Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

Equipment Discussions >> Mounts

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | (show all)
KDizzle
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 09/12/08

Loc: Woodinville, WA
Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? new [Re: orion69]
      #5357274 - 08/07/12 10:30 PM

Quote:


So how about CGE Pro as imaging mount?





It's awesome. 6.5hrs of 30 min exposures:
http://www.astrokev.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/ic342-driz3.jpg


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gnowellsct
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/24/09

Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? new [Re: KDizzle]
      #5357285 - 08/07/12 10:42 PM

Quote:


It's awesome. 6.5hrs of 30 min exposures:
http://www.astrokev.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/ic342-driz3.jpg




Those are round stars indeed. Autoguider? And what focal length were you shooting at? thanks GN


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gnowellsct
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/24/09

Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? new [Re: freestar8n]
      #5357300 - 08/07/12 10:51 PM

Quote:


I have no idea what criteria visual users have for a mount - since people are happy with everything from a push-to dobsonian to a giant AP with a little refractor on it.
Frank




If you touch the focuser and the OTA bounces so much that it interferes with the focusing, it is undermounted for visual.

If you are buying an an aftermarket electronic focuser gizmo because you want the image to stay steady while you focus, you're undermounted.

If you have a cat on a gem and it become unusable at the same wind threshold as the shrouded dobs in the neighborhood, it is undermounted. You should be observing when the dobs are having problems. You have a very small sail area and the mount should be up to the task IMO.

If you're pouring sand or cement into the hollow legs of a flimsy aluminum tripod to stabilize it, you're wayyyyy undermounted.

Greg N


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gnowellsct
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/24/09

Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? new [Re: jmiele]
      #5357333 - 08/07/12 11:10 PM

Quote:

I've use a C-14 on a Mach 1 and it's fine visually. I do agree with Greg, a 900 or Paramount MX would be a lifetime mount for you Jim. For the same money as the 9000, the PMX comes with two weights. It very portable and accurate. However, given your lack of desire to bring anything more than an IPad (don't blame ya) the AP900 would be the way to go. If fact, as you don't need the enhanced capabilities of the "potentially" too be added absolute encoders on the replacement 900....wait until they announce a replacement and grab a mint used 900 at a bargain price.


Joe




I received word today from Software Bisque that they intend to have a wi-fi unit that will work with iOS which apparently means iphone operating system. Maybe ipad too (?? I surmise this, I was not told).

Don't ask me how, where, or when, but they are cognizant that their portable MX will attract more visual observers if they have some kind of hand unit.

While I understand the irony in recommending a 24" fork mounted elephant to Jim, the more serious point is that Jim is on this group a lot and has gone through a lot of lower end mounts. Given his heavy involvement in astronomy the encouragement to go for the option that costs maybe $3k more (such as the Mach 1) or a beauty like the MX or 900GTO is I think reasonable and not pie in the sky. He would immediately fall in love with the equipment and it would greatly enhance his enjoyment of his scopes, and might even operate to enhance his options in terms of OTA, which is good, because there is merit in our spending his money in order to help the economic recovery and provide a steady demand to support the manufacturers so they will be around when we in turn are ready to feed our addiction.

But leaving all that aside there is the question of his soul, his immortal soul, which will learn humility about the powers of the Creator when at last Jim is face to face with the revealed truth of first class CNC machining. His salvation is at stake, and it is a sorry thing to urge a man to hell fire and damnation in order to save a mere three thousand bucks.

Greg N


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gnowellsct
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/24/09

Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? new [Re: bilgebay]
      #5357338 - 08/07/12 11:16 PM

Quote:



Then, the guys in Spain, who have been building NexSXD cards for Vixen Sphinx mounts produced a similar card for the New Atlux as well. These boards are replacing the Vixen control boards and running the Vixen mounts with Nexstar protocol with Celestron Hand Controller or NexRemote. I did immediately purchased one and replaced the Vixen board on the mount. The mount, now, believes it is a CGE Pro

Since then, I am the happy owner of the best mount in its class. Wonderful mechanics from Vixen and a great and smart controller from Celestron.
Clear skies

Sedat




That sounds terrific, I have heard that almost everyone tries to come up with an alternative to the Vixen controller, you'd think they would wake up. Maybe it sells well in Japan.

Generally speaking I like Vixen products--I use one of their refractors a great deal. But they are not a major contender in the U.S. mount market so far as I can see and their controller is definitely one of the reasons.

Greg N


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
KDizzle
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 09/12/08

Loc: Woodinville, WA
Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? new [Re: gnowellsct]
      #5357364 - 08/07/12 11:36 PM

Quote:

Quote:


It's awesome. 6.5hrs of 30 min exposures:
http://www.astrokev.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/ic342-driz3.jpg



Those are round stars indeed. Autoguider? And what focal length were you shooting at? thanks GN




Orion Starshoot Pro v2 color, Orion SSAG through Orion OAG, AT10RC @ 2000mm, CGE Pro.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gnowellsct
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/24/09

Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? [Re: KDizzle]
      #5357380 - 08/07/12 11:49 PM

Quote:


Orion Starshoot Pro v2 color, Orion SSAG through Orion OAG, AT10RC @ 2000mm, CGE Pro.




30 minutes at 2000 mm and round stars is very good. What's it like unguided?

GN


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? [Re: gnowellsct]
      #5357533 - 08/08/12 03:23 AM

This is a narrow band image at 0.8" per pixel made from 15m sub-exposures that had round stars around 2.2" fwhm. Standard C11 with reducer at f/6 Guided with OAG and MetaGuide on CGE-Pro from a sea level suburban site north of Manhattan.



Examples of raw, unprocessed sub-exposures for the image and others with cge-pro and cge are at the MetaGuide site.

More images with HD11 and HD14 on cge-pro (also guided with OAG and MetaGuide) can be found here.

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? [Re: gnowellsct]
      #5357544 - 08/08/12 03:37 AM

Quote:

If you touch the focuser and the OTA bounces so much that it interferes with the focusing, it is undermounted for visual.




That helps because I think all your points relate to just the stability of the mount and how steadily it holds the image when you touch the ota or when there is wind. Nothing about usability, polar alignment, setup time, back pain, ergonomics, cable catching, and general robustness. And cost-effectiveness for someone on a budget.

I found the c11 on cge to be extremely solid but I guess it is under-mounted for a c14 for imaging. Many people would say a c14 is "ok for visual" on a cge - but that would depend on the tolerance people have - which varies and is harder to pin down than achievable fwhm in long exposure images.

The cge has a hidden flexure mode when the bolts at the top of the tripod are slightly loose - which can give it the impression of not being solid - but when they are tight it makes a big difference. The cge-pro next to the cge is even more solid - and much better for a c14 or long refractor.

Frank

Edited by freestar8n (08/08/12 04:02 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gnowellsct
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/24/09

Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? [Re: freestar8n]
      #5357885 - 08/08/12 11:42 AM

So in answer to Jim's question, there are some good ones. GN

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
EFT
Vendor - Deep Space Products
*****

Reged: 05/07/07

Loc: Phoenix, AZ
Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? [Re: gnowellsct]
      #5357912 - 08/08/12 11:57 AM

Quote:

What's it like unguided?




Why does that matter? I'm just curious because if a mount performs very well guided, why should you care how it performs unguided. I mean, if the mount has relatively high native PE that is easily and well guided out and allows you to take good images, who cares about unguided performance, particularly in a not-very-transportable mount?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Alph
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 11/23/06

Loc: Melmac
Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? [Re: EFT]
      #5357932 - 08/08/12 12:10 PM

Quote:

I mean, if the mount has relatively high native PE that is easily and well guided out and allows you to take good images, who cares about unguided performance



I think We've heard that from Meade


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rmollise
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? [Re: Alph]
      #5357938 - 08/08/12 12:16 PM

And it is still true, even if the DREADED Meade did say it.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
orlyandico
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 08/10/09

Loc: Singapore
Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? [Re: Alph]
      #5357939 - 08/08/12 12:16 PM

good one Alph.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gnowellsct
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/24/09

Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? [Re: EFT]
      #5357978 - 08/08/12 12:37 PM

Quote:

Quote:

What's it like unguided?




Why does that matter? I'm just curious because if a mount performs very well guided, why should you care how it performs unguided. I mean, if the mount has relatively high native PE that is easily and well guided out and allows you to take good images, who cares about unguided performance, particularly in a not-very-transportable mount?




It's in the category of interesting-to-know. For example, let's say you have an ED doublet refractor which shows NO in focus color. Why is that triplet owners are so happy when their scope shows no *out of focus* color? Who cares?

But we ask anyhow.

Greg N


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
EFT
Vendor - Deep Space Products
*****

Reged: 05/07/07

Loc: Phoenix, AZ
Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? [Re: Alph]
      #5358001 - 08/08/12 01:01 PM

Quote:

I think We've heard that from Meade




Seriously. I don't care about the current Meade situation as that is not the point here. What I care about is how everyone wants a magic bullet to decide what mount is the best without regard to how well it actually does its job. Wouldn't two mounts that provide identical results for imaging be worth the same relative amount regardless of whether one had higher native PE than the other? For that matter, why would a mount with low native PE but poor overall performance be worth more than a mount with higher native PE but better overall performance. For many people it is ease of use that is even more important than the PE numbers. A good example is a friend of mine who, having gone through a number of mounts in search of good performance, jumped up to a very high quality mount that turned out to be so difficult to use that he switched back to a mount of presumably lesser quality but greater ease of use.

I don't think the question is quite the same for most refractors, but Greg is correct in regards to paying more for a triplet that performs every bit as good as an ED doublet (if that is in fact the case and all other things like f ratio are the same).

There is a certain amount (maybe a lot) of snobbery involved here (e.g., my triplet's better than your doublet, my PE is lower than your PE) that completely ignores the end result. Everyone is looking for the easy answer in regards to equipment but in the end is forgetting about the actual performance of the equipment (i.e., can't see the forest for the trees).

Other than the current Meade issue (because the native PE has not been shown to be the root of the problem), I want to hear why people think the difference is important if the end result is the same.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wolfman_4_ever
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 07/15/11

Loc: El Segundo, Ca, So. Cal
Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? [Re: EFT]
      #5358417 - 08/08/12 04:49 PM

If we were to all believe all we read on the internet, i doubt any of us would have any equipment at all.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Alph
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 11/23/06

Loc: Melmac
Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? [Re: EFT]
      #5358470 - 08/08/12 05:22 PM

Quote:

I want to hear why people think the difference is important if the end result is the same.



It depends on what the end result is. Some reasons for a low PE were discussed in the past e.g. in the context of the TDM. It looks like more and more mount manufactures will be installing high resolution encoders. Put that question to Astro-physics.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gnowellsct
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/24/09

Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? [Re: Alph]
      #5358499 - 08/08/12 05:44 PM

Quote:

Quote:

I want to hear why people think the difference is important if the end result is the same.



It depends on what's the end result is. Some reasons for a low PE were discussed in the past e.g. in the context of the TDM. It looks like more and more mount manufactures will be installing high resolution encoders. Put that question to Astro-physics.




The servo mounts already have high resolution encoders which divide a circle into more than two million tics. I think you mean automatic PE compensation via encoder measurements of the speed of rotation...or something like that. I don't know whether TDM style control can be done in the drive servos. Greg N


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gnowellsct
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/24/09

Re: CGE Pro: Anyone have a good one? [Re: gnowellsct]
      #5358614 - 08/08/12 06:55 PM

Contrary to what I read someone on one of the CN fora, the AP900GTO is not going away. Apparently though people who want a 1200 GTO will have to settle for the 1600. GN

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | (show all)


Extra information
32 registered and 31 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Dave M, richard7, bilgebay 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 9279

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics