Astro-Physics Mach2 vs. 10Micron GM1000

[Lead_weight]

Hi All, I don't know how many across the pond consider AP mounts, but having recently purchased one to pair up with my 10Micron mount, I started getting asked what my thoughts were on the two.

Suffice to say, they are both really good options, but if you were curious how they stack up from a service, hardware, and software standpoint, I put my thoughts down in a blog post.

I tried to be fairly objective, so please let me know what you think.

[markse68]

What a great thorough comparison- thank you! I’m not in the market for a premium mount like that- my old G11 will have to do for now but i do dream of such things  Worrying that they both had issues out of the box at that price but good service is good to know

Mark

 

[Lead_weight]

Thank you. I've had validation from a few others that had similar experiences with service. A little bit surprising for a premium mount, but I guess you can't catch everything when these things aren't tested in the field as they come off the assembly line.

[CCD Imager]

Hi Andrew

You must be the unluckiest astro imager in the world! Mounts from two prestigious manufacturers and both had problems requiring returning to base. You could probably count on one had how many mounts each company have had to repair at base.

I have owned 2 AP mounts over the last 24 years and currently own the GM2000

Strictly speaking, in the UK at least, the Mach 2 should be compared with the GM2000 where both cost around £14K. The GM1000 is much less at 10K.

The support for 10 micron in the US is sketchy to say the least, only one guy? What happens when the poor overworked fella needs a 2 week holiday? But, its just the same for users of AP mounts in the UK, zero support here, any issues and off it trots back to the US. Any issues I have had and a phone call or email to Baader and they respond very quickly and when I had an issue with the knob on the mounting plate, a replacement arrived within days. Michael Risch is your main man and Thomas Baader also communicates. The 10 micron forum is awash with information and very knowledgeable people, response to questions occur within hours and will solve the majority of users questions. Baader in Europe front any issues with 10 micron mounts and if need be they ship them back to 10 micron for repair.

The clutch knobs on the GM1000 are an issue and poor design, one of its shortcomings, but the bigger mounts knobs are much better. The knobs on the GM2000 work perfectly well, I had one AP knob finger break on me, due to its shape and maybe after a few years of use, became more brittle.

The thru the mount cabling is a nice feature of the Mach 2, better suited to the mobile imager. As my mount is permanently mounted with good cable management, it isn’t really an issue. And the 10 micron mount head can be split into 2 components for easier transport and assembly in the field. I can attest to this having taken it to Kelling star party on several occasions.

I personally find the handset interface on a PC very useful, you could always use the real thing and there are many mount control packages to control the mount if desired. When powering up the mount, I always use the desktop keypad to unpark and slew to my first object, great too for looking at modelling data.

I do think that calling third party software for modelling "a bit shocking" surprising. The truth is that there are several such packages available, I know of four, giving you options and in some, with quite comprehensive tools. These were developed by third parties in direct liaison with Baader, just as AP has done with Ray Gralak for APCC. In reality that is no different to 10 micron. So there is no concern about software creators for 10 micron modelling software, dont think they will get bored or retire! Besides, this question has already been answered, sadly the author of Model Maker died at an early age, so Baader collaborated with other software engineers to develop new software, whilst you could still use Model Maker. And likewise, heaven forbid, that Roland left us, will AP become kaput? 10 micron happens to be a much larger company.

Your focus seems to be on physical attributes and software, I was hoping you would compare how the mounts perform, for example, pointing accuracy, periodic error, telescope capacity, backlash, all measured with data and graphs.

My impression is that the Mach 2 is a superb modern mount capable of unguided imaging, but its cost here in the UK is similar to the GM2000 that is larger and has a bigger payload capacity. As 10 micron support in the US is limited, you would be better off with the Mach 2 and conversely, here in Europe, we would fare better with 10 micron.

 

Adrian

 

 

Edited January 8, 2023 by CCD Imager

[Peds]

On the topic of AP customer service in the UK, I have been very happy so far. One of the Eagle tripod feet for my Mach2 arrived damaged. AP promptly sent a replacement to me via Michael from Baader. Both companies have always been a pleasure to deal with.

Whilst I suspect an issue with my Mach2 would be more troublesome to deal with (if shipping back to the US for repair was required), I’m sure in the end I would get the same customer satisfaction, with perhaps slightly longer transit times.

 

Pedro

[Lead_weight]

On 08/01/2023 at 07:27, CCD Imager said:

Hi Andrew

You must be the unluckiest astro imager in the world! Mounts from two prestigious manufacturers and both had problems requiring returning to base. You could probably count on one had how many mounts each company have had to repair at base.

I have owned 2 AP mounts over the last 24 years and currently own the GM2000

Strictly speaking, in the UK at least, the Mach 2 should be compared with the GM2000 where both cost around £14K. The GM1000 is much less at 10K.

The support for 10 micron in the US is sketchy to say the least, only one guy? What happens when the poor overworked fella needs a 2 week holiday? But, its just the same for users of AP mounts in the UK, zero support here, any issues and off it trots back to the US. Any issues I have had and a phone call or email to Baader and they respond very quickly and when I had an issue with the knob on the mounting plate, a replacement arrived within days. Michael Risch is your main man and Thomas Baader also communicates. The 10 micron forum is awash with information and very knowledgeable people, response to questions occur within hours and will solve the majority of users questions. Baader in Europe front any issues with 10 micron mounts and if need be they ship them back to 10 micron for repair.

The clutch knobs on the GM1000 are an issue and poor design, one of its shortcomings, but the bigger mounts knobs are much better. The knobs on the GM2000 work perfectly well, I had one AP knob finger break on me, due to its shape and maybe after a few years of use, became more brittle.

The thru the mount cabling is a nice feature of the Mach 2, better suited to the mobile imager. As my mount is permanently mounted with good cable management, it isn’t really an issue. And the 10 micron mount head can be split into 2 components for easier transport and assembly in the field. I can attest to this having taken it to Kelling star party on several occasions.

I personally find the handset interface on a PC very useful, you could always use the real thing and there are many mount control packages to control the mount if desired. When powering up the mount, I always use the desktop keypad to unpark and slew to my first object, great too for looking at modelling data.

I do think that calling third party software for modelling "a bit shocking" surprising. The truth is that there are several such packages available, I know of four, giving you options and in some, with quite comprehensive tools. These were developed by third parties in direct liaison with Baader, just as AP has done with Ray Gralak for APCC. In reality that is no different to 10 micron. So there is no concern about software creators for 10 micron modelling software, dont think they will get bored or retire! Besides, this question has already been answered, sadly the author of Model Maker died at an early age, so Baader collaborated with other software engineers to develop new software, whilst you could still use Model Maker. And likewise, heaven forbid, that Roland left us, will AP become kaput? 10 micron happens to be a much larger company.

Your focus seems to be on physical attributes and software, I was hoping you would compare how the mounts perform, for example, pointing accuracy, periodic error, telescope capacity, backlash, all measured with data and graphs.

My impression is that the Mach 2 is a superb modern mount capable of unguided imaging, but its cost here in the UK is similar to the GM2000 that is larger and has a bigger payload capacity. As 10 micron support in the US is limited, you would be better off with the Mach 2 and conversely, here in Europe, we would fare better with 10 micron.

 

Adrian

 

 

Adrian, Great to hear some feedback from another user of both mounts. I didn’t really cover performance of the mounts because really, they’re identical. The only exception might be carrying capacity. Both will handle my largest telescope (EdgeHD 11). I can only perform a model with about 50 points in my location due to my home blocking most of the south view. But with a 50 point model both mounts perform to around .25-.3 RMS error. 

I agree there are plenty of modeling options for 10Micron mounts. MountWizzard is my favorite by far. But I just find it strange that no modeling software comes with the mount nor do they officially recognize any specific software for users to use. Even though AP has Paid Ray to make APCC, it’s considered a first party software, and comes with the mount.

[Lead_weight]

On 08/01/2023 at 09:01, Peds said:

On the topic of AP customer service in the UK, I have been very happy so far. One of the Eagle tripod feet for my Mach2 arrived damaged. AP promptly sent a replacement to me via Michael from Baader. Both companies have always been a pleasure to deal with.

Whilst I suspect an issue with my Mach2 would be more troublesome to deal with (if shipping back to the US for repair was required), I’m sure in the end I would get the same customer satisfaction, with perhaps slightly longer transit times.

 

Pedro

For sure. That’s exactly what I experienced when needing to send my 10Micron to Italy. Long transit time, quick fix. It was as trouble free as could be expected. 

[Hoppes No9]

On 30/01/2023 at 08:51, Lead_weight said:

I agree there are plenty of modeling options for 10Micron mounts. MountWizzard is my favorite by far. But I just find it strange that no modeling software comes with the mount nor do they officially recognize any specific software for users to use. Even though AP has Paid Ray to make APCC, it’s considered a first party software, and comes with the mount.

New 10Micron GM2000 user here.

I agree, it seemed strange to me that the manufacturer does not include model building software on a near-$20K mount.  

To be fair, the firmware in the mount controller DOES allow full modeling -- it's just not a very convenient interface as you have to add points one at a time...

Fortunately, MW4 is excellent and remains actively supported and developed.

Dan

 

 

 

[dan_adi]

On 01/01/2023 at 23:22, Lead_weight said:

Hi All, I don't know how many across the pond consider AP mounts, but having recently purchased one to pair up with my 10Micron mount, I started getting asked what my thoughts were on the two.

Suffice to say, they are both really good options, but if you were curious how they stack up from a service, hardware, and software standpoint, I put my thoughts down in a blog post.

I tried to be fairly objective, so please let me know what you think.

An honest impression ... and perhaps a little bad luck? The main thing is, many people praise this or that company but as in your case, everyone can screw things up a little. Nobody has 100% track record, neither 10M, or AP, or etc.

I don't have any of these mounts, but I am curious about the absolute encoder tech on these mounts. Currently I use a Mesu 200, that is 5 years old, and although it took me some time to learn the controller software, I can always happily guide at 0.2-0.3" RMS, and never had a mechanical problem. As an opposite  example, there is a fellow mostly active on CN, that had a bad time with a Mesu, and always discourages others into buying the mount. I find it very awkward because most of Mesu users didn't have his problems, and we are happy with our mounts. 

From what info I've gathered mostly in private messaging with owners of 10M mounts, most of them, especially above 1000 mm focal length or using an SCT, do guide these mounts. 

To my surprise I even found fellow astronomers on the ASA forum that get better results with guiding.

So I always wondered what is the point of paying for the encoders if, in the end, the best results are achieved by superimposing guiding corrections. Off course the guiding corrections are fewer, but still ... 

If the main reason for purchase is quality craftsmanship then I fully understand, but most seem to be hypnotised by this unguided nirvana. This could be the reason why AP offers the mach 2 with encoders, the masses seek unguided imaging.

From time to time, I am highly temped to replace my Mesu with a 10M 2000 HPS, but if I am getting the same 0.2-0.3"RMS unguided, it will have no impact on my images, worse still, if I have to guide for the same RMS, then I've paid 15K euros for the performance of my current 6K mount.

Sorry for the long rambling ...