Which mount?

[gazza]

I am in a quandary....

I have a TSA120 and I need a mount for it. My IEQ30 appears to be too light duty for it. Uses will be 80% astrophotography, and 20% visual mounted permanently on a steel pier in a shed.

The TSA took most of my discretionary funds (ie my secret slush fund :-) so things are a bit tight. I have two options. I can get a secondhand Losmandy G11 Gemini 2 (about 10 years ols - was originally a Gemin 1, but was upgraded after the G1 controller failed. It has (and I have tested this myself) around 9 arc secs of PE, with a large component of this the 76 second error. It would need to be fitted with a one piece worm block to cure this.

As an alternative, there is the AZEQ6, this would cost about 2/3 of the Losmandy so is my preferred option. I have no experience of how well these track, or what sort of PE they are exhibiting. There seems very little around on them. This may actually mean they are working well. I also seem to read regularly that people have to fiddle with the G11's to keep them working well. I really don't want to have to do this as over the years I have spent more time making things work than using them - I'm over fiddling, but woud do it if I only had to do it once.....

Whatever mount I get it will probably have my C11 mounted on it in the future as an alternate OTA.

Opinions?

cheers

Gary

[pete_l]

As an alternative, there is the AZEQ6,  ...

Whatever mount I get it will probably have my C11 mounted on it in the future as an alternate OTA.

Since you intend to have the mount permanently in an obsy, would you ever use the Alt-Az features pf the AZEQ6? If not I would suggest that the additional weight of an NEQ6 wouldn't be a disadvantage and that mount would be cheaper.

However it could be a challenge to do photography with your proposed C11. If you are definitely going down that route, maybe the Losmandy would be the more capable option.

[perfrej]

I think you should go premium on this. A C11 is no easy game to play in imaging. If you want to eliminate guiding from the equation a 10Micron GM1000HPS is a good choice, or even better their GM2000HPS Mk II.

If you accept to guide (which I hate to do) there are more options available, like the Bisque mounts or the Avalons.

/per

[ollypenrice]

These are two different questions if you want to do DS imaging with the C11 as well. This really will require a good mount and neither the Skywatcher nor the G11 would be my choice. It would have to be premium for me with the Mesu200 being the cheapest. Both scopes could live permanently on a Mesu 200 with ease. It has a vast payload and ours has never missed a beat in nearly three years. It can certainly handle the focal length. Ours was used for 2 years at 2.4 metres/0.6 arcsecs per pixel. It never dropped a sub.

The TSA 120 is a different matter and far more tolerant. All forms of the EQ6 can carry it happily and deliver, probably, perfectly good autoguided results. It will also sit happily on the Avalon Linear. I have one carrying the larger TEC 140 and find it guides well. http://ollypenrice.smugmug.com/Other/Best-of-Les-Granges/i-XqpRhfL/0/X3/SAG%20TRIPLET%20TEC%20MOSAIC-X3.jpg

The elastic feeling of the drives is a little alarming but the results are consistently nice.

The Alt-EQ6 does have two big advantages over the standard one even in an permanent observatory. Primary drive is by toothed belt and the power cable connector is decent. I've broken the standard one in a cable wrap incident and the new motherboard would have paid most of the difference in initial price.

Although I haven't had the Avalon for long everything about the engineering (ie the quality and the unlubricated, low-stressed belt drive with multiple contact points) says 'low mainenance and long life.'

Olly

[FLO]

I am in a quandary....

... things are a bit tight. 

I think you should go premium on this. A C11 is no easy game to play in imaging. If you want to eliminate guiding from the equation a 10Micron GM1000HPS is a good choice, or even better their GM2000HPS Mk II.

...It would have to be premium for me with the Mesu200 being the cheapest. 

Good luck requesting advice for affordable mounts while Per and Olly are online

[Tinker1947]

Good luck requesting advice for affordable mounts while Per and Olly are online

I think there is a valid point as far as the C11 goes, i had one on a NEQ6 and they have a bit to much FL for the mount........

[Scott]

I think there is a valid point as far as the C11 goes, i had one on a NEQ6 and they have a bit to much FL for the mount........

I've not seen a c11 on an neq6 so i'll bow to your experience however, if this is the case, I'd be more inclined to sell the c11 and keep an neq6...That way, I can have a house too

[Tim]

Here's a quick piccy I took with a C11 on a standard out of the box EQ6 pro.

Sorry, what was the question again?

Tim

[Scott]

Here's a quick piccy I took with a C11 on a standard out of the box EQ6 pro.

Sorry, what was the question again?

Tim

Oh my 

[Tinker1947]

I've not seen a c11 on an neq6 so i'll bow to your experience however, if this is the case, I'd be more inclined to sell the c11 and keep an neq6...That way, I can have a house too

The C11 went my 10" P-DS went on the NEQ6 and a Dob 300P GoTo replaced the C11.......

[Tinker1947]

Here's a quick piccy I took with a C11 on a standard out of the box EQ6 pro.

Sorry, what was the question again?

Tim

Very nice but the stars to me appear a bit bloated......

[Tim]

I wasn't taking a picture of the stars...........they just happened to be in it too.

[Tim]

Like Per I have a gm1000 now, but have used the EQ6 extensively with long focal length tubes. At C11 focal length any mount will only perform as well as it is set up and understood by the user, you dont get plug and play as it were, but I cant see any realistic reason why you shouldnt expect great results with an NEQ6 or the AZEQ6, even with your C11.

Solid proven performers with the biggest user base and 3rd party software support (eqmod).

You can correct for PEC if you so desire, but guiding pretty much does that anyway. The biggest single improvement you could make to the imaging would probably be upgrading to an OAG, pretty much essential for decent results over 1000mm fl.

You can always save up for that Astro Physics Super Duper Whopper Mounter whilst you enjoy the results from your eq6 for a few years

[ollypenrice]

Good luck requesting advice for affordable mounts while Per and Olly are online

Not fair. I've heartily recommended the EQ6 in my reply with regard to the main scope in question, the TSA 120. The EQ6 is very affordable and I run two of them. I also know that Tim has done wonders at long FL with this mount but if someone said to me, 'Tim did it so do you think you can you do it?' I would say, 'I doubt it.'

Olly

[gazza]

Hi all,

thanks for taking the time to reply to my query.

The EQ^ may be a valid suggestion, but my experience is that they are of very variable quality.  I had one in the past that was replaced 3 times under warranty due to tracking issues. They all had a very bad issue with spikes at, if I remember correctly around 10.2 seconds) These made them unguidable. I believe I was one of the earliest to convert one to belt drive, but it was till a poor tracker. Replaced the worm with an aeroquest that was no better. Just a fortnight ago I had a conversation with a guy who had bought an NEQ6 a year ago, and he was following the same path due to the same issue. I know some people are having great results with them, but I just can't bring myself to go down that path again (3 wasted years). 

The AZEQ6 appeals as there are no intermediate gears, there are no adverse reports that I can find - that's got to be good...... Th AZ part is irrelevant, ut the belt drive is...

I'd love a Mesu or similar, but the top tier mounts are completely out of the question money wise at the moment.

The G11 is an option, but the idea of performing continuous maintenance to keep performance up is a bit unappealing. I want ti image, not fiddle!!!

I figure in a year or two, perhaps I could upgrade the AZ with a TDM? Weight wise it would seem to carry either scope. I have an OAG so will end up using that..

Still thinking.......

cheers

Gary

[perfrej]

Good luck requesting advice for affordable mounts while Per and Olly are online

Haha! Yes, that is true. Yet, a valid point in all this is that quality never goes out of style. I still think biting the bullet is good way to go because of all the trouble - and potentially money - it saves you in the long run. For the record; I own an NEQ6 that is super-tweaked and delivers fantastic results.

That said, I am "upping" my bid with a suggestion to get a GM4000HPS. A steal at €23k and you can sit along with the scopes for a ride - it takes a whopping 150kg imaging payload

/per

[perfrej]

Hi all,

thanks for taking the time to reply to my query.

The EQ^ may be a valid suggestion, but my experience is that they are of very variable quality.  I had one in the past that was replaced 3 times under warranty due to tracking issues. They all had a very bad issue with spikes at, if I remember correctly around 10.2 seconds) These made them unguidable. I believe I was one of the earliest to convert one to belt drive, but it was till a poor tracker. Replaced the worm with an aeroquest that was no better. Just a fortnight ago I had a conversation with a guy who had bought an NEQ6 a year ago, and he was following the same path due to the same issue. I know some people are having great results with them, but I just can't bring myself to go down that path again (3 wasted years). 

The AZEQ6 appeals as there are no intermediate gears, there are no adverse reports that I can find - that's got to be good...... Th AZ part is irrelevant, ut the belt drive is...

I'd love a Mesu or similar, but the top tier mounts are completely out of the question money wise at the moment.

The G11 is an option, but the idea of performing continuous maintenance to keep performance up is a bit unappealing. I want ti image, not fiddle!!!

I figure in a year or two, perhaps I could upgrade the AZ with a TDM? Weight wise it would seem to carry either scope. I have an OAG so will end up using that..

Still thinking.......

cheers

Gary

I do not know how good the AZEQ6 is, but a simple bearing change (cost €300), a belt mod and careful adjustments on an NEQ6 takes it into territory that could be considered upper class, most likely better than the AZEQ6.

For me, the NEQ6 is good value as I know it can be transformed into a good work horse with marginal effort. On the other hand, I do like to fiddle with things and I am not afraid of taking things apart. The only things I own that I haven't taken apart are my Phaeton W12 and the 10Micron mounts. I just reassembled my SBIG CCD camera after SBIG proved unable to fix it.

I would stay clear of the Losmandy G11. The mere thought of 1-2mm play on the CW shaft (considered "good adjustment" by Losmandy) scares me off. It was on my short-list when I wanted to upgrade from the NEQ6 but fell off pretty early on in the process after had a chance to play with one.

/per

[Tim]

That said, I am "upping" my bid with a suggestion to get a GM4000HPS. A steal at €23k and you can sit along with the scopes for a ride - it takes a whopping 150kg imaging payload

/per

I am planning one of these too, so that I can mount myself to it with a pair of heavy binos and do a bit of visual whilst imaging.....

[pyrasanth]

I love my Paramount MX+ & does a great job with the C11. I don't know for sure but I suspect that it would also be good enough for a C14 but I have seen arguments to the contrary so the jury is still out on that one.

[Lars]

I use my PMX that has less powerful motors than yours and image with a C14, 5kg tube rings and other accesories  and have no problems at all when imaging with a C14. It just works. All the time. Just curious, what arguments have you found to the contrary?

/Lars

[gazza]

Hi Guys,

I had a chance to test an AZEQ6GT last night - a friend had just bought one. Used Pempro to check the PE. Came in at around 221arc secs  P to P. It had no nasty jiggles or spikes, and was very repeatable - Should respond very well to PE correction. We did some fun unguided imaging with a TSA102 Plus TOA35 redeucer corrector- we were able to keep 75% of the 60 second subs. ... will post result after I transfer data from other computer

cheers

Gary

[gazza]

47 Tucana, 28 x 60 sec, no darks or flats, unguided AZEQ6GT, TSA102, TOA35 Reducer corrector, ST8300C.

No world beater, but not bad for a first go unguided.

cheers

Gary

[gazza]

Sorry 21 arc seconds .....didn't notice the extra 2...

Gary

Hi Guys,

I had a chance to test an AZEQ6GT last night - a friend had just bought one. Used Pempro to check the PE. Came in at around 221arc secs  P to P. It had no nasty jiggles or spikes, and was very repeatable - Should respond very well to PE correction. We did some fun unguided imaging with a TSA102 Plus TOA35 redeucer corrector- we were able to keep 75% of the 60 second subs. ... will post result after I transfer data from other computer

cheers

Gary

[pyrasanth]

I use my PMX that has less powerful motors than yours and image with a C14, 5kg tube rings and other accesories  and have no problems at all when imaging with a C14. It just works. All the time. Just curious, what arguments have you found to the contrary?

/Lars

One of the users of the MX on the bisque forums has put up a rant about the amount of vibration and settling when the mount slews. His argument is that there should be no bounce after any motion with the C14 tube. I think this is nonsense as the laws of inertia i.e. potentially moving 100+ kilos are not going to go away even for a Paramount!