A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Amateur Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Mount prices continue to rise



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 6th 17, 03:56 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
RichA[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,076
Default Mount prices continue to rise

Wow! I saw some mounts from Italy going for near five figures recently. Even cheapo mounts like those from iOptron and the like can top $1000.00 now.. Celestron and Meade, formerly vendors of relatively inexpensive fork mounts are offering German mounts for high prices. Is it the cost of aluminum? No. Is it the electronics? No. Both are relatively cheap, though development (You'd think the basics would be amortized by now) of the firmware and software costs a bit. It's the machining. There is no magic bullet from (yuck!) 3D printing. Good mounts still need to be done on metal lathes and milling machines and even in China now, the cost of labour to do this isn't cheap. The average lathe operator in China earns over $100,000/yr. In Europe or the U.S.? Forget it. Even with full CNC, you still need people to program the machines and run them.
  #2  
Old September 6th 17, 04:31 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Razzmatazz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 265
Default Mount prices continue to rise

On Wednesday, September 6, 2017 at 1:51:46 AM UTC-5, Chris.B wrote:

I could never understand why they cost so much for such a simple mechanism with quite modest tolerances.
It's not as if they are paying royalties to anybody! ;-(


With today's digital cameras the requirement for precision has gone up by a factor of 10 and more. Back in film days one could not resolve features on a negative much below 40 microns because of grain size. Now there are cameras that have pixel size of 5 micron and even 2.5 microns which puts great emphasis on pointing and tracking precision, as well as focuser stability.

Where before one could have a mount track to within 60 arc seconds of periodic wobble back and forth (about the width of Jupiter) and it would be considered a good mount, nowadays people who do astrophotography demand sub-arc second pointing and tracking for hour-long time periods. This places great demands on the whole drive train, from the specialized angular contact bearings on the worms, a set of 4 costing $160.00 versus $3.00 for the old oilite sleeves, $450 for a set of servo motors with shaft encoders versus $5.00 for a simple clock motor, $200 for the massive main bearings versus $5.00 for the bronze sleeves we used to use in the pre-digital era, and so on and so forth. And that does not even include the $3000 - $4000 for the parts needed to add precision shaft encoders for the most serious applications of remote unattended observatories that a lot of amateurs are now building.

Even the worms are now much more accurate than even the best premium mounts of the past, and it is not unusual to have 1 arc second or less periodic error with lapped worms that use special alloys. In order to achieve this, all the components have to be made to much higher tolerances. Back when it was ok to have +- .001" tolerance on shafts, one could slip a shaft into a bearing in a second and it did not require any special skills to do so. However, now the tolerances are so tight that ordinary assembly techniques do not work any more, and it takes a skilled assembler a fair amount of time to do the job. It requires a great deal of concentration and skill to keep parts from jamming and seizing during assembly, but that is what is required to make a highly accurate mounting.

Can you still buy cheap fork mounted scopes like back in the good 'ol days? Certainly, and believe it or not they are cheaper now than they ever were if you include inflation adjusted costs. Sturdy accurate mounts were never cheap, even back then. An equivalent Beyer's mount would cost you in excess of $20k in today's dollars. That amount of money will now buy you the most sophisticated encoder controlled mount of far higher accuracy than anyone ever offered 30 years ago.

Razzy

  #3  
Old September 6th 17, 04:52 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Chris L Peterson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,007
Default Mount prices continue to rise

On Tue, 5 Sep 2017 19:56:08 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:

Wow! I saw some mounts from Italy going for near five figures recently. Even cheapo mounts like those from iOptron and the like can top $1000.00 now. Celestron and Meade, formerly vendors of relatively inexpensive fork mounts are offering German mounts for high prices. Is it the cost of aluminum? No. Is it the electronics? No. Both are relatively cheap, though development (You'd think the basics would be amortized by now) of the firmware and software costs a bit. It's the machining. There is no magic bullet from (yuck!) 3D printing. Good mounts still need to be done on metal lathes and milling machines and even in China now, the cost of labour to do this isn't cheap. The average lathe operator in China earns over $100,000/yr. In Europe or the U.S.? Forget it. Even with full CNC, you still need people to program the machines and run them.


I get stuff machined, and machining costs have generally dropped for
complex pieces.

Mounts today are simply better than they used to be. A $1000 iOptron
mount is a bargain, and outperforms $5000 mounts from 10 or 15 years
ago. And for $5000 now you can get mounts that perform as well as
those carrying huge telescopes in professional observatories.

In terms of tracking quality and stability for the dollar, I don't
think good mounts have ever been cheaper.
  #4  
Old September 6th 17, 07:37 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
StarDust
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 732
Default Mount prices continue to rise

On Wednesday, September 6, 2017 at 8:52:23 AM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Tue, 5 Sep 2017 19:56:08 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

Wow! I saw some mounts from Italy going for near five figures recently. Even cheapo mounts like those from iOptron and the like can top $1000.00 now. Celestron and Meade, formerly vendors of relatively inexpensive fork mounts are offering German mounts for high prices. Is it the cost of aluminum? No. Is it the electronics? No. Both are relatively cheap, though development (You'd think the basics would be amortized by now) of the firmware and software costs a bit. It's the machining. There is no magic bullet from (yuck!) 3D printing. Good mounts still need to be done on metal lathes and milling machines and even in China now, the cost of labour to do this isn't cheap. The average lathe operator in China earns over $100,000/yr. In Europe or the U.S.? Forget it. Even with full CNC, you still need people to program the machines and run them.


I get stuff machined, and machining costs have generally dropped for
complex pieces.

Mounts today are simply better than they used to be. A $1000 iOptron
mount is a bargain, and outperforms $5000 mounts from 10 or 15 years
ago. And for $5000 now you can get mounts that perform as well as
those carrying huge telescopes in professional observatories.

In terms of tracking quality and stability for the dollar, I don't
think good mounts have ever been cheaper.


My old Vixen GP D mount has all the gears, internal parts etc... precision ground, I heard!
Insane!
Vixen GP D was made for the Japanese market, GP DX for the US market, far as I know!
  #5  
Old September 6th 17, 07:42 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
StarDust
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 732
Default Mount prices continue to rise

On Wednesday, September 6, 2017 at 8:52:23 AM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Tue, 5 Sep 2017 19:56:08 -0700 (PDT),

Wow! I saw some mounts from Italy going for near five figures recently. Even cheapo mounts like those from iOptron and the like can top $1000.00 now. Celestron and Meade, formerly vendors of relatively inexpensive fork mounts are offering German mounts for high prices. Is it the cost of aluminum? No. Is it the electronics? No. Both are relatively cheap, though development (You'd think the basics would be amortized by now) of the firmware and software costs a bit. It's the machining. There is no magic bullet from (yuck!) 3D printing. Good mounts still need to be done on metal lathes and milling machines and even in China now, the cost of labour to do this isn't cheap. The average lathe operator in China earns over $100,000/yr. In Europe or the U.S.? Forget it. Even with full CNC, you still need people to program the machines and run them.


I get stuff machined, and machining costs have generally dropped for
complex pieces.

Mounts today are simply better than they used to be. A $1000 iOptron
mount is a bargain, and outperforms $5000 mounts from 10 or 15 years
ago. And for $5000 now you can get mounts that perform as well as
those carrying huge telescopes in professional observatories.

In terms of tracking quality and stability for the dollar, I don't
think good mounts have ever been cheaper.


I think, it's a lot to do with computer technology, sensors, auto compensate for mechanical errors, tracking, backlash, even on a cheaper made mounts.
Cheaper digital cameras have anti shake compensation now days too.
  #6  
Old September 8th 17, 12:43 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Davoud[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default Mount prices continue to rise

Chris L Peterson:
I get stuff machined, and machining costs have generally dropped for
complex pieces.


And my machine shop often does simple jobs for me at no cost, likely to get me out of their hair more quickly. I pay them in photographs that I made using the machined part(s). These days that's more likely to be a macro of a little arthropod than an astrophoto. They're getting a framed 24x20 of this photo https://www.flickr.com/photos/primeval/36371460720.

Mounts today are simply better than they used to be. A $1000 iOptron
mount is a bargain, and outperforms $5000 mounts from 10 or 15 years
ago. And for $5000 now you can get mounts that perform as well as
those carrying huge telescopes in professional observatories.


In terms of tracking quality and stability for the dollar, I don't
think good mounts have ever been cheaper.


The iOptron is certainly a nice mount for the dollar. A glance at my iEQ45 will tell you that they studied Razzmatazz's mounts in the design phase. Not quite the same as my trusty A-P 1200GTO with CP4 Control Box from Razzmatazz, but the iOptron is portable and my 1200GTO isn't portable (for my purposes), nor would I want it to be.
  #7  
Old September 8th 17, 12:47 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Davoud[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default Mount prices continue to rise

StarDust:
I think, it's a lot to do with computer technology, sensors, auto compensate for mechanical errors, tracking, backlash, even on a cheaper made mounts.
Cheaper digital cameras have anti shake compensation now days too.


Not an astrophotographer, I see. Image stabilization is built into lenses, not cameras. It is intended to be switched off when the camera is on a tripod. And it has nothing to do with astrophotography through a telescope. For that you need one of Razzmatazz's mounts. They may not be inexpensive, but they're also not cheap. Computer compensation for tracking errors is all well and good, but for best results, start with a finely machined mount.
  #8  
Old September 8th 17, 02:03 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
StarDust
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 732
Default Mount prices continue to rise

On Thursday, September 7, 2017 at 4:47:47 PM UTC-7, Davoud wrote:
StarDust:
I think, it's a lot to do with computer technology, sensors, auto compensate for mechanical errors, tracking, backlash, even on a cheaper made mounts.
Cheaper digital cameras have anti shake compensation now days too.


Not an astrophotographer, I see. Image stabilization is built into lenses, not cameras.


I said, digital cameras has anti shake, in general. of course it's built into lenses.
No I'm not an astro photographer, but I've took some nice pictures of the planets,Eclipses, Orion nebula etc...

It is intended to be switched off when the camera is on a tripod. And it has nothing to do with astrophotography through a telescope. For that you need one of Razzmatazz's mounts.

I have a Vixen GP D mount with SkySensor 2000 goto. Rated for 29LB. Not the latest, but a very fine mount, very accurate. Good enough for me.

They may not be inexpensive, but they're also not cheap. Computer compensation for tracking errors is all well and good, but for best results, start with a finely machined mount.

  #9  
Old September 8th 17, 06:46 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,551
Default Mount prices continue to rise

On Friday, September 8, 2017 at 12:44:04 AM UTC+1, Davoud wrote:
Chris L Peterson:
I get stuff machined, and machining costs have generally dropped for
complex pieces.


And my machine shop often does simple jobs for me at no cost, likely to get me out of their hair more quickly. I pay them in photographs that I made using the machined part(s). These days that's more likely to be a macro of a little arthropod than an astrophoto. They're getting a framed 24x20 of this photo https://www.flickr.com/photos/primeval/36371460720.


This is time-lapse as it shows an accurate condensed view of the eclipse event

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuIGlDPEQVs

What you describe as time lapse is actually sequential imaging, fine if you want to color the event with your own personal taste. Sequential imaging is useful for creating the spectacle of the phases of Venus and its motion around the Sun. Time-lapse is essential for explaining outer planetary retrogrades rather than sequential imaging . Put it down to a highly developed sense of perspective common to astronomers but not so much to celestial sphere enthusiasts.

  #10  
Old September 8th 17, 02:15 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Chris L Peterson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,007
Default Mount prices continue to rise

On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 16:47:44 -0700 (PDT), Davoud
wrote:

StarDust:
I think, it's a lot to do with computer technology, sensors, auto compensate for mechanical errors, tracking, backlash, even on a cheaper made mounts.
Cheaper digital cameras have anti shake compensation now days too.


Not an astrophotographer, I see. Image stabilization is built into lenses, not cameras.


Not exclusively. Quite a few new camera designs are switching to
in-camera stabilization. The rather superb mirrorless Sony cameras are
an example. These shift the sensor, and provide stabilization without
having to duplicate that technology in each and every lens you own.

For astrophotography, tip/tilt systems are pretty common, and are
essentially equivalent to image stabilization (with optical feedback
rather than gyros or accelerometers, as in cameras). Tip/tilt
compensation largely removes the requirement for accurate tracking in
a mount. That said, however, the sort of mounts that have mechanically
solid tracking also tend to have other mechanical benefits that make
them easier and more pleasurable to use.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apo telescope prices continue to rise RichA[_1_] Amateur Astronomy 3 May 17th 14 09:14 AM
Gas Prices G=EMC^2[_2_] Misc 0 April 10th 12 01:43 PM
Gas Prices gregz Misc 1 April 9th 12 02:59 AM
Dollar tanks, scope prices rise! Rich[_1_] Amateur Astronomy 7 September 28th 07 08:25 PM
Still on prices Richard Darn UK Astronomy 13 December 22nd 03 10:00 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.