Rainmaker

I am trying to understand why people get so enthusiastic about Taks…..

These are the “Keepers” Takahashi TOA130NFB, Skylight Telescopes AR101 F15 and Berry&Mackay 3.25” F15

I decided to simplify my monoviewing eyepiece selection to those eyepieces I use the most. I kept these:

and my homemade "Excalibur" 18" F3.5

My homemade "Guinevere" 18" F5.6

Skylight AR101.15 looking up at the Light in the Sky

I owned both the E21 and N22, I now own only the N22 as I didn’t really find the 100 degree field easy to view… The N22 is just so easy to use….

More scopes should have the ‘character’ of these Skylights….

Yes, full brass 4” F15, Richard made three such OTAs, two went to customers and he kept one of them for himself, albeit without optics.

What a fine acquisition….. there’s something special about these long focus instruments by Richard Day. I have one of the three all brass ones, I mostly use it for lunar and solar viewing….

My case after a lot of downsizing, these are the survivors of the cull....

Jeremy, the Planet is more than sufficient for any normal load, especially if the legs aren't extended too much. I used the Planet for several setups without any problem at all. This Tak tripod is the one specified for the EM400 and EM500 mounts, it has a load capacity of 1000 lbs or 450Kg, it is overkill but I use it for outreach and have had people bumping into it without it affecting the view at the eyepiece, even with the legs fully extended it retains full stability.

My wife said "No more telescopes" but I did manage to make these two over the past five years:

I think the Berlebach Planet is the best thing you can add to the AZ-EQ6GT for a reasonable cost. The standard tripod resembles half-cooked spaghetti when trying to place a scope like the Esprit 150 on it. The leg braces do help somewhat but the thin tubes used by Skywatcher mean that you really cannot extend the legs at all if you want stability. I started modifying my AZ-EQ6GT setup first with a DIY leg brace, then I swapped the tubes for longer, thicker walled tubes. I eventually abandone the GMT128 tripod altogether and bought the Takahashi TMT70300 tripod..... No more issues with vibrations or worry about load capacity....

Very nice purchase! I have them on each of my scopes.

That 180mm APM-LZOS sure looks tempting........... alas I shall have to be content with little one............

Had RACIs before, mainly RDF (Baader SkySurferV) now, but I agree that the Tak 6x30 is not bad, in fact it probably has the finest optics of any finder I have used....

Jeremy, as far as I am aware they have always been made with ED. I have had sets from each of the 3 generations of 7.5mm and 5mm LEs and optically they have been the same. The differences have been with graphics on the housing. Does you setup reach focus without the barlow? by removing the extension tube? I found that I had better results using the Baader 1.25x GPC in the diagonal instead of barlows like the WO. The GPCs were designed by Roland Christen to counter spherochromatism caused by the binoviewer prisms and as they also move the focal point out, they help with light path issues.

I would suggest that you double up on the LE7.5. The LE7.5 and the LE5mm are ED eyepieces. The 7.5mm will give you 120x if used without the barlow lens, I have found this to be a very useable magnification for many targets. I previously had pairs of Naglers, DeLites etc. My current binopairs are the LE30,18, 7.5 and 5 as well as the Panoptic24s. Of those I mostly use the LE18 and 7.5, both give very sharp, contrasty views.

My vote also for the N26T5, I previously had the N22T4, Ethos 21mm and Nagler 31T5 but sold those as the N26T5 did everything I needed in widefield. I found I never used the extra field of the Ethos and the N31 gave too large an exit pupil in my other scopes. The N26T5 is a definite keeper....

Takahashi Seisakusho have always had a very particular ethos, they design their scopes as part of a system that works incredibly well as a system. All their components are of high quality and work because they are designed and intended to be used with other Takahashi components. They don't cater for ES or TeleVue or Morpheus because they already have a selection of eyepieces and other components like prisms and diagonals that are of a high quality. They make their mounts, focusers and rings in their traditional way, sandcasting them, I doubt that will ever change.... Their draw tube travel in each model is sufficient to allow the use of any of their own eyepieces...... but lately they have softened their approach a little to try to accommodate individual preferences...

How?

NICE !!! More pictures please. Great choice of focuser and finder too. How is the thicker mirror for cooling, do you have active cooling with fan/fans?

Funny how often many people quote RC ....... I have a very nice Newtonian with an excellent mirror, a well set up SIPS system but there so many occasions when my refractors put up a better image Obviously the Newtonian will have its advantage in terms of ability to resolve finer details but the fact remains that so often the sky conditions of seeing and transparency set the limit to what the scopes can do..... in optimum conditions there is no question about what a very good large mirror can do, but more often when the conditions, including the position of the target planet in the sky, are sub-optimal the refractors are my choice...... but we are veering away from the topic that is FS102 V TSA102..........

I agree that they both give stunning images and you really need to have the two scopes side by side with matching diagonals and eyepieces to see differences. I set up my TSA alongside my FS in my binoscope cradle with matching eyepieces in order to see the differences.