Poll: Orion Atlas vs Losmandy G-11
Longfellow
for the knowledgeable readers to hold forth.
One consideration is that the Atlas GOTO system seems to be well
regarded while the Losmandy Gemini (?) GOTO system is not. The Atlas
seems to be less expensive that the G-11, but is it noticeably less
able to perform for astrophotography?
What else am I missing here?
Thanks,
Longfellow
William R. Mattil
A G-11, while having a few foibles that need to be understood is a
much more capable mount having much less PE than the Atlas. So if
astrophotography is contemplated then the G-11 might be a better choice
Bill
Bill
Longfellow,
In addition to saa, the losmandy users group on yahoo is another good
place to seek additional, in depth, info on the G-11 mount & goto
options.
Bill
--
Email address is a Spam trap.
Longfellow
> On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 21:12:48 -0500, Longfellow wrote:
> In addition to saa, the losmandy users group on yahoo is another good
> place to seek additional, in depth, info on the G-11 mount & goto
> options.
>
> Bill
>
Aha, thanks. I've sort of gravitated to the Losmandy because of its
source, a precision machine shop not dedicated just to making equatorial
mounts (and all that that implies). Dunno how important an integrated
electronic system would be, and that seems to be the point of contention
from (presumably) Atlas users.
I'll add the user's group to my research.
Again thanks,
Longfellow
Bill
Regardless of the mount chosen, the main thing is knowing your own
needs/wants from a goto system.
For example: safety features to alert the user and/or prevent/stop a
mount from slewing/tracking your scope into your pier/tripod may not be
critical if you sit at the scope. But it could be very important if
you're prone to nodding off to sleep while at the scope, or would be
located some distance away, and not be able to intervene in time to
prevent damage to your equipment.
On a happier note, If you'll be doing imaging, one feature I would
personally look for in a goto system is the ability to upload
customized periodic error correction data/files from a personal
computer. This would permit efficient use of tools like Ray Gralak's
"Pem Pro" (www.ccdware.com).
PemPro can collect many cycles of PE data, then aid you in produce
various optimized sets of PE corrections that can be uploaded to the
mount -- in sync with the RA drive. Really nice option to have for
imaging -- not needed at all for visual use.
Enjoy the journey...
Longfellow
> On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 01:26:33 -0500, Longfellow wrote:
> Regardless of the mount chosen, the main thing is knowing your own
> needs/wants from a goto system.
I'll be having other observers from time to time, and not having to
watch the star hopping of a neophyte is almost certain to be
appreciated. Also, I'm given to understand that it actually helps users
to learn the sky...
> For example: safety features to alert the user and/or prevent/stop a
> mount from slewing/tracking your scope into your pier/tripod may not be
> critical if you sit at the scope. But it could be very important if
> you're prone to nodding off to sleep while at the scope, or would be
> located some distance away, and not be able to intervene in time to
> prevent damage to your equipment.
Oww...! I can just see that happening, especially during a long viewing
session. Thanks for the heads up!
> On a happier note, If you'll be doing imaging, one feature I would
> personally look for in a goto system is the ability to upload
> customized periodic error correction data/files from a personal
> computer. This would permit efficient use of tools like Ray Gralak's
> "Pem Pro" (www.ccdware.com).
Interesting. I'm noting that PEC algorithms are advertized as included,
which presumably allow the detection and compensation for any PEC for
the mount in question.
At the moment, I've got the Orion 8" Newtonian with the SkyPro mount,
which is quite obviously inadequate for imaging, so I'm looking to
up-grade the mount. In addition, I'm trying to determine what is and is
not really useful at an imaging session, and having a laptop to control
the hardware seems to be a requirement. Which begs its own question:
What, if anything, is the most common recommendation for a laptop? Is
there a capability that is needed that is not available in all brands?
Or does it really matter? I can see the ability to resist collected dew
as a needful thing, what else?
> PemPro can collect many cycles of PE data, then aid you in produce
> various optimized sets of PE corrections that can be uploaded to the
> mount -- in sync with the RA drive. Really nice option to have for
> imaging -- not needed at all for visual use.
>
> Enjoy the journey...
>
> Bill
Thanks!
Longfellow
Craig
expereince with the G-11, that while it does not have as nice a handpaddle
as the Orion/Meade/Celestron systems. It is far from poor.
It has a one line display, and the basic mode is scrolling through menus,
but It's accuracy is pretty good (asuming you have good polar alignment and
have built a decent pointing model.).
On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 21:12:48 -0500, Longfellow wrote:
Davoud
> What, if anything, is the most common recommendation for a laptop?
The cheapest Windows laptop you can find, running XP Pro. It doesn't
require a lot of horsepower to issue a slew command to a 'scope or an
"open/close shutter" command to a camera. If you're going to do a lot
of image processing, however, see below.
> Is
> there a capability that is needed that is not available in all brands?
Not needed by all, perhaps, but I find my MacBook Pro's ability to run
the Mac OS, Unix, and Windows (all without emulation) very handy in my
little zerbat'ry. No other brand can do that. Three computers for the
price of one, with serious horsepower for image processing. And priced
very competitively compared to other name-brand laptops _with
comparable hardware_.
On the subject of the mount, my G-11 has been a sterling performer.
<http://www.primordial-light.com>. I switched to an AP1200 GTO for only
one reason--its additional load capacity. The G-11 is rated at 60 lbs
and I got perfect guiding with as much as 70 lbs on it. Now my load is
about 85 lbs, a bit much for the G-11.
Davoud
--
Don't re-elect the failures of the past eight years.
usenet *at* davidillig dawt com
Bill
problem I have is spilling beverages...
I don't feel qualified to advise you on a laptop; but I'd want to be
comfortable that I could run whatever control applications I might want:
camera, guider, focuser, and maybe even the option to control my mount
via other software: The Sky, ACP, etc. Part of this is making sure you
know how many ports & their type you will need have.
If you want to do image processing in the field you might want to look
at the laptop's display capabilities & the video card more closely --
make sure you're getting what you want.
Since most laptops run kinda warm anyway, I'd wonder if keeping a
lightweight blanket sorta draped around the laptop would work to keep it
warm enough to keep dew off it. If not, there are heating pads
available for laptops.
hope it helps,
Longfellow
> My setup is a permanent one -- only desktop pcs that stay indoors...the
> problem I have is spilling beverages...
>
> I don't feel qualified to advise you on a laptop; but I'd want to be
> comfortable that I could run whatever control applications I might want:
> camera, guider, focuser, and maybe even the option to control my mount
> via other software: The Sky, ACP, etc. Part of this is making sure you
> know how many ports & their type you will need have.
Got that.
> If you want to do image processing in the field you might want to look
> at the laptop's display capabilities & the video card more closely --
> make sure you're getting what you want.
That was my first consideration, actually. Will be using it for other
kinds of photography as well, so that is a real issue.
> Since most laptops run kinda warm anyway, I'd wonder if keeping a
> lightweight blanket sorta draped around the laptop would work to keep it
> warm enough to keep dew off it. If not, there are heating pads
> available for laptops.
Ah, hadn't thought of that, but that's a good call.
> hope it helps,
> Bill
Yes, thanks!
Longfellow
Longfellow
> While I don't have the orion Mt nor seen it in action, I can tell you from
> expereince with the G-11, that while it does not have as nice a handpaddle
> as the Orion/Meade/Celestron systems. It is far from poor.
>
> It has a one line display, and the basic mode is scrolling through menus,
> but It's accuracy is pretty good (asuming you have good polar alignment and
> have built a decent pointing model.).
Good information, Thanks.
Longfellow