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 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | (show all)
Hilmi
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 03/07/10

Loc: Muscat, Sultanate of Oman
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. new [Re: Pinbout]
      #6212417 - 11/24/13 12:21 AM

Quote:

If a manufacturer claims that a new design can in fact carry a load that is substantially greater than other mounts in its weight and cost class without the need for more precise engineering and manufacturing, then it is for them to show that this is actually the case or for the end users to find out the hard way whether or not the claims are true. As is often stated, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, but you never know when a new design might actually provide that truth even when history suggests it might not.




I think it is too early to judge if the engineering on this mount is substandard. Unless someone has worked on the mount everything is speculation now. May I remind you that labour costs outside the USA are substantially cheaper allowing for things that cost a lot of money to be done at a much lower cost. I will give you an example. I worked for an American company as an engineer in the Middle East and while I got paid around $250 per day my Canadian colleague of similar skills and capabilities got paid $500 per day. That $250 was still considered a good amount of pay for me because in my country I am not required to pay taxes. Therefore, assuming the expertise to make a good quality mount is available outside the USA there is no surprise if the people cost was as much as 60% lower.

Also, nobody complains that other mount manufacturers of the same level as iOptron quote over stated load capacities


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

Reged: 05/07/07

Loc: Phoenix, AZ
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. new [Re: Hilmi]
      #6212466 - 11/24/13 01:02 AM

Quote:

Quote:

If a manufacturer claims that a new design can in fact carry a load that is substantially greater than other mounts in its weight and cost class without the need for more precise engineering and manufacturing, then it is for them to show that this is actually the case or for the end users to find out the hard way whether or not the claims are true. As is often stated, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, but you never know when a new design might actually provide that truth even when history suggests it might not.




I think it is too early to judge if the engineering on this mount is substandard. Unless someone has worked on the mount everything is speculation now. May I remind you that labour costs outside the USA are substantially cheaper allowing for things that cost a lot of money to be done at a much lower cost. I will give you an example. I worked for an American company as an engineer in the Middle East and while I got paid around $250 per day my Canadian colleague of similar skills and capabilities got paid $500 per day. That $250 was still considered a good amount of pay for me because in my country I am not required to pay taxes. Therefore, assuming the expertise to make a good quality mount is available outside the USA there is no surprise if the people cost was as much as 60% lower.

Also, nobody complains that other mount manufacturers of the same level as iOptron quote over stated load capacities




I don't know that it a question of substandard engineering as opposed to standard engineering with a lesser tolerance. It really depends on what the established standard is. Is it the standard in mass produced mounts, the standard in individually hand made and solid machined mounts, or is it something else? I would say that everyone complains about all of the mass-produced mount manufacturers' statements of capacity. I can't really think of any that I have seen the same complaints made about.

Just because labor costs are less in one country from another does not mean that the same quality can or will be produced in one country at a lesser price than the other. It is not that it doesn't happen, but experience shows that it is often not the case because the two countries may have very different philosophies regarding design and manufacture of products (e.g., quantity vs. quality).


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


Reged: 12/23/12

Loc: New Mexico
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. new [Re: Pinbout]
      #6212516 - 11/24/13 01:50 AM

Quote:

Quote:

If a manufacturer claims that a new design can in fact carry a load that is substantially greater than other mounts in its weight and cost class without the need for more precise engineering and manufacturing, then it is for them to show that this is actually the case or for the end users to find out the hard way whether or not the claims are true.




maybe when they display the mounts, have it loaded to compacity and run some pec software and diplay it on a 42" flatscreen, no laptop, so everyone can see.

just for fun put a vid camera in the scopes and move the mount to see the dampening time when stopping the slews.




Pinbout,

Here is a video taken from a MallinCam X2 on the LX850 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7826NcjdhS4). I did not shake it manually, but it was moving around quite a bit. See if you notice much vibration.

If I get the CEM60, or get to try it out (hello iOptron…. ) I will give that unit the video test. I can post it on YouTube and do the live feed thing.

Either way all the chat about loads for the CEM60 mount pretty much boils down to speculation and conjecture and extrapolation from iOptron's specs, which is fine. It keeps us busy on all these cloudy nights!

I think I would be willing to give this mount a trial run for my requirements - a fairly light weight mount that I can take in the field (remote locations), and it can support AP for loads up to 45 lbs, and go to the weight limit for visual and video. The only pain - I will have to get an OAG for this unit. Key functionality - heavier load, but light weight. Now, if I was camped out in Eastern Oregon, White Sands, or Chaco for three weeks or so, then I would drag out the LX850. For all other uses, I need to go lighter (being practical). This is where I see the big potential for this mount.

And then I can test out how Physics impacts this mount, heh heh heh heh…


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


Reged: 12/23/12

Loc: New Mexico
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. new [Re: mclewis1]
      #6212526 - 11/24/13 02:00 AM

Quote:

Quote:

I guess it depends on the mount. This does not matter on the LX850. SCT, Long Refractor, stacked, flat, etc.



Of course it matters with the LX850, it isn't immune from the laws of physics.

The CEM60 might be just fine for imaging with an SCT like a C11 but might also have problems with a similar weight 6" apo (30-35lbs 4' length). In the same way the LX is fine with a 14" SCT but would have problems with a 9" apo (80lbs, 7' length). In this type of comparison I would also assume similar focal lengths (focal reducers used on the longer fl SCTs).

In both situations the scopes are within the specifications of the mounts but the length of the scope and where the weight is concentrated has a profound impact on how effective a mount might be.

Manufacturers are going to put their best numbers in their mount ratings, but in general the smaller the mount the more aggressive the ratings will be so comparing the imaging capabilities of a 30lb mount will be different % wise than that of a 60lb mount vs. a 90lb mount.

A whole bunch of variables (focal length, weight, tube length, weather conditions/wind, amount and type of PE, autoguiding aggressiveness, pixel size, sky conditions, etc. etc.) all contribute to determining how effective a mount might be on any particular night. No one set of numbers no matter who publishes them is going to tell you the whole story.





Mark,

I stand corrected, no mount is immune from the laws of Physics. And I 100% agree with you, this is a multivariate problem for certain.

I would hope the CEM60 will at least be able to handle my 130mm APO and gear. Of course we will have to test that out.

The LX850 might be able to handle an 9" APO. Who knows unless we test it. Do you have one we can test? Still, I grant you that might be the limit, but I the 9" APO is likely an outlier sales wise. I certainly would love to test out the 175mm APO from Astro-Phyics on it though.

So I guess we are in the stay tuned mode. My bet…the CEM60 might not be ready until the late spring, and then I will have a small weather window to work with, before the Monsoons come here. Of course, any new major astro gear causes weather problems. I have learned this first hand. Grrrrrrrr.


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

Reged: 02/22/10

Loc: nj
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. new [Re: Spacetravelerx]
      #6212973 - 11/24/13 10:51 AM

Thanks for making me cut n paste...

Is your mount fully loaded to the rating?

Edited by Pinbout (11/24/13 10:51 AM)


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


Reged: 12/23/12

Loc: New Mexico
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. new [Re: Pinbout]
      #6213087 - 11/24/13 11:50 AM

Quote:

Thanks for making me cut n paste...

Is your mount fully loaded to the rating?




Are you referring to the video I posted?


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

Reged: 01/07/05

Loc: NE Ohio
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. new [Re: Spacetravelerx]
      #6213097 - 11/24/13 11:55 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Thanks for making me cut n paste...

Is your mount fully loaded to the rating?




Are you referring to the video I posted?




More than likely. URL's should actually be posted using the "URL" feature provided by CN. If you don't use that feature, placing a URL surrounded by "(" and ")" prevents the URL from being clickable and then requires the ol' cut-n-paste.


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


Reged: 12/23/12

Loc: New Mexico
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. new [Re: DaveJ]
      #6213125 - 11/24/13 12:06 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Thanks for making me cut n paste...

Is your mount fully loaded to the rating?




Are you referring to the video I posted?




More than likely. URL's should actually be posted using the "URL" feature provided by CN. If you don't use that feature, placing a URL surrounded by "(" and ")" prevents the URL from being clickable and then requires the ol' cut-n-paste.





Ahhhh - I learn something new every day!

The mount is nearly fully loaded, a little over 80 lbs. On it is a 14" f/8 acf, finder, StarLock, 80mm APO, video camera, and Canon 60Da with all the attachments. I am on a plane right now, but I believe I posted a pict of the similar setup in the refractors forum on cn.

I would not load the CEM60 like this. Too much stuff to haul around


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

Reged: 02/22/10

Loc: nj
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. new [Re: Spacetravelerx]
      #6213291 - 11/24/13 01:19 PM

Thanks for making me cut n paste...

Is your mount fully loaded to the rating? And with a longer momentum as in a frac?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Alfred Tan
sage


Reged: 10/25/09

Loc: Singapore
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. new [Re: Spacetravelerx]
      #6237989 - 12/06/13 07:24 PM

Quote:

The only pain - I will have to get an OAG for this unit. Key functionality - heavier load, but light weight. Now, if I was camped out in Eastern Oregon, White Sands, or Chaco for three weeks or so, then I would drag out the LX850.




Hi Andrew,

I have been using a KWIQ autoguider on my iEQ45. Have not used an OAG.

Why is there a need to get an OAG? Is there an added advantage for using an OAG?

Alfred

twitter.com/yltansg


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


Reged: 12/23/12

Loc: New Mexico
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. new [Re: Alfred Tan]
      #6238176 - 12/06/13 09:47 PM

Quote:

Quote:

The only pain - I will have to get an OAG for this unit. Key functionality - heavier load, but light weight. Now, if I was camped out in Eastern Oregon, White Sands, or Chaco for three weeks or so, then I would drag out the LX850.




Hi Andrew,

I have been using a KWIQ autoguider on my iEQ45. Have not used an OAG.

Why is there a need to get an OAG? Is there an added advantage for using an OAG?

Alfred

twitter.com/yltansg




Hello Alfred,

True one can use a traditional auto guider. I am so spoiled with StarLock on the LX850 though my thought is to just go with an OAG on the other mounts. We will see, I have some time to think about it

I am looking at the SBIG STX-16803 camera with OAG for the non-LX850 mounts. I am trying to figure that all out for early next year. But that is a different topic. Stay tuned as they say!


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

Reged: 05/08/06

Loc: Waikoloa Village, Hawaii
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. new [Re: Spacetravelerx]
      #6246341 - 12/11/13 05:03 AM

Under the "there's nothing new under the sun" category, check out the IAC80 telescope mount in the Canary islands. It was designed over 30 years ago.

http://www.iac.es/telescopes/media/Galeria_publica/Instalaciones/IAC80/cupula...

http://www.iac.es/telescopes/pages/es/inicio/telescopios/iac80.php

You will note the offset counterweights (just like on the CEM60).

Also note that the OTA is on the bottom-end of the RA axis shaft and not the top end (or middle.)

So the CEM60 is still an English Cross-Axis Mount (not original) with offset counterweights (also not original.)

No matter how weird or original a new mount design might seem to be, the odds are good that every single idea presented has been tried at least once in the past by someone else.


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

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. new [Re: Christopher Erickson]
      #6246359 - 12/11/13 05:24 AM

Quote:

So the CEM60 is still an English Cross-Axis Mount




I have no idea why you are fixated on categorizing it this way. The design combines elements of other mounts but doesn't exactly match any of them. There is no "cross-axis" here so it is crazy to me to use that term. When you see an English Cross-Axis - you see a big cross-axis thing - and there is none here. It is more of a 'Z'.

The web page describing the IAC80 describes the mount with:

Quote:

This telescope has an equatorial german mount




So they clearly don't think of it as "English cross-axis."

I agree that mount has the main elements of the CEM60 and I figured it wasn't completely original - but I still don't know of any having been sold in the amateur astro market, so it does have novelty. And it has additional elements not in the observatory version - such as the ability to tilt the counterweight axis angle.

Frank


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

Reged: 05/08/06

Loc: Waikoloa Village, Hawaii
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. new [Re: freestar8n]
      #6246378 - 12/11/13 06:13 AM

LOL - It isn't a GEM ("montura ecuatorial alemana") by a long shot. That description is an embarrassing failure of whoever wrote the verbiage for the web page. GEM's don't have forks on one end and don't have the OTA on the bottom end of the RA axis either!

That just goes to my point that there is a lot of bad/sloppy information floating around out there when it comes to telescope mount designs and mount nomenclature.

The CEM60 is a basic English Cross-Axis mount with offset counterweights and some reworked dimensions.

http://frostydrew.org/papers.dc/papers/paper-scopes/

To claim that the CEM60 is some kind of new, bold or innovative mount design just isn't true.

I am not trying to bash iOptron. I have an iOptron Cube Pro that I use as a vacation/travel mount and I am content with its performance in that role. I have also been considering picking up an iEQ30 or 45 for public outreach and leaving my Astro-Physics 900GTO and Meade LX200GPS-16 at home. Obviously this means that I have nothing against iOptron or their products.

But heck, people can believe whatever they want. Just because I design, build and repair professional observatories for a living doesn't mean anyone has to listen to me!

Clear skies and chocolate for all.


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

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. [Re: Christopher Erickson]
      #6246449 - 12/11/13 07:25 AM

Quote:

But heck, people can believe whatever they want. Just because I design, build and repair professional observatories for a living doesn't mean anyone has to listen to me!




We are most certainly in agreement on that point.

Frank


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

Reged: 05/03/09

Loc: Silsbee Texas
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. [Re: Christopher Erickson]
      #6246491 - 12/11/13 08:11 AM

Quote:

But heck, people can believe whatever they want. Just because I design, build and repair professional observatories for a living doesn't mean anyone has to listen to me!




Shouldn't you be listed as a vendor then?


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

Reged: 08/10/09

Loc: Singapore
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. [Re: Stew57]
      #6246498 - 12/11/13 08:21 AM

Mark, only if the denizens of CN can buy 1-meter class telescopes.

Chris is more famous among us mortals for the Roboscopes yahoo group, where conversions were done from non-GoTo to GoTo using cheap Meade motors and the Autostar controller.


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


Reged: 12/23/12

Loc: New Mexico
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. [Re: Christopher Erickson]
      #6246597 - 12/11/13 09:17 AM

Quote:





Clear skies and chocolate for all.





Dude, get with the times!

It is now BACON for all. Chocolate is so 1980's…



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


Reged: 06/18/08

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. [Re: Spacetravelerx]
      #6246666 - 12/11/13 09:56 AM

Andrew - sorry to correct your correction, but bacon is so June 8th, 2011...it's now CHOCOLATE-COVERED BACON for all.

I don't really mind figuring the "etymology" of the CEM60, one man's GEM is another man's English Cross-Axis (and what about the Welsh Cross-Axis, them Welsh NEVER get any love), it makes me read cool articles and look stuff up. (Not to be confused with the entomology of the CEM60...as I'm hoping it doesn't have a lot of bugs.)

I think the bottom-line is iOptron is trying a rarer configuration (old, new, borrowed, or blue) that we don't usually see in amateur astronomy in an attempt to give a better weight-to-load ratio at a lower price. Which is great!

Now we're just hoping it performs well, which'll mean another great choice for all of us looking for new gear in the new year.

Paul


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

Reged: 05/03/09

Loc: Silsbee Texas
Re: iOptron CEM60, not a rumor anymore. [Re: psandelle]
      #6246683 - 12/11/13 10:05 AM

+1

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | (show all)


Extra information
24 registered and 30 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: 19276

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics