Cem60

Posted on 30 August 2017

CEM60 or CEM60-EC - Mounts - Cloudy Nights - I have an AVX which think m starting to push the limits of. Some people swear by the CEM I always swore at it. I still have one Celestron mount left an AVX but don use ASPA with any longer. Donation is not required by any means so please enjoy your stay. The guided tracking with CEM and my astrograph has been very impressive. And I m not sure how you know unless test with drifting or guiding to see off is

Much better than my hypertuned Atlas. The guided tracking with CEM and my astrograph has been very impressive. No regrets from me for getting the CGX. I can get minutes unguide with nice tight star from my CGX

iOptron CEM60 and iEQ45 Pro

I assume this your primary observing site. Are you primarily visual observer Do wish to explore in the future plan on putting more scopes weight mount While at it have problem seeing Polaris from your current location. based on ms minimum guide pulse length. The CEM seems more advance and nicer overall design but performance on par with CGX. What s the learning curve like moving to CEM How is polar alignment without Polaris etc. Go back to the manual and read section Two Star Polar Align which think is what they are calling it now. The CGX L just works with a well established NexStar interface very accurate GOTOs and tracking rock solid stability easily handles payload. The same could be said for Polemaster

www.ioptron.com

On the other hand CGX has that nice polar alignment option very comfortable with can do quickly. is irrelevant and meaningless marketing numbers. I do have to manually set up every time want image so carrying that weight and out of the house. PHD and other software will enumerate quality your alignment. I used ASPA for years but never found its reports on how close was to the Nikau apartments waiheke pole reliable. CEM vs telfer underground mine CGX which wins a cage match Started by Lead Weight Aug PM Please log to reply replies this topic Messenger starter Posts Joined Jul Loc Houston Posted August Seriously though looking both mounts

Payner likes this Back to top ip28 6aa Lead Weight Messenger topic starter Posts Joined Jul Loc Houston Posted August PM All mimsy were the borogoves and the mome raths outgrabe Andrew Well lessee. With the AVX that took about minutes for me once learned

184.198.246.200

Assuming it works advertised doesn seem any harder than ASPA. My only issue with they basically say do until you re happy

86.221.60.128

The CEM seems more advance and nicer overall design but performance on par with CGX. It s awesome. That is easily demonstrated by doing ASPA twice row without moving the mount

164.42.107.180

Back to top Lead Weight Messenger topic starter Posts Joined Jul Loc Houston Posted August PM Just moved from an AVX CEM and still the learning curve mount. payner and Arringar like this Back to top gdd Vanguard Posts Joined Nov Loc Lynnwood WA Seattle Posted August PM choose the CEM. With the AVX that took about minutes for me once learned

236.239.36.207

That is easily demonstrated by doing ASPA twice row without moving the mount. On the other hand CGX has that nice polar alignment option very comfortable with can do quickly

174.26.193.93

The mount does have polar alignment system in HC but you really only need precise if imaging and are Sharpcap or Polemaster way to go easier than ASPA more accurate it similar methods. I have no problem carrying the equipment down to my and back up second floor next day not want tempt any potential thief by leaving view from yard at all so always drive miles one remote site for imaging session

71.90.185.116

Back to top Lead Weight Messenger topic starter Posts Joined Jul Loc Houston Posted August PM Just moved from an AVX CEM and still the learning curve mount. It s quicker for me than what used to do two ASPA iterations and my alignments are noticeably better. Thanks this was actually really reassuring

150.44.17.140

On the other hand CGX has that nice polar alignment option very comfortable with can do quickly. A tree is right in the way of pole. I do not want to waste time learning all new procedures rather spend that on imaging

190.226.208.250

Posted August PM Just moved from an AVX to CEM and still in the learning curve on mount. And I m not sure how you know unless test with drifting or guiding to see off is. Perhaps current CEM owner can weighin here and talk more about the difficulty level of PA

17.159.139.123

Go back to the manual and read section Two Star Polar Align which think is what they are calling it now. The CGX is nice enough but really just an incremental improvement on CGEM

43.103.67.78

The HC is a little different but not that . Bob Huerbsch likes this Back to top suvowner Vostok Posts Joined May Loc Arkansas Posted June PM use ASPA but know that its reports are only reproducible about

141.252.80.78

I still have one Celestron mount left an AVX but don use ASPA with any longer. Back to top rmollise ISS Posts Joined Jul Posted August PM imaging

15.149.179.199

A tree is right in the way of pole. Otherwise d look hard at iOptron

253.94.53.14

Assuming it works advertised doesn seem any harder than ASPA. Joey As I said the CEM HC has polar alignment routine builtin two star

40.204.204.248

Mm or less. You then have to be able rotate RA axis significant angle another region also within or degrees of pole

46.9.102.185

Every time. Posted August PM Just moved from an AVX to CEM and still in the learning curve on mount

185.227.234.252

PHD and other software will enumerate quality your alignment. The resolution of CEM stepper motor is. A tree is right in the way of pole

34.137.47.113

I still have one Celestron mount left an AVX but don use ASPA with any longer. arcsec resolution

136.128.108.60

No regrets so far. is irrelevant and meaningless marketing numbers. Anyhow I have no view of Polaris and need to be able align accurately

117.57.165.169

You can also drift align with PHD without Polaris being visible. Michael Covington likes this Back top rmollise ISS Posts Joined Jul Posted August PM Andrew Well lessee. I m also interested trying different company than Celestron understand the AVX is low end but was very dissatisfied with workmanship lack of QC my mount

143.208.20.92

There shouldn be much of a learning curve. The tracking never performed right with oscillation errors and PEC not within specs even short exposures

219.138.209.65

I ve had lot of experience with both CEM and the CGXL much prefer latter. payner likes this Back to top Lead Weight Messenger topic starter Posts Joined Jul Loc Houston Posted August PM Andrew Well lessee. Don t Sharpcap and Polemaster require Polaris see tree where should be

85.250.39.64

Otherwise d look hard at iOptron. Phil Cowell tonyt and Arringar like this Back top Gipht Apollo Posts Joined Nov Loc Prescott Valley AZ

88.97.127.135

I can get minutes unguide with nice tight star from my CGX. I assume this your primary observing site. An Atlas should under good conditions be able to manage minutes per sub without excessive throwaways and IMHO is the minimum one consider if going for that length but like everything higher mount price will improve keeper rate

87.15.82.194

The same could be said for Polemaster. You don t actually have to see Polaris use Sharpcap and probably Polemaster well but within or degrees of the

153.55.131.63

You do have to be scrupulous about putting the mount home position Zero but that necessary with AVX too. is irrelevant and meaningless marketing numbers

202.206.176.222

Regards Mr. You then have to be able rotate RA axis significant angle another region also within or degrees of pole

120.185.180.74

The CGX is nice enough but really just an incremental improvement on CGEM. You can also drift align with PHD without Polaris being visible. payner and Arringar like this Back to top gdd Vanguard Posts Joined Nov Loc Lynnwood WA Seattle Posted August PM choose the CEM

246.158.245.30

What seems like tedious polar alignment on the CEM might be true first. I assume this your primary observing site. I only travel with my scope times year so mostly imaging from the back yard where can see north and west clearly

235.117.63.107

The CGX is nice enough but really just an incremental improvement on CGEM. I ve also read the manual for CEM and their alignment process when you have no Polaris