And now, a new mount? Advice please..

[Derbyshire Dave]

Been fighting communicatiions problems with my HEQ5 Pro, and finally today returned it for a refund. SO.... a new mount then...

My main issue is that I have a very bad back, I could handle the HEQ5 Pro, no way that I could manage an EQ6, so moving away from Sky watcher, I have found the iOptron CEM-40, which weighs only 15.8 lbs with a payload of 40 ibs, which seems really good, and it looks like a much newer generation of gear than the Skywatcher products. Priced at £1779 with case and tripod.

 

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/ioptron-mounts/ioptron-cem40-center-balanced-equatorial-goto-mount.html

 

For another £1000 they have a version with RA encoders...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/ioptron-mounts/ioptron-cem40-ec-center-balanced-equatorial-goto-mount-with-ra-encoder.html

 

They're saying that you can effectively turn off RA guiding, presumably PHD2 would still track declination drift.

That's a big chunk of dosh extra, I have no experience of this, could you let me know thoughts on the mounts and RA encoding please.

 

ALSO

 Are there any other mounts that I should maybe consider, which might be light enough for me to manage but still be sturdy and have a reasonable payload.

 

Thanks guys..

[Derbyshire Dave]

Interesting, FLO replied..

I do not normally recommend the EC versions. The encoder reduces the PE to virtually zero but does not model the mount and imaging train the way other encoder mounts such as the 10 Micron range do.

Thus you still need to autoguide and the guiding approach needs to be quite different to that normally employed, and some customers struggle to adapt to that. The standard CEM40 has low and smooth PE that easily guides out and is more than good enough.

 

I'd still be ineterested there are any other mounts I should be considering..

[gilesco]

2 minutes ago, Derbyshire Dave said:

Interesting, FLO replied..

I do not normally recommend the EC versions. The encoder reduces the PE to virtually zero but does not model the mount and imaging train the way other encoder mounts such as the 10 Micron range do.

Thus you still need to autoguide and the guiding approach needs to be quite different to that normally employed, and some customers struggle to adapt to that. The standard CEM40 has low and smooth PE that easily guides out and is more than good enough.

 

I'd still be ineterested there are any other mounts I should be considering..

As they say, the CEM40 should give just as good results for your money (if you're guiding then may as well guide both Dec and RA IMO). I'd spend the money you save on the EC version on the nice iPolar, Tripod and Case!

I think 10Micron would be beyond a lot of people's budgets for the same, but better EC feature.

Remortgage the house?, anyone: https://www.ikarusimaging.com/10micron-hps-mounts

[The Admiral]

Hi Dave, welcome to the fray!

This was posted a while ago and might provide some useful input.

At the beginning of lock-down I purchased the iOptron GEM45 (non-EC). Given that we've since gone through short nights and none too obliging weather it really hasn't been put through its paces, but it does seem a quality piece of kit. The latest generation of iOptron mounts do give a good payload for their weights, and was one of the reasons I opted for one as my ability to lift is a bit limited.

Ian

 

[DaveS]

I think the std version might be more cost effective. Encoder guiding and whole-ssky models come into their own when you get into ASA territory.

[newbie alert]

People still guide with the EC versions.. I would recommend ioptron over skywatcher / celestron.. different league..

[pete_l]

Personally, if I had had a problem with one example of a mount that is very popular and has a good reputation I'd just go for anther mount of the same type.

There are no generic communications problems with HEQ5s so this would seem to be a single bad example. Not a reason to abandon the entire range. In my experience (sample size: 1 * HEQ5 Pro) my communications problem was caused by an inappropriate power supply. One that was intended as a charger for laptops rather than to power sensitive equipment. Once I swapped that for a better supply, all my problems disappeared.

Edited September 3, 2020 by pete_l

[Derbyshire Dave]

1 hour ago, pete_l said:

Personally, if I had had a problem with one example of a mount that is very popular and has a good reputation I'd just go for anther mount of the same type.

There are no generic communications problems with HEQ5s so this would seem to be a single bad example. Not a reason to abandon the entire range. In my experience (sample size: 1 * HEQ5 Pro) my communications problem was caused by an inappropriate power supply. One that was intended as a charger for laptops rather than to power sensitive equipment. Once I swapped that for a better supply, all my problems disappeared.

Thanks Pete, appreciate your comments. It was a long and arduous fight over several months, comms would always work with APT and Sellarium, but intermittently with SGPro, so I'm ready for a change really. Plus you can't get an HEQ5 pro until at least December. Interesting to see all the commenst coming in, and then I can make a decision.

[Icesheet]

I started with a belt modded HEQ5 then moved to an EQ6-R, sold that and now have a CEM40 sitting at home! I haven’t had the CEM40 out yet so can’t comment on performance but in terms of build quality and form factor the CEM40 looks and feels a higher quality mount than the SkyWatcher ones. However, the biggest benefit for me is the weight. I initially tried to save money by moving to the EQ6-R thinking the weight wouldn’t be an issue but it was! It’s even noticeably lighter than the HEQ5.
 

Fingers crossed it doesn’t just look good and performs too! One thing I picked up on when researching the CEM40, and iOptron mounts in general, is that the stock tripods are generally not thought to be up to it. Most people recommend going straight to their tri pier. I already had a Berlebach Uni tripod so I’m going to put it on that.  
 

Given weight is clearly a big factor for you I don’t think there is anything else in its price class that can match the iOptron payload to weight ratio. 

[Derbyshire Dave]

1 hour ago, Icesheet said:

I started with a belt modded HEQ5 then moved to an EQ6-R, sold that and now have a CEM40 sitting at home! I haven’t had the CEM40 out yet so can’t comment on performance but in terms of build quality and form factor the CEM40 looks and feels a higher quality mount than the SkyWatcher ones. However, the biggest benefit for me is the weight. I initially tried to save money by moving to the EQ6-R thinking the weight wouldn’t be an issue but it was! It’s even noticeably lighter than the HEQ5.
 

Fingers crossed it doesn’t just look good and performs too! One thing I picked up on when researching the CEM40, and iOptron mounts in general, is that the stock tripods are generally not thought to be up to it. Most people recommend going straight to their tri pier. I already had a Berlebach Uni tripod so I’m going to put it on that.  
 

Given weight is clearly a big factor for you I don’t think there is anything else in its price class that can match the iOptron payload to weight ratio. 

Appreciate your comments, I've no experience of tri-piers, I've seen them though and realise that a lot of people use them..

[The Admiral]

7 hours ago, Derbyshire Dave said:

Appreciate your comments, I've no experience of tri-piers, I've seen them though and realise that a lot of people use them..

I had thought about the Tri-Pier when I acquired my GEM45, but ultimately decided that the extra weight might be a stumbling block, and went for the standard tripod with mini-pier on top. Actually, I would recommend the mini-pier anyway because having to set up and take down each session, I didn't think the threads in the tripod top plate would be long lived. The mini-pier's threaded holes appear to have an insert and hopefully more robust. I haven't enough experience with the mount to know if the tripod isn't up to snuff, but I've not had any problem.

If it helps my initial review of the GEM45 is here:

Overall, I'm pleased with the quality.

Ian