculous.
The AP900, NJP, MI-250 all would be better suited for the 60 lbs load.
Blueman
The point I was making is that the manufacturer's rated capacity is misleading. Losmandy is rather generous with their ratings while the top end manufacturer's are much more conservative. The result is that comparing rated capacities from Losmandy to capacities from Tak, AP or MI gives the impression that the G11 is in a higher weight class than it really is.
--------------------
deanrowe.net/astro
FWHM Imaging Forums
Whats with that avatar?
|
lineman_16735
3.14159265
Reged: 12/04/04
Posts: 1492
Loc: At home
|
|
Well, I'm not familiar with PEAS but the one thing that I see is the spikes in the G-11 FFT graph looks to be around 80 seconds with a high intensity. Of course I'm not aware of the conditions that either of these graphs were obtained under but it seems obvious that the EM-200's graph is very smooth with no jumps. I would love to see a PEMPRO produced graph (free trial). I would assume though that a little longer focal length will show where the G-11 starts to lose to the EM-200. These were both taken at the same declination?
--------------------
Chris
Meade 2080 ALT/AZ Goto Autostar 494
"quidquid Latine dictum sit altum videtur"
|
lineman_16735
3.14159265
Reged: 12/04/04
Posts: 1492
Loc: At home
|
|
Another thing I noticed is that these graphs both show guiding at less than a half arc second. That in itself is amazing to me. Perhaps it is my seeing conditions but my NJP never guided that well throughout an entire worm cycle.
--------------------
Chris
Meade 2080 ALT/AZ Goto Autostar 494
"quidquid Latine dictum sit altum videtur"
|
Dean
Post Laureate
Reged: 12/31/04
Posts: 4232
Loc: Bailey Co Elev 8780 feet
|
|
Quote:
Here is a shot of my guiding graph for the G-11, typical graph for a giving night. 22 lb load plus 22 lbs of weights.
Blueman
One thing about this and the EM200 chart - you really want to look at the chart with unsmoothed data. The reason being that it's the very short term (a few seconds) smoothness that matters the most if you are autoguiding. When I had my EM200, I wouldn't hesitate to use 12-15 second guide exposures (and have used 30 second guide exposures with my NJP). I've never heard of anyone using guide exposures of more than a couple seconds with a G11 at any significant image scale (< 2 arc secs / pixel or so).
--------------------
deanrowe.net/astro
FWHM Imaging Forums
Whats with that avatar?
|
Dean
Post Laureate
Reged: 12/31/04
Posts: 4232
Loc: Bailey Co Elev 8780 feet
|
|
Quote:
Another thing I noticed is that these graphs both show guiding at less than a half arc second. That in itself is amazing to me. Perhaps it is my seeing conditions but my NJP never guided that well throughout an entire worm cycle.
Assuming the scale is correct, my guess is the recording was made while autoguiding
--------------------
deanrowe.net/astro
FWHM Imaging Forums
Whats with that avatar?
|
tim53
sage
Reged: 12/17/04
Posts: 287
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: