New Celestron CGX Beltdriven mount, first look

[Tim]

Here's a piccy, with my 150 Esprit for company. The mount is one of the first to arrive in the UK, and was kindly provided by FLO for the SGL XII star party.

Dire skies meant there was no real opportunity to use the mount. 

 

We liked the carry handles, and the graduated markings on the tripod legs. The belt housings have clear windows so you can actually see them working. The mount is highly adjustable and will be usable at a wide range of latitudes

 

[Tiny Small]

I've just been reading up on this mount. Looks like a good bit of kit. I wonder why they went with a belt/sprung worm combination rather than just full belt drive? 

I hope it delivers as much as I think it will.  Keep us posted on how it performs

[jkm13]

looks nice. i have one question, can you confirm where this product made?

is Made in USA or China ?

 

thanks

[iapa]

Reading about this, it looks like the tripod legs are 2.75"?, so less than the CGM-DX (which this seems to be the replacement for) with the 3" legs on the tripod.

I'm sure the 3" legs were provided for a reason?

 

 

[FLO]

5 hours ago, jkm13 said:

is Made in USA or China ?

A mix of both, probably.

For new products like this, design and development usually happens at Celestron in the US. It is then manufactured by Synta in China with final assembly and QC by Celestron in the US. 

The photo below (from Eric J Kopit, leader of Celestron's design and development team in the US) shows some CGX mounts after they cleared QC. 

HTH, 

Steve 

[Skyline]

They look very pretty - The Celestron Army

[Tim]

Sorry for not answering the questions, I have no more info or opinion than in my original post! I only had the mount on the pitch for a couple of nights and it was cloudy the whole time.

Cheers

Tim

[jkm13]

On 11/14/2016 at 21:56, FLO said:

A mix of both, probably.

For new products like this, design and development usually happens at Celestron in the US. It is then manufactured by Synta in China with final assembly and QC by Celestron in the US. 

The photo below (from Eric J Kopit, leader of Celestron's design and development team in the US) shows some CGX mounts after they cleared QC. 

HTH, 

Steve 

Thanks for confirm! final assembly is USA looks good.

[FLO]

On 01/11/2016 at 09:30, Tiny Small said:

I've just been reading up on this mount. Looks like a good bit of kit. I wonder why they went with a belt/sprung worm combination rather than just full belt drive? 

I hope it delivers as much as I think it will.  Keep us posted on how it performs

I am not sure, I'll ask when next I speak with one of their tech team. 

On 14/11/2016 at 11:47, iapa said:

Reading about this, it looks like the tripod legs are 2.75"?, so less than the CGM-DX (which this seems to be the replacement for) with the 3" legs on the tripod.

I'm sure the 3" legs were provided for a reason?

The CGX has a lower profile head with less mass than the CGEM DX so can use the lighter 2.75" tripod. The tripod is also set with it's legs at a wider angle. 

HTH, 

Steve 

[iapa]

1 hour ago, FLO said:

I am not sure, I'll ask when next I speak with one of their tech team. 

The CGX has a lower profile head with less mass than the CGEM DX so can use the lighter 2.75" tripod. The tripod is also set with it's legs at a wider angle. 

HTH, 

Steve 

Thanks, I get the lower height due wider spread, but with the 44lbs of the CGX vs the 41lbs of the CGEM-DX, I would have expected the 3" legs to deal with the increased mass of the mount itself. 

One for the  injueers i suppose  

time to dig out th eol' lipstick and dust of the ref books

Or, I'll just ask my daughter.....

[rodmichael]

With regard to capabilities and features of the CGX, I have been wondering about using a QHY PoleMaster camera with my CGX.

 

In the CGX thread on CloudyNights, this conversation took place about 10 days ago:

 

FROM DERIK FROM CELESTRON:

"Re: handle on the front of the [CGX] Dec axis.  Yes, you can remove that.  4 screws.  But the PoleMaster does not need to be perfectly aligned columnated with the RA axis to work properly. So you can mount it to the handle or you can put it on the (optional) polar finder bracket.

Re: Polar alignment and astrophotography.   What applies to all equatorial mounts, not just CGX.   I am not astrophotographer, but ASPA will usually converge to within 10 arcminutes of the pole.  (it might take 2 iterations).    You can find a calculator to compute the dec drift for you, but empirically I find that corresponds to a drift rate of about 1 arc second per minute near the celestial equator.   This is comparable to the drift in RA due to mount/tube flexure.    And both are much smaller than the drift rates caused by Periodic Error.   Moreover, a small amount of easily correctable Dec drift can be desirable since it sets up the option of unidirectional autoguiding.     Nevertheless, PoleMaster is a fine product.  It is probably more accurate than ASPA and has other advantages as well.   I hope it does extremely well.     Again, I don't do astrophotography so take this last paragraph with a grain of salt."

 

I have some questions for anyone out there more familiar than I am with the QHY PoleMaster camera:

    1.  Has anyone tried one of the PoleMaster mounting alternatives that Derik from Celestron suggests, i.e., mounting the PoleMaster to the front handle of the CGX or mounting one on an "optional polar finder bracket?"
    2.  Is QHY planning a PoleMaster adapter for the CGX?
    3.  Is a CGX adapter possible?
    4.  If I chose to mount a PoleMaster on the optional [Celestron] polar finder bracket or on the front handle of the CGX, does the PoleMaster software need to know the position of the camera relative to the RA axis?  I had presumed that each adapter QHY fields had to be correlated with the software to define the position of the camera for proper calculations in the program.
    5.  Does anyone know where to find an optional Celestron "Polar Finder Bracket" for the CGX?

[iapa]

All I can add is that in one of the advertising videos from Celestron they did say that an optional mount for a polar scope would be available.

Implication is that the polar scope, or other device, need not be directly not he RA axis.I suppose that when you think about it - if the polariscope is dead centre on the RA or 2 feet offset then it's not going to make much different - it's the short side of a right angle triangle where the other two sides are millions of miles long  As long as it rotates about the RA....

[Beeko]

I have my Polemaster on a proper qhy adaptor but there are many people who have them mounted to guide scopes or modifications with a bracket at the end of a vixen rail. No one has had any problems with this arrangement - they can't all be wrong! I'd be much more  wary of the cgx mount given its very new to market and there seems a lack of proper reviews at the moment under proper test conditions.  

[Tim]

AFAIK the model that was on show at SGL 12 was afterwards whisked off to a magazine for review. Normally the reviews are conducted a couple or three months in advance, so look out in the near future!

[JimT]

Looks like I will be getting the CGX to take my 11" RASA whilst the NEQ6 Pro will revert to my smaller refractors.  As I have the PoleMaster on the NEQ6 I will probably get the Starsense for the CGX.

Jim

[Dave_D]

looks like a good mount on paper... i just wish the church mice in my head would stop whispering my bank balance in my ear....

[Squiddy]

On 2016-12-26 at 22:06, rodmichael said:

    3.  Is a CGX adapter possible?
    4.  If I chose to mount a PoleMaster on the optional [Celestron] polar finder bracket or on the front handle of the CGX, does the PoleMaster software need to know the position of the camera relative to the RA axis?  I had presumed that each adapter QHY fields had to be correlated with the software to define the position of the camera for proper calculations in the program.
    5.  Does anyone know where to find an optional Celestron "Polar Finder Bracket" for the CGX?

3. Everything is possible...

4. You don't have to do any correction in the software regarding the position of the camera. The software itself makes all corrections needed by calculations. All that's required is to have the camera somewhat accurate aligned along the RA axis. Some deviation is allowed, but I can't recall how much. As long as the camera is somewhat parallel with the RA axis you can place it of center if you like.

5. Yes, you make one yourself. The picture shows how I solved it on my CGE. I took an alu plate, drilled three holes for the camera and two more for the mount. I then drilled two holes in the mount and made M6 threads in it.