CLICK ON THESE AFFILIATE LINKS TO SUPPORT THE CHANNEL: * Agena Astro: bit.ly/487tmnj * High Point Scientific: bit.ly/49z9qdv * Amazon: bit.ly/darkskygeek-amazon-affiliate-link OTHER WAYS YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL: * Send a donation via PayPal: www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=49UXY8F6VVYFA * Click on the "Thanks" button in the toolbar located underneath this video. * Join the Dark Sky Geek Community Discord server: discord.gg/Rg7JYF8nHw * Like, subscribe, comment on this video, tell your friends about it, etc.
Good review. Few points: 1. I have the EXACT same problem you mentioned where the RA drifts if I move the DEC north and south. It is very reproducible. I have only noticed it when I was doing Planetary imaging. I sent a video of this 6 months ago to iOptron. They were very slow to respond. Said that they are not sure what is the cause and never heard back from them. It is absolutely laughable that they pretend they did not hear of this issue before. Whether that issue affects astrophotography I have no idea. Your explanation seems reasonable though. 2. The issue with the Azimuth polar alignment is that the mechanism also anchors the mount to the tripier plate. So when you losen the scews, it also loosens the mount. If the mount is extremely unbalanced, then it will slightly tilt , which in turn will throw your polar alignment off when your tighten the Azimuth screws. I have always had them mostly tight when I get close, just enough to be able to adjust the azimuth, and then tighten full. I have had no issues with the Altitude levers. They have been very precise and it keeps its PA even after being tightened. I leave the scope and mount out in my backyard for weeks and sometimes months and it holds the polar alignment very very well. 3. I have used the HAE69ec with the ASIair exclusively but plan on using a fully fledged PHD2 soon. It has been guiding better than your results even close to celestial equator. That being said it is definitely seeing dependent. On average it spends most of its time around 0.4". Bad seeing will get it closer to 0.5-0.6". Good seeig or farther frome the celestial equator and it will easily get to 0.3". 4. I have to say I am very addicted to Harmonic mounts at this point. No balancing and light weight is hard to beat. 5. I believe I pointed out the fact that the mount has high precision encoders not absolute encoders on CN. Glad you cleared that up. 6. iOptron's support is terrible in my experience. Any time there is a question about guiding, they send you a PDF about how to tighten the belts. They won't even respond to my emails at this point even though I may have emailed them twice in 6 months. They really don't care. Tightening the belts involves removing the front plate with multiple wires attached to the board that are very difficult to remove without potential serious damage to the board. 7. By the way, did you ever figure out why on earth they put a "bubble level" under the mount head, where it is impossible to look at that bubble? Personally, I am keeping the mount and getting decent results, but I will never buy an iOptron mount again. Hopefully we get more high payload capacity harmonic mounts from other manufacturers. Looking to skywatcher for the 150i.
Hi, i do not own a Ioptron mount, but regarding the bubble level, I would say its only function is to level the mount for Alt-AZ operation. It Matters more in Alt-Az than when using the mount in EQ-mode since you will be polar aligning anyway.
@@Miguel_Noppe You are right that leveling a mount is not important for tracking accuracy, but leveling an EQ mount is still important for its goto accuracy, which is helpful when doing planetary imaging at very high resolutions with no second camera or scope to do platesolving.
@@AshA-ww8hc Any discrepancy in the level is negated by the polar alignment (provided it is well done). So you can just eyeball the level of your tripod if you do a good polar alignment afterwards. But when your tripod is nice and level, the manual corrections you need to do in altitude and azimuth will be easier because with a level tripod the corrections are in straight lines. So a good polar alignment is all you need for a good tracking and GoTo.
Great review! My HAE69CEC Dec backlash measured at 235 +/-44 ms in PHD2. I'm keeping good polar alignment by partially tightening, re-adjusting, and repeating until tight. I think the main issue with the base is that it allows conversion to Alt-Az mode, so it needs to be somewhat mechanically sloppy. I agree, I'd like to see a version with the CEM70 base. I personally switched from the CEM70 because I'm partially disabled and getting older, so it's getting harder to handle the counterweights.
The gradual tightening of the alt/az axes is something I have done. Honestly, I hesitated to mention it in the video. And then I thought: for $6K, I shouldn’t have to do this 😁 so I purposefully left it out of the review. And yes, I hear you about getting older and not being able to carry a heavy mount around. I would love it if iOptron came out with a v2 of this mount and corrected the issues I mentioned in this video. I would buy it in a heartbeat!
@@darkskygeek The problem with omitting from the video is that it left me an impression that you were unable to get polar aligned. My experience mirrors that of WestwoorAstro where you have gradually tighten, tweak, tighten, tweak. Frankly not a lot different than my HEQ Pro or, apparently, the NYX-101. And yes, I too would prefer not to have to fiddle with a mount at that price point.😃
It would be great if you could post the test methodologies you used (assuming your collaborators agree). There are enough of us out here with the mount that it would be useful for us to have a common benchmark to compare and build a broader base profile of the mounts performance. Thank you for such a thorough review.
Fairly new to the hobby. I have a cem26, and honestly I just tighten it down enough to where it’s firm but can still adjust for PA. Then I leave it be. I think the weight on it is enough to where I haven’t had any movement, also due to the thread pitch of the adjusters, it would take excessive force to move it. I’m usually around .5-.7 total RMS. But that’s just me…. I’m curious as it might be a buffer when slewing while tracking, maybe take a dry erase marker and mark it before, then slew around, when it drifts back, see if it returns to the original spot if that makes sense. Great video! I honestly love encoders, use them a lot at work. They basically just keep the servo motor honest. Hope some of my info helped you or others reading.
Love your videos and great review. I own a CEM70EC and disagree with your statement about the CEM70 not having an issue with PA . If you loosen the Alt screws to acquire PA then tighten them again once you have PA then PA shifts a considerable amount. For this reason I tend to force PA in Alt against a tightened clamp screw which is no good for the brass half gear on the Alt adjustment. Also, there's a new version of Commander 9.13 - I don't think it improve your issues but may be worth a shot.
@@darkskygeek Very common problem, plenty of posts on CN reporting the same issue. It's not a deal breaker for me as you learn to adjust PA slightly out then when you tighten the clamp it brings in the PA slightly. Any further adjustment is forced by adjusting the ALT wheel with the Allen Key, but this is not ideal as I'm certain that the brass gear on the Alt adjustment is being prematurely worn.
Thank you for your excellent reviews! My friend, who has the same mount, encountered guiding issues and poor results in PHD2 until he changed the settings from LowPass2 to Hess and Stree, and increased the guiding exposure to 4 seconds, despite PHD2 recommending LowPass2. With these adjustments, he achieved a total RMS of approximately 0.38 using the EdgeHD 11" under poor seeing conditions in a Bortle 9 sky, without a counterweight. I received my exact mount about a week ago, but I haven't had the chance to test it yet since it arrived just a day before my vacation to Europe. I plan to try it out next Friday with my EdgeHD 9.25 scope and will post an update then. Clear night!
Please, share your experience! I am really curious! I am sure that some samples will work much better than others. Also, good tip on the guiding algorithms. I’ll read up on those. CS!
I have an HAE-29EC and haven't experienced the issues you have identified. I have been able to get it polar aligned to within 1' pretty easily, though I have to make sure the locks are very tight. I'm using the carbon fibre tripod rather than pier though. I've been able to image unguided for several minutes with perfect star shapes but that's with a 250mm focal length redcat51. I've not noticed either significant backlash or the cross contamination issues in slewing the axes but will watch out for them. Thanks for the thorough review!
Thanks for the second part of the review. I'm on the fence for HAE69BEC, and this review makes the fence a little taller. lol I've seen reports on CN of people, who acknowledged the PA issue, being able to zero out the PA the same way you did, that is by pre-tensioning the ALT and AZ knobs. I guess it's finicky but it can be done once the procedure is developed. UPD: I agree with your earlier comment that we shouldn't have to do this exercise with a $6k mount.
It certainly can be done, but do you feel like you should have to do that when you’ve already spent $6K on a mount? Personally, I expected a little better from iOptron.
Thx for this review. I was on the fence to get this HAE69. I do own the HAE43EC which works fine, but I noticed the RA drift a couple of times when observing the moon. I noticed the tracking was stopped for a moment. After small manual adjustments. I did sell my CEM70 recently…. Might not be the best decision I made recently. I have had many iOptron mounts (7) and the PA is a PITA. But is doable.. what I do know is that with strainwave mounts you get the best results when the ota is well balanced. A light tail heavy unbalance works great. I use a TEC140ED of 15kg on the HAE43 and it guides good. I bought the 43 more for grap and go…. I will wait until there is serious CEM70 specs like strainwave. Keep up these reviews.
Many thanks for this detailed review. At the price point, there seems to be too my issues with this mount for it to make my short list. As you say, hopefully there will be V2.
I own a HEM27EC which is a hybrid harmonic mount and I am able to image unguided for upto 60 seconds before I notice star trails. But this is only after perfect polar alignment and a super sturdy tripod. I just use the default PHD2 settings and use guiding assistant to find optimum settings. I usually allow the encoder to most of the work by using 4 to 5 second PHD2 exposures. From what I understand, harmonic mounts with an encoder cannot compete with the like of a CEM70 because of the high PEC. Actually the encoder makes a harmonic mount work like a regular mount without an encoder. Either way the encoder helps with long focal lengths over 1000mm. Thanks for the video!
Sry detailed and well thought and presented review. I love strain test mounts because of their portability as I am disabled and a big heavy mount is almost impossible for me to carry constantly, but of coarse imaging demands that the mount aligns properly to the NCP and keeps that alignment. For the price I think you are right, it has great potential but still needs some work. Thank you for your video. Best regards Luis from NY
I bought the HAE69B EC about a year ago and I can agree with most of your findings (except backlash): Polar alignment: There's a lot of backlash in the altitude adjustment screw. Together with the lubricated hinge it moves when tightening. I couldn't even clamp it strong enough by hand to not move when the mount is moving (center of gravity shifting). I experienced some drifting on the first subs. I ended up removing the lever/bolt and using a wrench for tightening. I also purchased an iPolar (this should really come with the mount for the price) and I anticipate the movement caused by tightening with the wrench. Works fine now, getting good polar alignment but it's a major design flaw. A week ago I also discovered a loose bolt at the top of the tripier which caused the top plate to move in altitude. Fix was easy of course but yet another drifting issue. DEC/RA movement: Interesting find, I also noticed this when doing lunar, solar and planetary imaging. Never noticed something like this doing deep sky (not actively using the Commander in this case). Unguided: Totally agree, I expected much better results by the encoder. I'm running at 3 seconds for my guide exposures which are totally fine, but when I let PHD do some analysis (no guide outputs) the drift starts soon after. Guiding accuracy: Also mostly around 0.5, when seeing is good sometimes also 0.3 Backlash: Luckily mostly not existent, sometimes maybe 200 ms. Very happy with that since my previous much cheaper mount had huge issues with backlash which I couldn't fix due to production errors. Overall I'm quite happy with this mount but I expected more for the price. I can live with not being able to do unguided exposures since I always image at longer focal lengths but I bought the version with the encoder "just in case". Very happy with guiding and backlash. Biggest issue for me is the polar alignment with the design flaw and the iPolar. The iPolar works great but it should really be included for the price. In the end I now need longer for polar alignment than with my previous mount.
Mr. Geek, Great review as always! Someone could think this is great performance; let’s get it. I have done this once based on reviews of IOptron mount. Got total sheeit, no specification worked. I just wonder why AP, 10um, Tak, PlaneWave didn’t give you any mount and telescope for review. Didn’t you?
Julien, first of all, Awesome review!!! I wish more reviewers out there took the quantifiable results approach that you use. Secondly I apologize for the late reply, I originally passed on this video since I neither have the mount nor was I interested in purchasing it but you caught me with the Japan video and I just kept watching this next! Despite not necessarily being interested in buying one I did very much enjoy seeing the methods you used to quantify your results. One thing I am interested in is, did you have to set up a pointing model? I have a Paramount MyT which has a similar relative encoder system to the HAE69C and I also recently received an A-P Mach2GTO and both of those mounts don't really do their best work until the pointing model is complete and in place. Also in the case of the Paramount MyT you really need to to a PEC model as well. Next observation is that with my ZWO AM5 I found that I got my best results like you did with this mount. By polar aligning with slight RA and Dec drift and setting an appropriately low MinMo and aggressiveness I found that I could pretty much always be correcting in just one direction and avoid the horrendous backlash that my AM5 has. Keep going with the great videos!
I did not use a pointing model (I think I mentioned it at some point in the video). Also, PEC is not supposed to be needed with the high-resolution encoder in RA. Interesting to hear that you have had issues with the AM5. That mount has been often reviewed, but unfortunately, all the reviews I have seen of it are extremely superficial, and who knows which ones are real reviews as opposed to “sponsored content” 😉 Thank you for the kind words. Clear skies!
6:45 Can you explain the high frame rate methodology you used? I'd like to do that with my mount. Excellent review!! I wish someone would explain mire thise cross contamination issue❤. I have that with an AM5.
The best thing you could do is ask for help on CloudyNights. You will have to capture a SER file and upload it somewhere. Then, people, like me, may analyze your file and provide some insights. CS!
Nice review, I'm curious if iOptron will have anything to say regarding the DEC backlash. Regarding the Polar alignment, my strategy is to partially lock the axis before the last adjustment. This gives me very reasonable PA numbers.
Yeah, gradually tightening the axes is a good strategy. But the real question is: do you feel like you should have to do that when you already paid $6K for a mount?
@@darkskygeek I don't disagree, but the CEM70 is also a significantly heavier setup so I feel there were some engineering compromises to get it in the HAE69 package. The Backlash is definitively more an issue to me as it can affect performance.
It is certainly true that the CEM70 is significantly heavier! That being said, I feel like the compromises that iOptron has made in the design of the HAE69 mount can be corrected with slightly better engineering, and I hope that iOptron evolves this mount to make it better. Then, I would buy it in a heartbeat!
For a 6k mount I would expect 2 NEMA motors in the Lat/Az axes and some automated procedure. Until that is that, you need to pre-tighten and the last adjustment will just be a stronger turn
Clearly, I was not and so I returned it to Agena Astro. If you do buy it, consider the version WITHOUT the high resolution encoder. Also, consider adding teflon washers for the altitude adjustment. With that, you should have a serviceable mount. CS!
I’m wondering if you enabled RA guiding in the handset settings. I had to do that for the HAE43EC to get ST-4 guiding to work from my solar Hinode guider.
Are all early versions of cem70 plauged by the RA circuitry problem? I bought mine at the end of 2020 December. I havent been doing AP for some time and cant remember if it was the RA or DEC that was going all wonky on me, amd nothing I did fixed it. So i get oblong stars as you did.
You likely have the same issue. If I were you, I would ask iOptron support. They will send you a document that describes how to get the RA board model number. That information will allow them to let you know whether your board has the problem. CS!
@@darkskygeek already emailed Roger. Board #2024. Your faulty one was 2004. Ive seen a CN users board who thought it was an issue, but it was a faulty bearing, board was 2117. Im curious of your new board number? If you recall off hand.
THe problem you have with the base of your mount is also shared with many other IOptron mounts. I currently own a GEM45, and it has the exact same issue, because it hase the exact same design. You can mitigate it, but never fully resolve it.
Thx for this review. I was on the fence to get this HAE69. I do own the HAE43EC which works fine, but I noticed the RA drift a couple of times when observing the moon. I noticed the tracking was stopped for a moment. After small manual adjustments. I did sell my CEM70 recently…. Might not be the best decision I made recently. I have had many iOptron mounts (7) and the PA is a PITA. But is doable.. what I do know is that with strainwave mounts you get the best results when the ota is well balanced. A light tail heavy unbalance works great. I use a TEC140ED of 15kg on the HAE43 and it guides good. I bought the 43 more for grap and go…. I will wait until there is serious CEM70 specs like strainwave. Keep up these reviews.
I'm researching for an upgrade for my AVX mount which I use for my C8 SCT, OAG, ASI174mm , Starizona focal reducer and ASI071MC Pro. Weight is about 19lbs. I image primarily at 1442mm with the focal reducer. Using NINA. Would a more traditional mount like a CEM40 be better than a strain wave mount for a SCT? Does the CEM40 have the same PA issues? My AVX will move a little but usually I can get NINA TPPA under 1". Thanks.
I have never tested the CEM40, but I have a lot of experience with the CEM70, and it works very well. It is not without downsides, but it is reliable. CS!
Thanks so much for this review. It's disappointing the HAE69 mount is not quite fully baked. Sadly, this is the only strain wave option for heavy OTAs unless you have $8.5K for the Rainbow Astro RST-300. I wish ZWO or Sky-Watcher would release larger strain wave mounts (or even better, maybe someday Astro-Physics or Software Bisque will release strain wave mounts).
I seem to remember watching a recent episode of the “What’s Up? Webcast” (Sky-Watcher USA YT channel) and the host (who is very knowledgeable!) stated that SWG mounts do not scale well. I tend to agree with him. Time will tell!
I am considering upgrading to either the CEM120 or the HAE69C (C-EC). I already have the Tri Pier. Additionally, the recently added AM5N has reduced its periodic error by half. The fact that it is priced at half of the HAE69EC also piques my interest. Which equatorial mount do you think would be less affected by wind with equipment weighing around 16kg? Personally, I'm leaning towards the HAE69C (or EC), but I would appreciate any advice. Also, I'm curious about the wind resistance of the HAE69C as a travel mount. Thank you in advance.
The CEM120 is likely to be the best, but it is not a mount you can easily move around/take to a dark site. The HAE69 (without an encoder) could be an option. I don’t have any experience with the AM5, but it may be a little on the light side for a C11. Clear skies!
@@darkskygeekThank you for your advice. I have decided to ultimately purchase both the HAE69CEC and either the AM5 or AM5N. I will report the results in the near future. Although both have challenges with PA, there is an excellent screw manufacturer in Japan called NABEYA BI-TECH, so I plan to perform stable tuning for fine adjustments.
PEC is generally not useful with SWG mounts because the error changes every period. Additionally, PEC should not be needed for a mount equipped with a high-res encoder. CS!
The inability to get an accurate polar alignment is an immediate deal breaker. I own a CEM40 (an older model) and was seriously considering upgrading to the 69HAE (non-EC). More payload capacity at a lighter weight is very appealing. I'm honestly shocked at how poorly this mount performed. The guide graph you share paints a pretty ugly picture. Sure, the overall RMS was around 0.5"; however, the various spikes are disheartening. I would expect a mount, especially one equipped with encoders, to be far more stable. Then again, your polar alignment was so far off, I'm skeptical of the accuracy of the end results.
The spikes would not have looked that bad if I had changed the vertical scale in the guide graph. My seeing that night wasn’t so amazing. But in the end, the guided results are quite decent, like I said in the video, so this mount is not complete garbage. But the point I made in the conclusion is that this mount has too many problems to justify its relatively high price. Hope this helps! CS!
@@darkskygeek I would love to see you review another copy of this mount! I have trouble believing your poor results in PE and backlash are typical of this mount? I'd also love to see you review the HAE29C. I just bought one and haven't had time or the weather to use it yet, but the original HAE29 has been reviewed and got a lot better PE and backlash than you did with the HAE69C so I can't understand why a bigger model with EC is not giving entirely excellent results? th-cam.com/video/_YoXF8ukvhQ/w-d-xo.html
That software analyzing the centroid position to detect oscillations should be implemented in PhD2 or released. Plenty of people may have that issue. Im sure iOptron knew it. After watching half of the video I can say I wont buy an iOptron mount
I am pretty sure that most other mounts in the $2-$5K range would show similar problems if exposed to enough scrutiny. Most mount reviews are very shallow, unfortunately. IOptron is no better or worse than Sky-Watcher or ZWO or other brands. CS!
CLICK ON THESE AFFILIATE LINKS TO SUPPORT THE CHANNEL:
* Agena Astro: bit.ly/487tmnj
* High Point Scientific: bit.ly/49z9qdv
* Amazon: bit.ly/darkskygeek-amazon-affiliate-link
OTHER WAYS YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL:
* Send a donation via PayPal: www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=49UXY8F6VVYFA
* Click on the "Thanks" button in the toolbar located underneath this video.
* Join the Dark Sky Geek Community Discord server: discord.gg/Rg7JYF8nHw
* Like, subscribe, comment on this video, tell your friends about it, etc.
We need more of these thorough reviews. Great job!
Good review. Few points:
1. I have the EXACT same problem you mentioned where the RA drifts if I move the DEC north and south. It is very reproducible. I have only noticed it when I was doing Planetary imaging. I sent a video of this 6 months ago to iOptron. They were very slow to respond. Said that they are not sure what is the cause and never heard back from them. It is absolutely laughable that they pretend they did not hear of this issue before. Whether that issue affects astrophotography I have no idea. Your explanation seems reasonable though.
2. The issue with the Azimuth polar alignment is that the mechanism also anchors the mount to the tripier plate. So when you losen the scews, it also loosens the mount. If the mount is extremely unbalanced, then it will slightly tilt , which in turn will throw your polar alignment off when your tighten the Azimuth screws. I have always had them mostly tight when I get close, just enough to be able to adjust the azimuth, and then tighten full. I have had no issues with the Altitude levers. They have been very precise and it keeps its PA even after being tightened. I leave the scope and mount out in my backyard for weeks and sometimes months and it holds the polar alignment very very well.
3. I have used the HAE69ec with the ASIair exclusively but plan on using a fully fledged PHD2 soon. It has been guiding better than your results even close to celestial equator. That being said it is definitely seeing dependent. On average it spends most of its time around 0.4". Bad seeing will get it closer to 0.5-0.6". Good seeig or farther frome the celestial equator and it will easily get to 0.3".
4. I have to say I am very addicted to Harmonic mounts at this point. No balancing and light weight is hard to beat.
5. I believe I pointed out the fact that the mount has high precision encoders not absolute encoders on CN. Glad you cleared that up.
6. iOptron's support is terrible in my experience. Any time there is a question about guiding, they send you a PDF about how to tighten the belts. They won't even respond to my emails at this point even though I may have emailed them twice in 6 months. They really don't care. Tightening the belts involves removing the front plate with multiple wires attached to the board that are very difficult to remove without potential serious damage to the board.
7. By the way, did you ever figure out why on earth they put a "bubble level" under the mount head, where it is impossible to look at that bubble?
Personally, I am keeping the mount and getting decent results, but I will never buy an iOptron mount again. Hopefully we get more high payload capacity harmonic mounts from other manufacturers. Looking to skywatcher for the 150i.
Thank you for your very detailed comment! We agree on all points 😁 Clear skies!
Hi, i do not own a Ioptron mount, but regarding the bubble level, I would say its only function is to level the mount for Alt-AZ operation. It Matters more in Alt-Az than when using the mount in EQ-mode since you will be polar aligning anyway.
@@Miguel_Noppe You are right that leveling a mount is not important for tracking accuracy, but leveling an EQ mount is still important for its goto accuracy, which is helpful when doing planetary imaging at very high resolutions with no second camera or scope to do platesolving.
@@AshA-ww8hc Any discrepancy in the level is negated by the polar alignment (provided it is well done). So you can just eyeball the level of your tripod if you do a good polar alignment afterwards. But when your tripod is nice and level, the manual corrections you need to do in altitude and azimuth will be easier because with a level tripod the corrections are in straight lines. So a good polar alignment is all you need for a good tracking and GoTo.
Great review! My HAE69CEC Dec backlash measured at 235 +/-44 ms in PHD2. I'm keeping good polar alignment by partially tightening, re-adjusting, and repeating until tight. I think the main issue with the base is that it allows conversion to Alt-Az mode, so it needs to be somewhat mechanically sloppy. I agree, I'd like to see a version with the CEM70 base. I personally switched from the CEM70 because I'm partially disabled and getting older, so it's getting harder to handle the counterweights.
The gradual tightening of the alt/az axes is something I have done. Honestly, I hesitated to mention it in the video. And then I thought: for $6K, I shouldn’t have to do this 😁 so I purposefully left it out of the review. And yes, I hear you about getting older and not being able to carry a heavy mount around. I would love it if iOptron came out with a v2 of this mount and corrected the issues I mentioned in this video. I would buy it in a heartbeat!
@@darkskygeek The problem with omitting from the video is that it left me an impression that you were unable to get polar aligned. My experience mirrors that of WestwoorAstro where you have gradually tighten, tweak, tighten, tweak. Frankly not a lot different than my HEQ Pro or, apparently, the NYX-101.
And yes, I too would prefer not to have to fiddle with a mount at that price point.😃
It would be great if you could post the test methodologies you used (assuming your collaborators agree). There are enough of us out here with the mount that it would be useful for us to have a common benchmark to compare and build a broader base profile of the mounts performance.
Thank you for such a thorough review.
Fairly new to the hobby. I have a cem26, and honestly I just tighten it down enough to where it’s firm but can still adjust for PA. Then I leave it be. I think the weight on it is enough to where I haven’t had any movement, also due to the thread pitch of the adjusters, it would take excessive force to move it. I’m usually around .5-.7 total RMS. But that’s just me…. I’m curious as it might be a buffer when slewing while tracking, maybe take a dry erase marker and mark it before, then slew around, when it drifts back, see if it returns to the original spot if that makes sense. Great video! I honestly love encoders, use them a lot at work. They basically just keep the servo motor honest. Hope some of my info helped you or others reading.
Love your videos and great review. I own a CEM70EC and disagree with your statement about the CEM70 not having an issue with PA . If you loosen the Alt screws to acquire PA then tighten them again once you have PA then PA shifts a considerable amount. For this reason I tend to force PA in Alt against a tightened clamp screw which is no good for the brass half gear on the Alt adjustment. Also, there's a new version of Commander 9.13 - I don't think it improve your issues but may be worth a shot.
Thanks! I do not have that problem with my CEM70. When I tighten the altitude axis, NINA’s TPPA plugin does not report any significant shifting.
@@darkskygeek Very common problem, plenty of posts on CN reporting the same issue. It's not a deal breaker for me as you learn to adjust PA slightly out then when you tighten the clamp it brings in the PA slightly. Any further adjustment is forced by adjusting the ALT wheel with the Allen Key, but this is not ideal as I'm certain that the brass gear on the Alt adjustment is being prematurely worn.
Thank you for your excellent reviews!
My friend, who has the same mount, encountered guiding issues and poor results in PHD2 until he changed the settings from LowPass2 to Hess and Stree, and increased the guiding exposure to 4 seconds, despite PHD2 recommending LowPass2. With these adjustments, he achieved a total RMS of approximately 0.38 using the EdgeHD 11" under poor seeing conditions in a Bortle 9 sky, without a counterweight.
I received my exact mount about a week ago, but I haven't had the chance to test it yet since it arrived just a day before my vacation to Europe. I plan to try it out next Friday with my EdgeHD 9.25 scope and will post an update then.
Clear night!
Please, share your experience! I am really curious! I am sure that some samples will work much better than others. Also, good tip on the guiding algorithms. I’ll read up on those. CS!
@@darkskygeek +1 I have an EdgeHD 9.25 scope ordered and plan to order this mount.
I have an HAE-29EC and haven't experienced the issues you have identified. I have been able to get it polar aligned to within 1' pretty easily, though I have to make sure the locks are very tight. I'm using the carbon fibre tripod rather than pier though. I've been able to image unguided for several minutes with perfect star shapes but that's with a 250mm focal length redcat51. I've not noticed either significant backlash or the cross contamination issues in slewing the axes but will watch out for them. Thanks for the thorough review!
Thanks for the second part of the review. I'm on the fence for HAE69BEC, and this review makes the fence a little taller. lol I've seen reports on CN of people, who acknowledged the PA issue, being able to zero out the PA the same way you did, that is by pre-tensioning the ALT and AZ knobs. I guess it's finicky but it can be done once the procedure is developed. UPD: I agree with your earlier comment that we shouldn't have to do this exercise with a $6k mount.
It certainly can be done, but do you feel like you should have to do that when you’ve already spent $6K on a mount? Personally, I expected a little better from iOptron.
@@darkskygeekYes, I totally agree with you and updated my comment as such after reading your similar conversation with another person.
Thx for this review. I was on the fence to get this HAE69. I do own the HAE43EC which works fine, but I noticed the RA drift a couple of times when observing the moon. I noticed the tracking was stopped for a moment. After small manual adjustments.
I did sell my CEM70 recently…. Might not be the best decision I made recently.
I have had many iOptron mounts (7) and the PA is a PITA. But is doable.. what I do know is that with strainwave mounts you get the best results when the ota is well balanced. A light tail heavy unbalance works great. I use a TEC140ED of 15kg on the HAE43 and it guides good. I bought the 43 more for grap and go…. I will wait until there is serious CEM70 specs like strainwave. Keep up these reviews.
Thank you for sharing your experience!
Impressive mount review, keep up the good work! 👌
Many thanks for this detailed review. At the price point, there seems to be too my issues with this mount for it to make my short list. As you say, hopefully there will be V2.
I own a HEM27EC which is a hybrid harmonic mount and I am able to image unguided for upto 60 seconds before I notice star trails. But this is only after perfect polar alignment and a super sturdy tripod. I just use the default PHD2 settings and use guiding assistant to find optimum settings. I usually allow the encoder to most of the work by using 4 to 5 second PHD2 exposures. From what I understand, harmonic mounts with an encoder cannot compete with the like of a CEM70 because of the high PEC. Actually the encoder makes a harmonic mount work like a regular mount without an encoder. Either way the encoder helps with long focal lengths over 1000mm. Thanks for the video!
You could not be more wrong
Sry detailed and well thought and presented review. I love strain test mounts because of their portability as I am disabled and a big heavy mount is almost impossible for me to carry constantly, but of coarse imaging demands that the mount aligns properly to the NCP and keeps that alignment. For the price I think you are right, it has great potential but still needs some work. Thank you for your video.
Best regards
Luis from NY
I bought the HAE69B EC about a year ago and I can agree with most of your findings (except backlash):
Polar alignment: There's a lot of backlash in the altitude adjustment screw. Together with the lubricated hinge it moves when tightening. I couldn't even clamp it strong enough by hand to not move when the mount is moving (center of gravity shifting). I experienced some drifting on the first subs. I ended up removing the lever/bolt and using a wrench for tightening. I also purchased an iPolar (this should really come with the mount for the price) and I anticipate the movement caused by tightening with the wrench. Works fine now, getting good polar alignment but it's a major design flaw. A week ago I also discovered a loose bolt at the top of the tripier which caused the top plate to move in altitude. Fix was easy of course but yet another drifting issue.
DEC/RA movement: Interesting find, I also noticed this when doing lunar, solar and planetary imaging. Never noticed something like this doing deep sky (not actively using the Commander in this case).
Unguided: Totally agree, I expected much better results by the encoder. I'm running at 3 seconds for my guide exposures which are totally fine, but when I let PHD do some analysis (no guide outputs) the drift starts soon after.
Guiding accuracy: Also mostly around 0.5, when seeing is good sometimes also 0.3
Backlash: Luckily mostly not existent, sometimes maybe 200 ms. Very happy with that since my previous much cheaper mount had huge issues with backlash which I couldn't fix due to production errors.
Overall I'm quite happy with this mount but I expected more for the price. I can live with not being able to do unguided exposures since I always image at longer focal lengths but I bought the version with the encoder "just in case". Very happy with guiding and backlash. Biggest issue for me is the polar alignment with the design flaw and the iPolar. The iPolar works great but it should really be included for the price. In the end I now need longer for polar alignment than with my previous mount.
Thank you for the detailed report! It’s very useful!
Hummmm, I was hoping for a better review, I'm in the market for a new mount that can handle the weight of heavier OTA's such as my 14"
ありがとうございます！
Mr. Geek, Great review as always!
Someone could think this is great performance; let’s get it. I have done this once based on reviews of IOptron mount. Got total sheeit, no specification worked. I just wonder why AP, 10um, Tak, PlaneWave didn’t give you any mount and telescope for review. Didn’t you?
Julien, first of all, Awesome review!!! I wish more reviewers out there took the quantifiable results approach that you use. Secondly I apologize for the late reply, I originally passed on this video since I neither have the mount nor was I interested in purchasing it but you caught me with the Japan video and I just kept watching this next! Despite not necessarily being interested in buying one I did very much enjoy seeing the methods you used to quantify your results. One thing I am interested in is, did you have to set up a pointing model? I have a Paramount MyT which has a similar relative encoder system to the HAE69C and I also recently received an A-P Mach2GTO and both of those mounts don't really do their best work until the pointing model is complete and in place. Also in the case of the Paramount MyT you really need to to a PEC model as well. Next observation is that with my ZWO AM5 I found that I got my best results like you did with this mount. By polar aligning with slight RA and Dec drift and setting an appropriately low MinMo and aggressiveness I found that I could pretty much always be correcting in just one direction and avoid the horrendous backlash that my AM5 has. Keep going with the great videos!
I did not use a pointing model (I think I mentioned it at some point in the video). Also, PEC is not supposed to be needed with the high-resolution encoder in RA.
Interesting to hear that you have had issues with the AM5. That mount has been often reviewed, but unfortunately, all the reviews I have seen of it are extremely superficial, and who knows which ones are real reviews as opposed to “sponsored content” 😉
Thank you for the kind words. Clear skies!
Comprehensive review, well done!
6:45 Can you explain the high frame rate methodology you used? I'd like to do that with my mount. Excellent review!! I wish someone would explain mire thise cross contamination issue❤. I have that with an AM5.
The best thing you could do is ask for help on CloudyNights. You will have to capture a SER file and upload it somewhere. Then, people, like me, may analyze your file and provide some insights. CS!
Nice review, I'm curious if iOptron will have anything to say regarding the DEC backlash. Regarding the Polar alignment, my strategy is to partially lock the axis before the last adjustment. This gives me very reasonable PA numbers.
Yeah, gradually tightening the axes is a good strategy. But the real question is: do you feel like you should have to do that when you already paid $6K for a mount?
@@darkskygeek I don't disagree, but the CEM70 is also a significantly heavier setup so I feel there were some engineering compromises to get it in the HAE69 package. The Backlash is definitively more an issue to me as it can affect performance.
It is certainly true that the CEM70 is significantly heavier! That being said, I feel like the compromises that iOptron has made in the design of the HAE69 mount can be corrected with slightly better engineering, and I hope that iOptron evolves this mount to make it better. Then, I would buy it in a heartbeat!
For a 6k mount I would expect 2 NEMA motors in the Lat/Az axes and some automated procedure.
Until that is that, you need to pre-tighten and the last adjustment will just be a stronger turn
Just a question. Are you happy with this mount. I still have it on my wishlist
Clearly, I was not and so I returned it to Agena Astro. If you do buy it, consider the version WITHOUT the high resolution encoder. Also, consider adding teflon washers for the altitude adjustment. With that, you should have a serviceable mount. CS!
I’m wondering if you enabled RA guiding in the handset settings. I had to do that for the HAE43EC to get ST-4 guiding to work from my solar Hinode guider.
I did not use the handset, and yes, I had RA guiding enabled in the Commander app. That is actually one of the first things I checked 😜
Thanks!
Thank you so much! ❤️
Are all early versions of cem70 plauged by the RA circuitry problem?
I bought mine at the end of 2020 December.
I havent been doing AP for some time and cant remember if it was the RA or DEC that was going all wonky on me, amd nothing I did fixed it.
So i get oblong stars as you did.
You likely have the same issue. If I were you, I would ask iOptron support. They will send you a document that describes how to get the RA board model number. That information will allow them to let you know whether your board has the problem. CS!
@@darkskygeek already emailed Roger. Board #2024. Your faulty one was 2004. Ive seen a CN users board who thought it was an issue, but it was a faulty bearing, board was 2117.
Im curious of your new board number? If you recall off hand.
THe problem you have with the base of your mount is also shared with many other IOptron mounts.
I currently own a GEM45, and it has the exact same issue, because it hase the exact same design.
You can mitigate it, but never fully resolve it.
Bedankt
Thx for this review. I was on the fence to get this HAE69. I do own the HAE43EC which works fine, but I noticed the RA drift a couple of times when observing the moon. I noticed the tracking was stopped for a moment. After small manual adjustments.
I did sell my CEM70 recently…. Might not be the best decision I made recently.
I have had many iOptron mounts (7) and the PA is a PITA. But is doable.. what I do know is that with strainwave mounts you get the best results when the ota is well balanced. A light tail heavy unbalance works great. I use a TEC140ED of 15kg on the HAE43 and it guides good. I bought the 43 more for grap and go…. I will wait until there is serious CEM70 specs like strainwave. Keep up these reviews.
I'm researching for an upgrade for my AVX mount which I use for my C8 SCT, OAG, ASI174mm , Starizona focal reducer and ASI071MC Pro. Weight is about 19lbs. I image primarily at 1442mm with the focal reducer. Using NINA. Would a more traditional mount like a CEM40 be better than a strain wave mount for a SCT? Does the CEM40 have the same PA issues? My AVX will move a little but usually I can get NINA TPPA under 1". Thanks.
I have never tested the CEM40, but I have a lot of experience with the CEM70, and it works very well. It is not without downsides, but it is reliable. CS!
I believe the software after some time si pointing automatically back to the target placing it in the center of the frame.
If you are referring to pointing accuracy and plate solving, then yes, absolutely, and I mentioned that in the video 👍🏻
Thanks so much for this review. It's disappointing the HAE69 mount is not quite fully baked. Sadly, this is the only strain wave option for heavy OTAs unless you have $8.5K for the Rainbow Astro RST-300. I wish ZWO or Sky-Watcher would release larger strain wave mounts (or even better, maybe someday Astro-Physics or Software Bisque will release strain wave mounts).
I seem to remember watching a recent episode of the “What’s Up? Webcast” (Sky-Watcher USA YT channel) and the host (who is very knowledgeable!) stated that SWG mounts do not scale well. I tend to agree with him. Time will tell!
I am considering upgrading to either the CEM120 or the HAE69C (C-EC). I already have the Tri Pier. Additionally, the recently added AM5N has reduced its periodic error by half. The fact that it is priced at half of the HAE69EC also piques my interest. Which equatorial mount do you think would be less affected by wind with equipment weighing around 16kg? Personally, I'm leaning towards the HAE69C (or EC), but I would appreciate any advice. Also, I'm curious about the wind resistance of the HAE69C as a travel mount. Thank you in advance.
The CEM120 is likely to be the best, but it is not a mount you can easily move around/take to a dark site. The HAE69 (without an encoder) could be an option. I don’t have any experience with the AM5, but it may be a little on the light side for a C11. Clear skies!
@@darkskygeekThank you for your advice. I have decided to ultimately purchase both the HAE69CEC and either the AM5 or AM5N. I will report the results in the near future. Although both have challenges with PA, there is an excellent screw manufacturer in Japan called NABEYA BI-TECH, so I plan to perform stable tuning for fine adjustments.
@@leftoff3rd I hope you use my affiliate links :)
@@leftoff3rd any update?
Did you record and use PEC
PEC is generally not useful with SWG mounts because the error changes every period. Additionally, PEC should not be needed for a mount equipped with a high-res encoder. CS!
How would we identify the latest PCB in our mounts ? Is there a different part number or firmware version ? Thanks for this info .
Best is to take a photo of the RA control board and send it to iOptron support.
thanks!
Great review. Same terrible iOptron performance and quality. I hear that ZWO is coming out with the AMS 10 which will be for heavy OTAs. Be patient.
Great review, not great price
So that’s what you got in Tokyo!
Hehe! Yup! I’ll talk about it in the next video 😁
The inability to get an accurate polar alignment is an immediate deal breaker. I own a CEM40 (an older model) and was seriously considering upgrading to the 69HAE (non-EC). More payload capacity at a lighter weight is very appealing. I'm honestly shocked at how poorly this mount performed. The guide graph you share paints a pretty ugly picture. Sure, the overall RMS was around 0.5"; however, the various spikes are disheartening. I would expect a mount, especially one equipped with encoders, to be far more stable. Then again, your polar alignment was so far off, I'm skeptical of the accuracy of the end results.
The spikes would not have looked that bad if I had changed the vertical scale in the guide graph. My seeing that night wasn’t so amazing. But in the end, the guided results are quite decent, like I said in the video, so this mount is not complete garbage. But the point I made in the conclusion is that this mount has too many problems to justify its relatively high price. Hope this helps! CS!
@@darkskygeek I would love to see you review another copy of this mount! I have trouble believing your poor results in PE and backlash are typical of this mount? I'd also love to see you review the HAE29C. I just bought one and haven't had time or the weather to use it yet, but the original HAE29 has been reviewed and got a lot better PE and backlash than you did with the HAE69C so I can't understand why a bigger model with EC is not giving entirely excellent results?
th-cam.com/video/_YoXF8ukvhQ/w-d-xo.html
I am going to pass on getting this mount. Thanks for the video.
Don’t forget to use my affiliate links in the future, though! 😁 Thanks! ✌🏻
Great idea poorly implemented. This just shows the power of testing to find the hidden problems that show up I all equipment.
Thanks for the video.
Don't send the mount back. They won't notice it missing..😊 OK.. sorry..just watched the entire review..send it back to Shenzen..
Hahaha, good tip 😁
That software analyzing the centroid position to detect oscillations should be implemented in PhD2 or released. Plenty of people may have that issue. Im sure iOptron knew it.
After watching half of the video I can say I wont buy an iOptron mount
I am pretty sure that most other mounts in the $2-$5K range would show similar problems if exposed to enough scrutiny. Most mount reviews are very shallow, unfortunately. IOptron is no better or worse than Sky-Watcher or ZWO or other brands. CS!
I can get 10 minute unguided subs with perfect stars on my hae43ec and a good PA
Thanks!
Thank you so much! ❤️
Thanks!