Mesu 200 vs Avalon

[JamesF]

Indeed. I'm not in the market, but it's interesting to know what these mounts are like, just in case someone gives me a winning lottery ticket.

James

[nmoushon]

Indeed. I'm not in the market, but it's interesting to know what these mounts are like, just in case someone gives me a winning lottery ticket.

James

I think 95% of use are in this same circumstance. lol

[ollypenrice]

That's exciting, Yves. I didn't know you'd made the decision.

Olly

[vdb]

That's exciting, Yves. I didn't know you'd made the decision.

Olly

I think you know what caused the decision ... I'm hoping on a test run tonight just to align polarscope and get to know yet another handset ...

[ncjunk]

Someone who wan't remote operation, wait for the new updates or uses another goto system ...

Yves

I still cant help but feel a little annoyed that the Ascom driver has no park (i couldnt find a list of enabled functions for the driver before i bought the mount).

And out of those two options having spent all my money on the mount theres no way i can afford to add another controller to it so that i can park the thing, so option 1 it is.

[Mike Hawtin]

M-Uno #2 tracking.doc

I have only just found this thread so my input may be too late but for what it's worth attached is a tracking chart of my M-Uno, actually this particular mount is a replacement for the one I originally received, its tracking performance was even worse!

Mike

[pete_l]

... a tracking chart of my M-Uno, actually this particular mount is a replacement for the one I originally received, its tracking performance was even worse!

So am I reading this right?

I'm unacquainted with the mount in question, but it looks to me that there's a rather fast wobble of about 5 arc-sec pk-pk overlaid on top of the (IMHO massive) 30 arc-sec periodic error.

I thought that belt drives were supposed to design out those high frequency errors?

[Mike Hawtin]

Yes there is a fast ripple overlaying the tracking curve, I think this is mostly responsible for my being unable to get it to guide properly. Large tracking errors are no big deal really as long as they happen slowly but in this case the deviation can be up to 0.2 arcsec/sec, add the ripple to this and the result is poor guiding even with a one second autoguide cycle and consequently no chance of extending the guide cycle to pull in fainter guide stars. This makes off axis guiding really frustrating, it's just as well my neighbours are a bit hard of hearing.

Mike

[Earl]

I have to admit that my vote is far from cast now, I decided to sort out the scope as with that I could make no wrong decision.

Im still looking at mounts I still watching what people have to say. My EQ6 is working so im not in a hurry.

[Helen]

I'm the same as you Earl. I've got my imaging scope sorted out now and the EQ6 is working nicely. It would be great to have a mount with a really high capacity though as I'd love to be able to mount my C11 as well so that I could do planetary and lunar, and small galaxies without having to dismantle everything. I do really love EWMod though....I wonder if the Mesu could be configured to use it????

Helen

[Earl]

It would be the logical thing for the mesu to support the eqmod community and give it a great selling point

[ncjunk]

The thing is you dont need most of the functionality of eqmod. Most of its functionality, although great, is not part of the ascom standard (this dictates what standard control functions can be configured by the driver programmer if they want to).

With a mount like the mesu all you need is goto, park and tracking on/off. If you want to accurately map your goto errors then you can do it in the s3rvocat. but the mount is such quality you don't NEED all that additional eqmod functionality.

I only ever used eqmod as a pure ascom driver and ignored all the other functionality.

Once servo cat and argo navis provide an update that provides tracking off and park then the mesu will be perfect.

Dont get blinded by excess functionality...although damn useful on the eqs.

[Cath]

I'm with James - can't hope to afford one, but the info you guys post is very interesting.

[Earl]

This is what's good, both side of the coin and hands on experience. :biggrin:

[Helen]

That's interesting Neil. I only use a small part of the EQMod functionality - basically the pointing model and scope control, along with park options. If those functions can be delivered easily with the Mesu then it may be next on the wishlist :-)

Helen

[Earl]

That's interesting Neil. I only use a small part of the EQMod functionality - basically the pointing model and scope control, along with park options. If those functions can be delivered easily with the Mesu then it may be next on the wishlist :-)

Helen

ah but EQmosaic will really help you get those Luna images with your C11.

ARGH....

[Helen]

ah but EQmosaic will really help you get those Luna images with your C11.

ARGH....

Hmmm, haven't used that functionality. Sounds great.

[Earl]

It is very nice, and make mosaicing (is that a word) a doddle.

[ncjunk]

Thats where eqmod blurs the lines between ascom driver and general astro software. i'd almost argue that it's a great piece of Astro software which also has an ascom driver built in. Rather than primarily an ascom driver with additional features...its gone too far beyond its original driver functionality.

But then i have maxim and acp to do all my control....so eqmod is alot cheaper for mosaics thanwhat i am using ;-D

[chrisshillito]

The thing is you dont need most of the functionality of eqmod. Most of its functionality, although great, is not part of the ascom standard (this dictates what standard control functions can be configured by the driver programmer if they want to).

I really wouldn't get too hung up on the ASCOM standard. ASCOM is simply the glue that binds together applications and drivers. It provides little or no functionalty itself and in many cases ASCOM only exposes a limited subset of the control functions that a modern mount/driver can provide, or indeed what users want.

EQMOD development has, from day one, been driven by user input and request. I'd be suprised if the functions that EQMOD users considered so desirable, even if not essential, would not benefit other mount drivers as well.

Chris.

[ollypenrice]

Bit dusturbing, to say the least, that Mike is having such hassle with the M Uno. I couldn't find his guide graph though.

Mounts are such a nightmare. I won't repeat which is my favourite mount of all time because you are sick of hearing me say it! The thing is that, if you are shooting at shorter focal length, the NEQ6 really is very good.

My Tak EM200 is considerably better and can now be relied on but it is too expensive compared to... that other mount.

Mike, any updates on yours?

Olly

[Mike Hawtin]

Olly, no update on mine yet, I've just emailed the retailer asking for a refund and will see what they have to say. I've attached another tracking graph just out of interest, this one was taken last night, every one I take is different to the others as there is no discernable pattern to them, the only thing in common is the very large amplitude and the fast ripple producing unguidable deviations from sidereal rate. If anyone thinks otherwise I would be very grateful for their suggestions.

Mike

Mount 2 tracking.doc

[ncjunk]

I really wouldn't get too hung up on the ASCOM standard. ASCOM is simply the glue that binds together applications and drivers. It provides little or no functionalty itself and in many cases ASCOM only exposes a limited subset of the control functions that a modern mount/driver can provide, or indeed what users want.

EQMOD development has, from day one, been driven by user input and request. I'd be suprised if the functions that EQMOD users considered so desirable, even if not essential, would not benefit other mount drivers as well.

Chris.

I think i am labouring the point too much but a telescope driver should provide the base level of control required to interface with the mount. All other additional functions are not part of the driver.

The additional functionlity eqmod users need is not part of the driver but uses the driver as the control element.

Its a bit off topic so i won't continue the debate but to me there is a clear distiction and eqmod provides both driver and additional non driver fuctions (which are fantastic and usefull)

More a topic for the pub i think...in industrial control i wouldnt mix the two.

[chrisshillito]

Thats where eqmod blurs the lines between ascom driver and general astro software. i'd almost argue that it's a great piece of Astro software which also has an ascom driver built in. Rather than primarily an ascom driver with additional features...its gone too far beyond its original driver functionality.

But then i have maxim and acp to do all my control....so eqmod is alot cheaper for mosaics thanwhat i am using ;-D

You are correct, EQMOD's core purpose has always been as a PC based synscan replacement. It was never conceived as being "just a driver", the Celestron/Nexstar ASCOM drivers already did that for the EQ mounts. From an EQMOD prespective ASCOM is simply a self contained set of COM interfaces that allow EQMOD to be scripted. That is a pretty standard model for application design and isn't specific to a driver environment (or indeed original to ASCOM). I've never regarded ASCOM as an ideal blueprint for control architecture, rather simply a means to an end.

Irresepctive of the perecieved rights and wrongs of EQMODs design it is quite understandable that EQMOD users considering a new mount type would wonder if they will get equivalent functionality. If that functionality comes as part of the driver or some higher level application(s) then I guess they will be happy. However if it is only attainable by purchasing the likes of ACP and Maxim, Maxpoint, PEMPro, etc. then I suspect that some might feel a little short changed.

For what its worth EQMOSAIC doesn't blur any lines at all . It is a completely standalone ASCOM client application. The fact the EQMOD interface has a quick launch button doesn't change this. With a bit of luck you may just find that EQMOASIC (and EQTOUR) work fine with the MESU ASCOM driver - if not let me know and I'll attempt a fix.

Chris.

[ollypenrice]

Olly, no update on mine yet, I've just emailed the retailer asking for a refund and will see what they have to say. I've attached another tracking graph just out of interest, this one was taken last night, every one I take is different to the others as there is no discernable pattern to them, the only thing in common is the very large amplitude and the fast ripple producing unguidable deviations from sidereal rate. If anyone thinks otherwise I would be very grateful for their suggestions.

Mike

That's dire. Really sorry to hear of your hassles. You are quite sure the camera's guide ports are all communicating? ie no bad connection in the ST4 cable, for instance?

Keep us posted.

Olly