Speaking as a user of both AP and iOptron mounts, I find my little CEM25 to be more than adequate for portable imaging. I use it for 80mm refractor and smaller optics all the way down to simple camera lenses and get guided tracking good enough (1.1 arc-sec rms typical) that the mount is not the determining factor to image resolution. The mount seems to be a practical choice.
What would be the motivation for a customer to spend more money to handle a similar payload while having a similar carry weight for all the gear ?
While Astro-Physics would certainly build a mount with even better tracking, how would the end user actually benefit ?
How could A-P recoup the engineering costs without selling very large quantities of the mount ? Would they not have to garner a major share of all the small mount users to make this work fiscally ? Is that realistic when these iOptron (and other) mounts cost only $1000 new ?
I love A-P quality enough that I would not wish to see the health of the company hurt by pursuit of a market in which their strengths don't align with customer interests.
-- David F.