Paramount MYT or 10 Micron GM1000HPS

[DaveG64]

Hi guys and girls

Im thinking of maybe getting a high end mount rather than upgrading in a few years time . I've been reading up on the Paramount MYT and the 10 Micron GM1000 both very good mounts one with absolute encoders but £2000 more the other with motor based encoders, not sure I would need the encoders as the mount would be in a permanent location . The only think I'm worried about is building the tpoint and the 10 micron version, also I would like to use with Nina. So I'm interested what you guys think would be the better and easier to use I would be only using it for astrophotography . I would want to get a bigger scope eventually and have seen there is 7 kg load difference between the two so this might be a consideration 

thanks

Dave

[dan_adi]

Both are very good mounts. With the 10M mount you could go unguided if you pair it with a refractor. If the mount is in a permanent obsy, you will have to build a model once or twice a year provided that you don't change anything in your setup. Also because 10M  tracks in DEC you don't have to stress about polar alignment either, the model will take care of it. 

So what scope will you use?

[DaveG64]

At the moment I've got a 80 mm frac so the mount will probably be overkill but I'm definitely going to get a 130 or bigger frac and at sometime a 10/12 inch newt or cass

[Peds]

The 10u mount is a (big) notch above the Paramount, and if you can afford it is a much better choice. After sky modeling, you'll easily be able to go unguided with your 80mm refractor or a 130mm refractor in the future. You'll also find integration with NINA to be a lot better, as there is a dedicated plugin for 10u mounts in NINA.

 

[DaveG64]

I was thinking the same thing Peds the only thing that I’ve just read funny enough that there is no dedicated software for the 10u and that the 10u users have come up with some software which is really good apparently. My question is now how do you then build a sky model can you do it in Nina for instance ?

[Oddsocks]

Hi Dave.

You can create a mount model in NINA, for which there is either a plug-in, or it’s now built-in to NINA, I’m not up to speed on that as I don’t use NINA myself but have read about it on the 10u forum.

Other options for modelling the 10u include Model Creator, that is provided by 10u, or Mount Wizzard4 that is freeware and that I use.

I would recommend joining the 10u and Software Bisque forums before committing to either mount and read some of the topics and questions that are current to give you a feel for the different way these products are managed and supported.

I replaced a 10 yr old Paramount MX Classic with a 10 Micron 2000HPS Combi last year and so far I’m very impressed with the unguided performance of the 10u, something I could never achieve consistently with the Paramount.

It’s true that the 10u operating software is very basic and end users have stepped in to fill the gap. Per Frejvall, who was a contributor here on SGL until his untimely and sudden death, wrote the Model Creator software many years ago while Michael (Michel) Worion is currently authoring and actively updating Mount Wizzard4.

Mount Wizzard4 is a much more advanced modelling application than either Model Creator or the NINA 10u plug-in, but you’ll find users of all three on the 10u forum that are happy and comfortable using any of these.

You’ll find some instruction videos on Michael’s Mount Wizzard4 YouTube channel, although they are a bit disjointed and really could do with a refresh, nevertheless if you watch all the videos for MW4 a few times before using it for real then you’ll be building your first model after just a couple of hours practice.

Somebody once commented on one of the astronomy forums that if Software Bisque and 10 Micron built cars then a Paramount would be a NASCAR racer and 10u would be Porsche, I thought that was quite an apt analogy. Either product will do what it’s designed for but with quite a different approach. Software Bisque is a software house that decided to make a mount while 10 Micron are built by a division of an Italian precision engineering company.

The user manual for TheSky is over 850 pages, plus another 230 just for Paramount manual and a further 100 for T-Point. The user manual for the 10 Micron is just 100 pages.

The Paramount can only be directly controlled and must always be connected to TheSky software, with third party applications such as NINA connecting to TheSky, which then relays mount commands to the Paramount. This means you always need to have TheSky loaded and running even when using NINA, or other observatory or sequencing software.

The 10 Micron has it’s own software built into the control unit and is just a “black box” to the end user with control of the mount either via ASCOM, or the supplied hand controller, or via any third party software that has built their own plug-in, such as NINA.

It’s worth pointing out that the Paramount price includes TheSky software plus the licence plugins for T-Point and Cameras, bought standalone that would cost ~$700. If you have a dome and require dome integration with TheSky that is another extra license to buy.

The Paramounts use brass worms and aluminium gears. As a result of these material choices, and subsequent limited choice of brass-compatible greases, these need cleaning and re-greasing annually, as instructed by Software Bisque in the user manual, and because aluminium oxide continually develops on the gears, even while the mount is unused, it accumulates in the grease as soon as the mount moves and aluminium oxide is an abrasive, if you skimp on the regular maintenance then the worm wear-rate will be high and guide performance degraded.

The Paramount has no clutches and if you knock the mount accidentally when walking past and the drives are engaged you can deform the brass worm. At best this will require the PEC table to be rebuilt, at worst a new worm drive assembly fitted.

The Paramount is designed so that the end user can replace virtually all the major components themselves without having to ship the mount back to the factory.

In contrast, the 10 Micron uses bronze gears and hardened steel worms and requires no servicing or re-greasing (according to them) for at least ten years, after which it can either be returned to the factory for an overhaul, or you can contact them for advice on re-greasing the drives yourself, although I would expect that after ten years of moderate use the worms might be worn out and require replacing anyway.

The 10u mount has clutches so a gentle knock with the clutches engaged will normally just result in a slip but even If the worm was slightly deformed you might never even notice because the on-axis encoders and closed-loop control system are always re-positioning the axes accurately no matter how imprecisely the motor drives and worms are turning.

Besides the separate control box, hand controller and saddle plate there are no major user replaceable parts on the 10u and should a drive or other mount internal fault occur you would need to ship the mount back to Italy (or possibly Baader in Germany) for repair.

So far as mount modelling goes, either using T-Point with the Paramount or Mount Wizzard4 with the 10u, both are mostly automated and just need a few mouse clicks to initiate a model build and then apply it.

Given the sophistication of TheSky and the total integration of Paramount within TheSky the complete package is quite a big learning curve and mount modelling is actually a very small part of that.

With the 10u mount having a much simpler software environment the learning curve is much smaller since all the sequencing, plate solving, guiding, etc, is not a part of the 10u package and if you have been using some other application for that, such as NINA, SGP or ACP etc., then you’ll already know most of that.

HTH.

Edited April 24 by Oddsocks
Revised text for grammar and spelling.

[DaveG64]

Hi Oddsocks 

wow what a comprehensive reply just by reading what you have said I’m leaning more towards the 10u I was leaning that way anyway as I think the learning curve for the paramount is very steep whereas not so for the 10u . I have read some of both the forums it seems to me that users seem to have more problems with the paramount than the 10u and the sky x is harder to learn ,also you’ve got to read the manuals thoroughly.

cheers

Dave 

[Oddsocks]

On 23/04/2024 at 00:11, DaveG64 said:

I have read some of both the forums it seems to me that users seem to have more problems with the paramount than the 10u and the sky x is harder to learn ,also you’ve got to read the manuals thoroughly.

Hi Dave.

It's difficult to do a direct comparison between Paramount's and 10 Micron regarding reliability because the service model for Software Bisque provides support only via the user forum, it's virtually impossible to get support for Paramount problems that are away from the public gaze.

For 10 Micron mounts the user forum is primarily a talking space for users and a repository for information and software etc. Support for hardware problems is direct via email to Baader, or eventually 10u themselves if Baader can't resolve the problem, so you will not be able to compare reliability as we don't know the failure rate for 10u products.

There is also a volume bias. There must be thousands of Paramounts sold and in use around the world while the large price differential that previously existed between Paramounts and 10u means the volume of 10 Micron mounts in use worldwide will be much smaller. 10u has only recently gained a foothold in the US market which has been dominated by Software Bisque and Astro-Physics for premium mounts for many years.

Now that Software Bisque products have seen a large price hike over the last year we might expect to see many more 10u mounts sold worldwide.

While not going into boring detail I did spend almost half as much again on spares and repairs for my Paramount MX Classic over the ten+ years that I owned it as the mount cost me when I bought it new in 2012.

HTH

William.

[DaveG64]

Hi William 

Yes I agree you can’t compare the too makes properly as obviously as you say 10 micron are contactable for problems or concerns whereas Software Bisque have gone down the open forum route which probably distorts the percentage of their mounts that need fixing or problematic I guess the fact that they sold thousands around the world it’s obvious that more of their mounts are going to cause concerns . It’s a hard one to weigh up really I like the 10 micron but don’t know if I can justify the extra £2-3000 on it even I was leaning that way unless I can find a good second hand one but you don’t ever see them on Astro buy sell uk maybe I should save for longer . In all honesty I haven’t got a mount at the moment I’ve got all the rest of the gear though . I had a eq6 a few years back but sold it and have a lay off for a few years but have come into a bit of money this year so have bought telescope camera etc but want a good mount so I don’t have to upgrade it in a few years time so I’m willing to spend about £8000-£9000 at the moment .

Dave