Zwo harmonic mount pretty much confirmed

[900SL]

So the main benefit of these harmonic mounts is a reduction in gross weight, to be offset against the requirement for short exposure perma-guiding to deal with the inherent PE?

[Highburymark]

That is a tempting price. But I would definitely give it a few months (or longer). The 135 benefitted from very close working between Rainbow and owners to iron out early quirks and problems - most of it documented on long CN threads. With a small number of users and quick responses from the manufacturer, things were worked out pretty quickly. ZWO will sell far more units, and communication will be more difficult. 
All the coverage so far has focused on imaging, but these are excellent visual mounts too. I use my 135 mostly for visual, but plan to start solar imaging with it in the spring. It was designed to be used with carbon fibre photo tripods, but the ZWO - 50% heavier - is a slightly different proposition. I hope it delivers as these are game changing products, but wise to wait and see how reliably it performs before hitting the buy button.

[StarryEyed]

Rainbow get their gearboxes from Harmonic Drive a German company with an industrial reputation. It says on the ZWO site their strain wave gearboxes are  jointly developed with a local supplier. Sounds like a synta clone of a vixen mount all over again. 

Edited December 28, 2021 by StarryEyed

[Deadlake]

Crux are also based in China but source the harmonic drive from the same company as Rainbow. 
Interesting to see how this plays out. 
Rainbow Astro is an off shoot of the main company which produces robots for manufacturing so have years of experience as well...

Edited December 28, 2021 by Deadlake

[alexbb]

Artesky

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=4285999744837314&id=353915141379147

[wimvb]

Very soon they will be giving these away with so much competirion.

I wonder how these mounts would perform with high precision (renshaw?) encoders on the RA axis.

Edited December 28, 2021 by wimvb

[clouzot]

1 hour ago, wimvb said:

Very soon they will be giving these away with so much competirion.

I wonder how these mounts would perform with high precision (renshaw?) encoders on the RA axis.

That’s essentially what the RST-135E does (my understanding is it uses a Renishaw encoder, albeit not an absolute one)

[eshy76]

On 26/12/2021 at 08:56, pete_l said:

Is that really much of a benefit when a person would load the mount with up to 20kg of other equipment? It isn't as if you'd attach everything to it and then carry the whole thing to its place of use.
I see a mount as one component of a system. As such it is difficult to see what benefits this contributes, that a more mainstream mount would not be able to do for a similar price.

Well the other mount I was considering upgrading to was the CEM70, which would have been 17kg without counterweights…I can tell you that my 3kg RST-135 has been used on many more marginal nights than would have been the case with a much heavier mount, for someone like me who has to set up and tear down the mount each imaging night. So yes, there is a practical benefit, added to the lowered set up time through not having to balance the OTA.

And on your other point, with my 73mm aperture refractor (3kg) + imaging gear…it is actually possible to carry the fully assembled rig in and out of the house, which is what I do for even speedier setup! Granted that would not be possible with a heavier scope, but for a widefield refractor, eminently possible. 

The benefit of this mount is its portability and lightness while still packing a punch payload-wise and without compromising performance when guiding. If you have a home obsy/pier, intend to image at focal lengths of above 800-1000mm or value tracking accuracy above everything else, then this type of mount is not for you. If you want a more-than-capable portable travel mount, or need to set up each time you observe/image and dread having to lug heavy gear out, harmonic drive mounts can be a great option.

[StarryEyed]

4 hours ago, eshy76 said:

.... 

This is really the point when something does what its supposed and is trouble free time after time then it's value is disproportionate to its actual cost. 

[The Admiral]

6 hours ago, eshy76 said:

I can tell you that my 3kg RST-135 has been used on many more marginal nights than would have been the case with a much heavier mount, for someone like me who has to set up and tear down the mount each imaging night. So yes, there is a practical benefit, added to the lowered set up time through not having to balance the OTA.

Indeed. I've just about reached the point in life where the weight of my gear deters me from setting up from scratch each time, and moving from even a GEM45 to a light weight mount and scope would be of great benefit. So I'm keeping an eye on these developments.

Ian

[Lee_P]

6 hours ago, eshy76 said:

The benefit of this mount is its portability and lightness while still packing a punch payload-wise and without compromising performance when guiding. If you have a home obsy/pier, intend to image at focal lengths of above 800-1000mm or value tracking accuracy above everything else, then this type of mount is not for you. If you want a more-than-capable portable travel mount, or need to set up each time you observe/image and dread having to lug heavy gear out, harmonic drive mounts can be a great option.

I think this is a brilliant summary.

[Peter Drew]

We too easily fall into the trap of what suits us personally when being critical of a product.  I'm sure that there are at least as many who will appreciate a good portable mount as there are for others with further ambitions and I'm also sure that ZWO and the other HD mount providers will have noticed it.    🙂  

[fireballxl5]

9 hours ago, eshy76 said:

Well the other mount I was considering upgrading to was the CEM70, which would have been 17kg without counterweights…I can tell you that my 3kg RST-135 has been used on many more marginal nights than would have been the case with a much heavier mount, for someone like me who has to set up and tear down the mount each imaging night. So yes, there is a practical benefit, added to the lowered set up time through not having to balance the OTA.

And on your other point, with my 73mm aperture refractor (3kg) + imaging gear…it is actually possible to carry the fully assembled rig in and out of the house, which is what I do for even speedier setup! Granted that would not be possible with a heavier scope, but for a widefield refractor, eminently possible. 

The benefit of this mount is its portability and lightness while still packing a punch payload-wise and without compromising performance when guiding. If you have a home obsy/pier, intend to image at focal lengths of above 800-1000mm or value tracking accuracy above everything else, then this type of mount is not for you. If you want a more-than-capable portable travel mount, or need to set up each time you observe/image and dread having to lug heavy gear out, harmonic drive mounts can be a great option.

Several good points made by @eshy76 that resonant here. Over the summer I've been pushing my travel rig (AZ-GTi/Tak FS60CB/Q combo) to smaller image scales as it gives me flexibility to reach lower altitude targets beyond the reach of my heavy duty fixed rig. After losing too many subs as a result of inconsistent guiding, I realised that I needed a better quality mount of similar portability.  I considered the AT360 but went for a RST-135E that came up in the black Friday sale🙂 This is now mated with an RC6 for even higher resolution. Together with the ASIair/OAG/OSC (scope & accessories are 7.5kg) this can be carried outdoors on to the patio.  Early days yet with first PA and star test last night during a brief clear gap but the signs are looking good👍

[The Admiral]

6 minutes ago, fireballxl5 said:

Several good points made by @eshy76 that resonant here. Over the summer I've been pushing my travel rig (AZ-GTi/Tak FS60CB/Q combo) to smaller image scales as it gives me flexibility to reach lower altitude targets beyond the reach of my heavy duty fixed rig. After losing too many subs as a result of inconsistent guiding, I realised that I needed a better quality mount of similar portability.  I considered the AT360 but went for a RST-135E that came up in the black Friday sale🙂 This is now mated with an RC6 for even higher resolution. Together with the ASIair/OAG/OSC (scope & accessories are 7.5kg) this can be carried outdoors on to the patio.  Early days yet with first PA and star test last night during a brief clear gap but the signs are looking good👍

I'm interested to know whether you, or anyone else for that matter, are sticking with a photo type tripod or using a sturdier/more stable astro tripod with your set-ups?

Ian

[eshy76]

21 minutes ago, The Admiral said:

I'm interested to know whether you, or anyone else for that matter, are sticking with a photo type tripod or using a sturdier/more stable astro tripod with your set-ups?

Ian

Well I personally was lucky when upgrading - the 3/8" screw connection of the RST-135 fit my iOptron CEM25P 1.5" tripod (and its minipier) perfectly, so I'm using that! 

It's all about ensuring the tripod does not topple, which is why one could choose to use a counterweight even if it does not necessarily improve guiding. I admit to being nervous about using a carbon fibre photo tripod with my setup for this reason, but lots seem to successfully.

 

Edited December 29, 2021 by eshy76

[fireballxl5]

3 hours ago, The Admiral said:

I'm interested to know whether you, or anyone else for that matter, are sticking with a photo type tripod or using a sturdier/more stable astro tripod with your set-ups?

Ian

I have no plans to use the RST with a regular photo tripod, even when traveling. I have a couple of astro tripods that seem to be suitable, a Vixen HAL 130 (though not the current design, this one is being 2000-era) and if necessary a Berlebach Planet. Currently trying out the HAL.

CS, Andy

[Highburymark]

I use my 135 in alt-az mode with a Gitzo 5 series carbon fibre tripod advertised as supporting up to a 40kg payload. Mostly carrying a 5” Newtonian or 85mm refractor. It’s very stable. I was slightly less confident using a Gitzo 4-series that has a 25kg payload. Always use counterweights if any concerns about imbalance, but with the 5-series and my modest telescopes they are not needed.

[nfotis]

From what I understand here and the CN thread about the ZWO mount, it's a very lightweight HEQ5 class mount, with excellent portability.

An EQ6-R class mount (regarding load limit etc) seems to be in another price bracket.

N.F.

[Rusted]

Rather spookily [?] YT recommended a couple of videos about irregular jerking of a harmonic drive mount. Dec first and then the RA.
The mount was accepted back by the dealer after abut a year. [Lazy Astronomer channel?]

[david_taurus83]

3 hours ago, Rusted said:

Rather spookily [?] YT recommended a couple of videos about irregular jerking of a harmonic drive mount. Dec first and then the RA.
The mount was accepted back by the dealer after abut a year. [Lazy Astronomer channel?]

That was Cuiv and his Hobym Crux 140 mount. I watched those myself last night. As I understand it, Hobym use the Harmonic branded strain wave system yet they still had issues. After Cuiv sent his back they must have had more complaints as Hobym done a recall on up to 30% of that model as they had issues! Apparently it was only the Crux 140 that was affected and none of their other mounts. Reading up in the Crux 140 they claim if PEC is used the PE can be brought down to +-5 seconds which is impressive. Remains to be seen how good the ZWO attempt will perform given it is nearly half the cost of others in the same class. If somethings too good to be true and all that..

[Stuart1971]

The Pegasus version is also on its way

 

[Elp]

What about the Sharpstar MK3?

[Rusted]

Although the dealer ultimately has responsibility for quality issues it doesn't help if the distant manufacturer demands a return to base.

I had a failed, completely unusable ZWO camera: The German dealer required the camera be sent back to China for analysis.

Doesn't the dealer have any responsibility for obvious flaws within the nominal guarantee period?

I would argue that such behaviour does not satisfy the spirit of EU/UK Consumer Law.

[johninderby]

Think that German dealer needs to look at how FLO handles any defective ZWO products. FLO deals with it themselves so no need to return it to China. 👍🏻

[david_taurus83]

19 minutes ago, Rusted said:

Although the dealer ultimately has responsibility for quality issues it doesn't help if the distant manufacturer demands a return to base.

I had a failed, completely unusable ZWO camera: The German dealer required the camera be sent back to China for analysis.

Doesn't the dealer have any responsibility for obvious flaws within the nominal guarantee period?

I would argue that such behaviour does not satisfy the spirit of EU/UK Consumer Law.

I suppose it would depend on the fault. A consumer should never have to repair a product that's covered under warranty. That said, a lot of us would, for example, be able to replace a fan that had stopped working on a ZWO camera. Only to save sending it away and being without. Most dealers should be able to do the same and offer warranty on the work. If its something more complex like a failed sensor or blown circuit board, it may need to be sent back to the manufacturer. For something like the leaky sensors, ZWO at the very least should have offered to reimburse their dealers to accept returns and cleaned professionally. I know FLO will do this and Altair also for their own brand. ZWO's stance though is, or was, that consumers should do it themselves and risk damaging/scratching the sensor. With customer service like this, I for one will be staying away from their more expensive products.