DaemonGPF
Post Laureate
Reged: 03/22/08
Posts: 3567
Loc: New Mexico
|
|
I've seen all of these mounts, but have never owned one, nor have I met anyone who has owned more than one of the three I listed. I've read the specs, but that doesn't really answer the real question I'm getting at.
The question is - What is the quality difference in a CGE compared to a CGEM or Atlas mount? In other words, the CGE is twice the price, but is the quality difference significant enough to warrant $3000 vs $1400-$1500?
My original upgrade plans involve moving up from the CG5/LXD75 I had, and in to something like a CGEM or Atlas. But I may be able to extend the mount budget up to around the $3K mark. That being said, I'm considering new options that weren't available to me before. CGE seemed like an obvious contender in that price range.
Thoughts anyone?
--------------------
-Josh
http://cleardarksky.com/c/AlbuqNMkey.html
My AP Gallery
|
jrcrilly
Refractor wienie no more
Reged: 04/30/03
Posts: 25196
Loc: NE Ohio
|
|
Quote:
The question is - What is the quality difference in a CGE compared to a CGEM or Atlas mount? In other words, the CGE is twice the price, but is the quality difference significant enough to warrant $3000 vs $1400-$1500?
The quality difference is substantial, but so are the capacity and weight. If you need the larger capacity and don't mind the extra weight, the quality is just a bonus. If you don't need the extra capacity or do mind the weight, the quality difference may not be worth the price difference to you.
--------------------
John C
Urban Observatory
A&M/Astreya 76mm F/6 APO
TMB/LOMO 80mm F/7.5 APO
Tak FSQ-106N F/5 APO
Meade 178ED F/9 "APO"
Meade ETX-125AT
C14
Teeter 20" F/3.8 truss Newt w/ServoCat
CI-700, NJP, GPDX/SS2KPC, CG5-GT
ST-10XME, DSI Pro
|
Eddgie
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 02/01/06
Posts: 2703
|
|
I currently own a CGE, and prior to that, I owned an EQ6 (Go-to Atlas).
Now the EQ6 was a very early version, and I wrote a review critical of the software, but that was 3 years ago, and I am sure that the EQ6 software has improved.
Like John, I would say that the Celetron is better quality, though that difference is not great.
I did like the packaging of the Atlas.
The real question though, as John C also says, is that the carry capacity of the CGE puts it in a seperate class.
The Atlas was originally positioned as a competitor to the CGE, but in my opinion, it is not. And if you use it for any larger scopes, you will have to replace the saddle, which is one of the issues that keep it out of the CGE/G11/LXD750 class.
I consider there to be about 5 classes of mounts.
Small mounts like the CG4/CG3/Vixen Polaris
Next, mounts like the LXD75/CG5/Vixen SP/GP
Next, medium mounts like the GM8/Atlas/Atlux
Heavy duty mounts like the CGE/G11/LXD750
And finally, observatory class mounts like like the Titan or AP mounts. These are mounts that can carry a serious payload for advanced imaging.
So, it is hard to compare the Atlas to the CGE because in my own opinion, they are different class mounts.
But in both comparisoins (quality and payload), I give the nod to the CGE.
And the obvious question: Is the CGE worth that much more than the Atlas? Yes, if you need a heavy duty mount, it is. If you don't, then it isn't.
--------------------
Celestron C14, CGE (Big Al)
Astro-Physics 6" f/8 (Buffy)
Televue 101 (No name, but I call it my Widescreen HD Space TV)
The night sky is my mistress. She seduces me away from all other lovers.
|
jrcrilly
Refractor wienie no more
Reged: 04/30/03
Posts: 25196
Loc: NE Ohio
|
|
Quote:
I consider there to be about 5 classes of mounts.
Small mounts like the CG4/CG3/Vixen Polaris
Next, mounts like the LXD75/CG5/Vixen SP/GP
Next, medium mounts like the GM8/Atlas/Atlux
Heavy duty mounts like the CGE/G11/LXD750
I'm pretty much in agreement, though I wouldn't consider the GM-8 to be in the same capacity class as the Atlas.
--------------------
John C
Urban Observatory
A&M/Astreya 76mm F/6 APO
TMB/LOMO 80mm F/7.5 APO
Tak FSQ-106N F/5 APO
Meade 178ED F/9 "APO"
Meade ETX-125AT
C14
Teeter 20" F/3.8 truss Newt w/ServoCat
CI-700, NJP, GPDX/SS2KPC, CG5-GT
ST-10XME, DSI Pro
|
Eddgie
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 02/01/06
Posts: 2703
|
|
Yes, it was a hard call. I think it is closer to the Atlas than it is to the GP though. While the tripod is not as heavy, the head is SOOOOOO much lighter that the tripod doesn't have the added strain of carrying 40 lbs of Atlas mount head. So that converts to extra payload.
I ran a C9.25 on a GM8 and it handled it beautifully.
And you can also easily fit the standard G11 saddle, which makes it like the Atlas too, in that it can handle the mounting of larger scopes.
I agree though.. It doesn't fit neatly into the class, but I think a 30 lb load is not a problem for it. Keeping the head itself so light and the saddle so close to the RA axis makes this little mount much stiffer than the CG5/LXD/Vixen mounts where the saddle top is 5 inches or so from the RA shaft. It allows the scope to be mounted closer to the RA shaft, and consequentl, the counterweights can ride higher on the shaft, reducing the polar moment of the mount. So, if you can use somewhat lighgter counterweigts lower on the shaft, or you can use heavier weights higher on the shaft, but using the lighgter weights further down once again helps boost payload.
So, for these reasons, I put it into the next class up. Just a judgement call though, for sure.
I adored my GM8. In many ways, I prefer a GM8 with DSCs to modern Go-To mounts, and if you made me choose between it and an Atlas for a C9 or similar scope, I would go with the GM8 I think. I have a CG5 GT and I don't think it would do as well as the GM8 did with the C9. Even with my TV101, it doesn't seem as solid as the GM8 did with a Genesis.
--------------------
Celestron C14, CGE (Big Al)
Astro-Physics 6" f/8 (Buffy)
Televue 101 (No name, but I call it my Widescreen HD Space TV)
The night sky is my mistress. She seduces me away from all other lovers.
|
lambermo
member
Reged: 07/16/07
Posts: 58
Loc: .nl
|
|
Quote:
... I wouldn't consider the GM-8 to be in the same capacity class as the Atlas.
The GM-8 has a payload capacity of 13 kg, the Atlas has 20 kg. See my list . Corrections and additions are welcome btw 
-- Hans
|
JCAZ
super member
Reged: 08/11/09
Posts: 100
|
|
So you can use DSC without a GOTO system on the GM8? I own a GM8 and am curious how you hook it up.
Thanks,
john
|
DaemonGPF
Post Laureate
Reged: 03/22/08
Posts: 3567
Loc: New Mexico
|
|
I appreciate the input guys.
Weight won't be a major factor for me. I'll probably continue to use modest aperature OTAs for a while. Ultimately I may swing for an RC8 or similar, but probably won't go much larger than that until I move and can consider a more permanent setup(observatory).
I'm just at the point where I'm done tinkering with the entry level mounts and want something with less attitude. Unfortunately I am still stuck setting up and tearing down each session. I don't mind dealing with the weight of the mount since it only has to travel a few feet out a patio door. The quality/accuracy is important though. I know none of these are Tak or AP mounts, but I can't see spending the cash on one of those yet until I have a more permanent home for it.
I didn't even think about the G11. I suppose it's in this price range. I'm really familiar with Celestron products and their interfaces etc, but I know zero about the Losmandy products. Any thoughts between the G11 and a CGE?
Also, since weight isn't a massive factor and going back to my original thoughts - Would the CGE even be worth the extra money given my particular circumstances or should I just save the money, go with an Atlas or CGEM for now and worry about a more serious mount later on?
--------------------
-Josh
http://cleardarksky.com/c/AlbuqNMkey.html
My AP Gallery
|
Chris Erickson
member
Reged: 05/08/06
Posts: 47
Loc: Waikoloa Village, Hawaii
|
|
I have a G-11 and it is a massive, rigid mount with beautiful finish.
It isn't very portable.
Losmandy really needs to re-engineer their design for adjusting worm gear backlash.
Losmandy really needs to get rid of the horrible little Oldham motor shaft couplings they are using too.
Having said all of that, overall I am very satisfied with my G-11.
--------------------
"My Advice is always free and worth every penny!"
-Christopher Erickson
Network Design Engineer
Waikoloa Village, HI 96738
N19°57' W155°47'
Meade 16" LX200 SCT
www.data-plumber.com
|
Bill Cowles
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 04/16/06
Posts: 1045
Loc: Utah
|
|
If weight is not a problem I would consider the Atlas or the new CGEM. I recently upgraded my Atlas with the dual ADM saddle. It is now easier to mount, with much larger lockdown knobs and much increased surface area to work with.
Since it is a dual saddle I can upgrade to a Losmandy style dovetail If I need too. However, my Vixen dovetail is fine for now. I did replace the stock dovetail with a thicker Scope Stuff dovetail.
Bill
--------------------
Lunt LS60TS50DS/B1200/FT (on order)
TV Gensis/Solarmax 60 filter
PST DS/Herschel Wedge/C4-R
C6-R /Atlas Goto/Moonlite CF2
12" LightBridge/Round Table
MCHP/8" Orion OTA/Ultima 2000
10" Discovery /Celestron SE-4
|
Eddgie
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 02/01/06
Posts: 2703
|
|
Yes, you can, however it won't be cheap.
Losmandy sells an encoder kit, but it retails for a whopping $425. This is WITHOUT the computer. The fancy gear covers machined from Delrin cost a whopping $85. Not essential, but I personally HATE exposed gears and was aggrevated that Losmandy did not include these in the encoder kit.
Throw in the Sky Commander or similar, and you are pushing another $300 or so (though I had a Sky Commander and LOVED it).
Or for the staggering sum of $1595, you can do a Gemini conversion, but when you look at it, that is maybe more cost effective than doing DSCs with a premium computer like the Argo Navis (buy the time you add up all the parts).
JMI used to sell universal encoder kits, but even on a budget, I think doing DSCs will still run $400 or $500.
So, you can do it, but it ain't cheap.
--------------------
Celestron C14, CGE (Big Al)
Astro-Physics 6" f/8 (Buffy)
Televue 101 (No name, but I call it my Widescreen HD Space TV)
The night sky is my mistress. She seduces me away from all other lovers.
|
Patrick
Postmaster
Reged: 05/16/03
Posts: 7807
Loc: Franklin, Ohio
|
|
Quote:
See my list . Corrections and additions are welcome btw
Since you mention it...(sorry...a little off topic).
Here is the Periodic Error for my CG5-GT ...much better than the +/- 40 arc-seconds shown in your chart. This is my second CG5 and I believe the first one was just as good based on the unguided imaging I did with it...although I didn't measure it.
Patrick
--------------------
10" f/6 Truss Tube Newtonian
Celestron C6S-GT SCT
AT66ED Refractor
Oberwerk Ultra 15x70 Binocular
475B Geared Tripod & 501HDV Head
Celestron Regal 8x42 Binocular
Canon XSi; Meade DSI;SPC900-NC
Vixen GP2 Photo Guider Mount
My Astronomy Pages
|
Steve Fisher
"Curmudgeon in Training"
Reged: 08/12/06
Posts: 1732
Loc: Utah
|
|
Josh:
Somewhere in the back of your mind you know how big a scope you are hoping to end up with. The EQ6-Pro was an excellent mount for my WO 132FLT. I knew when I sold the OTA I would need a bigger mount and had the CGE the same day I got my 6" f/12.
--------------------
Steve
8" f/12 D&G Achromat Refractor Delivered 08/27/09
6" D&G f/12 Achromat Refractor
66mm f/6.1 William Optics Petzval
6" f/8 Celestron Starhopper
----------------------
"Never try to teach a pig to sing, It wastes your time and it annoys the pig". (Robert Heinlein)
Edited by Steve Fisher (10/18/09 07:49 PM)
|
Steve Fisher
"Curmudgeon in Training"
Reged: 08/12/06
Posts: 1732
Loc: Utah
|
|
Now the CGE. It handles a C-8, a 6" f/12 and yes temporarily a 8" f/12.
If you are comfortable with Celestron software that would sway me. The CGE is Excellent and well worth the extra money. I purchased mine used and it has done great! Just my opinion.
--------------------
Steve
8" f/12 D&G Achromat Refractor Delivered 08/27/09
6" D&G f/12 Achromat Refractor
66mm f/6.1 William Optics Petzval
6" f/8 Celestron Starhopper
----------------------
"Never try to teach a pig to sing, It wastes your time and it annoys the pig". (Robert Heinlein)
|
Eddgie
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 02/01/06
Posts: 2703
|
|
Your photographs highlight the weakness in all of these mounts.
I noticed that you use a pier for your refractors. When I got my EQ6, it was being pushed as a "Heavy Duty" mount. When I had to extend the legs to mount my Meade 152ED, I decided that the mount was heavier duty than the tripod! This was the MAIN issue with the Atlas. It could not handle a 6" refractor.
This I think is why so many people go to the Mini Pier. It allows you to keep the tripod legs short to make the mount stiffer.
The CGE is better, and I can mount my 6" on it just by raising the legs.
But that isn't as good as the LXD 750. This mount was designed to handle the Meade 178ED, and it shows. It is the most stable mount I have ever owned by far.
I would buy another LXD 750 and replace the CGE with it if you could still get parts, but I worry that if the handset goes, I am sunk. Will have to buy a used mount just for parts.
If you want to mount a big refractor though, the Meade LXD 750 is the way to go. I shortened the spread on mine and now I don't even have to raise the legs for my 6" refractor. With the legs extended, I could mount up to 8" with no problem.
Regards.
--------------------
Celestron C14, CGE (Big Al)
Astro-Physics 6" f/8 (Buffy)
Televue 101 (No name, but I call it my Widescreen HD Space TV)
The night sky is my mistress. She seduces me away from all other lovers.
Edited by Eddgie (10/19/09 12:26 PM)
|
Steve Fisher
"Curmudgeon in Training"
Reged: 08/12/06
Posts: 1732
Loc: Utah
|
|
Ed:
You are correct on a lot of facts. I have considered the 750 as my OTA's have lengthened. It is an awesome and proven mount. I have had the same concerns about availability of parts and service. My thinking is that now you own the mount it is worth owning another for parts if needed. I'm always on the lookout for CGE parts.
The one thing that the pier extensions offer that hasn't been mentioned is that they allow safer slews occasionally. I have nearly knocked off finders and my short focal length Pentax eyepieces on occasion as the appendage swung near the pier. I have used the 6" without the extension and it was constantly swinging past three tripod legs. Always gives me a start.
--------------------
Steve
8" f/12 D&G Achromat Refractor Delivered 08/27/09
6" D&G f/12 Achromat Refractor
66mm f/6.1 William Optics Petzval
6" f/8 Celestron Starhopper
----------------------
"Never try to teach a pig to sing, It wastes your time and it annoys the pig". (Robert Heinlein)
|
DaemonGPF
Post Laureate
Reged: 03/22/08
Posts: 3567
Loc: New Mexico
|
|
WOW! That is one lengthy OTA you have on that CGE, Steve. Your CGE has no problems slewing something with that much mass that far out from the center of the mount? That is impressive indeed.
I sold all of my large aperature Newts, so the biggest thing I would throw on there is a 4.5" reflector or a 4" Mak at the moment. I'm considering an RC8 for longer fl imaging, but nothing too elaborate. I prefer the more compact OTAs for the time being due to storage constraints.
--------------------
-Josh
http://cleardarksky.com/c/AlbuqNMkey.html
My AP Gallery
|
Eddgie
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 02/01/06
Posts: 2703
|
|
Good point about the Mini Pier. It does indeed perform that very important service.
The spreader mod to the LXD 750 almost totally eliminated that as an issue with my setup (another reason I am happy I did the mod), but my scope is only a 6" f/8. I doubt that a 6" f/9 would clear.
For refractor usege, they should have tripods where the angle of the leg spread could be reduced. If the legs are raised up higher, they start to get in the way, and if you could reduce the spread when you lowered the legs, it would aid in the clearance issue. I mean do you NEED the giant footprint of most tripods when the legs are fully extended? Most likely, the answer is no.
Of course the spreader design of the Atlas and CGE doen't permit easy modification. Would be interesting is someone considered this in their design thouhg. The original spread on the LXD 750 was bizarrly large.. Looked like the Lunar Lander module. 
--------------------
Celestron C14, CGE (Big Al)
Astro-Physics 6" f/8 (Buffy)
Televue 101 (No name, but I call it my Widescreen HD Space TV)
The night sky is my mistress. She seduces me away from all other lovers.
|
waassaabee
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 11/26/07
Posts: 2700
Loc: Central California Coast
|
|
Crimony sake Steve, how in the name of rubber cement do you mount that scope? Do you have to call in a crane?
--------------------
Gary
34N 120W
-My kingdom for blue squares!-
WO Megrez 90FD/TV 0.8x FR/FF
AT8RC
mini Borg 50/Q-Guide/PHD
CGEM
Canon 350D Hap Griffin Baader mod - o.o
My Friend Flickr
|
lambermo
member
Reged: 07/16/07
Posts: 58
Loc: .nl
|
|
Added to the list, thanks !
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 