Author Topic: CGX vs Atlas Pro AZ/EQ-G  (Read 263 times)

poithegepur

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
CGX vs Atlas Pro AZ/EQ-G
« on: December 25, 2017, 09:21:06 AM »
I am trying to select between these two mounts.  Main use will be AP with OTAs ranging from 8lbs to 18lbs.

My worries are:
Stability
AP suitability
Reliability
Software compatibility
Support when needed if something breaks

Without placing a great deal of my opinions on the market, I'd really like to understand what more seasoned AP folks think and what your choice is and why.

I have not completed any AP in a couple of decades now.  I used to use a CGEM with a Orion Newtonian Astrograph and got fine benefits but the mount was overloaded and I had some backlash and other issues as a result.  I'm a bit from practice and I'm trying to make the ideal choice for the ideal reasons.Thanks for the input and advice!



Paul Syring

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 116
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: CGX vs Atlas Pro AZ/EQ-G
« Reply #1 on: December 30, 2017, 09:41:37 PM »
Between those two I'd probably go CGX If I had to make a choice but IMO a used G11 would be a far better choice.

Owen Richter

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: CGX vs Atlas Pro AZ/EQ-G
« Reply #2 on: December 31, 2017, 09:03:09 PM »
Quote
I am trying to choose between these two mounts. Primary use will be AP with OTAs ranging from 8lbs to 18lbs.

My concerns are:
Stability
AP suitability
Reliability
Software compatibility
Support when needed if something breaks

Without putting a lot of my own opinions out there, I would really like to know what more seasoned AP folks think and what your choice would be and why.

I haven't done any AP in a few years now. I used to use a CGEM with a Orion Newtonian Astrograph and got ok results but the mount was overloaded and I had some backlash and other issues as a result. I'm a bit out of practice and I'm trying to make the right choice for the right reasons.Thanks for your input and guidance!


If you are mainly doing imaging, why do you want to pay for the alt-az stuff? A more reasonable choice would be the SkyWatcher EQ6-R.

Anyway...the Atlas/EQ6 mounts and their variations are pretty stable. The weak link being a somewhat light tripod. At the minimum you want the TPI spreader system for them.

Many, many good shots have been taken with the EQ6 over the years. I've been very happy--or was till I sold my Atlas when my back went south--with its tracking/guiding.

Lots of good software including EQMOD. Just about any program can work with the EQ6

I am impressed by the support SkyWatcher USA is currently offering, so my advice would be to buy the SkyWatcher branded version of the mount at this time.

The CGX would also be a reasonable choice with some advantages. Mainly, its hand control, which offers better goto accuracy than any of the Atlas/EQ6 SynScan family of mounts. OTOH, if your gotos are being done by EQMOD or plate-solving, there's no advantage.

All these mounts--Atlas, SkyWatcher, Celestron--are made by the same company, Synta, and are more alike than different. The "Atlas" mounts are the branding the dealer Orion puts on the Synta mounts. The company's own housebrand for these mounts is "SkyWatcher."

Andre Stubblefield

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 121
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: CGX vs Atlas Pro AZ/EQ-G
« Reply #3 on: January 04, 2018, 05:05:34 PM »
I got burned once before buying a used mount. I am pretty sure it has lightning damage. I ended up replacing the main board and HC and selling it. It was fine after that but at the time that wasn't cheap to do.
There are three reasons I consider the atlas pro an option. The first is the closed loop electronics. That's a pretty great feature. The second is the ease of use of the adjustment screws. They are smooth and very user friendly. The mount will be mobile, no permanent pier mount so adjustments will be necessary each time I setup. Third is the AZ feature. While it is definitely going to be used for AP at least 90% of the time it is still nice to be able to switch into Alt/Az mode to do some daytime stuff or solar viewing or imaging. Bottom line is that I feel like it expands the possibilities of the mount a bit. It was my first choice if I'm being honest but I know better than to make an impulsive decision about a mount.
But I also know that every model has its quirks and issues. Regardless of my preconceived ideas about the atlas pro, for all I know it is a terrible mount with a hundred and one serious problems and you guys know that better than I. I have never owned an Orion mount, only a CGEM and it definitely had its quirks and problems.
I am looking at the Skywatcher EQ6-R Pro now as well. It seems to be the same as the current Atlas EQ6 with an increased payload capacity and the canon snap port. I can't seem to find any information about the length of the warranty on the Skywatcher site though. One of the things that attracted me to the CGX was the 2 year warranty vs the 1 year that Orion offers.

swarfestmatvo

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: CGX vs Atlas Pro AZ/EQ-G
« Reply #4 on: January 08, 2018, 12:01:34 AM »
Quote
There are three reasons I consider the atlas pro an option. The first is the closed loop electronics. That's a pretty great feature. The second is the ease of use of the adjustment screws. They are smooth and very user friendly. The mount will be mobile, no permanent pier mount so adjustments will be necessary each time I setup. Third is the AZ feature. While it is definitely going to be used for AP at least 90% of the time it is still nice to be able to switch into Alt/Az mode to do some daytime stuff or solar viewing or imaging. Bottom line is that I feel like it expands the possibilities of the mount a bit. It was my first choice if I'm being honest but I know better than to make an impulsive decision about a mount.
I am looking at the Skywatcher EQ6-R Pro now as well. It seems to be the same as the current Atlas EQ6 with an increased payload capacity and the canon snap port. I can't seem to find any information about the length of the warranty on the Skywatcher site though. One of the things that attracted me to the CGX was the 2 year warranty vs the 1 year that Orion offers.


The electronics on this mount are no different than those on the EQ6. The only difference is that it has an alt-az mode and external encoders that can let you push the mount to targets without losing your alignment. Unfortunately, they are not very precise, and can cause problems with goto. There is no "closed loop" on the gotos. The mount counts steps to get to your target; the encoders are not involved in any shape, form, or function for goto operation.

If I had to choose one of these mounts, I'd probably let my decision rest on whether I intended to do mostly visual (or maybe video) or long exposure imaging. The accuracy of the CGX HC is a big help if you need to goto a lot of targets. OTOH, I believe the EQ6-R may be a better bet otherwise. It's a pretty well proven design, while the CGX appears to be having some teething pains.

buckfeedssapfai

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: CGX vs Atlas Pro AZ/EQ-G
« Reply #5 on: January 08, 2018, 08:55:36 PM »
I believe the EQ6-R and AZ-EQ6 are also belt drives. The EQ6 is not. Means things are quieter for sure. Whisper quiet. CGX is too I believe.

scenunhadef

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: CGX vs Atlas Pro AZ/EQ-G
« Reply #6 on: January 11, 2018, 02:52:46 PM »
I am leaning toward the Skywatcher EQ6-R Pro now. I think I'll spend the extra money on an additional scope for planetary imaging. lol

Chris Castillo

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: CGX vs Atlas Pro AZ/EQ-G
« Reply #7 on: January 11, 2018, 05:18:39 PM »
Excellent idea! EdgeHD 11" for the win!

wagishohots

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 103
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: CGX vs Atlas Pro AZ/EQ-G
« Reply #8 on: January 12, 2018, 06:21:55 PM »
The AZ eq6 is a joy to use

viogreetnifi

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: CGX vs Atlas Pro AZ/EQ-G
« Reply #9 on: January 18, 2018, 03:15:16 AM »
Quote
Excellent idea! EdgeHD 11" for the win!

LOL - No doubt, but the difference between the two mounts definitely will not pay for that.

handvestlazo

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: CGX vs Atlas Pro AZ/EQ-G
« Reply #10 on: January 20, 2018, 03:51:14 PM »
The AZ-EQ6 has a better Latitude adjuster, a thicker CW shaft, is a couple of pounds lighter and has a shorter moment arm (scope closer to RA axis) than the EQ6-R. I think it's a slightly better design even if you're only using the mount in Eq mode.

Omar Manning

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 129
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: CGX vs Atlas Pro AZ/EQ-G
« Reply #11 on: January 21, 2018, 02:47:30 PM »
Quote
The AZ-EQ6 has a better Latitude adjuster, a thicker CW shaft, is a couple of pounds lighter and has a shorter moment arm (scope closer to RA axis) than the EQ6-R. I think it's a slightly better design even if you're only using the mount in Eq mode.

The AZ-EQ6 doesn't seem to be sold anymore. The skywatcher site still has it listed yet without a price and it doesn't show up on the Skywatcher USA site at all. Makes me wonder if they still make this mount in the Skywatcher branded model vs the Orion one.

pregdefciato

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 130
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: CGX vs Atlas Pro AZ/EQ-G
« Reply #12 on: January 23, 2018, 05:02:25 PM »
Maybe Orion has distribution rights in the US? The white AZ-EQ6 is sold in Australia whereas the black Orion version is much less common here.

Lawrence Paez

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 108
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: CGX vs Atlas Pro AZ/EQ-G
« Reply #13 on: January 31, 2018, 04:59:18 AM »
Orion has the exclusive distribution rights in the US for the AZ-EQ6 which they rebrand under their house name and paint black. You have to buy from Canada or the EUto get the Skywatcher version. They are identical savefor color and possibly (unconfirmed but alluded to) some small differences in the hand controller software.

schemsucopost

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 110
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: CGX vs Atlas Pro AZ/EQ-G
« Reply #14 on: February 02, 2018, 08:52:00 PM »
I have the CGX (with EdgeHD 11), and it's a phenomenal combination. I was just using it last night at our club's "dark" site (about 40 miles west of Louisville, Ky.). Setup takes about 30 minutes. I have the StarSense, but in my experience that doesn't work well 'till about 1/2 hour after sunset. Before that, I use the NexStar+ HC and did a Solar System alignment on the Moon. It was close enough that I could GoTo and hit Jupiter and Saturn in my wider EP (Luminos 23mm, with the .7 field reducer). Once it was dark enough, I used the StarSense for an Auto-Allign, and then GoTo accuracy was consistently in the field for any target, E or W of the meridian. I did the ASPA, then another StarSense Auto-Align, and GoTo was then accurate enough for all targets to be in-field even with my X-Cel LX 12mm. I also connected via USB to my laptop, running Starry Night Pro 7, and drove the scope to a few dozen obscure targets, and it was spot-on all night. I also did a fair amount of imaging with my Sony A7RII at 2800mm. Even though I wasn't super-careful with my ASPA, I was still able to get 90-second exposures with round stars, unguided.

I've never used the Atlas mount, but I can attest to the capabilities of the CGX, without hesitation.

Bobby Roe
Georgetown, Ind.