johnturley

Notice that you have a Skywatcher 9x 50 finder installed in the Tak finder bracket. I wanted something a bit bigger than the Tak 6 x 30 finder for my recently acquired 100 DZ., but didn't want to pay as much a £330 for the Tak 7 x 50, so purchased a secondhand (which turned out to be like new) Skywatcher 9 x 50, and installed in the Tak bracket. John John

Rother Valley Optics currently have the DF on offer at £2,049 for the OTA, or with the clamshell, bracket and 6x30 finder for £2,349, plus during November and December (I think) a free Zygo check. I decided however to go for the DZ (which isn't on offer apart from the Zygo test), maybe I have wasted quite a bit of money, as some have stated that there is virtually no difference in the performance between them. John John

Although slightly tempted, I am not seriously thinking of getting an Askar 185 at present, although would have been very tempted if they had been around at that price when I purchased my Esprit 150. If I had wanted a larger APO Refractor at that time, I would have had to pay more than double the price, I did in fact briefly consider a CFF 160 which was available then for around £9k, but was put off by reports of inconsistent optical quality, and problems with the lens holding collimation. A TEC or APM LZOS 180 would have been around £18k, so opted for an Es Reid tested Esprit 150 at £4k. Incidentally the Askar is about the same weight as my Esprit 150 (which is mounted piggy back on my 14in Newtonian in an observatory shed) at 14.9 kg net, and a similar tube diameter at 185mm, although I assume the tube length will be about 35 x 7 = 240 mm longer (maybe less with the retractile rear lens tube). As mentioned previously I still have my doubts as to whether the listed price of £5,049 is correct, especially as their 151mm version costs £4,399, and what I thought before was the cheapest 180mm APO around, the TS 180 costing around 12k Euros. I would however be very interested to hear any reports about the optical quality of the Askar 185.

Sounds like the price of £5,049 which FLO are listing it at may be incorrect, would expect to to be around £10k in £'s. John

The 185mm would be potentially great for high resolution planetary/lunar imaging, depending on the quality of the lens. I find that my Esprit 150 gives better results than my 14in Newtonian, unless atmospheric conditions are very good. It would however require a suitable mount, maybe an EQ8 or CEM120 (expensive), although the mount is not as critical as with deep sky imaging, some planetary imagers produce excellent results with dobsonians. John

I wondered about the 185 in particular, 180mm Refractors from TEC, CFF, and Stellarview cost over £15k, even the Explore Scientific 165mm Refractor, which is not regraded as being a premium scope, costs £8k. John

I think that Spain used to be on the same time zone as the UK, but switched to CET when they joined the EU, although the Canary Islands remained on the same time zone as the UK. Based on the longitude, mainland Spain should be on the same time zone as the UK (as I think is Portugal), and there was recently some talk about them switching back. John

Will think about getting a Tak Prism Diagonal if you think its worthwhile for improved high power planetary views, they are not as expensive as I thought at £108 from FLO. Looking at your photo, have you fitted a micro focuser, if so is that the genuine Tak one, FLO just list the More Blue version. More Blue Precision Focuser Retrofit Kit for Takahashi Telescopes | First Light Optics John

That seems very cheap for a 185mm Refractor, most 180mm Refractors such as TEC, CFF, and Stellarvue cost over £15k, even the Explore Scientific 165mm (not regarded as a premium refractor) costs £8k. Just looked on FLO's website, and they seem remarkable for the price, about the same as the Esprit 150, and about the same weight. John

I finally picked up the Takahashi FC 100 DZ from Rother Valley Optics yesterday, taking over a week to come from their supplier, apparently this was the last one available in the country before further stocks arrive from Japan, although according to FLO’s website they currently have one in stock. I went to Rother Valley Optics mainly because they are only 30 minutes drive away from me, so that I could pick up the scope in person, and avoid possible subsequent damage, or misalignment of the optics, in case of rough handling by the courier. In addition RVO were £60 cheaper than FLO at £2,905, and are currently offering a free Zygo Test on ED Refractors up to 120mm. According to the test the scope came out as Strehl 0.987, in line with what would be expected. The scope was certainly well packed compared to some other scopes that I have bought, being ‘triple boxed’, and on inspection appeared in perfect condition with no visible marks on the tube or dust on the lens. To me it appeared incredibly small, light, and compact compared to my ES 127mm Refractor, especially with the dewshield retracted. It had been my original intention to purchase some Stella Lyra black tube rings to mount it on my Skywatcher AZ-EQ 5 mount, but @mikeDnight kindly offered me a Tak 95mm Clamshell with dovetail, so I thought I would give it a try, and it does appear to grip the tube quite firmly. The AZ-EQ5 feels like a bit of overkill for such a small light scope (I originally purchased it for the ES 127 Refractor), and I may consider selling it and buying a smaller and lighter mount in the future, so that I can carry everything out as one unit. However with now only requiring one balance weight, plus not the extension bar (2 balance weights plus extension bar were required with the ES 127), the mount and tripod are a bit lighter to carry out. In addition at present, I can potentially mount both scopes on the AZ-EQ5 in AZ mode, which would be useful when it comes to comparing them, although the large difference in weight between them (4kg as opposed to 9kg) could cause balance problems. I wanted a larger finder than the standard Tak 6x30, but did not want to pay as much as £322 (plus £90 for mounting bracket) for a Tak 7 x 50, so instead paid £30 for a second-hand Skywatcher finder (including bracket), which turned out to be like new. It had been my intention to mount it on the DZ utilising a More Blue Finder Base from FLO. More Blue Universal Finder Base for Tak | First Light Optics However these are currently out of stock, and not likely to come in before December, so after checking that the Skywatcher finder would fit, I splashed out what I though was an exorbitant £90 on the Tak bracket when I picked up the scope, but it does at least match the colour of the rest of the scope, although as Tak purists will note, the Clamshell is a slightly different shade of green, I assume that Tak must at some stage have changed the colour. Overall the finish of the Tak is excellent, although I must confess to being a bit disappointed with the focusing mount, which I gather is not a strong point of Taks, and understand why some fit Feathertouch focusers. I found it rather stiff even after slackening the adjustment knob, has a limited travel distance of about 62mm (although better than the 45mm of the ES 127), and only course focusing. More Blue do make a Precision Focuser Retrofit Kit, available from FLO, and wondered whether anybody had purchased one of these, and how they rate them. More Blue Precision Focuser Retrofit Kit for Takahashi Telescopes | First Light Optics As can be seen from the photo below I have fitted a Baader 2in Click Lock Diagonal (which used to be on my CPC 9.25), and was planning to get another Click Lock 2in to 1.25in Reducer (I have these on both my 14in Newtonian and Esprit 150), however the Tak one which came with the scope, although not click-lock, appears to be of very good quality, so I might not bother. I wasn’t sure whether I would need the extension tube that came with the scope to reach focus with the diagonal, I think that @Mr Spock mentioned that with the Baader M72 ClickLock Clamp and diagonal, he didn’t require any extension tube, but will find out by trial and error. Baader 2" ClickLock M72 Clamp (Takahashi) | First Light Optics As mentioned it is my intention over the next few weeks to compare the performance of the 100 DZ with the ES 127 before selling the latter, and see whether Taks are as good as some claim. However I will not be unduly disappointed if the DZ turns out to be not quite as good on planets as the ES 127 with its extra 27mm of aperture (although not as good quality lens), as I wanted a smaller lighter scope anyway. I would not expect it to compare on Deep Sky Objects, but I have two other scopes (my 14in Newtonian and Esprit 150) better suited to this purpose. John

Looks like you have a Baader 37mm Click Lock extension tube attached, is this required to reach focus with the Baader Diagonal, also do you get good wide field views with the Vixen 42mm LVW. John

I observed this also, and noted that Ganymede and its shadow were only just on the Jovian disc, unlike last year. I understand that occasionally in Jupiter's 12 year rotation period round the sun, Ganymede and its shadow can completely miss the Jovian disc, on the other hand Callisto and its shadow miss the Jovian disc more often than they transit. John

It's not easy to spot visually under light polluted skies, I've seen it several times through my 14in Newtonian, but it's not obvious, also been able to make it out through my Esprit 150. The attached photo was a processed (in Lightroom) 30 second single shot image taken with a Canon 6D digital SLR through my 14in Newtonian. I'm not into making multi images using darks and flats etc. for Deep Sky objects, and processing with Pixinsight or other dedicated deep sky software. It must have been an early attempt with my Canon 6D, I subsequently found that the vignetting of the image, can be largely cured by using a 48mm to Canon adaptor rather than the commonplace M42. John

It was hard to spot through my Esprit 150, quite large and diffuse, but obvious through my 14in Newtonian though. John

Unfortunately, weather outlook not very good in Derbyshire. John

I understand that in 2025 there will only be a single passage of the earth through the ring plane, unlike 1966, 1979-80, and 1995 when there was a triple passage. In addition unlike some previous apparitions, I don't think that there will be an observable period when the unilluminated side of the rings will be tilted towards the earth, which appears as a dark band across Saturn's disc, and Saturn appears ring less.

Agree, last night the shadow of Io was very clearly visible through both my 14in Newtonian, and Esprit 150, but I couldn't make out the disc of Io on the Jovian disc through either instrument. I didn't however start observing Jupiter until around 23.00, so missed the part when Io was close to the limb, and more easily visible. However I observed a transit/shadow transit of Ganymede a couple of months ago, and in this case the disc of Ganymede was quite easy to spot. John

Thanks for the info, I might need something like that if I decide to take the scope on holiday.

I've just ordered one from FLO for my shortly to be acquired Tak 100 DZ, looks like this particular bag will be the best fit, wondered whether it might be a bit on the big size with it being designed for 900 mm fl scopes. John

Hi Michael That's interesting, a couple of years ago I did a shoot out under good viewing conditions, looking at fine craterlets in the Mare Crisium on the moon between my 14in Newtonian, Esprit 150, and ES 127 Refractors, I would have included the CPC 9.25, only my wife had boxed it in in the conservatory with a large potted Argave that she had taken in for the winter (which is another reason besides my back that I decided to sell the CPC). Although of course the 14in Newtonian gave a much brighter image, there was very little to chose between it and the Esprit 150 regarding the visibility of the small craterlets and sharpness of the view. The ES 127 was on the other hand some way between the other two, the view was less sharp, and it failed to show some craterlets that were clearly visible in the other two scopes. As I mentioned previously, the CPC more or less became redundant after I purchased the Esprit, but held on to it as I don't like parting with telescopes, and based on your experience on Jupiter with your CPC 9.25, it sounds like the Esprit is superior to it on planets, as I have recently been able to see a lot a detail in the cloud belts of Jupiter through it. In fact 9 out of 10 nights it gives a more pleasing view, than the 14in Newtonian, but the latter does give a better view under very good seeing conditions. However when it comes to deep sky objects and comets, there is no comparison between the two instruments, the larger reflector wins hand down every time, but the wider field of the Esprit does however enable me to fit the whole of the Pleiades and most of the Andromeda Galaxy in one field of view (using the Vixen 42mm LVW). I am fortunate perhaps that my 14in Newtonian is on a massive fork mount built by Astro Systems (Luton) in the 1980's , which can also handle the weight of the Esprit, and would cost a fortune these days. In fact the mount has its similarities to the Taurus Fork Mount which costs £18,000 at FLO, but with a larger 720 teeth brass worm, but of course no computer control or GOTO. I do not expect the 100 DZ to come close to either of the above two instruments, but I purchased it to provide me with high quality portable instrument, and will enable me to move it around the garden to view objects which are blocked off from my observatory shed by trees and houses, and possibly take on holiday, although for the latter I will require a lighter and more portable mount than my current AZ-EQ5. It will be interesting to compare it with my ES 127 Refractor before I sell it, but I will not be unduly disappointed if it turns out to be not quite as good. John

One of the reasons I went for the 100 DZ was that according to Takahashi it is easily carried on most commercial flights, although I have received conflicting reports about that, so it probably depends on the airline, and would need to check with them. I did have some thoughts of taking it to Mexico when we go to view the total solar eclipse next April, but as this trip involves multiple internal flights, probably best not to risk it on this trip, and confine taking it to Tenerife some time, where we usually fly with JET2, who are usually fairly relaxed about what you can take in the cabin, and I wouldn't mind paying a bit extra for it if needs be. John

I agree that the 100 DZ might be hard pressed to outperform, or even equal the performance of the new crop of 125mm FPL53 ED Doublets, but I am getting the 100 DZ partly because I want a lighter and more portable instrument. Unfortunately for me, the new crop of 125mm ED Doublets costing around £1,500, might also make it more difficult for me to get a decent price when it comes to selling my Explore Scientific 127mm FCD100 Refractor, which currently costs around £2,200 new. About 10 years ago Explore Scientific 4-5in ED Refractors, alongside the Skywatcher ones, were quite popular choices for Amateur Astronomers, but currently, although still in production, they rarely get a mention. John

Thanks for the info, this might be useful, although according to FLO's website its out of stock at present. John

I have owned several different scopes both Reflectors and Refractors over the years, but have never previously owned a Takahashi Refractor, and have been intrigued by claims from some Tak owners, that their scopes provide razor sharp images of planets at 100x or even 120x per inch of aperture, which would equate to around 400x for a 100mm scope. I found this somewhat surprising, as it is very rare that I can use to advantage, a magnification in excess of 300x with either my 14in Newtonian or 150mm Esprit Refractor. Earlier this year I injured my back trying to lift a gate off its hinges, and its taken nearly 6 months to recover, hence I came to the conclusion that at my age (74) my CPC 9.25 was now getting a bit heavy to lift comfortably. In addition I was also under some pressure from my wife to reduce the number of scopes in the conservatory (which housed both my CPC 9.25 and Explore Scientific 127 Refractor), and to be honest I’d hardly used the CPC since in 2019 purchasing my Esprit 150 (which gives similar planetary performance), and which is conveniently mounted piggyback on my 14in Newtonian in my observatory shed. I purchased the CPC back in 2014, as at the time I was thinking over moving house, and wanted something at was at least semi-portable, and with a computerised GOTO facility. The C9.25 was at the time recommended by Damien Peach for its performance on planets, but with hindsight it might have been better purchasing a C9.25 OTA and GEM separately, but at the time I don’t think that most GEM’s offered a computerised GOTO facility. At 9kg (with tube rings, finder and diagonal) my ES 127 (which used to be mounted piggyback on my 14in before I purchased the Esprit, and is currently mounted on a Skywatcher AZ-EQ5) is no lightweight either, and ideally I could do with something more portable. I worked out that if I sold both the CPC and the ES 127, I could roughly fund the purchase of a Tak 100DZ. However I decided that I would sell my CPC first, and keep my ES 127 a little longer, so that I could also satisfy my curiosity as how the Tak would compare to a larger non premium scope such as the ES 127. I have already compared the ES 127 to the Esprit 150, and found the latter to be streaks ahead, more than you would expect from just an extra 23mm of aperture, which I put down to the superior quality of the Esprit lens, and I am not expecting a 100mm Tak to come close to this. I will mount the 100 DZ on my existing AZ-EQ5 mount, and for the purpose of doing the comparison, can potentially mount both scopes on it in AZ mode. The AZ-EQ5 mount is not exactly lightweight either, and I might in future look for a lighter mount for the Tak, but should only require one rather than two balance weights with the 100 DZ, making it marginally lighter. I finally sold my CPC 9.25 last week, and contacted Rother Valley Optics to order my 100 DZ, which they expect to come into stock next week. At £2,905 for the DZ OTA, this did seem a high price for a 100mm Refractor, and I was tempted by the cheaper 100 DF, which RVO currently have on offer at £2,049 for the OTA, and the performance of which some have stated is virtually equal to that of the DZ. However I decided to stick with my original plan to go for the longer focal length DZ, with its sliding dewshield. I have also decided to pay the extra for a Zygo test, so that I can be 100% certain of its optical quality, Es Reid (whom I know personally) told me that he has occasionally come across what he described as a ‘Friday afternoon’ Tak. Adam at RVO informed me that if the scope does not come up to the expected optical standard in the test, then they sent it back to Tak and get a replacement. I will be picking up the scope from RVO, who are only about 15 miles away from me, so I can be 100% certain that no damage, or mis-alignment of the optics takes place in transit. I decided to go for the basic OTA as @mikeDnight kindly offered me a spare Tak clamshell, and rather than pay £171 for a Tak 6x30 finder, or £322 for a 7 x 50 finder, I have purchased a second hand Skywatcher 9 x 50 finder for £30, but I expect that I will need to buy the genuine Tak finder bracket. I will post an update after getting the 100 DZ, and after I have had a chance to compare it with my other scopes. John

You might need an extension tube if you are not using a star diagonal, most refractors sold these days require an extension tube to reach focus without a diagonal. John