 This video is sponsored by professional photographers of America. Join a community of over 33,000 photographers and find equipment, insurance, education, and business tools made specifically for photographers like you. This is the ZWL AM5, this is the IOPRON M27, and today we're going to see if these little harmonic drive mounts can take on my tried-and-true Skywatcher EQ6R in an astrophotography mount showdown. Ask any experienced astrophotographer what the most important piece of gear is in their system, and they're likely going to tell you the mount. The mount has to not only hold your telescope and camera steady, but it has to do so while tracking the night sky at a very high level of precision for minutes at a time. It has to do that so that we can take long exposures with round stars. In general, if you want to use a bigger telescope with longer focal length, it means you're going to need a bigger mount. At least that was true. This new type of telescope mount, called a harmonic drive mount, may change all that, as this type of mount uses a different kind of gearing inside called strain-wave gearing. It can be made very small in terms of the mount size, but due to its design, it can handle a huge payload even without counterweights. As I understand it, the only reason to use a counterweight at all with this harmonic drive mount is so the whole thing doesn't fall over from being so far on balance. These kinds of mounts have actually been around a while. I first saw them offered by a South Korean company called Rainbow Astro. They were demoing them at Neef in 2019, and I remember thinking, wow, that looks really cool, but it was way out of my price range at the time. I think the price was higher back then because they were brand new. So they've definitely come down in price since. Even the premium ones from Rainbow Astro and Crux have come down in price over the past four years. But 2022 was an interesting year because all of a sudden there's tons of harmonic drive mount announcements, including from manufacturers who had never made a mount before like ZWO, like Sharpstar, like Pegasus, Astro, and others. Ioptron is a well-known maker of mounts, and this one is their first harmonic drive mount, the Hem-27. So with all this attention on these new mounts, I was naturally curious about them. And so this is a review video of the two cheapest harmonic drive mounts widely available in the US market today, the ZW-AM5, the Ioptron Hem-27, and then I'm using my EQ-6R as a control sample of a good mount that's not harmonic drive. And in this video we're going to talk about the design, the features, the cost, the setup, all of the things, and end of course with real-world imaging tests that I've done with these mounts. And since it's a review, let me start with some disclosures. The EQ-6R I bought personally several years ago. The ZW-AM5 I bought for the channel using income I generate from ads and Patreon. I bought it directly from ZWO when it was still a pre-order item. The Ioptron Hem-27 is on loan from Highpoint Scientific, which is an awesome telescope store here in the Northeastern US. This video isn't sponsored by Highpoint, but they are letting me borrow this mount for a couple months for free. So thank you very much to Highpoint Scientific. I really appreciate everything you do. Everything else in this video may have started as review units, but I have since bought. This video does have a sponsor, which is PPA, and I'll talk about them a little bit later. Okay, so let's start with the design and features. The EQ-6R and the Hem-27 are equatorial mounts only, meaning you polar-align them. They track the night sky and right ascent. The AM-5 is also an equatorial mount, and that's how it comes shipped, but it can easily be converted and operated in Alt-As mode too. The way to do this is you set the azimuth adjustment here on the equatorial wedge all the way to 90 degrees. You then hold down the cancel button on the hand controller while turning the mount on, and this little status light will turn green instead of red. That's how you know you've switched it into Alt-As mode. So why would you want to switch modes? Well, I think the primary reason is if you're going to be using the mount for visual observation, like with an eyepiece. It's then more convenient to use it in Alt-As mode compared to equatorial, because the telescope's going to be in a more natural position, and visual observers just prefer Alt-As to equatorial. If you're only thinking about the AM-5 for photography, then this feature probably doesn't matter to you, but I just thought I'd mention it as it's only available on the AM-5 between these three. Okay, so for the rest of their view, we'll just be talking equatorial, and because these three are equatorial mounts, it means they do need to be polar aligned. The EQ-6R comes with a visual polar scope that's installed inside the mount head, and if you want to use a dedicated electronic polar scope, there are very easy ways to add either a QHY pole master, as I have here, or an iOptron iPolar. The iOptron HEM27 can be bought with an iPolar camera already installed. Then it's the HEM27A, and that's just $100 more than the base unit. I think this is a no-brainer if you plan to use the mount with a Windows or Mac laptop or a mini-PC. If you only plan to use the HEM27 with an ASI Air or StellarMate, or any other kind of Raspberry Pi-based system, I don't think the iPolar camera software works with those, so then you would just be relying on other polar alignment routines, and I would get it without that add-on. The ZWO AM5 does not come with a polar alignment scope, and there is no option for one from ZWO, so you're on your own in terms of using one of the electronically assisted methods, like an ASI Air or something like that, which is probably fine because if you're buying this mount, it's not a good choice unless you plan to use it with an ASI Air or a computer because it doesn't have a full-featured hand controller, but we'll talk about that a little bit later. In terms of adjusting the equatorial wedge on these mounts to dial-in polar alignment, I find them all slightly annoying, but in different ways. The EQ6R system is the one I'm most used to, and I've probably done it over a hundred times. It's not perfect, but it is a huge improvement from this mount's predecessor, the EQ6. For the R version, they went with bigger plastic knobs on the azimuth adjustment, and then they added a plastic knob to the front altitude adjustment here, too. This spring-loaded handle on the back altitude knob is not the best design, especially when dealing with heavy payloads, and so many people modify this bolt to make it easier. A friend of mine has given me 3D printed knob to replace this little spring-loaded lever, but I haven't gotten around to putting it on yet. In any case, this is purely a push-pull system, so you loosen one bolt and then tighten the other bolt. It pushes against a pin, and that moves the mount head slightly to dial-in polar alignment. Then the only way you are locking it down is just by making both the push-pull bolts tight against that pin, that piece of metal. And I find after practicing this a half dozen times, you're going to get it, and it becomes pretty easy to pull or align quickly with just a push-pull system like this. Both the HEM27 and the AM5 use a slightly more complex design. There are still push-pull mechanisms, and there are also locks on both systems here. So there's more points of contact to dial-in polar alignment. And the problem with that is once you get it right with two of the knobs, then when you're locking the others, it can throw off polar alignment. Now to avoid that, what you need to do is tighten up the locks 95% of the way when you're very close to polar alignment, so then you can just make a tiny little final adjustment by fully locking it down. But I find it's a little bit more fiddly. It takes a little bit more practice to bump polar alignment just into that perfect position once you have everything very close with all the different little knobs and adjustments. But the ZW01 is laid out very well. I think all of the plastic knobs and things are nice and easy to grasp and tighten or loosen. The Ioptron design is quirky and honestly not my favorite in this regard. The knobs for the push-pull on the azimuth here are fairly standard, a little bit small for my taste. But they are plastic, which is nice at night. But then the locks that you have to use are all tightened by this little hex key that's included that's magnetically stored on the side of the mount here. Okay, so in principle this may work. If I just am doing it inside, it's no problem. But in practice, I find that this is one of the biggest pitfalls of this mount. The problem for me is asking me to operate a tiny metal hex key that fits into these tiny hex screws in the dark, in the cold is just not a good idea. If I were to drop this in the stove because my hands are cold, I've now lost a crucial piece of equipment to adjust polar alignment. For the altitude adjustment, it's again a fairly quirky system. They split the altitude into two ranges here and the change between one or the other requires taking the mount apart. For fine adjustment of the azimuth, instead of a push-pull system, they give you just full access to this long rod with a nice big knob on it to go up and down. And this is very nice. I had no problem using it. And they even put holes in the knob so you can get a bit more torque if you put the hex key in like this. So for all my complaints about the design here of the wedge on the M27, in the end, I didn't find it slowed me down that much in terms of polar alignment compared to the ZWO AM5. Everything did move smoothly and reliably. I just don't think this design with all its reliance on, you know, little screws and the hex key is particularly grab-and-go friendly. I'm proud to say this video is sponsored by PPA, Professional Photographers of America. I am a member myself and I'm very happy with what they offer as part of membership. For a low monthly price, you receive a bunch of unique benefits. I'm just going to highlight some of the ones that are most important to me as primarily an astrophotographer. If you're watching this video, you already know that astrophotography gear can get very expensive. And so it's a good idea to ensure your equipment. Well, PPA makes that super easy because membership includes photo care equipment insurance. It's a very nice plan that covers up to $15,000 in equipment coverage. And if something breaks and you need full replacement, it's a $350 flat deductible. Or if you can get your equipment repaired, it's just a $50 flat deductible. And that's a much better deal than I can get with my renter's insurance. So the equipment assurance alone makes PPA worth it for me, but then they also offer many other benefits like photography, education, and training. So I think this is just a really great organization to join. And if it sounds like something that you would be interested in, you can get a special discount if you follow the link in the video description. Okay, let's now go on to connections with these mounts. On the AM5, they are on the front of the mount mostly. There's also one DC out on the side. On the M27, they're almost all on the back of the mount here. And on the EQ6R, they're here on the side. To me, it doesn't make a huge difference where the ports are. But I guess I prefer the EQ6R because it's the easiest. I don't have to duck under the telescope or anything to plug things in and switch the power on. I'm also a big fan of a white mount like this because for me, that is very high contrast. It's the easiest to see in the dark as I'm plugging things in with just a red light. Black control panels like on the AM5 and the M27 are some of the worst in that regard. They all can be run off DC or an AC adapter, but only the M27 comes with an AC adapter included in the package, which is very much appreciated. I wish they all did that. The EQ6R comes with a cigar-style DC cable with the right connector, of course, for powering it. A lot of people think this is a proprietary power connector on the EQ6R, but it's not. This is called an aviation plug, or also known as a GX series connector. And this particular one is a 12mm 2-pin plug. So it's not the most common, but it's also not proprietary. And I personally applaud Skywatcher for using a locking connector, because I think that makes a lot of sense for power. The AM5 uses the most common type of power connector, which is a barrel plug with a 5.5mm outside diameter and a 2.1mm inside diameter. My unit did not come with any power cable included. The M27 uses a slightly less common 5.5mm plug with a 2.5mm inside diameter, meaning the cables that come with your Pegasus power box or your ASI air will not fit. But what I always have in my kit is several of these little adapters that convert from 2.1 to 2.5mm, because both are fairly common connectors. In terms of hand controllers, each of these mounts comes with a hand controller. On the Skywatcher, it's your standard full Sinscan hand controller for equatorial mounts. With the Ioptron, it is the standard GoToNova hand controller. And if this is your first Ioptron mount, I'll just note this hand controller requires a CR2032 button battery that is not supplied with the mount. You'll also need a mini screwdriver to take off the back plate and install that button battery. The M5 does not come with a traditional full hand controller. Instead, it's just this little joystick. So this is an important differentiation. These hand controllers from Skywatcher and Ioptron both give you tons of different options to control the mount. You can control the mount fully without a computer, just with the hand controller, including having access to giant GoTo catalogs, lots of alignment options, park options, and so forth, right in the hand controller. The ZWO1 just lets you move the mount at different speeds, and that's it. To access most of the features, you're going to need to use an app or an ASI Air or third-party software on a connected computer. Now, this is not necessarily a drawback, as many imagers don't really use the hand controller anyways, because they have all of those options on the computer, so they have no need for the hand controller. Now, in terms of bypassing the hand controllers completely, the M5 makes this quite easy. It has both Wi-Fi as an option or a full USB data connection. It's a B-style port right here on the front, and you can connect that to ASI Air or to a computer if you have the appropriate driver. I tried the ZWO Ascom driver on Windows, and it worked very well with no hiccups. The Skywatcher EQ6R is a bit complex in this regard. I have the Gen 1 EQ6R. The only way I can bypass the hand controller is with an EQ direct cable, which goes from this serial port connector on the mount to USB. In subsequent releases of the EQ6R, I know they've started adding a full USB port, and now with the new RI model, they even have built-in Wi-Fi connection, but I have not tested those. On the driver side for the EQ6R, there are many options. I personally use EQ Ascom, which is part of the free EQ Mod project. Another popular one is Green Swamp Server, and then also popular is ASI Air and other indie-based options. The HEM27 doesn't seem to allow one to fully bypass the hand controller. In my testing, it did need to at least be plugged in for the mount to operate correctly, but if you plug a USB cable into the bottom of the hand controller, most things can be done fully from the computer. For instance, an ioptron commander here. I can sync the date and time from my PC. I can set the latitude and longitude manually, and sync those back to the mount, and of course I can have full control over slewing and parking and all of that from the computer, too. In terms of other connections, they all have ST4 ports, so if you want to auto-guide with ST4, I don't really recommend it because pulse-guiding is better, but it is there if you want it. The EQ6R has a snap port for triggering your DSLR shutter. You have to use the hand controller if you want to do that. The HEM27 has an iPolar port for connecting to the iPolar camera if you have that installed. It also has USB 2.0 pass-through going from the saddle to the back of the mount, and it has two 12-volt power ports, one here at the top and one on the saddle. The ZWO AM5 also has DC out port on the side. Next, let's look at the saddles. If you look online, all of these mounts claim dual saddles that will accept Vixen or Lasmandi D-style plates. But the EQ6R and the AM5 have what I would really call a dual saddle, meaning they are ready to take either style plate at any time. You just slide them right in. The HEM27 can only do one style of plate at a time, and if you want to switch, it requires taking this whole saddle apart. So that's something I'd only want to do indoors since there are eight different screws that you have to remove to make that change. And again, this to me seems like a weird design decision on the Ioptron for a grab-and-go sort of mobile mount. Maybe it doesn't affect most people, but personally I have some telescopes on Vixen plates and some on Lasmandi plates, and so it is mildly annoying that I have to remember to take apart the saddle before I leave the house for an imaging session. My guess is that Ioptron did this to reduce the size and weight of the head because they really have made this a very compact unit. While we're up here on the Ioptron saddle, let me point out that it has a locking clutch right here. And the reason this has a declination clutch is because this is actually a hybrid mount where only the RA axis is driven by a strain-wave gear system while the declination axis is driven normally by a belt and a worm gear. While on the AM5, both RA and DEC are strain-wave gearing, there are no clutches whatsoever, and of course on the EQ6R it's not strain-wave, so both the RA and the DEC have clutches and the mount has to be carefully balanced to work well. On the topic of motors and all that, I know some people are interested in how much sound these mounts make, both when slewing and when tracking, so I am going to do some audio tests here to compare them. Okay, the next thing is weight and payload, and this is where harmonic drive mounts are so very interesting because the mounts don't weigh much, but they can handle a lot of payload. The ZWO AM5 mount head weighs 12.1 pounds, the max payload without counterweights is 28.6 pounds, and the max payload with a counterweight is 44 pounds. The ratio of max payload to mount weight is 3.6 to 1. The iOptron M27A, the one with the iPolar, the mount head alone weighs only 8.2 pounds, the max payload without counterweights is 29.7 pounds, and the max payload with a counterweight is 44 pounds. The ratio of max payload to mount weight is 5.4 to 1. The Skywatcher EQ6R mount head weighs 38 pounds, the max payload without counterweights is not really a feature of this mount, but I can tell you I've put a few pounds on it without counterweights and it still tracks fine. The max payload with a counterweight is 44 pounds. The ratio of max payload to mount weight is 1.2 to 1. So of course the interesting thing here is you, when you're using a counterweight, all these mounts have a max payload of 44 pounds, but the weight of the mount head is really pretty different with the M27 coming in the lightest at just a bit over 8 pounds, the AM5 right behind at just a little over 12 pounds, and then the EQ6R is a very heavy mount at 38 pounds just for the mount head. Now I'd like to talk about the cost of these mounts and then that will also lead into a discussion on the different tripod options and different accessories you can buy optionally with these. The Skywatcher EQ6R at time of recording is $2025 and that includes the steel tripod, the tripod spreader, two 11 pound counterweights and the hand controller. The AM5 is $2000 for just the mount head with no tripod, no counterweights, no counterweight shaft, but just the joystick and the mount head. The M27A, the one that includes iPolar is also about $2000 without tripod counterweight shafts counterweights that includes that full hand controller. And as I said earlier, you can get the M27 without iPolar for now $1888, so about $100 off. Both the AM5 and the M27 have carbon fiber tripods available that are designed to work with them, so for many people I think these tripods are going to be the right choice. The ZW-01, the TC-40 is $300 and the Ioptron-1, which actually works with many of their mounts is $318. These are very similar tripods. The Ioptron-1 gets a little bit taller and then they have different top plates because the way that they connect to the mount head is different. Next up we have cases, I forgot to mention that both of these mounts, the harmonic drive mounts come with really nice cases that holds the mount heads and some accessories. The Skywatcher does not. It does come with some nice foam packaging foam and there's now a third-party option High Point Scientific under their Apertura line makes a very nice case set for the EQ6R mount that includes cases for the mount head, the tripod and the counterweights and you do need to keep the original foam that came with your mount head to use that case set. At the time of recording this case set is on sale for $150 US but the normal price is $250. The EQ6R comes with the counterweight shaft that's actually part of the mount head and the counterweights, the Hem-27 and the AM-5 do not come with any kind of counterweight system because you can use them without counterweights up to about 25 pounds. If you do want a counterweight bar, the ZW-01 costs $39, the Ioptron-1 costs $45. And then you're going to need an appropriate counterweight. In my tests I just used a Skywatcher-1 with the insert removed. And sorry for the condition of my counterweights I do plan to repaint them soon. All of these mounts have optional pier extensions which can help bring the mount head up from the tripod and avoid your long telescope hitting the tripod in certain positions like when it's pointed near the zenith. And these pier extensions seem to also allow you to more easily adapt the harmonic drive mounts to beefier tripods, which would probably be a good idea if you're really planning to push these mounts to their limits. In any case, when we total everything and include cases and tripods which are both sort of essential items all of these mounts end up being around the same total price which is $2,300 US. You can bump up the harmonic drive mounts up to about 2400 total if you need the optional counterweight stuff. Now one thing to note about the Hem-27 is like most Ioptron mounts they do offer an EC version with high precision encoders. That costs $3,248 US today and since I haven't tried it I can't really tell you if it's a worthy upgrade. But Ioptron claims that you can forego guiding with this EC version so that could make for a very interesting proposition. But with the normal Hem-27 you definitely do need guiding and fast guiding. I was using 0.5 second exposures. So let's now move on to the imaging tests I've done. I first tested the three mounts with this setup. This payload weighs 15 pounds or 6.8 kilograms. The focal length on this scope the stellar view SVQ-86 is 464 millimeters. The camera is the ASI 2600MC and that makes the image scale 1.67 arc seconds per pixel. With the EQ-6R I did use counterweights and bounced the mount of course and with the harmonic drive mounts I did not use any counterweights. I wanted to use the same polar alignment method with all three mounts. So on this first night I tested I used my QHY pole master attached to the end of the dovetail like this with a Buckeye Stargazer 3D printed adapter. So let's first look at the guide logs for each mount using Andy Galasso's PhD2 log viewer. We're starting here with the ZWO AM5's calibration. So what you're looking for here is that it's basically at a 90 degree angle which this one is pretty close. I would call that a successful calibration and then here is the guide graph. It's a little bit over one hour of data and I've set it up so I think this is the default behavior that the dithering sections are excluded from the statistics. That's these little gray vertical lines but it is interesting to see where the mount is dithering because then you can see how quickly it settles and the settling time on the AM5 looks very good. Even when we have a very big movement right here about seven and a half arc seconds the star moved it then recovered pretty quickly and went back to normal. The other thing to look at in this guide graph are spikes in guiding. Those are always what we're concerned with. We have too many spikes and then it takes a long time to recover. You can get trailed stars. Now most of the spikes with the AM5 are looked to be around two arc seconds to two and a half arc seconds spikes in guiding. That means the star moved that much on screen and it recovered very quickly which is sort of what you'd expect in a harmonic drive mount I think. I don't really see any big issues. This section right here, this image looks a little rockier but then some other images look very smooth in terms of the guiding. The headline number is the overall total RMS over the one hour that it was guiding and that for the AM5 was 0.79 arc seconds. Pretty good. Let's next look at calibration for the Ioptron M27. This to me looks textbook even better than the AM5. That's just exactly 90 degrees I think. And then here is the guide graph. The one thing that concerns me a little bit here is how long it would take to recover after a spike in deck because you can see with some of these deck spikes like this one here it took a few seconds, maybe 10 seconds to recover back down to the normal baseline. That might be concerning especially at a higher focal length than what we're dealing with here. The faster it can recover from a spike the less likely that's going to result in any kind of degradation of your actual image meaning star trails. One interesting thing here to note is that remember the M27 is a hybrid mount where only the RA axis is the strain wave gearing. And if we compare the RA to the deck, this is the deck and this is the RA, you can see they do look pretty different there. So it's interesting if we look at the total RMS over the one hour and 19 minutes, it is 1.14 arc seconds. Okay, there's the calibration for the EQ6R, looks good, looks textbook. And here is the guide graph. I did exclude the first few seconds here because I think I was messing around with focus still. You know, this looks really good, you can see there's these spikes, all these spikes are when it was dithering basically and then it recovers very quickly. So if we actually look at the results in between these gray bars, you can see it's very good. Okay, headline number here, total RMS is 0.74 arc seconds, so very similar to what we got with the AM5. The loser of this night, I guess, in terms of numbers was the ioptron M27. But let's now actually look at the images because the images are the ground truth, of course. So we'll head over to PICS Insight and look at those. Okay, so first, again, this is one hour of data for each one. There's the AM5, there's the M27, there's the EQ6R. And what I want you to see here is just that at first glance, these are identical. You might think that I am tricking you and these are actually the same image, I assure you they're not. You can see slight little differences, but I mean, they look very, very similar, right? When we just look at the whole image like that. So let's zoom in and see if we can see any differences when zoomed in to about 200%. And I would say, no. Now, keep in mind, the image scale here was 1.67 arc seconds per pixel. The average RMS on the M27 was like 1.1 arc seconds. On these two, it was under an arc second. So you wouldn't really expect to see any differences, but we don't. Looking at the smallest stars in the image, I can find that same small star in each one. There might be slight differences with noise levels here because I took one hour with one mount, then I switched the telescope, took one hour, and then took the last hour. So Orion was in different parts of the sky slightly, so the noise might be slightly different, but in terms of the stellar performance, how round and small the stars are, they look identical. On my second test with all these mounts, I used a much bigger telescope. This payload weighs around 34 pounds or 15 kilograms. This is the Asgar 130PHQ, which has a 1,000 millimeter focal length. And the camera is the QHY533M, so that makes the image scale 0.78 arc seconds per pixel. On this night, I didn't have the right Pullmaster adapter for a Las Mandi plate, so I instead puller-aligned each mount with Sharp Cap Pro's puller-alignment routine, and that just uses the guide scope and camera and plate-solving to assist in puller alignment. Okay, so we're looking at the calibration for the AM5 with that heavier telescope. I didn't have quite as much time this night, so this is not an hour's worth of data. It's 35 minutes, but I think in 35 minutes we can still get a pretty good picture of what was happening. Just like last time, I excluded the dithers, so the total RMS with this heavier setup was 0.9 arc seconds, and if you remember before, it was like 0.79. Now, something to keep in mind with that number is we can't be sure if it was actually the heavier setup that caused this number to go up a little bit. It may have just been sky conditions being different between the two nights. So, really pretty similar, though, performance to last time with the AM5. We have some spikes, but they're, well, they're going a little bit higher than maybe last time around. Some of these are just a bit over 2.5 arc seconds. Okay, here's the calibration for the M27. Again, looks great, and here's 35 minutes of guiding, and the M27 was a lot closer to the AM5 this night. So, still not quite as good as 0.97 arc seconds total RMS, but very close. I mean, that's a rounding error, definitely. And whatever problem I was having with all of those sort of spikes in deck that took a while to recover the other nights, they're not showing up here, right? So, if I just look at the deck axis, you can see even when we do have a spike, it's recovering a lot quicker. So, that's interesting. I don't remember changing much in terms of settings, but maybe I changed them a little bit, but I'm not a master at PhD2 settings. Here is the calibration for the EQ6R. This looks like a little funky. It's a little bit wider than 90 degrees. I'm not sure why. And here is the guiding. Now, the total RMS with the EQ6R is one arc second exactly. The conditions were getting a lot worse at this point. So, sometimes guiding won't get a lot worse even though you have high clouds, but there was high clouds. So, I'm not sure how much that affected the performance of the EQ6R here, but in any case, it did pretty well. Okay, so here is the ZWOAM5, there is the M27, and there is the EQ6R. And again, the EQ6R looks worse here. We're not getting as many details in the dust, but that was because of conditions, sky conditions, not because of the performance of the mount. So, otherwise, I think these look very similar in terms of what we got, but let's zoom in and see if we can see any differences here. And not really. I mean, I think that the AM5 looks the best, but it was also the mount that I started with, and I think the sky conditions were the best at the beginning of the night. Other than that, I would say these look very similar in terms of how round and small the stars are. The stars look a little bit different over here on the EQ6R, but again, I think that is conditions and not actually anything we can conclude about the tracking or guiding of the mount. So, I hope this was helpful. I mean, basically, what I proved here in the performance section was any of these mounts can handle imaging setups within their limits. And if you're an experienced imager, you're gonna have no problem with any of these mounts. So, the real deciding factor is probably going to be other things. The only kind of performance difference that I saw was that the AM5 on paper guided a little bit better than the M27, and the EQ6R settled faster than either of the smaller mounts. You're now seeing everyone who supports me and this YouTube channel over on patreon.com slash Nebula Photos. It is an excellent community of dedicated amateur astrophotographers, people who want to learn more. We have over 800 members now. There's an active Discord community you can get involved in, and I can't thank my Patreon community enough. I am now doing this full-time thanks to all of you, and it really means the world to me to get that kind of support and allows me to make these videos and to really pursue what I want to do in life, which is help people learn astrophotography. So, thank you to everyone who supports me on Patreon, and if you enjoy this channel, I think, you know, you can get a lot of benefits out of joining my Patreon community. It starts at just $1 a month, and you get all kinds of support and a monthly Zoom call where you can ask me questions directly. We do a monthly imaging challenge, different objects every month, and you can see sort of people's different results. We pick a couple winners every month, and so there's a lot of fun stuff going on. So, if interested, head over to patreon.com slash Nebula Photos. Until next time, this has been Nico Carver. Happy holidays and clear skies.