Astro-Physics Mach1GTO vs 10Micron GM1000HPS

[perfrej]

For contrast, I upgraded my GM2000HPS to a GM2000HPS in 35 minutes and polar aligned it to 41 seconds of arc in a total of three "few-point" model iterations. About 10-15 minutes.

It is interesting to note that you have experienced LAN droputs, something that I have never heard of in my 30 years in the IT industry. USB dropouts, on the other hand, are notoriously present in most setups.

I do not know what was wrong with your GM1000 trial, but I am glad you found a solution that pleases you!

/per

[buzz]

Hi Per - to note my 10 micron setup time above also included the assembly and hookup for the entire system. Like you, on a good day and as I reported earlier on this thread I have aligned the mount and made a reliable model in about 15 minutes. Before I established a fixed tripod system though I would sometimes get one of the three plate solves to fail and I would have to start over. When I looked at Sam's GM2000 the azimuth bolts and base plate are better designed than that on the GM1000. Even operating with great care and with small markers to allow you to move the bolts in fractional turns, I found that the verifying polar alignment routine reported you had not moved the mount enough. (With both AZ bolts tight and the four clamping bolts loosened, I could swivel the mount slightly on its baseplate) I actually shimmed my base plate with self adhesive aluminum tape and this improved things.

On the dropout front, it is obviously a system thing, that includes the software at both ends as well as the hardware. I'm with you, USB is normally the problem. I think in this case, it is not the LAN itself but the software. I think some of the mount responses were slow and Maxim didn't like it. If you recall, many 10 micron users reported snail-like computer response when the mount connected, especially with Maxim. Later firmware updates improved this but in my case not sufficiently for Maxim to be truly reliable, or if the remote keypad was being used at the same time as another command. There were knock on consequences to other devices that timed out too even on a Dual Core I5 Laptop with SSD and running lean.  I saw a post that indicated Cyanogen acknowledge that Maxim DL5's Achilles heel was its intolerant behavior and they changed their device management in DL6 to address it.

I have used Maxim DL5 with the MX and it has worked so far without a hitch, with no sign of the same computer slowing down. Now that I have started using PixInsight for processing though, an upgrade to DL6 looks less like good value and since switching to Sequence Generator Pro and PHD2, I cannot stop grinning. It might not offer the full control required by a remote Obsy as you have in France but it is pitched very well for the end of the garden system when you want to get some shuteye and not worry about meridian flips. The focusing routine is especially clever, taking multiple HFD measurements from one image.

The engineer in me would love to know what the root cause of these issues were with my two GM1000HPS's *and the half dozen other customers'). The more I think about it, the more I wonder about those small clutch knobs. In a temporary setup I was cool that unguided operation was a bit unlikely with a modest model. If the guider response had been better, I wouldn't have swapped.

clear skies

[Whichwayisnorth]

I am going to drag this thread back into the light because I am now in the same position as several people who have posted in this thread.

I am finally ready to make a big move to a top-tier mount but I have some specific requirements.

Must be light weight and easily transportable. 

  I image from my back yard where my kids play.  I typically set up on a friday afternoon and take it down again on a monday morning.  I want to leave the mount on the tripod if possible and carry the whole thing as one system (minus the OTA and counter weights)

Must be easy to set up and align.

  If it is going to take me longer than 30 minutes to start imaging then I am not interested.  If I set up a model on Friday night, I need it to be valid after parking and unparking for three nights.

Must be very quiet to operate.

  Coming from a Meade LX850 that sounded like a coffee grinder, I am now hooked on belts or direct drive as they are so much quieter.  In my very quiet neighborhood I don't like the idea of a loud mount (AP Mach1GTO).

Must be capable of long exposures and long focal lengths.

 I need to be able to do unguided and guided 20-30 minute narrow band images at long focal lengths.  I have a 8" EdgeHD and a 11" EdgeHD  2000mm/2800mm respectively.  Using an off axis guider I need to have a mount that tracks and guides very well and is robust enough to shrug off the 40 pounds of instrument weight.

Needs to have absolute encoders in both axis.

  Even though I am guiding, if i am going to spend this kind of money I want encoders.  I simply will not buy a mount that I always have to guide.  This is why I am not considering the Avalon mounts.

My initial list contained

AP Mach1GTO - I decided against it because it is old tech using spur gears and is very noisy.

Paramount MX+ - This would probably be a good choice but it doesn't have absolute encoders and it also doesn't have a hand controller.  Oh and it is big/cumbersome to carry around.

asa DDM60Pro  - I have been very close on this mount for some time but I've been reading about some issues regarding current spikes and tracking errors.  I have no idea if the problem has been identified and resolved.  Also no hand controller. If it is outside and there is a power loss the mount swings freely?  Wind could send my OTA and camera into the tripod?  Sounds like an accident waiting to happen.

10Micron GM1000HPS - Has encoders, is quiet, has a hand controller, is light weight, can in theory handle up to 55 pounds of instrument weight.   The reason I am posting here and not committed yet to 10Micron is that there aren't enough reviews on the mount yet. The only review I've actually seen is from buzz earlier and he swapped out for the Paramount.   His comment "it just works" when refering to the Paramount is exactly what I am afraid of.  I spend 5K on a mount that mostly works, I look at a 13K (US$) mount and say to myself "Well, if I spent double I wouldn't have these issues".  From reading his report there is no promise there.    The iOprtron CEM60 EC is quiet, portable, has a hand controller(a nice one actually), and in theory could work really well and it is less than half the price.  But its Chinese mass produced with low QC and I know I'll fight with it more than I'll use it.

So now that we are in mid-September, what are the developments with the 10Micron GM1000HPS?  I know there was a bug where people trying to guide or dither were experiencing problems that 10Micron didn't seem to want to admit to.  Has this been acknowledged or corrected?  The ASA mount still having those issues with motor current?  Can the mount be controlled via Sky Safari in place of a hand controller?  

[sabin_fota]

@ Whichwayisnorth

I had the opportunity to test an 1000 HPS and I made for them an quick review : http://10micron.de/informations/customer_reviews/sabin-fota-2/?lang=en.

They change the hand control unit.

I actually intend to buy one.

[CCD Imager]

HI Which Way is North, its me Photovisions with the CEM60 from Cloudy Nights !

If I were you, I would go for the 10 micron mount. If I had the money, that is what I would do. I'm sure it would handle your C11 edge with room to spare. I think it is better than almost any mount in its class with good engineering and absolute encoders. the built in software for modelling is a big plus. The problem with ASA and 10 micron is that they have produced mounts that are relatively new and because of their expense, there are only a small number out there. There are some reviews on the 10 micron and even less on the ASA mounts. Hopefully one day I will get one of the 10 micron mounts, but I would like them to add features specifically for astrophotographers and that includes an accessory power/USB/Guiding port on the DEC plate with through the mount cabling...

Adrian

[Whichwayisnorth]

HI Which Way is North, its me Photovisions with the CEM60 from Cloudy Nights !

If I were you, I would go for the 10 micron mount. If I had the money, that is what I would do. I'm sure it would handle your C11 edge with room to spare. I think it is better than almost any mount in its class with good engineering and absolute encoders. the built in software for modelling is a big plus. The problem with ASA and 10 micron is that they have produced mounts that are relatively new and because of their expense, there are only a small number out there. There are some reviews on the 10 micron and even less on the ASA mounts. Hopefully one day I will get one of the 10 micron mounts, but I would like them to add features specifically for astrophotographers and that includes an accessory power/USB/Guiding port on the DEC plate with through the mount cabling...

Adrian

I really wish the CEM60EC would have worked out for  me.  As you know I was testing it for iOptron for a few months. When I say "testing" I have to stretch that truth quite a bit as I never had a functioning mount the entire time.  When I got the email saying the beta test period was over and I had 30 days to either return it or not, I really had no choice but to return it.  I still follow the threads and I encourage the other users to do a lot of testing.  A recent test done that the results are not public yet shows a lot of promise.  However I think when all is said and done, a true top-tier mount like the 10Micron will be well worth the extra cost.  

[CCD Imager]

I don't have the high res encoder version which may explain why my CEM60 works okay, the only but major issue I have is that the mount cannot carry anywhere near its quoted capacity and you will have seen my wobble video's on Youtube. I will be using my 4 inch FSQ and CEM60 at the Kelling Heath star party this week and suspect this combination to work well.

Hey, the 1000HPS has a quoted payload capacity of less than the CEM60, but which one would you choose

[CCD Imager]

or should I say, believe...

[x6gas]

I really wish the CEM60EC would have worked out for  me.  As you know I was testing it for iOptron for a few months. When I say "testing" I have to stretch that truth quite a bit as I never had a functioning mount the entire time.  When I got the email saying the beta test period was over and I had 30 days to either return it or not, I really had no choice but to return it.  I still follow the threads and I encourage the other users to do a lot of testing.  A recent test done that the results are not public yet shows a lot of promise.  However I think when all is said and done, a true top-tier mount like the 10Micron will be well worth the extra cost.  

I have to say that the latest firmware updates and ASCOM driver have improved the CEM60-EC's performance and I think it will become renowned as a mount that is hard to beat at its price point.  I can only say I've been increasingly happy with mine and have got more so as the firmware updates have kept coming.

As I've posted on another thread I have a 5" triplet and imaging gear weighing in at 37lbs which is 48" long and I have no wobble or instability at all.  In fact the mount handles it like it isn't there: slews easily and tracks very well.

HOWEVER, you've said you want absolute encoders on  both axes and the CEM60 does not have that.  I haven't fully tested it yet but I'd be really amazed if it was capable of 30 minute unguided subs at 2800mm focal length too.  That is seriously challenging territory and I am not sure any mount with the portability and other features you require actually exists, but based on your requirements above I don't think the CEM60 is for you... which is a shame as it's a terrific mount and the almost total absence of any backlash in RA or DEC makes it a real contender for long focal length imaging with a large SCT.

Cheers, Ian

[CCD Imager]

Hi Ian

Don't suppose you are going to the Kelling Heath star party with your CEM60 by any chance? I must say that I would really like to meet your mount, if you know what I mean...

I notice that your refractor weighs in at the same as my 6 inch APO, so I can't understand how ours are so different. I also visited Altair Astro and theirs was the same as mine. I'm pleased that yours is working out okay and I'm sure I will be fine with my FSQ at Kelling.

Adrian

[buzz]

As you can tell I have had the Paramount and 10 micron. The weight difference is small, especially when you take into account there's no separate electronics handbag with the MX. The MX though is physically bigger but my MX has carry handles in the housing. The size does mean I do not get leg clashes though on my tripod. It also has no clutch, which is a big bonus. The gears are either fully engaged, free or the mount is locked into a safe transport park position. I use my MX in a portable setup. I'm imaging within 15 mins now. To get the most out of the 10 micron, you need to spend time doing a model, align the mount and repeat the model. I averaged about 20 minutes on top of the setup time. That model was not sufficiently reliable to image without an autoguider. The MX polar scope gets me within 2' in no time at all and the mount autoguides painlessly. It is delivering the smallest HFD's and aspect ratio that I have ever achieved. It also handles a whopping 41kg payload. 40 lbs is a bit close to the 25kg payload of the 10 micron. On top, the power consumption is 2/3 that of the 10 micron.

At first, I missed the handset. After a few nights, I did not miss it at all and realised that I never really used it anyway because the computer and its software did everything I needed and was always connected. The encoder in the MX sets an absolute position within an arc second, allowing for repeated use without calibration. The software will always do an automatic plate solve and centre if the initial slew is off.

In summary, the MX is a fantastic instrument, perfectly at home in a mobile environment. Its biggest drawback is its physical size. I had a padded bag made up for mine by a UK company and it sits on the rear seat with a seat belt around it.

Then there is the through mount cabling and the red color and the engraved alt/az........

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Regards

Chris

[ollypenrice]

What's wrong with guiding? On my Mesu 200 here's what it involves. Plug in the guide camera, take a picture, choose a star and say 'Guide.' And that is exactly what it does, always. I don't recalibrate. There is simply no need. This routine worked for two years with an OAG at 2.4 metres of FL and now works for our tandem FSQ rig at 530mm. I don't recall ever losing a sub to guiding error. My simple Argo Navis version needs a one star alignment each night but this takes less time to do than it takes to cool the cameras so the time lost is zero. What strikes me about so many IT intensive solutions is that they would save time if they worked, but they don't work. They sometimes work.

I would never start out by saying 'I want absolute encoders' or 'I want to work unguidede.' I'd always start out by saying, 'I want to take picures.' And I do take picures on the stone age Mesu. Every single time I go outside...

Olly

[CCD Imager]

Chris

I don't know why you are talking about making a large model for use with the 10 micron? You only need this if you are considering ungiuded photography. So just as with your Paramount, you could use the 10 micron mount's 3 star model to get polar alignment, synch on a star and start imaging. OTH, you could spend a load of time with the Paramount using TPoint to get a large model that would allow Protrack to take unguided photographs. No different from the 10 Micron?

I don't know what went wrong with your mount, I know you were initially very pleased with it. I've used a Paramount in the past, but never used the 10 micron, but it does see very appealing..

Adrian

[Steve 1962]

I've just bought a second hand 10 Micron GM1000HPS from AstroBuySell and tonight is my first night using it (and the Tak 106 ED that came with it).

The 10 Micron was an upgrade from my old NEQ6 and I've been playing with it for a couple of weeks while I waited for a screw in camera adapter to be made for the TAK.

I have to say that the mount (and the scope) are (both) things of great beauty. I've found that Per's ASCOM driver works very well. The lack of grinding noise while slewing is just lovely.

Tonight is the first night that I've had the camera plugged into the scope and I've done a Balance, 3 star align and a polar alignment using the mount handset - all very straightforward indeed - although I did decide to tweek the PA with a bit of drift alignment. Now that's done, it's been a real revelation to select a target in Cdc for see the scope place it bang in the middle of the chip every time.

I've also focused my SX OAG and am now guiding using a Lodestar through the 106 at a focal length of about 500mm. I've got the guide speed set to 0.1 and 5 second exposures in PHD...and here's the result...

Given the complete lack of correction guide pulses; I'm quite (very) pleased with the mount so far! This is with no model at all. It's a real shame that I have an early start for work tomorrow otherwise I'd do a model and see what the dual tracking mode yealds...I think this will be a bit time consuming because I'm using SGP rather than Maxim, which Per's model maker needs but I've found that it is very easy to use AstroTortilla to add model points, so I'm planning to slew to some scattered  points across the sky and let AT solve and sync the mount next time I'm out.

Incidentally, here's a CCD Inspector plot of a 10 minute image using the 106 and my Atik 460...

Overall - I'm very happy with both the mount and the scope so far.

Steve

[CCD Imager]

Looks good Steve. Is your scale for PHD guiding in pixels or arc secs? I dont use PHD, so am lost in your graph! Keep us posted on how you get on, would love to hear as one day  I might be able to afford this mount. How have you found the tightening of the Az and Alt bolts, does it alter the ploar alignment much?

Adrian

PS, I know someone else that was interested in that mount 

[Steve 1962]

Hi Adrian

Is your scale for PHD guiding in pixels or arc secs?

The scale is in pixels.

How have you found the tightening of the Az and Alt bolts, does it alter the ploar alignment much?

Yes, there was some movement when tightening the Alt and Az locking bolts, but by watching the screen for star movement and being quite gentle, I think I've nailed the PA.

PS, I know someone else that was interested in that mount

I think there were quite a few of us! It was just too good to miss being just down the road from me. I think my wife would have been grateful if "someone" had beaten me to it!!

I'll keep you posted with progress.

Cheers

Steve

[buzz]

Chris

I don't know why you are talking about making a large model for use with the 10 micron? You only need this if you are considering ungiuded photography.

Adrian

Adrian -  I had always assumed I would need to guide any mount in a portable situation. Over many many hours, I found that the GM1000HPS firmware versions released 3Q 2013 and the beta versions in early 2014 did not guide very well. Me and several users had oscillations on both axis, even with gentle guiding, using Maxim or PHD software. There was clearly an interaction between the guider input and the closed loop control of the mount. After several attempts by 10Micron, the guider response in my opinion, was borderline. For steady state guiding it was flatline (as above) and the oscillations were controlled. I dither between exposures though and the over damped response took ages to settle. I simply lost my confidence the company and for such an expensive mount the support and communication from the company was severely lacking and that is the main reason I changed over. 

Olly is right, we don't NEED optical encoders but they have great appeal. Most of us image a single target on a night and pointing accuracy is kind of irrelevant, especially when any software can plate solve and sync in under a minute. With Per and others reporting excellent unguided results with their GM's I went down the road of trying to develop better models to render autoguiding unnecessary, with extreme emphasis on timing accuracy, weather conditions and obsessive attention to flexure. I didn't succeed and continued to have strange drift behavior on both axis with dual tracking. That behavior disappeared when I kept the same tripod and refractor assembly and just swapped over the mount. I had 2 GM1000HPS and I guess I was unlucky in both cases. Other users (mostly in Obsy environments) have better performance. The autoguider response is excellent on the MX and I have similar RMS tracking errors between 0.3 and 0.4" as the lucky Steve is getting, over 20 minute subs.

Steve - if it is performing that well - don't bother with a model, especially at high altitude where the refraction effect is less!  Maybe that is where I went wrong - trying to be too clever.

[Whichwayisnorth]

Adrian -  I had always assumed I would need to guide any mount in a portable situation. Over many many hours, I found that the GM1000HPS firmware versions released 3Q 2013 and the beta versions in early 2014 did not guide very well. Me and several users had oscillations on both axis, even with gentle guiding, using Maxim or PHD software. There was clearly an interaction between the guider input and the closed loop control of the mount. After several attempts by 10Micron, the guider response in my opinion, was borderline. For steady state guiding it was flatline (as above) and the oscillations were controlled. I dither between exposures though and the over damped response took ages to settle. I simply lost my confidence the company and for such an expensive mount the support and communication from the company was severely lacking and that is the main reason I changed over. 

Olly is right, we don't NEED optical encoders but they have great appeal. Most of us image a single target on a night and pointing accuracy is kind of irrelevant, especially when any software can plate solve and sync in under a minute. With Per and others reporting excellent unguided results with their GM's I went down the road of trying to develop better models to render autoguiding unnecessary, with extreme emphasis on timing accuracy, weather conditions and obsessive attention to flexure. I didn't succeed and continued to have strange drift behavior on both axis with dual tracking. That behavior disappeared when I kept the same tripod and refractor assembly and just swapped over the mount. I had 2 GM1000HPS and I guess I was unlucky in both cases. Other users (mostly in Obsy environments) have better performance. The autoguider response is excellent on the MX and I have similar RMS tracking errors between 0.3 and 0.4" as the lucky Steve is getting, over 20 minute subs.

Steve - if it is performing that well - don't bother with a model, especially at high altitude where the refraction effect is less!  Maybe that is where I went wrong - trying to be too clever.

This is EXACTLY what I needed to know.  I'm afraid I need to scratch 10Micron off the list then.  I am going to take another look at the MX+ as I already am very familiar with The Sky X Pro.  In fact Bisque is doing a workshop at my clubs dark sky site soon.  Maybe there is still a spot open...

[buzz]

These things are always a moving target, so best to keep options open up to the purchase point. The mechanicals of the 10 Micron are very sophisticated and I don't think they were the source of any of my issues. A new firmware version could emerge tomorrow and with its optical encoder, one can imagine a guider response that is sublime, with no stiction or backlash. It is worth checking their forum to see if there have been any updates since I parted company with mine. Philosophically, I think the 10 Micron mounts really shine in a fixed obsy. With a more robust autoguider response than the one I experienced, it would be reliable in portable setup too, after a simple three point plate solve to set the Alt/Az adjustments. For me the key word is reliability. Some users regularly enthuse about theirs and clearly have no issues with its performance in their setup, which is just as well as it is in a remote site.

One of my friends on the 10U forum guides once every 100 seconds (I assume he uses a tracking model at the same time) to remove any residual drift. I don't think he dithers though. Another friend has the GM2000. He had a firmware update that went wrong ( I cannot repeat the actual words he used) and after many months he had his mount replaced. His replacement is delivering long unguided subs in his observatory. He is very exacting and the attention to detail in the alignment and the model creation are now rewarding his patience. I think he would be shocked at how mine goes together in a matter of minutes, I use preset fixtures and PokeYoke devices and auto guide to fix the rest.

[Steve 1962]

An update on my 10 Micron mount - I've just done a 50 point model using the Cdc Sync command and the mount's pointing is now bang on - to the point that faint target stars were regularly hidden behind my imaging software's  cross hairs.

I've guided for 20 and 30 minutes using PHD with 6 second guide exposures with an RMS value of about 0.1 pixel (0.3") and a large dither from SGLPro between frame is uniformly and predictably guided out in about 30 seconds at a guide speed of 0.1. Dual Tracking is "on".

I'm running with firmware 2.10.12 released 26-07-2013.

I'm enjoying watching the mount guide so much that I'm not going to try unguided tonight - I'm going to try to get some data!

I share Chris's frustration   - such expensive bits of kit should work straight out of the box - but it seems there is significant variation in performance between individual mounts (of most, if not all types). Anyway - I'm glad that Chris's MX is performing well. ..and I'm delighted with my 10 Micron. Happy Days (sorry - Nights!) 

[buzz]

That is excellent news. I think my mount came with 2.9.x and my problems began when I updated it. 2.11.x was my nemesis. You will have to check with the forum but there were other reasons why 2.10.x was quickly superceded by 2.11.x.

Other users may want to chime in but I recall that they were to do with post slew wobble. As you are using CDC then I assume you are manually aligning. That would take care of that. ModelMaker results were being impaired at one point by occasional wobble after a slew for over 5 secs or so, causing plate solve errors. If you take a look at the forum, you should be able to piece the story together.

Out of interest, using Maxim DL, that FW version ( and its predecessor) slowed a PC to crawling pace. ( the exposure countdown would be erratic and mouse commands would be ignored) Do you notice anything in SGP?

I'm really pleased its working for you.

[Steve 1962]

Thanks Chris - I'll have a look at the forum.

You're right - I manually aligned my model points (not that it took much doing!).

I can't detect ny difference between SGP with the 10 Micron and how SGP was with EQMOD. my old NEQ6.

What is interesting is that I was speaking with a chap whose dome polling was slowing down Maxim to a crawl the other day - the Maxim customer support sorted that out. I hope you're not getting the same issue with your MX??

Steve

[CCD Imager]

As an outside observer of the 10 micron mounts, its confusing to say the least. Some seem fantastic and others not so. Have 10 micron not released a firmware upgrade in over a year?

I have a friend who is looking at buying a second hand Paramount MX, but there are issues surrounding the license of the software and it seems that the new owner will have to pay $300! I don't like that. Also the software needs activating for each new computer and I heard that it can only be put on 2 PC's. I hate this activation stuff!

Adrian

[buzz]

Adrian -  like Maxim, TSX, which is bundled with a Paramount, has an annual subscription anyway.  TSX has regular updates and rapid responses to issues and although I'm not yet at the point of having to pay a license fee again, don't feel I'm being robbed.  I have the software loaded on two machines and in two operating systems. I'm not sure why one would need more.

I guess on the mount side, philisophically, as people lay out more cash, their expectations rise on equipment performance. What some may have shrugged their shoulders on with a £500 mount becomes a major issue with a £6K+ mount. Performance is one thing, consistent and robust product design is another. The evaluation of a mount should consider both aspects and a trawl through the forums to gauge the degree of variability, issues and customer support with a product. No product is without issues and the good companies react positively to issues rather than blame you and everything else. Some certainly have more consistent performance and better software quality.

[ollypenrice]

I get to see lots of mounts from lots of makers and I also get to talk to lots of owners with mounts at home. One thing is clear, there is no maker capable of making consistently foolproof mounts! They can all misbehave. By far the greatest number of problems are on the IT side. There are lots of good makes from the mechanical point of view. The problem is the insane degree of precision we need. 

Because the IT side seems so intractable I prefer to keep it to a minimum, but that's just me.

Olly