AstroPhysics 600E SMD vs. Losmandy G-11
Ruel A. Motos
Hi My Fellow Hobbyists,
Which of the two do you think is a better equatorial mount for an
AstroPhysics 130mm f/6 EDF Starfire APO refractor? AP 600E SMD or
Losmandy G-11?
What do you think of University Optics Orthoscopics eyepieces? Is the
quality on par with Zeiss orthos??
Please share your experience and ideas.
Ruel Motos
Rich N.
Ruel A. Motos <User...@qualcomm.com> wrote in article
<355362...@qualcomm.com>...
Hi Ruel,
The AP 600E SMD. It is very well made. I like the internal
motor design. The servo motors seem like a good idea. It is
nice to have the OTA and mount from the same company.
The 130EDF should have very good damping time on the 600E,
I would guess it would be less than one second if you tapped
the focuser.
If serious astrophotography was your primary interest you might
consider a 900 mount.
I don't like the optional 600E travel case (at least the one available a
few
years ago). It is IMO too bulky for the size of the mount. I would
perfer if the mount were supported on more than just its base when
in the case. I would like to see a more compact hardsided case
with foam inside to hold the mount.
A Rubbermade (sp?) plastic box will hold the mount very nicely
with foam added for padding
I haven't the UO Orthos. The Zeiss are very nice, rather short
eye relief but for planetary viewing that's not a big problem.
The Pentax SMC XL give nice planetary performance.
Rich
Joe Castoro
Hi Ruel,
Both are very nice mounts and will be rock stable with that short
refractor. If you need to make a choice, remember the G-11 is about
1,500.00 less fully equiped ( you have to still purchase a tripod for
the Ap-600 ). If you are talking about the new Ap-600 with goto, then
the difference is a lot more than 1,500.00.
Joe Castoro
SSqui
>AP 600E SMD or
>Losmandy G-11?
If dollars are important go with the G-11. It will probably meet 85-95% of
your requirements for the short EDF. The best mount of the two is the AP.
>What do you think of University Optics Orthoscopics eyepieces? Is the
>quality on par with Zeiss orthos??
The UO orthos are GOOD general purpose eyepieces. They only cost ~$50.
The Zeiss average ~$200-250. It doesn't take much experience to see the
difference between the two. That said, having both, I get a lot of use out of
my UO's. Ir's a broader economic tradeoff than the mounts above, but theUO
are probably 85-95% of the Zeiss. To some the last 5-15% is the most
important. And if you're using these on an EDF I'd get the Zeiss.
A good middle of the road, yet with quality as high as the Zeiss, IMHO, are the
Pentax orthos. And they slot mostly in between the Zeiss on focal length. All
of these at the shorter focal ratios have poor eye relief, normally at or
shorter than the focal length of the eyepiece.
Lastly, the Pentax XL's are great short focal length planetary performers, with
broad FOV and 20mm eye relief. The Vixen Lanthiums retain the FOV of the ortho
design, and add the 20mm eye relief at the expense of more glass and coatings
that are a little short of the XL's.
-
Stewart Squires
"Islands lie beyond the sun that I shall raise ere day is done" Bilbo's Last
Song, J.R.R. Tolkien
kar...@pacific.net.sg
> >AP 600E SMD or
> >Losmandy G-11?
>
> If dollars are important go with the G-11. It will probably meet 85-95% of
> your requirements for the short EDF. The best mount of the two is the AP.
Could anyone care to explain exactly in what ways is the AP600E better
than the Losmandy G-11?
Thanks!!
Regards,
Qu
Joe Castoro
> Could anyone care to explain exactly in what ways is the AP600E better
> than the Losmandy G-11?
>
> Thanks!!
>
> Regards,
> Qu
Hi Qu,
I have checked out both. The differences are not that apparent. Load
carrying seems to be equal, maybe the edge goes to the G-11 after the
following: The mounts seem equal in performance only after the " tuneup
" is done to the G-11. This tuneup is mostly correcting the altitude
adjuster. Nothing else seemed important as a fix. This " Tuneup " I am
talking about is described in detail on the G-11 tune up Site. The big
difference was the price. The g-11 is $ 1,500 less, so I bought the G-11
and it was immeadiately available, no months of waiting from AP.
Purchased it from Pocono Mountain Optics. Had the mount in a few days.
G-11 tuneup page:
http://www.tfh-berlin.de/~goerlich/cg11tune.html
I serviced my altitude adjuster slightly different from the advice on
the above site. Those of you interested can do the following:
The internal brass pivot of the altitude adjuster was held in position
on one side of the upwrights with a set screw. This prevented rotational
movement of the brass pivot. Next a machine handle was added to the
other side where an allen hex bolt was. The machine handle has a 3/8"
steel stud protuding out for 3/4". It is threaded into the side and use
to draw the two sides together. Just unloosen the handle ( available
from MSC ), make the Altitude adjustment using your polar scope, then
retighten the handle. What you are doing is drawing together the
altitude halves securely. This method allows you to ignore all the slop
in the altitude adjuster. Once that handle is locked down, all the
latitude adjuster problems disappear.
A major plus for the G-11 is its tripod. Almost nothing is more stable.
With the telescoping legs, its a lot easier to transport. The
electronics work flawlessly. Easy tension adjustment on both axis with a
single knurled aluminum ring to adjust the friction of each axis. With
the Ap there are 4 plastic knobs around each axis collar to achive the
desired tension. The AP-600 is a nice mount. It could be more stable
with the addition of the Losmandy tripod ( you have to machine an
adapter plate ).
Now if you want something really stable for that 7" refractor, use the
AP-900 mount with an adapter plate for the Meade Giant field tripod.
This will make for an awesome combination. It gives you both Height and
stability.
Joe Castoro
Rich N.
kar...@pacific.net.sg wrote in article <35567D...@pacific.net.sg>...
> > >AP 600E SMD or
> > >Losmandy G-11?
> >
> > If dollars are important go with the G-11. It will probably meet
85-95% of
> > your requirements for the short EDF. The best mount of the two is
the AP.
>
> Could anyone care to explain exactly in what ways is the AP600E better
> than the Losmandy G-11?
The AP600E looks nicer, it is made by AP, the motors are inside
the mount (very clean looking), the wires attach at one point and
won't get tangled in the middle of the night. (mabe this true for
the G11 too?). The 600E now uses a servo motor that is said
to be very smooth running.
Rich
> Thanks!!
>
> Regards,
> Qu
>
Paul Gustafson
>The AP600E looks nicer, it is made by AP, the motors are inside
>the mount (very clean looking), the wires attach at one point and
>won't get tangled in the middle of the night. (mabe this true for
>the G11 too?). The 600E now uses a servo motor that is said
>to be very smooth running.
>
>Rich
The wires to the motors are exposed, but since they are coiled like a
telephone handset cord, tangling is not a problem. What is a problem is that
the encoder gears are exposed, waiting to bite any small cable that comes
too close. I ran a dew heater cable through an encoder gear, and other than
the aggravation, no damage was done--the gear on the encoder was easily
repositioned. However, if the gear shaft is bent, it would have to be
replaced.
Paul
Paul Gustafson
I get an error trying to reach the tuneup page--no response from server.
--
Paul Gustafson
Running a jOeY Bad Boy System
Joe Castoro wrote in message <3555E4...@erols.com>...
Joe Castoro
Try again later, the site is down. Its the right URL - no typos as far
as I see.
Joe Castoro
Joe Mize
Qu;
One very important thing to consider. AP600E is built by Astro-Physics, the
G-11 is built by Losmandy "for" Celestron.
I own a Losmandy GM-100, although both the GM-100 and G-11 are built by
Losmandy the GM-100 is superior to the G-11. More weight carrying capabilities,
larger more accurate gears and overall a more massive mount. The G-11 is built
for mass marketing by Celestron with all the associated cost savings incorporated
at the obvoius expenses of performance. The AP600E suffers none of those woes.
If I were to rank the three to buy they would be the GM-100, AP600E then the
G-11 in that order simply because both the GM-100 & AP600E are built by the
retailer, not built "for" someone else.
Don't get me wrong, the G-11 serves very well in its intended slot in the
market. It just doesn't compare to the other two mounts. You'll be happier with
the AP600E than with the G-11...joe :)
kar...@pacific.net.sg wrote:
> Could anyone care to explain exactly in what ways is the AP600E better
> than the Losmandy G-11?--
"May You Go Among The Imperishable Stars"
ssqu...@hsresources.com
jm...@globe-net.net wrote:
>
> Qu;
>
> One very important thing to consider. AP600E is built by Astro-Physics, the
> G-11 is built by Losmandy "for" Celestron.
>
I don't dispute your ranking, but it is important to note that the G-11 was
sold my Losmandy prior to Celestron's licensing of the mount. The mount was
upgraded after licensing by Celestron to handle the C-14. So although it is
now made 'for' Celestron the mount is everything that Losmandy designed it to
be prior to Celestron getting involved.
The only mount that Celestron has 'altered' is the G-9, by taking a GM-8 EQ
head and mounting it on a Chinese aluminum tripod.
Stew
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
kar...@pacific.net.sg
I notice that the RA gear size is smaller in the AP600E than in the
G-11. Does this mean that the G-11 has a more accurate drive system than
the AP600E?
Rich N.
kar...@pacific.net.sg wrote in article <3557E5...@pacific.net.sg>...
> I notice that the RA gear size is smaller in the AP600E than in the
> G-11. Does this mean that the G-11 has a more accurate drive system than
> the AP600E?
>
All things being equal the larger gear is better but.. I don't know
that the G-11 is more accruate.
I don't think the AP 600E was intended to carry as much of a load
as the G-11. The older AP 800 and now the 900 and 1200 were
designed to be the "heavy lifters" of the AP line.
Rich
Ian Turner
In article <01bd7d0e$e60a70e0$5ee0fc82@Neuschaefer_Rich.mis.tandem.com>,
"Rich N." <rich.neu...@tandem.com> wrote:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
To set the record straight I've used both.
For a dedicated astrophotographer or CCD imager the 600E is a better performer.
The G11 is a 98 Corvette fast cheap and nice with great performance.
The AP600E is a Porsche 911. Fast expensive and just about perfect, a finer
tuned machine.
The G11 does not retain it's PEC in memory I find this a pain. Turn the PEC
off you lose all it's training even thought the mount is still powered. I
don't like unplugging the hand controller than having to plug the
autoguider in.
Backlash must always be programmed it is not retained when power is removed.
There is no way to lock the DA and Dec axis. There is always a small amount
of free play in the sytem. ( wiggle the counterweight shaft)
U guy's and Girls decide for yourself based on your personal needs.
Ian
--
_____________________________________________________________________
Ian Turner
Replace the xxxxxxxxxx with mindspring
Astrophoto and CCD Imaging Tips
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/7247/
_____________________________________________________________________
Rich N.
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> To set the record straight I've used both.
>
> For a dedicated astrophotographer or CCD imager the 600E is a better
performer.
>
> The G11 is a 98 Corvette fast cheap and nice with great performance.
>
> The AP600E is a Porsche 911. Fast expensive and just about perfect, a
finer
> tuned machine.
>
> The G11 does not retain it's PEC in memory I find this a pain. Turn the
PEC
> off you lose all it's training even thought the mount is still powered. I
> don't like unplugging the hand controller than having to plug the
> autoguider in.
> Backlash must always be programmed it is not retained when power is
removed.
> There is no way to lock the DA and Dec axis. There is always a small
amount
> of free play in the sytem. ( wiggle the counterweight shaft)
>
> U guy's and Girls decide for yourself based on your personal needs.
>
> Ian
Hi Ian,
What OTA do you use on the AP 600E when doing CCD imaging?
Thanks,
Rich
Ian Turner
In article <01bd7d2f$70bfe100$5ee0fc82@Neuschaefer_Rich.mis.tandem.com>,
"Rich N." <rich.neu...@tandem.com> wrote:
>
>Hi Ian,
>
>What OTA do you use on the AP 600E when doing CCD imaging?
>
>Thanks,
>Rich
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I have used the AP600E with a Astrophysics 130EDT F8 & a 10" Meade SCT
Scott Rychnovsky
>
> I have used the AP600E with a Astrophysics 130EDT F8 & a 10" Meade SCT
>
>
> Ian
Doesn't the fork mount bump into the tripod when you track across zenith?
:-).
--
Scott Rychnovsky
sryc...@uci.edu
Remove the "z" in the e-mail header to respond
Rene Goerlich
In article <355685...@erols.com>,
The URL is O.K., although it's the mirror, my server is w3.tfh-berlin.de .
The ATM switch connecting us to the world was down.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rene Goerlich, TFH BERLIN, FB VI, Labor fuer Rechner- & Informationssysteme
smail: Technische Fachhochschule Berlin, University of Applied Sciences
FB VI, Luxemburger Str. 10, D-13353 Berlin
SMTP: goer...@tfh-berlin.de phone: +49 30 4504 2981
WWW: http://w3.tfh-berlin.de/~goerlich/
Bob Luffel
Re: the question about accuracy of the 600E vs G11 drives. Since the
G-11 has a larger worm gear, you would expect it to have proportionately
less periodic error.
Based on two samples of the 600 mount and one G-11 mount, I have found that
this is not necessarily the case. My observing buddies G-11 has a periodic
error of around +/- 8 arcseconds. Both 600 mounts that I have measured came
in at +/- 5 arcseconds. 5 arcseconds is extremely good (amazing, really, for
a 4" gear).
This is really splitting hairs. Anything under 10 arcseconds is quite
sufficient for deep sky ccd/photo work. You will always need to guide
for the best results, and at 10 arcsec or less this will be a piece of
cake (especially for an autoguider or track/accumulate ccd function).
Bob Luffel