Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: AP900 vs. AP1200 for TMB 152

Expand Messages
  • gnowellsct
    The Argo Navis TPAS has similar and powerful pointing capabilities comparable to Tpoint, and no laptop required. That s a big deal for someone who s not
    Message 1 of 23 , Oct 4, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      The Argo Navis TPAS has similar and powerful pointing capabilities
      comparable to Tpoint, and no laptop required. That's a big deal for
      someone who's not imaging.

      Roland has said that on the ap group that the new software is in the
      works but he gave no date.

      regards
      Greg N

      --- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "Tube Tim" <potentate@...> wrote:
      >Competition is a nice thing. :-) Using TheSky and Tpoint option,
      > I've modeled my AP900 and got excellent pointing results. Even
      > without, once properly Polar Aligned it does very well.
      >
      > > Reportedly AP has new software in the works.
      >
      > interesting... Any guesses of when and what will be the new
      features?
      >
      > >
      > > Bottom line: the 900 should work, and if it doesn't it won't be
      hard
      > > to resell.
      > >
      > > regards
      > > Greg N
      > >
      >
      >
      > ___
      > Tim
      >
    • Louis Marchesi
      ... for there ... I did [hesitate]. It s gone. At least the wait lists are getting shorter for mounts. Regards, Louis Marchesi New London Twp, PA
      Message 2 of 23 , Oct 4, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "Terry Tuggle" <tlt284@...> wrote:

        > These are so much better built than the G-11's, and many use G11's
        for there
        > 152's. I would not hesitate.

        I did [hesitate]. It's gone. At least the wait lists are getting
        shorter for mounts.

        Regards,
        Louis Marchesi
        New London Twp, PA
      • Louis Marchesi
        ... There s a lot of traffic around here :-) ... I am hopeful of building my observatory this coming spring and I honestly don t do too much astronomy away
        Message 3 of 23 , Oct 4, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "Tube Tim" <potentate@...> wrote:

          > Somehow I missed this question... ???
          There's a lot of traffic around here :-)

          > anyway, I have an AP 900 and it handles the 152 easily, even CCD
          > imaging with the STL11K and FF. A 1200 would be nice, but it's larger
          > and all that goes along with that (larger pier etc etc).

          I am hopeful of building my observatory this coming spring and I
          honestly don't do too much astronomy away from home (BFSP, WSP is
          pretty much it), so the extra bulk of a 1200 wouldn't be that much
          more cumbersome, would it?

          I am on both lists at AP. The current AP run of 1200's is up to July
          2006, so it would seem that I'll be in the next run in 2007. The 900's
          are only through 2004. So I could grab whichever were offered first.

          If you plan
          > to do imaging

          I do, otherwise I would probably stick with the G-11.

          Regards,
          Louis Marchesi
          New London Twp, PA
        • Louis Marchesi
          ... OTAs. That s a good point, Greg. The mount that was up for sale was a 2003 model, but by the time I got a pier, upgraded the controller to the latest
          Message 4 of 23 , Oct 4, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" <tim71pos@...> wrote:
            >
            > The one on the mart for $7.5k (if that's the one) struck me as
            > overpriced relative to some recent offers of the same mount in the $6
            > k range, particularly since it didn't seem to include counterweights
            > and other accessories. You need to really pay close attention to the
            > accessories offered with a used AP mount, and remember that the
            > mounts, while "highly prized" are not anywhere near as rare as the
            OTAs.

            That's a good point, Greg. The mount that was up for sale was a 2003
            model, but by the time I got a pier, upgraded the controller to the
            latest "spec" etc etc, I might as well wait until my name comes up at
            AP and get brand new for nearly the same outlay.

            Regards,
            Louis Marchesi
            New London Twp, PA
          • Tube Tim
            ... You re asking the wrong guy as I way over mounted my TMB 229 (hope to get a 305 someday :-) ) Since the AP s break apart setting either up is just a
            Message 5 of 23 , Oct 4, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              >--- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Marchesi" <lmarchesi@...
              > wrote:
              >
              > I am hopeful of building my observatory this coming spring and I
              > honestly don't do too much astronomy away from home (BFSP, WSP is
              > pretty much it), so the extra bulk of a 1200 wouldn't be that much
              > more cumbersome, would it?
              >

              You're asking the wrong guy as I way over mounted my TMB 229 (hope to
              get a 305 someday :-) ) Since the AP's break apart setting either
              up is just a matter of time as far as I know. I haven't worked on a
              1200 mind you. I think the price difference between the 900 Vs. 1200
              is not that great.

              > I am on both lists at AP. The current AP run of 1200's is up to July
              > 2006, so it would seem that I'll be in the next run in 2007. The 900's
              > are only through 2004. So I could grab whichever were offered first.
              >
              > If you plan
              > > to do imaging
              >
              > I do, otherwise I would probably stick with the G-11.

              Well if you have the observatory and you have any thoughts of a
              larger scope, perhaps the 1200 is the way to go. With the 1200 you
              could move up to a TMB 175 f/9 and using the AP focal reducer have a
              f/7.2 scope for imaging, best of both worlds.

              There are other quality mounts, like the ME and MI. The Parallax is
              also good if one includes a simple mod I would recommend. The Byer's
              gear are the best in my humble opinion and I've checked mine have zero
              run out. I think the ME also uses Byers. To get the most of these I
              think there is slightly different mod that would make it one of the
              best mounts out there.

              The group is very good at helping spending others money.

              Best Regards,

              Tim

              >
              > Regards,
              > Louis Marchesi
              > New London Twp, PA
              >
            • gnowellsct
              Well the thing about AP is that it appeals to be people who are in the upper income bracket and then again to the upper bracket of the upper income bracket.
              Message 6 of 23 , Oct 5, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Well the thing about AP is that it appeals to be people who are in the
                upper income bracket and then again to the upper bracket of the upper
                income bracket. My personal income demographic is good, from the
                statistics I see, and I HAVE an AP in the garage, but it MATTERS to me
                that I was able to save about $4-5k by buying used equipment. (I also
                am not fond of go-to in any case.)

                But MANY of the people who buy AP stuff don't really care whether they
                spend $11k or $12k for the mount with accessories, it's all the same
                to them, and what they're really after is shortening the wait.

                So you do see cases where these go-to mounts sell for minimal
                discounts off their new price. But it is much less pronounced than
                for the OTAs, which in fact are scarce relative to demand. You do see
                AP900s in the 6's (with go-to).

                And the non-go-to mounts sell for a very good discount. I saw an
                AP1200, non-go-to, at $5k and damned near bought it myself, but had
                just mailed the check off for the AP900, which is probably all I need.

                Because I look at it this way. If I want to image I COULD do it with
                the OTA I have and pop for a more expensive mount, in the $12k range
                (or maybe a used AP1200 at half that).

                OR, I could buy a c8 used for $600.

                Because 99% of imaging is in learning how to process and getting the
                tracking right. So I would LEARN how to image with a c8. Maybe a 9.25
                if inclined to splurge. The AP900 would be more than enough. Then
                I'd have the funds to pop for these fancy SBIG cameras etc.

                Once I was GOOD at imaging, and confident of what I was doing, I would
                consider upgrades to the OTA or the mount. Look at the stuff Wolfgang
                Promper did with a c8--some of it is still up on the web, last I checked.

                Nonetheless I am sympathetic to the apo-inclined who love their
                refractors. But the same logic applies. Learn the techniques with a
                four or five inch aperture on a g11 or AP900 before taking out a
                second mortgage for the AP1200 go-to with an 8" apo.

                regards
                greg n



                --- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Marchesi" <lmarchesi@...> wrote:
                >
                > --- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" <tim71pos@> wrote:
                > >
                > > The one on the mart for $7.5k (if that's the one) struck me as
                > > overpriced relative to some recent offers of the same mount in the $6
                > > k range, particularly since it didn't seem to include counterweights
                > > and other accessories. You need to really pay close attention to the
                > > accessories offered with a used AP mount, and remember that the
                > > mounts, while "highly prized" are not anywhere near as rare as the
                > OTAs.
                >
                > That's a good point, Greg. The mount that was up for sale was a 2003
                > model, but by the time I got a pier, upgraded the controller to the
                > latest "spec" etc etc, I might as well wait until my name comes up at
                > AP and get brand new for nearly the same outlay.
                >
                > Regards,
                > Louis Marchesi
                > New London Twp, PA
                >
              • gnowellsct
                I have only one reservation about Parallax mounts: it has a TINY user community. Two or three dozen on the Yahoo group if I recall. The mounts look nice but
                Message 7 of 23 , Oct 5, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  I have only one reservation about Parallax mounts: it has a TINY user
                  community. Two or three dozen on the Yahoo group if I recall. The
                  mounts look nice but in a sense it is "safer" to run with a more well
                  known mount where there is a bigger base of expertise.

                  The APs break apart and they break apart in a way that is "easy." The
                  Titans also break apart but you have to heft the dec head over a long
                  threaded shaft. I was always worried about that arrangement, worried
                  that I would booger the threads. The AP latch lock system is immune
                  from that problem.

                  regards
                  Greg N

                  --- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "Tube Tim" <potentate@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > >--- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Marchesi" <lmarchesi@
                  > > wrote:
                  > >
                  > > I am hopeful of building my observatory this coming spring and I
                  > > honestly don't do too much astronomy away from home (BFSP, WSP is
                  > > pretty much it), so the extra bulk of a 1200 wouldn't be that much
                  > > more cumbersome, would it?
                  > >
                  >
                  > You're asking the wrong guy as I way over mounted my TMB 229 (hope to
                  > get a 305 someday :-) ) Since the AP's break apart setting either
                  > up is just a matter of time as far as I know. I haven't worked on a
                  > 1200 mind you. I think the price difference between the 900 Vs. 1200
                  > is not that great.
                  >
                  > > I am on both lists at AP. The current AP run of 1200's is up to July
                  > > 2006, so it would seem that I'll be in the next run in 2007. The 900's
                  > > are only through 2004. So I could grab whichever were offered first.
                  > >
                  > > If you plan
                  > > > to do imaging
                  > >
                  > > I do, otherwise I would probably stick with the G-11.
                  >
                  > Well if you have the observatory and you have any thoughts of a
                  > larger scope, perhaps the 1200 is the way to go. With the 1200 you
                  > could move up to a TMB 175 f/9 and using the AP focal reducer have a
                  > f/7.2 scope for imaging, best of both worlds.
                  >
                  > There are other quality mounts, like the ME and MI. The Parallax is
                  > also good if one includes a simple mod I would recommend. The Byer's
                  > gear are the best in my humble opinion and I've checked mine have zero
                  > run out. I think the ME also uses Byers. To get the most of these I
                  > think there is slightly different mod that would make it one of the
                  > best mounts out there.
                  >
                  > The group is very good at helping spending others money.
                  >
                  > Best Regards,
                  >
                  > Tim
                  >
                  > >
                  > > Regards,
                  > > Louis Marchesi
                  > > New London Twp, PA
                  > >
                  >
                • Paul Gustafson
                  ... The 1200 is twice the mount of the 900 for not much more money (relatively speaking). The only real benefit of the 900 over the 1200 is portability. I was
                  Message 8 of 23 , Oct 5, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    "Louis Marchesi" <lmarchesi@...> wrote:
                    > I am hopeful of building my observatory this coming spring and I
                    > honestly don't do too much astronomy away from home (BFSP, WSP is
                    > pretty much it), so the extra bulk of a 1200 wouldn't be that much
                    > more cumbersome, would it?

                    The 1200 is twice the mount of the 900 for not much more money
                    (relatively speaking). The only real benefit of the 900 over the 1200
                    is portability. I was torn between the two but since I must transport
                    to observe easy portability won out for me.

                    Paul Gustafson
                  • Tube Tim
                    ... When I went shopping for my Parallax I was surprised there wasn t a Yahoo group at the time. Joe just isn t into that. There is little activity which one
                    Message 9 of 23 , Oct 5, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      >--- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" <tim71pos@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > I have only one reservation about Parallax mounts: it has a TINY
                      > user community. Two or three dozen on the Yahoo group if I recall.
                      > The mounts look nice but in a sense it is "safer" to run with a
                      > more well known mount where there is a bigger base of expertise.

                      When I went shopping for my Parallax I was surprised there wasn't a
                      Yahoo group at the time. Joe just isn't into that. There is little
                      activity which one can take to mean no one is tinkering, they are
                      observing. Myself, I tinker and tear everything apart, nothing is
                      sacred. That's why I mention a recommended mod. When I saw the RA
                      rides on a huge 5" timken bearing I was impressed.

                      Joe was nice enough to build a custom unit between an observatory
                      mount and the HD200. I dubbed it the HD250C. After measuring the PE
                      of the Byer's gear at 1.5 arc-seconds I was sold (or glad I bought).
                      With the gears disengaged, the movement is velvet smooth, one pound of
                      off balance is noticable. Normally the gears are always meshed so one
                      has to fight the clutches. Someday I may have my machinist fix a
                      quick engage / release mechanism for this and then the clutches are
                      only there for safety. I like to tinker.

                      >
                      > The APs break apart and they break apart in a way that is "easy."

                      The Parallax does also, but it takes two bolts to put them back
                      together. Plus you have to place the DEC axis on two little metal
                      pegs. The best solution is an permanent observatory where it's always
                      clear, warm and the people are friendly. :-)


                      Tim
                    • Louis Marchesi
                      ... The thought of a larger scope has crossed my mind, and makes the 1200 the better option. ... I thought the AP mounts had an open architecture (as in
                      Message 10 of 23 , Oct 5, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "Tube Tim" <potentate@...> wrote:

                        > Well if you have the observatory and you have any thoughts of a
                        > larger scope, perhaps the 1200 is the way to go. With the 1200 you
                        > could move up to a TMB 175 f/9 and using the AP focal reducer have a
                        > f/7.2 scope for imaging, best of both worlds.
                        The thought of a larger scope has crossed my mind, and makes the 1200
                        the better option.

                        >
                        > There are other quality mounts, like the ME and MI.
                        I thought the AP mounts had an open architecture (as in programming
                        interface, etc) whilst the Bisque mounts could only be controlled by
                        their proprietary software. A bit of a negative in my book.
                        Regardless, it would be yet another increase in cost. I'm already
                        running out of money I don't even have :-)

                        > The group is very good at helping spending others money.
                        That much is certain :-)

                        Regards,
                        Louis Marchesi
                        New London Twp, PA
                      • Louis Marchesi
                        ... I agree Paul. ... One thing is clear from this thread; it doesn t seem like a bad choice can be made. Regards, Louis Marchesi New London Twp, PA
                        Message 11 of 23 , Oct 5, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gustafson" <laservet@...> wrote:

                          > The 1200 is twice the mount of the 900 for not much more money
                          > (relatively speaking).

                          I agree Paul.

                          >
                          > The only real benefit of the 900 over the 1200
                          > is portability. I was torn between the two but since I must transport
                          > to observe easy portability won out for me.
                          >

                          One thing is clear from this thread; it doesn't seem like a bad choice
                          can be made.

                          Regards,
                          Louis Marchesi
                          New London Twp, PA
                        • Louis Marchesi
                          ... My guess is that AP s customers tend to devote more of their income to the hobby. Let s see, if I don t buy a new car every year, have a boat at the marina
                          Message 12 of 23 , Oct 5, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" <tim71pos@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Well the thing about AP is that it appeals to be people who are in the
                            > upper income bracket and then again to the upper bracket of the upper
                            > income bracket. My personal income demographic is good, from the
                            > statistics I see, and I HAVE an AP in the garage, but it MATTERS to me
                            > that I was able to save about $4-5k by buying used equipment. (I also
                            > am not fond of go-to in any case.)

                            My guess is that AP's customers tend to devote more of their income to
                            the hobby. Let's see, if I don't buy a new car every year, have a boat
                            at the marina and take multi-thousand dollar vacations each year, it
                            would be relatively "easy" to afford.

                            Reminds me of the adage: You can have anything you want, you just
                            can't have everything you want.

                            > OR, I could buy a c8 used for $600.

                            Darn, I could've had a C-8 (sorry, couldn't resist)

                            Regards,
                            Louis Marchesi
                            New London Twp, PA
                          • gnowellsct
                            Hey I m used to it. But check this out: http://www.astro-pics.com/42nc.htm regards Greg N
                            Message 13 of 23 , Oct 5, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Hey I'm used to it. But check this out:

                              http://www.astro-pics.com/42nc.htm

                              regards
                              Greg N

                              --- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Marchesi" <lmarchesi@...> wrote:
                              >

                              > Darn, I could've had a C-8 (sorry, couldn't resist)
                              >
                              > Regards,
                              > Louis Marchesi
                              > New London Twp, PA
                              >
                            • Tube Tim
                              ... Wheeh! At least you don t fly your airplane to the marina. With and airplane you can easily make a small fortune, assuming you have a large one to begin
                              Message 14 of 23 , Oct 5, 2006
                              • 0 Attachment
                                >--- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Marchesi" <lmarchesi@...
                                > wrote:
                                >
                                >
                                > My guess is that AP's customers tend to devote more of their income
                                > to the hobby. Let's see, if I don't buy a new car every year, have
                                > a boat at the marina and take multi-thousand dollar vacations each
                                > year, it would be relatively "easy" to afford.
                                >

                                Wheeh! At least you don't fly your airplane to the marina. With and
                                airplane you can easily make a small fortune, assuming you have a
                                large one to begin with.

                                > Reminds me of the adage: You can have anything you want, you just
                                > can't have everything you want.

                                -better yet-

                                "We want the world and we want it now" Jim Morrison, The Doors.

                                >
                                > > OR, I could buy a c8 used for $600.
                                >
                                > Darn, I could've had a C-8 (sorry, couldn't resist)

                                Funny !


                                Tim
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.