Rowan AZ100 Mount Owners Thread

[jetstream]

7 minutes ago, johninderby said:

I did a head to head comparison between the SW. 3/8 steel tripod and the report and found the report had less vibration and felt more stable. 👍🏻 

Good to know. What was the settling time difference at what mag?

[johninderby]

27 minutes ago, jetstream said:

Good to know. What was the settling time difference at what mag?

At about 100x settled in about half the time. Was surprised at the difference. 🤔

Edited February 18, 2021 by johninderby

[jetstream]

5 minutes ago, johninderby said:

At about 100x settled in about half the time. Was surprised at the difference. 🤔

That is substantial actually.

[johninderby]

The wood dampens vibrations better than steel which probably explains the difference.

[omo]

For me its not the tripod that needs to settle - its the paving slabs it sits on - careful positioning required so i don't stand on them 😁

[brianckeegan]

Apologies if this is off topic, but since we’re talking about damping and tripods for this mount: Is there any consensus on using the K70 geared column for a Planet versus using a Planet with some spacers? Obviously the K70 adds a lot on the price and reduces portability, but it seems like it really improves the versatility. Do these kinds of geared columns also introduce deficiencies with damping, stability, etc.?

Edited February 19, 2021 by brianckeegan

[Stephenstargazer]

There is no geared column like no geared column. Tripods work best when the centre of mass supported is as close to the intersection point of the legs as practical. It's just a basic structural fact (trust me, I am an engineer). Any type of pier extension should only be used where it is essential for other reasons. Piers which do work are fairly massive and/or very well fixed. (PS yes this a bit off topic but we have been sharing ways of supporting a Rowan - they deserve it!!)

Additional comment:

To be fair, geared tripods are a brilliant soluton for photographers (according to my brother-in-law) trying to get just the right angle on near objects. Astronomers have the option of moving their butts (as I believe you say on your side of the pond!) instead, as the 'angle' to a distant object is trivial.

 

Edited February 19, 2021 by Stephenstargazer

[johninderby]

Triangles are an engineers best friend. 🙂

I’ve used a photographic tripod with a geared column and it was convenient and OK with a very light load but the more you raised the column vibration became more of a problem. 

[jetstream]

I think Im going to try that K70.

[JeremyS]

I’ve not used a geared column, but it makes no sense to buy a super stable tripod like the Planet (which I have) and lose stability with a geared column.

[Space Hopper]

Are the RA engineers going to introduce some sort of extension option at any point do you think ?

So the AZ100 can work on a Berlebach type wooden tripod with a longer refractor ?

 

[Stephenstargazer]

Hardly worth their while as you can buy EQ6 extensions already and cost of producing CNC machined item likely to be uncompetitive. If they did it would be a good one, like the EQ5 or pier adapter!

[John]

21 hours ago, Space Hopper said:

Are the RA engineers going to introduce some sort of extension option at any point do you think ?

So the AZ100 can work on a Berlebach type wooden tripod with a longer refractor ?

 

I found my F/9.2 130 refractor worked OK without an extension in the main. Once or twice I needed to turn the tripod but not often. Or were you thinking of a longer frac than that ?

[johninderby]

I’ve not had problems with my 100mm f/13 refractor. As John says occasional have to turn the tripod but not a problem.

[Stephenstargazer]

But it is a problem when using encoders and digital SC of course.

[John]

2 hours ago, Stephenstargazer said:

But it is a problem when using encoders and digital SC of course.

Yes, I can see that now you mention it. Not an option that I would be going for but I can see that you would not want to keep moving the tripod once it's set up.

 

Edited February 20, 2021 by John

[HollyHound]

On 17/02/2021 at 22:01, Alma said:I have mine on an iOptron Tri-Pier which I already owned and just added the EQ6 adapter.  I thought about getting another top plate for my UNI18 for the AZ100 but I’m very happy with the Tri-pier and I think it’s a good match especially with heavier scopes.  The Tri-pier is a little heavier than a Planet but it has lots of clearance for long refractors and I quite like the fact that you can adjust the pier settings for height.

 

Thank you so much for posting this... I’m considering the AZ100 and was wondering how to mount it. Although I have a Uni 28, it has an EQ5 head, so was going to have to get an adaptor plate. However, I also have the iOptron Tri Pier and as luck would have it, the very same EQ6 adaptor you have, which I purchased last year and forgot about 😬. So I’m actually good to go without spending any more on mount adaptors 👍

[omo]

@Space Hopper i little bit of diy: Losmandy AZ8 riser reinforced and a HEQ5 Rowan adaptor

 

[Space Hopper]

Thanks all for the set up pictures.

I'm not planning on an AZ100 (although i'm half tempted), and its the upcoming motorisation plans that have really caught my attention. It all looks very impressive.

But looking at the above pics, theres always going to be potential tripod clearance issues with this type of alt-az design if you have a long tubed refractor,

and the DM6 is no different in that regard, except Discmounts have a dedicated extension for this. It works very well (no clearance issues with a UNI 18 tripod) but still leaves the eyepieces pretty low down

when looking at anything really high up. But thats the nature of the beast. Because of this when using my 140 / 980 scope i don't tend to look really high so often.

If i was planning an AZ100 though, i wouldn't really want to rely on third party extensions as i kind of think they spoil the aesthetics a bit (just my opinion), and if not well designed may even introduce vibrations etc,

so i think i'd probably opt for a different tripod solution all-together.

The iOptron pier looks ok with it, but seems pretty expensive for what it is. Another option is perhaps the Losmandy FHD with dedicated pier extensions, but expensive again.

But neither of these have that ever so useful accessory tray (where do i put my tea ?) that the Berlebachs have or look as nice.

I am a bit surprised though that the Rowan brothers have not thought about extensions and come up with something.  Maybe they will.

 

 

[Stephenstargazer]

AZ mounts are difficult for tracking stars around the zenith anyway, so some of the physical problem of clearance to a tripod will in practice rarely happen. The benefit of equatorial mounts is that they can track through this area. Also by flipping across the meridian virtually all issues with tripod clearance are overcome. The blind spot for an EQ mount is around the pole instead. That is my excuse for having two mounts!!

[Telescope40]

14 hours ago, Space Hopper said:

Thanks all for the set up pictures.

I'm not planning on an AZ100 (although i'm half tempted), and its the upcoming motorisation plans that have really caught my attention. It all looks very impressive.

But looking at the above pics, theres always going to be potential tripod clearance issues with this type of alt-az design if you have a long tubed refractor,

and the DM6 is no different in that regard, except Discmounts have a dedicated extension for this. It works very well (no clearance issues with a UNI 18 tripod) but still leaves the eyepieces pretty low down

when looking at anything really high up. But thats the nature of the beast. Because of this when using my 140 / 980 scope i don't tend to look really high so often.

If i was planning an AZ100 though, i wouldn't really want to rely on third party extensions as i kind of think they spoil the aesthetics a bit (just my opinion), and if not well designed may even introduce vibrations etc,

so i think i'd probably opt for a different tripod solution all-together.

The iOptron pier looks ok with it, but seems pretty expensive for what it is. Another option is perhaps the Losmandy FHD with dedicated pier extensions, but expensive again.

But neither of these have that ever so useful accessory tray (where do i put my tea ?) that the Berlebachs have or look as nice.

I am a bit surprised though that the Rowan brothers have not thought about extensions and come up with something.  Maybe they will.

 

 

Hello @spacehopper  Bit late to this but please see photos. I did add a pier extender to my Uni 28 and AZ100.  No issues with hitting my the tripod even with my 150 frac. Bit grunt and go TBH Have since transferred the extension to my goto mount.  It may end up swopping between the 2. 

HTH John

Edited February 21, 2021 by Telescope40

[JeremyS]

AZ100 on Berlebach Planet (EQ6) with Tak TSA 120

[JeremyS]

AZ100 on Berlebach Planet (EQ6) with Tak FC 100 DZ. 

[Alma]

13 hours ago, HollyHound said:

Thank you so much for posting this... I’m considering the AZ100 and was wondering how to mount it. Although I have a Uni 28, it has an EQ5 head, so was going to have to get an adaptor plate. However, I also have the iOptron Tri Pier and as luck would have it, the very same EQ6 adaptor you have, which I purchased last year and forgot about 😬. So I’m actually good to go without spending any more on mount adaptors 👍

There are pluses and minuses to using a Tri-Pier with the AZ100.   The pluses are:-

• the low centre of gravity compared to a conventional tripod offsets the relatively heavy weight of the AZ100 rather well,
• the footprint is smaller than a conventional tripod, so if like me you’re prone to stumbling over tripod legs this is less of a problem,
• There is plenty of clearance for long refractors,
• there is virtually nil vibration, at least with the scopes I use.

The downsides are :-

• Weight ... 11.7 Kgs vs 11.0 Kgs for a Planet,
•  Handling.  There are lots of twiddly adjustment levers to tighten (6 in total) and three leg adjustment screws to play around with before you can use it,  Berlebachs are SO much nicer in this respect.   Likewise, wood is much nicer to handle than cold steel.
• As Space Hopper points out there is no accessory tray, although you can work around this with a bit of inventiveness, 
• Aesthetics. Self explanatory really.

To be honest if I was starting from scratch I’d choose a Berlebach Planet over the Tri-Pier for the AZ100, but for those who already own a Tri-Pier I would say try it first; it works and works very well with the AZ100.

•  

[HollyHound]

On 21/02/2021 at 12:10, Alma said:

There are pluses and minuses to using a Tri-Pier with the AZ100.   The pluses are:-

• the low centre of gravity compared to a conventional tripod offsets the relatively heavy weight of the AZ100 rather well,
• the footprint is smaller than a conventional tripod, so if like me you’re prone to stumbling over tripod legs this is less of a problem,
• There is plenty of clearance for long refractors,
• there is virtually nil vibration, at least with the scopes I use.

The downsides are :-

• Weight ... 11.7 Kgs vs 11.0 Kgs for a Planet,
•  Handling.  There are lots of twiddly adjustment levers to tighten (6 in total) and three leg adjustment screws to play around with before you can use it,  Berlebachs are SO much nicer in this respect.   Likewise, wood is much nicer to handle than cold steel.
• As Space Hopper points out there is no accessory tray, although you can work around this with a bit of inventiveness, 
• Aesthetics. Self explanatory really.

To be honest if I was starting from scratch I’d choose a Berlebach Planet over the Tri-Pier for the AZ100, but for those who already own a Tri-Pier I would say try it first; it works and works very well with the AZ100.

Thanks for the pros and cons, very helpful 🙂

I'm fortunate that I have both the Uni 28 (EQ5 head) and Tri Pier, so it was really more of a question of getting started and given I have the adaptor for the Tri Pier, it might have been easier to use that. However, I have found that Rowan do sell an EQ5 adaptor, so I will probably get that and use the Uni 28, then it leaves the Tri Pier free for its main role of carrying the AZ Mount Pro.

The planet is an option down the road, but none of my (current) scopes are particularly heavy, so the Uni 28 should be ok for now 🤞

Just one small thing regarding the Tri Pier... I have found that leaving its centre column setup in the right location and not locking/unlocking the rings around that, that I can just undo the three leg knobs, fold them inwards and then leave the Tri Pier standing in the corner of the room (it takes very little space). When I go outside, I can quickly kick the three legs out, tighten the bolts and it's all ready to go at the correct height... so my setup is almost as quick as the Uni 28... however, I agree the Uni 28 feels more elegant and is a little quicker... also that tray is so useful.

I find (like you) that the Tri Pier is almost like a solid mounted pier once setup... it just doesn't move at all.

Cheers

Gary

Edited February 24, 2021 by HollyHound