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: << 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | >> (show all)
Lee Jay
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Why me? new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5396258 - 08/31/12 08:55 AM

Quote:

No, it really isn't. Alt-az mounts of similar capacity cost considerably less. Equatorial mounts with significantly greater accuracy cost considerably less.





That's a total distortion. Where can you get both for the same price or lower?

And, where can you get a computerized dual-OTA alt-az mount that can handle 60+ pounds for $1,000? Some of the decent manual-only alt-az mounts that can handle this much weight cost more than that.

I look at this as a big, computerized, driven alt-az mount with a Kenko Skymemo built in. Just the Kenko Skymemo costs 50% more than this mount does.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lee Jay
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Why me? new [Re: jmiele]
      #5396260 - 08/31/12 08:57 AM

Quote:

IMO Rich, folks that "think" they need this mount for the dual capabilities have manufactured the need based on the manufactures advertisements. In other words, necessity in this case was NOT the mother of invention, rather, the INVENTION was the mother of necessity. You can say you always wanted a mount like this, but IMO you all saw the docs and said - "wow, that's a great idea", "I want one", right?





Wrong.

The reason I've never upgraded my ETX is primarily because all the mounts out there lacked this ability.

Here's a thread I contributed to in 2008 on this topic because I was already frustrated by this hole in the market back then.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Peter D.
sage
*****

Reged: 02/09/12

Loc: Central New York
Re: Why me? new [Re: Stew57]
      #5396321 - 08/31/12 09:43 AM

Quote:

many thought it would be competition for the CGEM, Atlas, and IEQ45 at AP.



Yes, I think that Meade did, too. Unfortunately, at this point it looks like they blew it. Hopefully this will be resolved; right now there's a big hole in their product line: they have no viable entry-level GEM, at least not for AP.

Of course this is still a very useful Az/El mount; I'd buy it for that if I wasn't interested in AP right now. Maybe I'll buy it yet.

I do appreciate this thread, even as long and convoluted as it is. Consumer awareness at its best.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
neilson
professor emeritus


Reged: 08/22/10

Re: Why me? new [Re: jmiele]
      #5396340 - 08/31/12 09:52 AM

Hi,
Since Meade dropped the LXD75, are they going to come out with a replacement. One that can improve on it's load capability for doing AP. This mount can't even do as good as my LXD75 for AP. Or is the LX800 supposed to be our only choice. Sorry but I don't have $5,999. Oh wait it went up to $7,299. Wow that's a $1,300. jump in price and it doesn't even work. Drop the price to $2,000. after it's fixed and I'll buy one. I just hope I don't have to tweak it.
I know that wasn't nice but I just realized I just spent $2,069. on a Celestron 9.25 edge ota to accommodate my new LX80 for AP. I could of just bought the 9.25 ota and used it with my LXD75 and saved all that time tweaking and money I just spent on the LX80.
The whole purpose I bought this mount was I expected it to have a max load cap. of 40lbs. in AP like advertised so it could carry my 30lb ota's. I wanted to use my 10"ota from my LX3 and my SN10". I was going to send my glossy blue 10"ota to Meade and get new ACF optics for $800. But now that money's spent. And I still don't have a mount for either 10"ota...I sure have made some bad choices recently. I originally planned $799. for the mount, $800 for the optics. Total investment $1,600. But now I spent $2,200 for a mount and 10"ota that doesn't have ACF optics. Plus $2,069 for a 9.25 edge ota. That's $4,2069. and I still don't have a mount for either of my 10"sct ota's or my SN10". Luckily I got rid of the new 10"ota-$1200.That's still $3,069.
If I knew all this would work out like it did I would of just bought a CGEM DX with a 50lb cap. for $1799. and spent $800. for new ACF optics on my 10" and would have been so much better all around. A proven heavy duty mount with 2.75" legs that can handle either of my 30lb 10"ota's plus guidescope and cameras with ease for AP. Plus they have that special setup for Polar alignment and Meade has none. Oh yea the manual says drift align. I use iterative.

neilson


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

Reged: 06/02/09

Loc: Houston, Texas, USA
Re: Why me? new [Re: neilson]
      #5396351 - 08/31/12 10:03 AM

For whom does the bell toll? The bell tolls for Meade.

See you later "Big Blue".


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Stew57
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 05/03/09

Loc: Silsbee Texas
Re: Why me? new [Re: RodgerHouTex]
      #5396369 - 08/31/12 10:17 AM

It looks like this mount will have a niche. Seems to me that Meade really didn't plan on it being an AP mount, and hopefully has something to replace the LXD series in the works. For those of us looking for a lighter cheaper Atlas are disappointed, those looking for a dual ota alt/az visual mount are pleased it seems. Fair assessment?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: Why me? new [Re: cheapersleeper]
      #5396391 - 08/31/12 10:31 AM

Not at all. People were building scratch versions of simple alt/az mounts before Nagler introduced the TV Gibraltar.

-Rich

Quote:

Quote:

IMO Rich, folks that "think" they need this mount for the dual capabilities have manufactured the need based on the manufactures advertisements. In other words, necessity in this case was NOT the mother of invention, rather, the INVENTION was the mother of necessity. You can say you always wanted a mount like this, but IMO you all saw the docs and said - "wow, that's a great idea", "I want one", right?


Best,
Joe




The same could have been said about the Nagler.




Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: Why me? new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5396412 - 08/31/12 10:42 AM

With its demonstrated performance, there are a lot of mounts able to do what this does for less.

Since the equatorial mode doesn't really work, the Nexstar SE single arm fork is a full functional alt-az with equatorial ability in the same carrying class.

As for 60 lb capacity, please read the rest of this thread. If you're going to ask for something doing what this mount does at this price point, the facts on the ground say the LX80 doesn't do them itself.

If you want an alt-ax/equatorial mount capable of carrying a 10" scope, that exists; it's called an LX200. And once you realize that, the LX80 really falls on its face since an LX200 really can do astrophotography when equatorially mounted.

-Rich

Quote:

Quote:

No, it really isn't. Alt-az mounts of similar capacity cost considerably less. Equatorial mounts with significantly greater accuracy cost considerably less.





That's a total distortion. Where can you get both for the same price or lower?

And, where can you get a computerized dual-OTA alt-az mount that can handle 60+ pounds for $1,000? Some of the decent manual-only alt-az mounts that can handle this much weight cost more than that.

I look at this as a big, computerized, driven alt-az mount with a Kenko Skymemo built in. Just the Kenko Skymemo costs 50% more than this mount does.




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

Reged: 05/07/07

Loc: Phoenix, AZ
Re: Why me? new [Re: neilson]
      #5396429 - 08/31/12 10:48 AM

Quote:

Hi,
Since Meade dropped the LXD75, are they going to come out with a replacement. One that can improve on it's load capability for doing AP. This mount can't even do as good as my LXD75 for AP. Or is the LX800 supposed to be our only choice. Sorry but I don't have $5,999. Oh wait it went up to $7,299. Wow that's a $1,300. jump in price and it doesn't even work. Drop the price to $2,000. after it's fixed and I'll buy one. I just hope I don't have to tweak it.
I know that wasn't nice but I just realized I just spent $2,069. on a Celestron 9.25 edge ota to accommodate my new LX80 for AP. I could of just bought the 9.25 ota and used it with my LXD75 and saved all that time tweaking and money I just spent on the LX80.
The whole purpose I bought this mount was I expected it to have a max load cap. of 40lbs. in AP like advertised so it could carry my 30lb ota's. I wanted to use my 10"ota from my LX3 and my SN10". I was going to send my glossy blue 10"ota to Meade and get new ACF optics for $800. But now that money's spent. And I still don't have a mount for either 10"ota...I sure have made some bad choices recently. I originally planned $799. for the mount, $800 for the optics. Total investment $1,600. But now I spent $2,200 for a mount and 10"ota that doesn't have ACF optics. Plus $2,069 for a 9.25 edge ota. That's $4,2069. and I still don't have a mount for either of my 10"sct ota's or my SN10". Luckily I got rid of the new 10"ota-$1200.That's still $3,069.
If I knew all this would work out like it did I would of just bought a CGEM DX with a 50lb cap. for $1799. and spent $800. for new ACF optics on my 10" and would have been so much better all around. A proven heavy duty mount with 2.75" legs that can handle either of my 30lb 10"ota's plus guidescope and cameras with ease for AP. Plus they have that special setup for Polar alignment and Meade has none. Oh yea the manual says drift align. I use iterative.

neilson




Certainly, if I were you I would return the mount for a refund and get what you really want if that is still possible. However, if you bought the mount in combination with the OTA and have sold off the OTA, then that is not likely to be an option. In regards to the C9.25HD, I wouldn't regret that as you are just as well off with that OTA. But that OTA could be easily sold and pay for the upgrade of you Meade 10" if you are convinced that you are better off doing that.

I do have someone dropping off an LX80 today for me to play with. Because of the TOS, I will likely have to post comments about it on the LX80 Yahoo group but there are some true Meade haters over there so I am not sure about that.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Fred1
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 09/19/07

Loc: Somewhere in the Orion Spur
Re: Why me? new [Re: Stew57]
      #5396468 - 08/31/12 11:05 AM

Quote:

... those looking for a dual ota alt/az visual mount are pleased it seems. Fair assessment?




I'm quite pleased with mine with my 8" SCT and 80mm apo riding on it. I bought it for alt/az visual only. It's one of the best bargains I obtained so far in this hobby. If I want to use 1 scope in EQ, then I use one of my CG5ASGT's, as they are easier to set up and lighter to hoist around plus the Hand Controller is better. But as a higher payload alt/az mount that can handle my two smaller scopes that gives reasonably accurate GoTos, I'm a happy camper. At the price point, for my purposes...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lee Jay
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Why me? new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5396470 - 08/31/12 11:07 AM

Quote:

With its demonstrated performance, there are a lot of mounts able to do what this does for less.

Since the equatorial mode doesn't really work, the Nexstar SE single arm fork is a full functional alt-az with equatorial ability in the same carrying class.

As for 60 lb capacity, please read the rest of this thread. If you're going to ask for something doing what this mount does at this price point, the facts on the ground say the LX80 doesn't do them itself.

If you want an alt-ax/equatorial mount capable of carrying a 10" scope, that exists; it's called an LX200. And once you realize that, the LX80 really falls on its face since an LX200 really can do astrophotography when equatorially mounted.

-Rich





No, I think you're wrong all the way around here.

First of all, the equatorial mode does work at reduced capacity (just like most GEMs do). I'm planning to mount my dSLR with total weights from 3 to 5 pounds in EQ mode and I think this mount will do just fine with that in equatorial mode, just like a Kenko Skymemo would.

The Nexstar is single-OTA only, and the single-arm's I've tried haven't really been suitable for piggybacking due to arm flexibility. Others in this thread have reported putting close to 60 pounds on the LX80 in dual-OTA alt-az mode with acceptable performance. Also, having the OTA out to the side is an advantage for me since I'm often shooting with a dSLR overhead, which is a difficult or impossible thing to do with a single-arm or fork-mount.

The LX200/LX600 are an option I considered carefully, but one major disadvantage of that approach stopped me from buying one - weight. The layout of my house doesn't really allow for a scope-buggy approach, and carrying a 60+pound fork/OTA combo outside - down a couple of stairs - day-after-day is a recipe for an accident. The LX80 breaks down into 30ish pound chunks so that shouldn't be an issue. I think if the LX200/LX600 mounted the OTA with dual dovetails or some such, I'd already have one, but again, having the OTAs out to the side is a pretty big advantage for me for shooting with a dSLR near zenith, so maybe the LX80 is better anyway.

Anyhow, I'll wait a while longer to see how this all plays out and to see if the Skywatcher EQ6 alt-az/GEM combo mount comes out and at what cost, weight, functionality and quality.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Joe Ogiba
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 02/14/02

Loc: NJ USA
Re: Why me? new [Re: Stew57]
      #5396476 - 08/31/12 11:10 AM

Quote:

those looking for a dual ota alt/az visual mount are pleased it seems



That is all I plan on using it for so I will not cancel my pre-order from February.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
David PavlichAdministrator
Transmographied
*****

Reged: 05/18/05

Loc: Mandeville, LA USA
Re: Order cancelled new [Re: ur7x]
      #5396481 - 08/31/12 11:13 AM

Ok, guys. Time to get back on topic. This threads about tracking. If you have something constructive to say, have at it. If the bashing continues,

David


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
neilson
professor emeritus


Reged: 08/22/10

Re: Why me? new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5396574 - 08/31/12 12:03 PM

Hi,
I have an LX200 already and I love it but at this time I cannot mount it permanently. Its very difficult to set it up on a tripod with a wedge and polar align each night. Then to add I have back problems. When I want to do Alt/Az imaging I dont mind bringing it out but I wanted to do longer exposures.
Since I am getting the 9.25 and keeping the LX80, I was wondering if there is anyone out there that has tried using one on this mount. And if so have you tried imaging in polar, how well is the tracking. Even if anyone has had luck with a Meade 8" since it weighs almost the same 19lbs. I would like to hear your results on imaging. And if you are guiding what method, PHD ect. I would really like to get 3 to 5 minute subs.
neilson


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jmiele
Patron Saint?
*****

Reged: 12/04/10

Re: Why me? new [Re: cheapersleeper]
      #5396735 - 08/31/12 01:18 PM

Quote:

Quote:

IMO Rich, folks that "think" they need this mount for the dual capabilities have manufactured the need based on the manufactures advertisements. In other words, necessity in this case was NOT the mother of invention, rather, the INVENTION was the mother of necessity. You can say you always wanted a mount like this, but IMO you all saw the docs and said - "wow, that's a great idea", "I want one", right?


Best,
Joe




The same could have been said about the Nagler.




I completely agree. If you want a wider field view, get the proper scope for it.

Joe


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jmiele
Patron Saint?
*****

Reged: 12/04/10

Re: Why me? new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5396736 - 08/31/12 01:19 PM

Quote:

Quote:

IMO Rich, folks that "think" they need this mount for the dual capabilities have manufactured the need based on the manufactures advertisements. In other words, necessity in this case was NOT the mother of invention, rather, the INVENTION was the mother of necessity. You can say you always wanted a mount like this, but IMO you all saw the docs and said - "wow, that's a great idea", "I want one", right?





Wrong.

The reason I've never upgraded my ETX is primarily because all the mounts out there lacked this ability.

Here's a thread I contributed to in 2008 on this topic because I was already frustrated by this hole in the market back then.




Here the bad news.... You still don't have what you want as this thing doesn't work.
Joe


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jmiele
Patron Saint?
*****

Reged: 12/04/10

Re: Why me? new [Re: neilson]
      #5396738 - 08/31/12 01:21 PM

Quote:

Hi,
Since Meade dropped the LXD75, are they going to come out with a replacement. One that can improve on it's load capability for doing AP. This mount can't even do as good as my LXD75 for AP. Or is the LX800 supposed to be our only choice. Sorry but I don't have $5,999. Oh wait it went up to $7,299. Wow that's a $1,300. jump in price and it doesn't even work. Drop the price to $2,000. after it's fixed and I'll buy one. I just hope I don't have to tweak it.
I know that wasn't nice but I just realized I just spent $2,069. on a Celestron 9.25 edge ota to accommodate my new LX80 for AP. I could of just bought the 9.25 ota and used it with my LXD75 and saved all that time tweaking and money I just spent on the LX80.
The whole purpose I bought this mount was I expected it to have a max load cap. of 40lbs. in AP like advertised so it could carry my 30lb ota's. I wanted to use my 10"ota from my LX3 and my SN10". I was going to send my glossy blue 10"ota to Meade and get new ACF optics for $800. But now that money's spent. And I still don't have a mount for either 10"ota...I sure have made some bad choices recently. I originally planned $799. for the mount, $800 for the optics. Total investment $1,600. But now I spent $2,200 for a mount and 10"ota that doesn't have ACF optics. Plus $2,069 for a 9.25 edge ota. That's $4,2069. and I still don't have a mount for either of my 10"sct ota's or my SN10". Luckily I got rid of the new 10"ota-$1200.That's still $3,069.
If I knew all this would work out like it did I would of just bought a CGEM DX with a 50lb cap. for $1799. and spent $800. for new ACF optics on my 10" and would have been so much better all around. A proven heavy duty mount with 2.75" legs that can handle either of my 30lb 10"ota's plus guidescope and cameras with ease for AP. Plus they have that special setup for Polar alignment and Meade has none. Oh yea the manual says drift align. I use iterative.

neilson




Neilson, I understand. That's the same reason I don't have and Enzo Ferrari.

Joe


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jmiele
Patron Saint?
*****

Reged: 12/04/10

Re: Why me? new [Re: jmiele]
      #5396742 - 08/31/12 01:23 PM

Sorry David I posted along the way and didn't see your post until I finished reading the rest. I will stay on point.

Joe


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: Why me? [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5396762 - 08/31/12 01:34 PM

Lee,

Taking an LX-80 to mount 3-5 lbs of a DSLR with a short focal length lens and then claiming that's a success for its claimed capability is absurd. That's the point where you can bolt the camera to a static camera tripod with a barn door tracker and get equal success at 1/8 the cost.

So I'm going to go ahead and state the obvious: with the LX80's demonstrated load capacity and tracking performance, you'd do far better with a CG-5 for less money. And you wouldn't be limited to a 50mm camera lens.

-Rich

Quote:

Quote:

With its demonstrated performance, there are a lot of mounts able to do what this does for less.

Since the equatorial mode doesn't really work, the Nexstar SE single arm fork is a full functional alt-az with equatorial ability in the same carrying class.

As for 60 lb capacity, please read the rest of this thread. If you're going to ask for something doing what this mount does at this price point, the facts on the ground say the LX80 doesn't do them itself.

If you want an alt-ax/equatorial mount capable of carrying a 10" scope, that exists; it's called an LX200. And once you realize that, the LX80 really falls on its face since an LX200 really can do astrophotography when equatorially mounted.

-Rich





No, I think you're wrong all the way around here.

First of all, the equatorial mode does work at reduced capacity (just like most GEMs do). I'm planning to mount my dSLR with total weights from 3 to 5 pounds in EQ mode and I think this mount will do just fine with that in equatorial mode, just like a Kenko Skymemo would.

The Nexstar is single-OTA only, and the single-arm's I've tried haven't really been suitable for piggybacking due to arm flexibility. Others in this thread have reported putting close to 60 pounds on the LX80 in dual-OTA alt-az mode with acceptable performance. Also, having the OTA out to the side is an advantage for me since I'm often shooting with a dSLR overhead, which is a difficult or impossible thing to do with a single-arm or fork-mount.

The LX200/LX600 are an option I considered carefully, but one major disadvantage of that approach stopped me from buying one - weight. The layout of my house doesn't really allow for a scope-buggy approach, and carrying a 60+pound fork/OTA combo outside - down a couple of stairs - day-after-day is a recipe for an accident. The LX80 breaks down into 30ish pound chunks so that shouldn't be an issue. I think if the LX200/LX600 mounted the OTA with dual dovetails or some such, I'd already have one, but again, having the OTAs out to the side is a pretty big advantage for me for shooting with a dSLR near zenith, so maybe the LX80 is better anyway.

Anyhow, I'll wait a while longer to see how this all plays out and to see if the Skywatcher EQ6 alt-az/GEM combo mount comes out and at what cost, weight, functionality and quality.




Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lee Jay
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Why me? [Re: Starhawk]
      #5396768 - 08/31/12 01:40 PM

Quote:

Lee,

Taking an LX-80 to mount 3-5 lbs of a DSLR with a short focal length lens and then claiming that's a success for its claimed capability is absurd. That's the point where you can bolt the camera to a static camera tripod with a barn door tracker and get equal success at 1/8 the cost.

So I'm going to go ahead and state the obvious: with the LX80's demonstrated load capacity and tracking performance, you'd do far better with a CG-5 for less money. And you wouldn't be limited to a 50mm camera lens.





As I keep saying over and over, I also want to mount a big SCT for planetary astrophography (video - tracking doesn't matter much), for visual, and for terrestrial photography. And I have a 200mm and 400mm lenses as well, which could result in 2 arc seconds per pixel, so I need performance more like a Kenko Skymemo than a barn door tracker or some of the other camera-only devices.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: << 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | >> (show all)


Extra information
14 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: 68192

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics