New SW AZ5

[mikeDnight]

I've often felt that the AZ4 could do with slow motion controls in both axes, and although every AZ4 I've owned has needed some fettling to get it to move smoothly, they are fairly solid little mounts. Well now SkyWatcher have developers the AZ5 which has slow motions in altitude and azimuth. It looks like a sturdy little mount ideally suited for a grab and go set up. The problem is that its not yet available and there's no indication of cost. 

I think my little Tak will be a perfect match for this mount! 

Mike

[Knighty2112]

Be very interested in this when it is finally released. Much prefer alt Alt Az mounts to Equatorial. 

[Knighty2112]

Just found this video on YouTube. Sadly in Russian, but you do get to see the kind of payload it can hold. Looks very good to me. Now, just get it over to the UK so I can buy one!  

 

[mikeDnight]

37 minutes ago, Knighty2112 said:

Just found this video on YouTube. Sadly in Russian, but you do get to see the kind of payload it can hold. Looks very good to me. Now, just get it over to the UK so I can buy one!  

 

This version is available in the uk from 365Astronomy but looks like a similar mount i tried a few years ago which had terrible damping time. I think id prefer to hang on until the New Skywatcher AZ5 is set free on the astro community. Plus the SW AZ5 looks more compact and less industrial. 

Mike

[andrew63]

It looks very much like the orion versa go mount on that video.  The  skywatcher does appear to be more refined.

http://www.telescope.com/Orion-VersaGo-III-Micro-Motion-Altazimuth-Mount/p/101903.uts

andrew

Edited May 21, 2016 by andrew63
add info.

[nightfisher]

I will be very interested when this comes out, looks ideal

[Stu]

Looks nice, although not dissimilar to perhaps a Vixen Porta II? Personally I don't like slo mo controls, or rather I end up not using them so not something I would go for.

[mikeDnight]

1 hour ago, Stu said:

Looks nice, although not dissimilar to perhaps a Vixen Porta II? Personally I don't like slo mo controls, or rather I end up not using them so not something I would go for.

For sweeping the sky at low to medium power the AZ4 is an ideal lightweight but reasonably sturdy mount. Over the last few weeks however, while observing Mars, ive had to use my AZ4 to see the planet, as from the observatory it was too low until near the meridian. Slow motions would have been good for me rather than the awkwardness of push/pulling and over shooting the target. After all, wasn't it Bruce Lee who said "Dont concentrate on the Telescope/mount, or you will miss all that heavenly glory!"?

Mike 

PS 

I think you may have cut yourself shaving Stu! 

[Stu]

33 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

For sweeping the sky at low to medium power the AZ4 is an ideal lightweight but reasonably sturdy mount. Over the last few weeks however, while observing Mars, ive had to use my AZ4 to see the planet, as from the observatory it was too low until near the meridian. Slow motions would have been good for me rather than the awkwardness of push/pulling and over shooting the target. After all, wasn't it Bruce Lee who said "Dont concentrate on the Telescope/mount, or you will miss all that heavenly glory!"?

Mike 

PS 

I think you may have cut yourself shaving Stu! 

I do confess that I now prefer using my Vixen GP for planetary observing. I just can't get the hang of adjusting two axes to track an object, never have. A manual EQ would be preferable I think.

[mikeDnight]

1 minute ago, Stu said:

I do confess that I now prefer using my Vixen GP for planetary observing. I just can't get the hang of adjusting two axes to track an object, never have. A manual EQ would be preferable I think.

Actually I agree! It wouldn't need to be a heavy mount for the FC either. I'll go for a lightweight  EQ instead. Thanks Stu! 

[nightfisher]

On 5/21/2016 at 21:00, Stu said:

I do confess that I now prefer using my Vixen GP for planetary observing. I just can't get the hang of adjusting two axes to track an object, never have. A manual EQ would be preferable I think.

If i get the chance of a good planet and luna night i use the EQ5 with dual dc drive, works well but for short sessions i use AZ4, but i would like a slo mo cable on this

[parallaxerr]

Bit of a thread revival, sorry guys!

Has anyone heard any more about the AZ5? I recently bought a new SkyWatcher scope from @FLO and the enclosed flyer had a picture of the AZ5 on it, so hopefully it's still in the pipeline.

I want an AZ for my ST120, would hate to buy an AZ4 then have this released!

[nightfisher]

18 hours ago, parallaxerr said:

Bit of a thread revival, sorry guys!

Has anyone heard any more about the AZ5? I recently bought a new SkyWatcher scope from @FLO and the enclosed flyer had a picture of the AZ5 on it, so hopefully it's still in the pipeline.

I want an AZ for my ST120, would hate to buy an AZ4 then have this released!

it seems 365 astronomy has this in stock

[parallaxerr]

3 hours ago, nightfisher said:

it seems 365 astronomy has this in stock

That's not the SW version. The one 365 Astronomy stock has been around for some time, touted as AZ5 and has mediocre reviews as discussed above. 

The first post has a picture of the SW version.

[nightfisher]

My bad, shame the orion gets bad press

[Moonshane]

For solar system objects I have recently been converted to the benefibenefits of a driven eq5.  cheap but but very sturdy.  I do still like my giro lll for quick sessions.

[Alan White]

There is now the AZ5 on FLO at a good price, wonder what it's like......

very tempting.

[Alan White]

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/sky-watcher-az5-deluxe/sky-watcher-az5-deluxe-alt-azimuth-mount.html#

[John]

I'm tempted as well. Looking for a lightweight alt-az head to go on my Oberwerk hardwood tripod to carry the Tak FC100DL when I don't want the weight of the Skytee II. I think I'd need to try one though - an F/9 tube can pose issues that an F/7.4 does not.

Edited July 26, 2017 by John

[Alan White]

John

I know what you mean about the difference in scope focal length and the mount.

That supplied tripod looks too light for my liking, the head looks nice and only £145 hmmmm.

[parallaxerr]

Well Well, I waited so long for this before giving up and buying the Sabre. £145 for the head is tempting, especially if it'll fit my CG5 tripod.....

[Alan White]

8 minutes ago, parallaxerr said:

Well Well, I waited so long for this before giving up and buying the Sabre. £145 for the head is tempting, especially if it'll fit my CG5 tripod.....

Jon

I also got fed up waiting,

according to FLO it will not fit as it has a photo tripod thread (3/8") not the CG5 one!

Edited July 26, 2017 by Alan White

[parallaxerr]

Yes I just noted the same. I'm also a little dissapointed at the rated ota capacity - up to 5kg? I'd like to have seen it capable of more than the AZ4.

Edited July 26, 2017 by parallaxerr

[John]

14 minutes ago, parallaxerr said:

Yes I just noted the same. I'm also a little dissapointed at the rated ota capacity - up to 5kg? I'd like to have seen it capable of more than the AZ4.

I'm a little confused by that as well. Similar design mounts by Explore Scientific, Orion (USA) and other brandings seem to be rated for 8kg

[glynnlondon]

Me too I was hoping for more than 5kg myself. I thought being skywatcher they might have made it with their 5 inch scope in mind. Bit disappointed in all honesty , tho the slo mo controls look nice.