These Posh "pushable" Alt-Azimuth Mounts?

[Macavity]

Many will be aware of these rather nifty "Eazy Touch" type Alt-Azimuth mounts and similar. At the moment, for my MAK 127, I have quite a workable "push to" system on a (much modified!) AZ3. Although I have solved the "balance problem" (ruddy great springs!), the zenith is a tad difficult (a.k.a. impossible!) to access. So I wonder: Would anyone like to comment on their experience with the slightly more "upmarket" Alt-Az (Eazy Touch(?) OR SIMILAR). Some dealers suggest they are good for "low and medium powers". Can one still "push" accurately, to manually track at ~180x (Say TFOV 0.36 Deg)? Or are there any Alt-Az's that use this basic principal and incorporate manual slow motions - Like gears, man? 8)

[GordonCopestake]

I've used Arthurs Aztech which is a beefed up GiroII clone, it worked very well and I would recommend them for wide field viewing. For high magnification stuff though I found balance and tracking started to get a little more .... frustrating. Thats not to say they dont work, but it takes a lot more concentration to track at high powers. The only AltAz that has slow motion controls that I know of other than the AZ3 is the Vixen portamount, highly regarded by many. I think either a GiroII/EZ-Touch or Portamount would be a good replacement for the AZ3 but then again there is a cost involved. If you are looking to spend some cash, then also look at the skypod which has full GOTO capabilities too.

[Macavity]

Thanks Gordon - I was hoping you might contribute. Re. the higher powers, I had rather suspected it might not be entirely a matter of "skill"! I sense it's a matter of offsetting such things against ALL requirements of working "in the field" - Some may (may not) be conducive to the "the experience"? Thanks for the other suggestions too. For any remaining officionados of the AZ3, I took my courage, or rather a hacksaw, in hand, and (effectively) shortened the Azimuth "flexible" slow-motion cable to ZERO. Turns out mine was solid core plastic. But, for the "wide bodied" scope owner, there's now potentially a BIT more zenith accessibility...

[Stardust]

I use a Portamount, very smooth very well made, instant set up, really like it.

DAve

[Macavity]

Thanks for the food for thought - Will have to start saving my pennies! In the interim, I decided to "file a bit off" my (not often used) EQ3-2, to allow the axis to point at the zenith. I also added a little "scale table" (wooden bit at centre!) and the ubiquitous digital level. Although my AZ3 plus springs ideas were "instructive", it's probably easier/better to start with a (vaguely) balanced system! For the enthusiasts of such nonsense, here's the current state of play...

[Kaptain Klevtsov]

I know its late, but the burning question in my mind is "why?". The GEM will track stuff more easily than an AltAz setup because it was designed to. Why modify it like that?

Captain Chaos

[Macavity]

Hey, it's an entirely fair question! T'be honest, lack of practice with a GEM style mounting?

In defense, I claim that's due to my "unconducive" site - A communal garden, used as a late-night shorcut by local "yoofs" (I really need that "grab & go" (run?) setup). But personally, I find star-hopping (v.few stars) a bit more "intuitive", when in alt-azimuth mode: Y'know M31: "left - left - up - up" &c. I'm also impressed by the star-finding potential of these "push-to" retrofit ideas - I use a cheap PDA to do coordinate conversions. Given ALL the above, and in restrospect, I do concede (waiting for) an ETX125 (say) might've been a better idea! On the other hand, I can stick my ST102/F5 on this setup, for (again rather linear!) star sweeping.

P.S. I should add (for a change) this particular "mod" is fairly non-destructive. The digital level is indeed drilled/screwed to the EQ3 drive mounting flange. But otherwise, I used that "double sided yakkem" the various DIY stores sell for sticking (<50lb?) errant offspring to walls etc.