Alt-Az mount for Tak100DL

[festoon]

15 hours ago, The Admiral said:

Of course, if you've got deep pockets there's always the TTS-160 Panther mount . I don't speak from experience of course!

Ian

Thanks Ian, although a wonderful option, I'll have to save a little before I can afford one of these

[festoon]

Does anyone have an opinion on a SW AZ-EQ5 vs Ioptron AZ Pro? Comparing the pros and cons?

[kerrylewis]

On 12/12/2017 at 07:27, festoon said:

Does anyone have an opinion on a SW AZ-EQ5 vs Ioptron AZ Pro? Comparing the pros and cons?

Hello Festoon  sorry don’t know your ‘real’ name.

I have the AZ-EQ 6 (which is similar in many ways to the 5 version) and the  Ioptron. 

 They are different beasts and I tend to use them for different things. The main advantage of the ioptron is its ease and speed of set up. It needs no data to be entered (no time, date etc) and doesn’t need to be hooked up to a power source with its inbuilt chargeable battery. I find it excellent to set up at short notice and perhaps for a short period. It is AltAz only but you say that is your preference, and I only do visual. You just need to level the mount (which can be a bit finicky sometimes)., switch on, find the suggested bright object, and you’re off 

The SW mount will be heavier and take a bit longer to set up. You need to enter data and have an external power source. However it is EQ too (although you say you don’t need this) and will take a heavier scope - but if you only want to use the Tak this is not an issue either. 

I find that I tend to use the Ioptron when I might be put off setting up the heavier mount (although the 5 version will be a bit lighter than mine) and tend to use the SW for longer sessions and/or a heavier scope. 

The SW mount is cheaper, if that is an issue. 

So, it’s horses for courses. I use both of mine, but there is no doubt that I have done more observing since I bought the ioptron.

If I can help any further, let me know.

cheers

 Kerry 

 

[festoon]

Thanks @kerrylewis, that is very helpful advice ( ps the name is Colin )

I'm very much stuck betwen two camps with the Ioptron AZ pro and the SW AZ GTi.

I really like the idea of how light the SW AZ GTi is. But I fear that my set up may be too heavy for it, even if using a more sturdy tripod like my HEQ5 tripod. I weighed all my equipment last night, and with the RACI the set up ranges from 6kg to 6.5kg. Considering the OTA is 940mm long, would any GTI owners put an opinion if I am pushing it too far at 6.5kg and 0.94m in length and no counterweight? Do you think I would be able to achieve views at x200 without too many wobbles?

One option would be to replace my 10x60 RACI with a lightweight RDF, but I went to the RACI to save my neck when viewing at the near zeneth...I found using the RDF a 'right pain in the neck'. However doing this would reduce the weight of the set up in the range of 5.2kg to 5.7kg

Alternative...definately the AZ Pro from Ioptron, but is much much more expensive, but looks like it would be able to handle the job with ease!

[The Admiral]

22 minutes ago, festoon said:

Alternative...definately the AZ Pro from Ioptron, but is much much more expensive, but looks like it would be able to handle the job with ease!

If it works properly! This is a Marmite mount, some find it a disaster to get working properly, others have no trouble. I recommend that you research reviews thoroughly. I've never used one, though did consider one, so I've no axe to grind.

Ian

[festoon]

Hi @disciplus55 - are you please able to tell me the weight of the DL+finder+diagonal+eyepiece that you use on the GTi and Berlebach UNI 18

Have you tried this combination at high power magnification? and if so how did you find it?

[AstroSylv1]

hello,

I sure can tell you that next weekend, I am away from home right now. When trying it, it was with the original Tak cradle, QuickFinder and small Tak prism diagonal with Fujiyama orthos... I was wondering if I had to gain extra weight by using thin aluminum rings instead of the heavy Tak cradle (I would gain 1kg with the gorgeous red aluminum Italian rings, cannot remember the name of that company...), but in the end it was already quite stable as such. I couldn’t try it further since mid October due to the weather... and believe it or not, I still didn’t get a clear night since then... so I am still in need of further testing. I leave in the North East of France, and now there is that massive storm with winds up to 135km/h last night :-/

[festoon]

Thank you @disciplus55  That would be brilliant if you could please let me know.

Yes we had quite bad winds last night in cambridgeshire, UK...but not as bad as you had I hope there were no problems for you afterwards

 

[GavStar]

I use the az gti with my fc100df and it works well even with heavy 1kg+ eyepieces but I use a gitzo carbon tripod rather than the supplied one. However my DF is quite a bit shorter than the DL as you know and in practice I found this makes quite a difference (I had a DL last year but sold it to Kerry).

I used to use my DL on vixen porta 2 with hal130 tripod but it did shake a bit a high magnifications (and imo this is a beefier Mount than the az gti)

I think what you can tolerate in terms of shakes is a personal thing and therefore what is good enough for one may not be ok for another. I prefer no shakes at all if possible and prefer over mounting if anything.

I also had the ioptron mini tower 2 but didn’t really get on with it - I had to make some changes eg add a pier, change to a Teflon washer and I still wasn’t convinced so also sold this.

[John]

My FC-100DL rides on my Skytee II on an Oberwerk hardwood tripod. I've used the scope up to 400x and the mount / tripod handle vibration and damping well.

 

[festoon]

Thank you @GavStar, what you say makes perfect sense. I think the DF and the DL are not that different in weight (whereas the DC is maybe about 0.8kg lighter) - but the difference between the DF and the DL as you stress in terms of mounting is the length - and this may make a big difference when at high magnification showing as wobble or shakes.

[festoon]

That looks very nice @John  for a grab and go that must be as close as you get when using a 100DL!

If the Skytee II was a goto - it would be top of the list!  

[John]

4 minutes ago, festoon said:

That looks very nice @John  for a grab and go that must be as close as you get when using a 100DL!

If the Skytee II was a goto - it would be top of the list!  

Sorry, I'd forgotton your GOTO requirement

 

[AstroSylv1]

Voilà : Tak FC 100 DL with the original Tak cradle, QuickFinder and small Tak prism diagonal with Fujiyama ortho = 5.6kg

[festoon]

Thank you @disciplus55

What magnification were you were using with the GTi? And how did you find the stability of the image (did you see any wobble)?

[AstroSylv1]

Too early to conclude on that one, I was not pushing above 180x the last and only time I could try it out... that was mid October, and since then, I didn’t get a single night of observation due to poor weather... sad but true :-(

[festoon]

2 minutes ago, disciplus55 said:

Too early to conclude on that one, I was not pushing above 180x the last and only time I could try it out... that was mid October, and since then, I didn’t get a single night of observation due to poor weather... sad but true :-(

Wishing you clear skies then It's very similar myself, If its a clear night than it never often coincides with a night that i dont need to work the next morning That's one of the main reasons for needing a quick to set up grab and go

[AstroSylv1]

Hello,

played 3h last night with Tak DL, small prism diagonal, Fujiyama orthos, QuickFinder, all on the SW AZ GTi mount, all on a Berlebach UNI 18 tripod... pushed the magnification to 375x on the Moon : no issues with tracking, vibration damping time was good, I could observe for 20 minutes all features on the Moon with no problem at all.

my only issue is that I am using iOS, therefore I had two iOS devices, one running the Synscan app, and the other one SkySafari... BUT, SkySafari didn’t want to work with the mount, I think it is because I use SkySafari 6 Plus and not SKySafari 5 :-(