iOptron CEM60 - a new mount design!

[perfrej]

I would consider the 10Micron mounts pretty much non-techie, though you have to realise that in order to reach unguided operation you have to have the rest of the pieces in place. "Pieces" in this context concerns your imaging train and the stability of it. Flexure is the enemy and must be combated at all times. SCTs are notoriously difficult, for instance.

/p

[DaveS]

Nothing's set in stone (Or concrete) yet, but this is where my thoughts are going.

Dual refractor rig, 160 mm f/6.3 oil-spaced CFF triplet for narrower fields of view and a Tak 106 for more wide-field. Mono CCDs (Of course!) and 7 or 8 place wheels on both. Mount on a solid pier probably under a roll-off cover for the mo. My little rig of Meg 90 / ST 80 on something lighter and more mobile, possibly with a DSLR or OSC camera.

But that's my ultimate goal, I don't expect to get there in one jump, and I have a lot of learning (When this weather lets me) to do first. May put a mono CCD / filter wheel on the Meg 90 for learning.

A phrase involving running and walking comes to mind as does the in-advisability of spending a nice car's amount of cash straight away, even though I could.

[perfrej]

That sounds like a GM2000HPS... Perfect match!

/p

[Davey-T]

Thought some people might like to see this.

Dave

[knobby]

Nice mount / scope combo ... but I'd definately expect someone with that kind of equipment to not be veiwing through double glazing 

[x6gas]

I've had my CEM60-EC for a month and finally got a few clear hours last night to get first light with it.  Impressed so far, though there are still some wrinkles to iron out.

First image with this mount is M63 The Sunflower Galaxy.

Cheers, Ian

[DaniAstro]

I've had my CEM60-EC for a month and finally got a few clear hours last night to get first light with it.  Impressed so far, though there are still some wrinkles to iron out.

First image with this mount is M63 The Sunflower Galaxy.

Cheers, Ian

I just want to ask - do you think this mout can support 27kg load. In your setup with C11 and camera I guess it all weight around 14-15kg. I we keep the rule to load the mount for astrophoto around 70% in your opinion can this mount support 19-20kg for astrophoto?

I am just worried if iOption have not just overstated the load capacity. My other very much likely option for now is AZ-EQ6. Reading the Cloudy Nighst topics for CEM60-EC beta testing it is obvious for me that making a good heavy load (20kg+) mount is really difficult taking into account the LX800 and EQ8 problems and the fact that EQ7 developement was stopped and started the new EQ8. For this reason ASA, Takahashi, 10Micron and AP cost much more.

[x6gas]

I just want to ask - do you think this mout can support 27kg load. In your setup with C11 and camera I guess it all weight around 14-15kg. I we keep the rule to load the mount for astrophoto around 70% in your opinion can this mount support 19-20kg for astrophoto?

I am just worried if iOption have not just overstated the load capacity. My other very much likely option for now is AZ-EQ6. Reading the Cloudy Nighst topics for CEM60-EC beta testing it is obvious for me that making a good heavy load (20kg+) mount is really difficult taking into account the LX800 and EQ8 problems and the fact that EQ7 developement was stopped and started the new EQ8. For this reason ASA, Takahashi, 10Micron and AP cost much more.

I don't believe that the wrinkles with the CEM60-EC are anything to do with payload capacity, but I am afraid that I can't really answer your question.  The CEM60 is rated at 60lbs (27kg) for visual; it very comfortably handles my Edge which with reducer and imaging train is about 17kg IIRC.  Reports from other IOptron owners are that their payload capacities (iEQ45 and ZEQ25) are not as over-blown as some of the other mid-range mounts, but I have no direct experience.

Of course the weight of the payload is only half the story - a similar heft of long Newt is a very different proposition to the more compact SCT...  Rumour has it that iOptron has a CEM120 in the offing so that would be a better bet (but probably not as portable so no good for me).

[ollypenrice]

Does the 60 use the spring loaded motors/worms as seen on the 45? I don't object to these in principle, far from it, but those of the 45 have two shortcomings in my experience over time. 1) They lose tension, allowing elasticity which is particularly bad for long tubes with a larger moment of inertia. 2) They are not well sealed against the ingress of dust and grit. Indeed you can see the worm if you pull back on the motors.

The 45s I've seen cannot begin to carry their claimed payload if it comes in the form of a long tube.  With shorter tubes they are better.

Olly

[Davey-T]

Does the 60 use the spring loaded motors/worms as seen on the 45? I don't object to these in principle, far from it, but those of the 45 have two shortcomings in my experience over time. 

Think I read somewhere that the were magnetic   

Dave

[x6gas]

Does the 60 use the spring loaded motors/worms as seen on the 45? I don't object to these in principle, far from it, but those of the 45 have two shortcomings in my experience over time. 1) They lose tension, allowing elasticity which is particularly bad for long tubes with a larger moment of inertia. 2) They are not well sealed against the ingress of dust and grit. Indeed you can see the worm if you pull back on the motors.

The 45s I've seen cannot begin to carry their claimed payload if it comes in the form of a long tube.  With shorter tubes they are better.

Olly

Dave's right - the CEM60 uses a patent-pending magnetic system to hold the worm up to the ring gear.  This also acts as the clutch on each axis so when you disengage the worm the axis rotates freely - and I mean very freely as there is virtually no friction so there are warnings all over the instruction manual to have a firm grasp on your kit before releasing the worm.  Engaging the worm holds the worm and ring together.  The magnetic mechanism is not user adjustable, as far as I can tell.  You basically have to nip the engagement knob up, or tighten and back off a quarter of a turn.  It sounds fiddly, but really it's not.

The beauty of the system is not only the ease with which you can balance the mount, but the fact that there is virtually no backlash at all in either axis.  At 2800mm focal length I couldn't detect any visually and from the DEC guide graph it was barely noticeable.  No idea how well sealed they are Olly, nor can I guess on the longevity of the design but it works well for now and time will tell.

My choice for a new mount came down to the CEM60 or an Avalon LineAR in the end.  I honestly don't know at this point if I've made a wise choice or not; the LineAR's belt drive has slow, smooth PE which is easily guided out as Sara Wager has demonstrated to great effect, the CEM60 some innovative (but unproven) design features, lower inherent PE (but which may prove harder to guide out) and for me was £500-600 less expensive.

Edit: Oh and on looks there is no contest:  the Avalon's are CNC'd and things of beauty, the CEM60 is a bit of an ugly duckling, IMO.  But they all look the same in the dark :-).

[DaniAstro]

I don't believe that the wrinkles with the CEM60-EC are anything to do with payload capacity, but I am afraid that I can't really answer your question.  The CEM60 is rated at 60lbs (27kg) for visual; it very comfortably handles my Edge which with reducer and imaging train is about 17kg IIRC.  Reports from other IOptron owners are that their payload capacities (iEQ45 and ZEQ25) are not as over-blown as some of the other mid-range mounts, but I have no direct experience.

Of course the weight of the payload is only half the story - a similar heft of long Newt is a very different proposition to the more compact SCT...  Rumour has it that iOptron has a CEM120 in the offing so that would be a better bet (but probably not as portable so no good for me).

Thanks for the answer.

[ollypenrice]

Dave's right - the CEM60 uses a patent-pending magnetic system to hold the worm up to the ring gear.  This also acts as the clutch on each axis so when you disengage the worm the axis rotates freely - and I mean very freely as there is virtually no friction so there are warnings all over the instruction manual to have a firm grasp on your kit before releasing the worm.  Engaging the worm holds the worm and ring together.  The magnetic mechanism is not user adjustable, as far as I can tell.  You basically have to nip the engagement knob up, or tighten and back off a quarter of a turn.  It sounds fiddly, but really it's not.

The beauty of the system is not only the ease with which you can balance the mount, but the fact that there is virtually no backlash at all in either axis.  At 2800mm focal length I couldn't detect any visually and from the DEC guide graph it was barely noticeable.  No idea how well sealed they are Olly, nor can I guess on the longevity of the design but it works well for now and time will tell.

My choice for a new mount came down to the CEM60 or an Avalon LineAR in the end.  I honestly don't know at this point if I've made a wise choice or not; the LineAR's belt drive has slow, smooth PE which is easily guided out as Sara Wager has demonstrated to great effect, the CEM60 some innovative (but unproven) design features, lower inherent PE (but which may prove harder to guide out) and for me was £500-600 less expensive.

Edit: Oh and on looks there is no contest:  the Avalon's are CNC'd and things of beauty, the CEM60 is a bit of an ugly duckling, IMO.  But they all look the same in the dark :-).

This is a very balanced and informative answer. Thanks. I agree with your assessment of the pros and cons, too. I just can't risk being disappointed again so I jumped the other way and have ordered an Avalon Linear myself. (It has nothing to do with looks. As you say, you can't see 'em in the dark!  ) The magnetic mesh is an interesting idea and suggests that iOptron knew there was something wrong with their springs, as indeed I believe there is. Magnets should give a consistent pressure and having a perfectly free system for balancing is a luxury worth having.

Olly

[x6gas]

Well when I've sorted the wrinkles out I'd better bring the CEM60 down to Les Granges, Olly, so we can compare the Avalon and iOptron side-by-side.  I've been meaning to book a trip and have almost sold it to my (very understanding) wife!

I almost pushed the button on the LineAR - especially while they still have the SynScan handset - but I came over all unnecessary and fancied being an early adopter of something new.  I may well live to regret that! 

[perfrej]

Wives, in general, actually enjoy Les Granges as long as you do not spend the entire light part of the day with a soldering iron in your hand or something nerdy like that! Add some rosé at night and you're done. Of course, it helps to have an automated setup so that you can image while showing the sites in the 20" DOB...

/per

[ollypenrice]

Wives, in general, actually enjoy Les Granges as long as you do not spend the entire light part of the day with a soldering iron in your hand or something nerdy like that! Add some rosé at night and you're done. Of course, it helps to have an automated setup so that you can image while showing the sites in the 20" DOB...

/per

My wife likes it here!

lly

[hrgreen]

Received a CEM60EC three days ago. Weather not great, so I'm testing what I can inside. There is a new upgrade set on the website (529 I believe) for all four boards, and I had no trouble upgrading. Looks great so far, smooth and free of backlash.

Hal

[x6gas]

In case of interest I've just posted a review of the CEM60 on my website.

I've had the mount for a couple of months but unfortunately that's only equated to just a tad more than a couple of clear nights so there may be more to add in future...

Clear skies, Ian

[lensman57]

In case of interest I've just posted a review of the CEM60 on my website.

I've had the mount for a couple of months but unfortunately that's only equated to just a tad more than a couple of clear nights so there may be more to add in future...

Clear skies, Ian

Excellent write up.

A.G

[dazza1639]

Great write-up I am looking for a new mount next year is was thinking about the EQ8 but now I might consider this mount, I don't think that my budget will stretch to the EC version. I hope we get lots more reviews especially of the standard version I'd like to see how it's performance compares. I hope that ioptron see your review and fix some of the issues you mentioned, like improved power connectors, surely this would be an easy fix no need to redesign. They could also quite easily move the port connectors from next to the polar scope to come out of the side, the polar scope needs protecting especially in a permanent setup

Darren

@SalAstroSoc & @astronut1639

www.salfordastro.org.uk

[x6gas]

Great write-up I am looking for a new mount next year is was thinking about the EQ8 but now I might consider this mount, I don't think that my budget will stretch to the EC version. I hope we get lots more reviews especially of the standard version I'd like to see how it's performance compares. I hope that ioptron see your review and fix some of the issues you mentioned, like improved power connectors, surely this would be an easy fix no need to redesign. They could also quite easily move the port connectors from next to the polar scope to come out of the side, the polar scope needs protecting especially in a permanent setup

Darren

@SalAstroSoc & @astronut1639

www.salfordastro.org.uk

Well at present the standard mount looks to be the way to go anyway...  I have to say that the power connector for the accessory panel is the only serious shortfall that I've come across... but it is mighty annoying and as you say would  be very cheap and easy to address (I've already made this suggestion to iOptron).  The other issues are very much more minor.  The location of the port connectors is a slight inconvenience but you can use the 6p6c port on the panel to bridge the guide port or another 6p6c connector on the other side of the mount.  Clearly one of these will be the wrong side and in any case the input port rotates with the RA...  That said, I think most people will be using it to connect up guiding which is why I raised it. 

Thanks for the comments.  If you have any questions shout and I'll do my best to answer them.

Ian

[sloz1664]

Excellent write up Ian. Nice to see you have what appears to be a very good mount. There has been a tendency for the Iopron mounts to be overlooked over the EQ8 and Avalon mounts.

Mensu are in a higher price bracket. I'll discount those.  . After this detailed report I think the iOptron  CEM60 will be high on ones list.

cheers

Steve

[x6gas]

Thanks Steve.

The standard CEM60 beats the Avalon on price by some margin.  Much harder question viz the Avalon LineAR at the CEM60-EC price point (the price of the EC mount has gone up since launch while the standard mount is being discounted despite an order waiting list to really build up some momentum - I doubt the discounting will last long...),  Similar payload capacity, similar mount head weight, similar price, similar elimination of backlash (so important for long-focal length guided performance - albeit achieved in very different ways).

If you want to do any unguided imaging then the EC may be the way to go, if you want a mount that's CNC machined and Ferrari red then it'll be the Avalon all the way!

[psjshep]

Hi Ian...

Just read your write-up as I realise you have posted to my review on here....

Interesting read, I must say...

Few points - the ASCOM driver still requires work - it is not a "hub" which means only 1 ASCOM program can connect to it at a time. So.. unless your guiding/planetarium & camera software is just 1 program, you'll need to employ the POTH hub - but timing issues can result...

Also... I had not heard about the "RA guiding disables the encoder for around 3 seconds after a guide pulse has been received"....

There is a reasonable amount of info on the iOptron & iOptron Imaging yahoogroups

Nice

[psjshep]

.... and fully agree with your +ve & -ve's  - great write-up