Starfield 102 ED F/7 / AZ GTiX / Berlebach Report

[Sunshine]

Wonderful setup! I didn't know the AZ GTI could handle the weight of a 102 but I guess I was wrong.

[cajen2]

7 hours ago, Sunshine said:

Wonderful setup! I didn't know the AZ GTI could handle the weight of a 102 but I guess I was wrong.

Ah, but it's the GTiX, which has 1 kg more weight capacity on one side, and 10kg for two sides, so it should handle 5.2kg (weight of everything) quite easily.

Stop press: we actually got a couple of hours clear tonight! 🍾😆

The Starfield was immense: great contrast and pinpoint images. I spent a lot of time just getting used to the go-to and slewing around from one target to another. Any problems with pointing were down to my inexperience with this type of mount - general ignorance! I can report that the GTiX handled the scope quite cheerfully, with no sign or sound of straining at all. The Berlebach was very good at dampening vibrations even at quite high mags.

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, cajen2 said:

Ah, but it's the GTiX, which has 1 kg more weight capacity on one side, and 10kg for two sides, so it should handle 5.2kg (weight of everything) quite easily.

Stop press: we actually got a couple of hours clear tonight! 🍾😆

The Starfield was immense: great contrast and pinpoint images. I spent a lot of time just getting used to the go-to and slewing around from one target to another. Any problems with pointing were down to my inexperience with this type of mount - general ignorance! I can report that the GTiX handled the scope quite cheerfully, with no sign or sound of straining at all. The Berlebach was very good at dampening vibrations even at quite high mags.

How is the view with 2 inch eyepieces?  Inquiring minds want to know. 

[cajen2]

3 minutes ago, Mike Q said:

How is the view with 2 inch eyepieces?  Inquiring minds want to know. 

To be honest, I was too busy messing around with the mount and app and didn't try either of my 2" EPs. I'll let you know next time, promise!

[Guest]

1 minute ago, cajen2 said:

To be honest, I was too busy messing around with the mount and app and didn't try either of my 2" EPs. I'll let you know next time, promise!

On a guess i would think you would get nice wide angle images. 

[cajen2]

We'll see. I'd be very surprised if they weren't excellent: that 2" WO di-electric diagonal is a doozy!

[cajen2]

The scope certainly likes Morpheus EPs - great synergy.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, cajen2 said:

We'll see. I'd be very surprised if they weren't excellent: that 2" WO di-electric diagonal is a doozy!

Those are supposed to be VERY good

[Guest]

1 minute ago, cajen2 said:

The scope certainly likes Morpheus EPs - great synergy.

No clue, i have only seen one Baader in the wild here and it was the variable. 

[cajen2]

3 minutes ago, Mike Q said:

No clue, i have only seen one Baader in the wild here and it was the variable. 

Well, it's my favourite EP range as I don't want to spend silly money. In fact, I intend to get the 17.5 Morph and replace my 68° 18mil SL.

[bosun21]

8 hours ago, cajen2 said:

Well, it's my favourite EP range as I don't want to spend silly money. In fact, I intend to get the 17.5 Morph and replace my 68° 18mil SL.

Same here. You will probably end up with all six of them like me. I am extremely happy with them.

[cajen2]

1 hour ago, bosun21 said:

Same here. You will probably end up with all six of them like me. I am extremely happy with them.

I have three already, I've just ordered the 4th (the 17.5) but my existing EPs cover other f/ls so that might be it.

[bosun21]

38 minutes ago, cajen2 said:

I have three already, I've just ordered the 4th (the 17.5) but my existing EPs cover other f/ls so that might be it.

The 17.5mm was the last Morpheus to come out after a long delay between itself and the others. Baader said that they wanted to get it right, and they sure accomplished that. It’s an exceptional eyepiece.

[cajen2]

4 hours ago, bosun21 said:

The 17.5mm was the last Morpheus to come out after a long delay between itself and the others. Baader said that they wanted to get it right, and they sure accomplished that. It’s an exceptional eyepiece.

I know....and so I've always cast covetous eyes on it. I already had a perfectly good 18mm 68° SL but the temptation was just too much for me. 😉

[cajen2]

I've been having problems with the accuracy of the mount: if I centre it on a target, slew away and slew back, it doesn't come back to the same place. Go-to is also problematic. So I've decided to fit the Baader counterweight to the L-bracket as previously planned. I've set it up so that the counterweight is on the same axis of rotation as the scope, thereby hopefully everything will stay in balance. I had to rebalance the scope, of course. By my calculations, the total load is now 6.2kg, but rather better balanced across the centerline.

Here's hoping it makes a difference.

 

[Zermelo]

58 minutes ago, cajen2 said:

I've been having problems with the accuracy of the mount: if I centre it on a target, slew away and slew back, it doesn't come back to the same place. Go-to is also problematic. So I've decided to fit the Baader counterweight to the L-bracket as previously planned. I've set it up so that the counterweight is on the same axis of rotation as the scope, thereby hopefully everything will stay in balance. I had to rebalance the scope, of course. By my calculations, the total load is now 6.2kg, but rather better balanced across the centerline.

Here's hoping it makes a difference.

 

The first time I assembled mine, I used the short pier extension that is supplied with it (as in your picture), and was alarmed at the visible sag when I mounted my Mak 127.  I happened already to have the aluminium SW extension, and that seemed to be more solid, but I still use it with a couple of kg mounted on the other side.

Are you sticking entirely with gotos during the session, or do you also enable the dual encoders and move it manually?
I mostly do the latter, to keep the noise down, but SW do say that the second set of encoders are not as accurate. 
In a recent session I tried using gotos exclusively for the first 10 targets, then I made a manual slew, and afterwards a mixture of the two. The first 10 gotos were an average 0.06° (3.6 arcminutes) out, while the rest averaged 0.53° (32 arcminutes). The second value is what I typically get in sessions where I've made use of the dual encoders. I think once you've moved the mount manually, the error is introduced (unless you're lucky), and even subsequent gotos are affected. In theory, the internal sky model ought to be recalibrated with a subsequent pointing accuracy enhancement, by aligning on a target in Synscan and confirming, but I've never found this to be very successful beyond the next observation in a session. In practice, I can deal with errors of this order (usually in a consistent direction) using a 50mm RACI.

[cajen2]

Thanks for your comments, @Zermelo .

When you say 'sag' with the pier extension, what exactly do you mean? I don't seem to get any play between the mount and the extension, so how does it manifest itself?

I'm a total beginner with any kind of go-to mount, having always been a dob man, so I'm learning a little at a time. I've needed to use the 'freedom find' encoders several times but can't tell you if it made the problems worse or better yet.

[Coco]

Interesting how you get on, as both this mount and scope is on my next purchase radar. 

[Zermelo]

2 hours ago, cajen2 said:

Thanks for your comments, @Zermelo .

When you say 'sag' with the pier extension, what exactly do you mean? I don't seem to get any play between the mount and the extension, so how does it manifest itself?

I'm a total beginner with any kind of go-to mount, having always been a dob man, so I'm learning a little at a time. I've needed to use the 'freedom find' encoders several times but can't tell you if it made the problems worse or better yet.

With the short extension fitted, and the Mak mounted on the side, and no counterweight, I could see the mount tip over very slightly to one side, when compared with the unloaded position. By pushing up under the Mak, I could restore the mount to its unloaded position.

I've not actually tested the mount in this configuration for observing, because I had the other extension to hand. It's possible that Synscan can compensate for these flexures; if the scope is balanced correctly on the Alt axis, then I would expect the departure from vertical to be constant. I'd not noticed any flex with my other mount, but it's a more irregular shape, and it might have been doing the same thing without my knowledge.

If you're able to run a test like I did - find some targets using goto only, before using the Freedom Find, I'd be interested in your findings. You can turn the dual encoders on at the start of the session, I believe it won't affect the pointing accuracy until you try to use Freedom Find.

[Apprentice]

Just a quick question, regarding the goto accuracy. Does the GTIX use external power supply like the GTi?

If so, what supply are you using, batteries or a powerbank?

[cajen2]

I'm using a power bank, which seems to cope very well with slewing. It still shows full charge after several sessions.

[The Lapwing]

Looks like an excellent rig. KUO produce some really good scopes for not a lot of money. So much good kit out there these days

[Apprentice]

Is the gtix still performing well and suits the scope?

I am looking for az goto mount for mine, and i do like to bino with it. So curious if gzix is the way to go.

[cajen2]

@ApprenticeTo be honest, I rarely use the AZGTiX any more. I bought a Sightron Japan manual mount just for grab & go and I'm so impressed by it that it stays on permanently. No go-to but nice manual slo-mo controls.

Edited February 9 by cajen2