Thinking of replacing my NJP with one from the Astro-Physics line, AP900 or AP1200 mainly because the equatorial head breaks down into two pieces and it has a hand controller which eliminates the need for a computer. Question is would the move be a step up or step down?
A friend (Rigel003) has an AP900 and it produces really nice shots. He had some minor cable problem which was replaced by AP but it is a beautiful mount and would be my alternate selection to a PME. Definitely a step up from an already great mount. It guides beautifully and has many great features. I am sure Graeme will give it a glowing reference.
Last edited by Paul Haese; 19-08-2012 at 09:41 AM.
A friend (Rigel35) has an AP900 and it produces really nice shots. He had some minor cable problem which was replaced by AP but it is a beautiful mount and would be my alternate selection to a PME. Definitely a step up from an already great mount. It guides beautifully and has many great features. I am sure Graeme will give it a glowing reference.
I think it would be a step up because you would now be able to do PEC.
Both mounts have the same capacity so it's a matter of whether the change over is worth it to you for the gains. The AP break-apart head is great and makes it very manageable. The counterweights slide on rather than screwing. The hand controller looks bulky but is in fact very well-designed and has great inbuilt routines for finding objects, exploring constellations as well as controlling the mount functions. It has a complete list of star proper names as well as bayer designations, which is great. Another feature not available on many mounts is the ability to image up to at least 2 hours past the meridian with a "meridian delay" feature which puts the counterweight shaft temporarily into the upside down position. Very useful if you want a continuous imaging run without a meridian flip.
you need to be aware that the 1200 has recently been replaced by a 1600 mount with substantially greater capacity and price. This may mean we'll see 1200s on the used market. The 900 will have similar treatment in future. If you want to steer away from computer use then the current models may suit you better.
The 900 has finished production so if you can hold off wait and see what its replacement is . Either way if you go with any AP mount you will be very happy and there service and support second to none I wouldn't hesitate to buy another one
The main competitor may be the Paramount MX. The PMX has a higher weight capacity, comes with a suite of software, is very sophisticated and integrates well with software.
But it is very computer oriented and may not suit your needs.
If you grab another mount Hans, will you be selling the NJP? If so and if yours is any where near as good as mine, there will be two winners, you with the new beautiful mount and the lucky person who gets your NJP I wouldn't part with my NJP for all the tea in China, it is a tireless high capacity precision mount of impeccable tracking accuracy that has served me very well
Thanks all for the feedback. Interesting that Astro-Physics is changing the line up of their mid sized mounts..something I didn't know or factor in.
They seem to do this sort of thing on a regular basis--gone are the 400, 600, 1200 and going is the 900. But according to all reports discontinued mounts are well supported, so I don't think it's a problem. At least I hope not, since I've just got my hands on a 900.
Geoff
Geoff AP dont change the mounts that often they have been around for awhile and still have parts or will make parts for every mount they have produced so never worry about your 900 the lastest updates are most likely just to bring the load capacitly up to make them more competative with the Paramounts.
I have a NJP and don't think that I would bother replacing 1 extremely good mount with another extremely good mount of a different brand with a similar capacity.
I cant comment about the ability to break it into parts as mine lives permanently in an observatory. The need for a computer is a bit moot. Do you really think you are going to use the scope without a computer?
If it is for photography then a computer is pretty much essential.
If it is just for visual use then why bother with such a good mount? Rather get a big dob with an Argonevis for less money.
Just my thoughts
Hi Terry, the problem is that you may want the mount to serve both purposes. Granted a computer is almost (but not quite) a necessity for astroimaging and if that is your only interest, then a mount that needs a computer doesn't suffer any disadvantage. But sometimes I want to go visual, in which case a computer is a PITA. Even a hand paddle is a bit over the top if you are showing a friend a selection of bright stuff.
So because I do visual and imaging, I don't want a mount that insists on a computer for its use.
Geoff
Both mounts have the same capacity so it's a matter of whether the change over is worth it to you for the gains. The AP break-apart head is great and makes it very manageable. The counterweights slide on rather than screwing. The hand controller looks bulky but is in fact very well-designed and has great inbuilt routines for finding objects, exploring constellations as well as controlling the mount functions. It has a complete list of star proper names as well as bayer designations, which is great. Another feature not available on many mounts is the ability to image up to at least 2 hours past the meridian with a "meridian delay" feature which puts the counterweight shaft temporarily into the upside down position. Very useful if you want a continuous imaging run without a meridian flip.
you need to be aware that the 1200 has recently been replaced by a 1600 mount with substantially greater capacity and price. This may mean we'll see 1200s on the used market. The 900 will have similar treatment in future. If you want to steer away from computer use then the current models may suit you better.
Prophetic words...I count 3 AP1200's and 2 AP900's on Astromart today.
I wouldn't part with my NJP for all the tea in China, it is a tireless 
