It's Here -- the "on sale" little CG-4 mt.!

Posted 28 March 2011 - 08:03 PM

I received this mt. a few days ago and am really pleased with it -- a great mt. for quick use out the door, and works well with my TAK FS-102 APO for visual. Here's a pic -- looks really nice too!

Attached Thumbnails

• 

• Back to top

Posted 28 March 2011 - 08:58 PM

• Back to top

Posted 28 March 2011 - 09:30 PM

Very nice setup.

• Back to top

Posted 28 March 2011 - 09:59 PM

I'm jealous.

• Back to top

Posted 28 March 2011 - 10:35 PM

Trev, Jason and Ian -- thanks for taking a look at this mt./scope combo. It really does work out well with a 4" refractor, and looks sharp, too, IMO.

• Back to top

Posted 28 March 2011 - 10:36 PM

Nice looks very accessible
Joe

• Back to top

Posted 28 March 2011 - 10:44 PM

Thanks, Joe. Yep, just a couple of steps out the door and a great view of the S. sky -- nice to share with friends over as well when the scope on the observing pier is also being used.

• Back to top

Posted 29 March 2011 - 06:51 AM

• Back to top

Posted 29 March 2011 - 07:00 AM

The mount does look great with the Tak white scopes! I was going to get one for my Tak Sky 90 when I had it, it would have been "Eye Candy"...

• Back to top

Posted 29 March 2011 - 07:02 AM

• Back to top

Posted 29 March 2011 - 01:33 PM

• Back to top

Posted 29 March 2011 - 02:14 PM

Thanks everyone!
I agree with you, Doug, the white finish on this mt. is nice, too, thick/lightly-pebbled texture/glossy. It's just slightly off-white which goes well with the TAK's colors. I don't know why there aren't more white mts. -- like you say, most of the OTAs seem to be white. The combo of light-colored OTA and mt. looks very clean.

• Back to top

Posted 29 March 2011 - 02:21 PM

I'm very pleased with my CG-4. The only thing I'm not thrilled with is that the optional drives look unfinished. They work fine, tracks very well, but they could have been designed better. Too bad, otherwise a very nice looking mount.

• Back to top

Posted 29 March 2011 - 03:01 PM

I also have a Celestron Super Polaris mt. (1980's w/wood legs) and the dual-axis motor drives look similar in a lot of ways, gears out in the open, wires sticking out, and just not a very sleek look IMO either. The one advantage the old SP mt. motor drive has is a clutch on both the RA and DEC allowing manual control on both. I didn't bother with getting the drives for this new CG-4 mt. as it's just going to be used more as a grab and go and if I want tracking I'll just use the SP mt.

• Back to top

Posted 29 March 2011 - 03:08 PM

• Back to top

Posted 30 March 2011 - 12:14 AM

• Back to top

Posted 30 March 2011 - 07:21 AM

Very nice set up.... .... What is the maximum weight you can put on it....

• Back to top

Posted 30 March 2011 - 09:36 AM

• Back to top

Posted 30 March 2011 - 09:40 AM

Maya, I just spent the last two hours living the experience that your Observatory Building Thread has provided! Wow, am I impressed! Someday I hope to build something half as nice as your beautiful little observatory. Thank you, it was truly an education.

Bart

• Back to top

Posted 30 March 2011 - 02:30 PM

I agree with the wt. limit -- Celestron states that the payload on the dovetail plate is max. at 20 lbs. But it also depends on the type of scope and its balance = a longer refractor or newt will be less steady due to it's dimensions and moment-arm, so with these I'd be happier with the 18 lb. limit....YMMV.

Thanks, Bart, for reading the observatory thread, I hope there are some helpful ideas in there!
Best wishes and clear skies!

• Back to top

Posted 30 March 2011 - 03:54 PM

Thank you both for the reply...

• Back to top