Interesting new alt-azimuth mount

[John]

This one is new to me - the NOA CT-20 from South Korea. The author of this review (Bill Paolini) seems impressed !:

https://www.cloudynights.com/articles/cat/user-reviews/field-test-the-noh-ct-20-alt-az-mount-r3313

20kg carrying capacity from a 2kg mount head is quite impressive

There is a heavier duty one as well:

http://www.nohsmount.com/entry5.html

[johninderby]

Pity they don’t have slo-mo controls. Otherwise they look OK.

[JeremyS]

Thanks for the info @John 👍🏻
Look pretty decent and amazing performance for little weight. Like John Handleby, I would miss the Slo-mo

Edited September 1, 2021 by JeremyS

[RobertI]

Interesting looking mount, Bill seems very impressed and said it’s the first mount of this type he used where he felt he didn’t need slo mo controls. Not sure it would appeal to me though - I think for that price I would want slo mo, but it does seem to fill a bit of a price gap in the market (assuming $650 = £650).   

[John]

6 minutes ago, RobertI said:

Interesting looking mount, Bill seems very impressed and said it’s the first mount of this type he used where he felt he didn’t need slo mo controls. Not sure it would appeal to me though - I think for that price I would want slo mo, but it does seem to fill a bit of a price gap in the market (assuming $650 = £650).   

I certainly think there is a gap in the market that needs to be filled somewhere between the Skytee II and the ~£1K mounts such as the Losmandy AZ8, AZ100 etc.

I also agree that slow motion controls are very nice to have as well though.

 

 

[Deadlake]

650 USD translate to around £650 after VAT and duty.

No slow-mo's are not an issue on this user thread:

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/764622-nohs-mount-ct-20-finally-arrived/?hl=+ct#820820=

I think once the encoders are fitted for non-planetary work where you want a tracking mount so you can concentrate on observing when the seeing lets you would be a good option.

Edited September 2, 2021 by Deadlake

[johninderby]

No slo-mo no sale for me I’m afraid. 🤔

[Louis D]

For me, the deal breaker is no altitude clutch to allow heavy eyepiece changes.  Once balanced and the axis tensions are backed off, I don't generally use the slo-mo controls on my DSV-2B mount while tracking.  It's so much easier to just use a light, fingertip touch on the handle to track than trying to alternately mess with two slo-mo controls.

I took a pass on the DM-4 and DM-6 mounts because they have no altitude clutches.  I was with a fellow observer using a DM-6 mounted 140mm refractor at a star party and watched his contortions trying to hold two large eyepieces while trying to prevent the scope from nose diving as he swapped them.  I was appalled at how un-ergonomic it was.  It tracks fine without slo-mo controls once the eyepiece is changed, though.

My DSV-1 mount is fine for short telescopes and light eyepieces, but I wanted to be able to mount larger scopes and heavier eyepieces, so I bought the DSV-2B for them.  I wouldn't go much past a 100mm refractor with it.  I'd probably get the DSV-3 at that point.

I guess my point is the lack of an altitude clutch on the NOH CT-20 is a deal breaker for me.

[Alan White]

Looks most interesting indeed.
Website is very clunky and lacking in information though.
And is that only one bearing set on each axis? If so is that good engineering?
Another Alt-Az is great to see though.

I like the look of the unprice Noh Tripod though, looks super.

[Deadlake]

Discussed with Bill P.

Slow mo:

With scope in balance on the CT20 I found the movement as smooth and actually more precise than what I am used to with slo mo controls. So it was quite amazing even at 600x as was able to move even the tiniest bit in the FOV very easily. It was really quite amazing as was able to move from crater to crater in the Moon at high mags quite effortlessly with no jitters in the view. More intuitive to move also compared to the two axis movement with slo mo. I was quite taken aback by the experience it was so pleasant moving so effortlessly across the Moon’s surface at high mags.

EP changes:

As far as clutches, the NOH has them for both Alt and Az. The two silver knobs on the vertical shaft  in the pic in my review.  Using the clutches was able to move between a 40XW and a tiny 6mm Abbe and not have to rebalance. With that major weight difference, I think more than 600g, there was a little backlash, but minor IMO.

Encoders:

The encoders will be available by the end of the year. I understand they attach to the mount as is and that customers will purchase them directly from the encoder manufacturer. 
 

Thoughts:

Using a super mount tripod that means mount plus tripod would total 5.5 kg, that’s less then some tripods. Super mount also has a half-pillar… This would make my LZOS 130\ F6 portable around the garden. An AZ100 with a t-pod tripod would be around 16.5 kg and then the scope.

Amazing it can take a C14 and C11 for a spin:

C14/C11 Demo

Edited September 12, 2021 by Deadlake

[RobertI]

12 hours ago, Deadlake said:

Discussed with Bill P.

Slow mo:

With scope in balance on the CT20 I found the movement as smooth and actually more precise than what I am used to with slo mo controls. So it was quite amazing even at 600x as was able to move even the tiniest bit in the FOV very easily. It was really quite amazing as was able to move from crater to crater in the Moon at high mags quite effortlessly with no jitters in the view. More intuitive to move also compared to the two axis movement with slo mo. I was quite taken aback by the experience it was so pleasant moving so effortlessly across the Moon’s surface at high mags.

EP changes:

As fas as clutches, the NOH has them for both Alt and Az. The two silver knobs on the vertical shaft  in the pic in my review.  Using the clutches was able to move between a 40XW and a tiny 6mm Abbe and not have to rebalance. With that major weight difference, I think more than 600g, there was a little backlash, but minor IMO.

Encoders:

The encoders will be available by the end of the year. I understand they attach to the mount as is and that customers will purchase them directly from the encoder manufacturer. 
 

Thoughts:

Using a super mount tripod that means mount plus tripod would total 5.5 kg, that’s less then some tripods. Super mount also has a half-pillar… This would make my LZOS 130\ F6 portable around the garden. An AZ100 with a t-pod tripod would be around 16.5 kg and then the scope.

Amazing it can take a C14 and C11 for a spin:

C14/C11 Demo

Fascinating. It’s almost got me converted to the idea of not needing slo mo for high powers, although in the vid the guy did have to quickly ‘catch’ the scopes before they rotated into the tripod! But still a very impressive looking mount. 

[johninderby]

Still think the way the AZ100 allows the use of slo-mo controls is the best. Super smooth with the slo-mo controls but can also be used without them so the best of both worlds. When Rowan bring out their smaller version of the AZ100 should be interesting althpugh not likely to see it for a while.

[Alan White]

I think lack of slow motion is a benefit, not a loss in any way. 

In most of my Astronomy time, I have never had a slow motion and when I did, found it more faff than benefit.

How many dob owners have slow motion? How many use higher power, a lot and they / we get on just fine.

We should be thankful for more quality mounts, Astronomy is very healthy at present, more decent kit makes for folks staying in the hobby. Nothing faster than bad kit to send folks scurrying away to something else.

 

[Deadlake]

The AZ100 weight is 5x this mount. I like slow motion but I can compromise if setup is quicker and I can move the scope around over the night. Also slow mo on any mount I’ve used introduces wobble which I do not get with my SXP2, I can zoom around all night and no wobbles.

[John]

I seem to be able to happily adapt to having slow motions (ie: my Skytee II and T-Rex) or not (ie: my 12 inch dob and Giro Ercole). I sometimes find them very useful but if they are not there, I'll do the job myself

If slow motions are fitted then they must not judder, create additional vibrations or have more than a very small amount of backlash. Achieving the latter can be a challenge on the Skytee II but I've managed it after quite a bit of tweaking.

The T-Rex slow motions are superb

 

 

 

 

[Louis D]

Swapping out a 40XW isn't much of a challenge at 1.5 pounds to keep a mount from diving in my experience.  My 17mm ES-92 at 2.6 pounds is much more of a challenge even for my Dob.  Another problem is that tall eyepieces make a mount want to tip backward at high altitudes.  I'd be interested in how well this new mount resists turning turtle under such conditions.

So this mount doesn't have tension knobs, only locking clutches?  I like separate tension and locking controls.  Usually, one can't do a good job of both unless it were to have a push-pull locking feature so as not to disturb the tension setting.

[Alan White]

I think the mount shown has tension controls, but does not lock to have an altitude lock for notable balance changes.

A side note, Wow a 40 XW, bet that’s nice.

An Alt Az without altitude lock needs the altitude tension locked when making notable changes of eyepiece, such as a 30APM UFF down to a 3-6 Zoom,  but it can be done fairly easily with practice, however a separate Altitude lock makes things easier and far nicer.

I don’t understand when someone makes an alt Az without an altitude lock to be honest.

 

[jjohnson3803]

I really prefer having slo-mo after previous experiences with friction mounts, but this mount looks tempting.

[Louis D]

The 40XW is nice thanks to its relatively light weight in comparison to the decloaked Meade 40mm 5000 SWA (same optics and weight as 40mm ES-68) or, presumably, the 41mm Panoptic which I haven't had a chance to use.  I'm not sure it's quite as sharp as the Meade, but it definitely isn't as flat of field.  There is a bit of field curvature in the XW, but nothing too distracting.  SAEP (kidney beaning) is less in the XW than the Meade, so it is easier to take in the entire FOV, but there is still a bit of blackout here and there.  The ergonomic conical top of the XW is very much appreciated compared to the slab top of the Meade which forces me to tilt my head to the side to use it.  Eye relief is significantly longer on the Meade, though.  I have to touch the top of the XW with my eyeglasses to take in the entire FOV while I can simply hover above the Meade.

All in all, it's hard to pick a winner between the two.