New SW AZ5

[Paanur]

Nice setup with the steel tripod..Can

 you describe how it behaves when not using the slow motion controls?Is it as smooth as an AZ4 is supposed to be?

I am between this and an az4 on this tripod or on a star discovery tripod(1.5" steel tripod)mounting an ED80 on it.Any additional feedback would be very helpful..

[davyludo]

5 minutes ago, Paanur said:

Nice setup with the steel tripod..Can

 you describe how it behaves when not using the slow motion controls?Is it as smooth as an AZ4 is supposed to be?

I am between this and an az4 on this tripod or on a star discovery tripod(1.5" steel tripod)mounting an ED80 on it.Any additional feedback would be very helpful..

I find it quite easy to move around without the slow motion. When I undo the clutch screws, my telescope stays in place and it's very easy and smooth to push around. Altitude is more awkward (with a short scope) than the AZ4 as I use the handle on that, and there's not one on the AZ5. But stiction is definitely less of an issue with the AZ5.  

[Paanur]

Nice thanks..

I am looking forward to see how it stays on the pillar with the steel tripod.(vibrations,etc.)

[davyludo]

Just a wee update (hope people aren't getting fed up)!

Finally got round to getting some longer 3/8th bolts....which weren't fully threaded - turns out that the non threaded bit is too big to go through the hole in the AZ4 tripod. So I had to order a fully threaded one instead. 

Just for info, I used a 3/8 UNC 2 1/2" fully threaded bolt. I think it might actually be referred to as a screw rather than a bolt.

I've fitted the extension pillar and the AZ5 head to my AZ4 tripod properly now. It's really stable and I'm really pleased with it. It's a nice height for me to use without extending the tripod legs.

Personally I can't see any noticeable difference in stability between having and not having the pillar fitted. This is how I think I'm going to use it. Quite a nice set up if I do say so myself 

Now I just need a decent night to try it out!

 

 

EDIT: Here's the ST102 on Franken-mount:

Edited September 9, 2017 by davyludo

[Paanur]

It  seems great and stable.Good thing about it doesn't weigh much more and keeps a refractor clear off the mount.

Hope this setup suits you better and the az5 even more.How does it fare compared to the az4 after some time you have it?Any updates on it?

[davyludo]

8 hours ago, Paanur said:

How does it fare compared to the az4 after some time you have it?Any updates on it?

Last night was actually the first time I've managed to get out to view stars - I've really just been playing with it during the day up until now. It was cloudy buy I managed to get out for about an hour. 

Really impressed with the setup - both with mak 127 and ST102. It's an absolute delight to use! I decided to try using it without the slow motion controls by completely loosening the clutch screws and just manually moving around. This was great for just scanning about for widefield views (which was what I liked about the AZ4). Both axis were smooth and easy to move - the alt is slightly more difficult to make small manual adjustments on (especially with the mak) because there isn't a handle to use to you have to manhandle the OTA. It's easier with the short frac. However after a while I found it really easy to move around manually, lock the clutch screw and make small adjustments with the slow motion controls. I found that the head didn't slip or droop when the alt clutch was disengaged completely - I was able to move the scope and then let go and it would stay. The AZ4 tends to droop if the clutch is too loose, especially on my ST102 which is back end heavy and can't be balanced well. The AZ5 has enough stiction to hold it in place, but it's not difficult to overcome when you want to move.

I've been trying to split the double double in Lyra, so spent a bit of time last using slow motion and waiting for clouds to thin out for a clear view. Maybe spent 15 minutes using slow motion controls here and the double double never popped out of my view once (various mags from 100 - 200x). With the AZ4 I know for a fact I would have overshot it quite a few times when nudging. I also tried to track manually without the slow motion by nudging the AZ5 - it can be done and is probably on par with a well balanced AZ4 (maybe slightly smoother and less stiction in alt) but I personally found myself switching back to slow motion very quickly as its just so easy and enjoyable. Vibrations when adjusting slow motion is actually quite minimal when using the AZ4 tripod. Small vibration that dampens down in a second or less. Adjusting the focus causes slightly more vibration.

For those interested, I managed to get it split in both the mak and the ST at just over 150x so YAY! It's silly, I could see the stars were elongated but couldn't see the gap, then all of a sudden it's almost like my vision just snapped into it and a could clearly make out the separation. Castor has been my only other double, so I was really pleased that I finally managed to see the double double.  

Spent some time on the moon with the mak at 200x and even 300x (view wasn't steady, but I wasn't looking for awesome views, this was a tracking experiment). I was able to track craters easily with both, however at 300x the vibration was more noticeable and a wider tfov eyepiece would be good here so that after you adjust the slow motion, you have more time to enjoy the view before adjusting again (if you're using the "nudge to edge and let it drift over your fov" approach).

In summary - the setup I've got now provides me the benefits of the AZ4 in terms of stability and freedom to move. But with the addition of slow motion when you need it, which is something I felt was missing from the AZ4. For my short OTAs it's perfect and a joy to use, I have no idea how it would cope with longer tubes though. I'm certainly not knocking the AZ4 head, I still think it's a really good piece of kit. But will I constantly be swapping the AZ4 and AZ5 heads on and off the same tripod.... probably not, I'll probably just use the AZ5 with the clutch screws disengaged when I want to scan around.

[Alfian]

Thats a nice write up Davy and I think you have found the "complimentary" setup that you were looking for - and in such a portable package too. Glad the 127Mak has worked out for you.

[davyludo]

12 minutes ago, Alfian said:

Thats a nice write up Davy and I think you have found the "complimentary" setup that you were looking for - and in such a portable package too. Glad the 127Mak has worked out for you.

Thanks Ian. I feel it's the perfect setup for me and works well with both my scopes. I understand it won't be for everyone, but I think I'm really going to enjoy observing with it 

Also as a side note - thanks for your help and advice regarding the mak. Really pleased with it. Just wish I'd realised that the planets aren't well positioned for the next wee while before I got it... rookie mistake! Guess it'll be used for the moon and doubles then! Might build a solar filter for it as well. 

[Paanur]

You have been very helpful with a very detailed review on az5.I think i am going for the az5 head instead of the az4 primarily because of the slow motion controls and the its lightweight pillar..I am going to use it with an sw ed80 and sw 130 pds.They both weigh around 4-5 kg with their accessories. 

[davyludo]

13 minutes ago, Paanur said:

You have been very helpful with a very detailed review on az5.I think i am going for the az5 head instead of the az4 primarily because of the slow motion controls and the its lightweight pillar..I am going to use it with an sw ed80 and sw 130 pds.They both weigh around 4-5 kg with their accessories. 

Glad you found it useful. Out of interest what tripod are you planning on mounting it on? I would imagine the AZ5 would be fine for both those scopes. I think I'm probably at about 4kg with the mak and it's accessories.

I actually tried the AZ5 tripod again, this time without the pillar and a with the legs not extended. I got on a lot better with it second time round. Think I may have been a bit harsh on it after only a short play with it. It's a lot more stable without the pillar and would make an acceptable lightweight travel tripod for me. I'll keep the pillar on the AZ4 tripod and swap the head between them. 

[Paanur]

I plan using it on the eq5 tripod like yours or the SW Star Discovery tripod.its a steel tripod but lighter and quite stable as it has 1.5" steel legs.on one of these deciding with both stability and portability in mind.

[Ags]

Looking at putting an AZ5 on a Berlebach UNI 4. Has anyone had experience of pairing the AZ5 with a 150/750 Newt on a solid tripod? I was planning on selling the Newt, but with the AZ5 rated up 9kgs on a heavy duty tripod, maybe just maybe this combination will work?

[Mark at Beaufort]

Agnes I have the AZ5 which I have put on a Pillar + metal tripod legs from a Celestron Astromaster. The system is brilliant with my Skywatcher Heritage 130P. I also tried my Orion VX8 on the same set up (VX8 weights 7 kgs) and although it mounted OK it wobbled a bit. 

[Ags]

Thanks for the info. What does a bit mean? Unusable, or a damping time of x seconds?

[Mark at Beaufort]

22 minutes ago, Ags said:

Thanks for the info. What does a bit mean? Unusable, or a damping time of x seconds?

Sorry Agnes I should have been more precise. The VX8 was usable on the mount and damping time was maybe 2 seconds. I suppose the pillar and the AZ5 was flexing on top of the metal legs because of the length of the scope (900mm FL). I have a SkyTee 2 mount on a Berlebach Uni18 tripod so I am more used to a very stable set up for this particular scope. As previously stated the Heritage works very well - see photo.

I previously had a Skywatcher 150PDS and I would guess that it would work OK on an AZ5 if the tripod was of a certain size and quality.

[davyludo]

I find the pillar and head pretty sturdy. On the normal tripod that comes with the AZ5, damping is very slow and vibrations are terrible - with legs fully extended I measured 6-7 seconds to damp vibrations from a knock. With the legs collapsed then it's in the 3-4 second range.

Changed the tripod to a 1.75" steel leg (still with pillar and AZ5 head) and the same level of knock now dampens down in less than 1 second. 

I did find that the legs on my AZ5 tripod were a bit lose (after my knock experiment) so I'm going to tighten it all up and try again. 

@Mark at Beaufort i think I have the same celestron tripod that I got with my astromaster. The skywatcher one seems to be a similar build, so hopefully with a bit of tinkering, I can get vibrations down to 2 seconds. 

[Ags]

Well, Mark if you can get damping of 2 sec with a 7kg 900mm scope, it is worth trying with a 5.6kg 750mm scope particularly on a Berlebach tripod.

[Ags]

On 12/25/2017 at 15:09, Mark at Beaufort said:

Messier list - 110/110 (complete) - Caldwell list - 63/67 (limit in UK) - O'Meara's Hidden Treasurers - 84/87 (limit in UK) - O'Meara's Secret Deep - 62/126 (limit in UK) - Herschel 615 (Mullaney) - 75/615 - Herschel 400 - 397/400 - Astronomical League 125 Open Star Clusters 2/125 - www.deepskywatch.com - 469/598(UK) (Quasars - 1) (Supernovae - 8) (Nova - 2) (Lunar 100 - 95/100) Double stars - Sissy Haas book by constellation - (100 Brightest Planetary Nebulae (67 above 30 degree Dec) 42/67 (Comets since 2007 - 14) (Venus Transit - 2 (UK + USA) - (Mercury Transit - 2 (UK) - (Total Solar Eclipse - 1 (Turkey) - Annular Solar Eclipse - 2 (Spain + USA)

You signature is a real education in astronomical hit lists! I have my eye on a dual scope setup down the line but unfortunately the skytee 2 would not fit on a UNI 4. So it's either a Giro... or a Losmandy AZ8 (after I win the lottery). Actually I just realized the AZ8 is sooo much more expensive than the skytee 2, it makes more sense to get a skytee 2 + a second tripod, and treat myself to fancy eyepiece with the change!

Looking at the pics of the Mak127 on the AZ5 it looks like the dovetail arm is quite short - certainly good for stability but perhaps restricting for a larger tube. Did you have a full range of travel with the VX8?

Edited December 26, 2017 by Ags

[Mark at Beaufort]

Agnes the AZ5 can be adjusted into two positions. The upright position makes it more stable and is recommended for heavier scopes. Well I placed the Orion VX8 in the higher position but I could not get the full range of travel.

I only really bought the AZ5 as a quick grab and go for my Heritage 130P and PST Ha scope. I also undertake outreach work for my Astro Society and it is easier to carry the smaller mount in the boot of the car. I only put the Orion VX8 on the AZ5 as an experiment it is unlikely to happen again whilst I still have the SkyTee 2/Berlebach arrangement.

[Ags]

It is an interesting experiment at any rate, and the results were quite surprising to me. You've inspired me to try to hang on to my 150PDS!

Edited December 26, 2017 by Ags

[FenlandPaul]

On 04/08/2017 at 17:57, FenlandPaul said:

I think it will be adequate for smaller scopes, John (I tried my Starwave 70 on it today), but I agree there would be too much flex for a bigger scope.  The advantage is that it collapses down quite tightly, more so than the SW aluminium legs, although I have both so will be able to do a side by side.  I know it's a pathetic reason, but the sound the SW aluminium tripods make when you extend the legs really grates on me!!

One other (trivial) observation about the tripod and extension is that the colours look great with the head.  It was a very aesthetically pleasing mount, which of course will really matter when I'm out at night!

Paul

This thread had popped back into use and I wondered why I’d tagged it, noting the comment above.  I can add to this now. The standard tripod is, in my opinion, one of SkyWatcher’s worst products.  Flimsy, prone to parts breaking and the twist-locks for the legs are infuriatingly prone to just spinning rather than unlocking the legs.  

The AZ5 is a great little mount, but it is badly let down by its tripod.  

[dexter77]

2 hours ago, FenlandPaul said:

This thread had popped back into use and I wondered why I’d tagged it, noting the comment above.  I can add to this now. The standard tripod is, in my opinion, one of SkyWatcher’s worst products.  Flimsy, prone to parts breaking and the twist-locks for the legs are infuriatingly prone to just spinning rather than unlocking the legs.  

The AZ5 is a great little mount, but it is badly let down by its tripod.  

This mount has two versions, one with black aluminum tripod and other with heavy steel tripod. Version with steel tripod is really great, I have one.
SW AZ5 mount head is also really good, better than old version of AZ5 which was bad construction.

Steel version:

[FenlandPaul]

11 hours ago, dexter77 said:

This mount has two versions, one with black aluminum tripod and other with heavy steel tripod. Version with steel tripod is really great, I have one.
SW AZ5 mount head is also really good, better than old version of AZ5 which was bad construction.

Steel version:

Now THAT’s a proper tripod! Wish I’d gone for that!!