jetstream

1 hour ago, 25585 said:

10mm, 9mm, 8mm, 7mm, 5mm, 3.5mm

What are they? I'm curious - if they are reasonably low scatter then they will be fine. A lot of this eyepiece talk is splitting hairs really and the seeing has to be very good to split those hairs. I would reconsider your mounting options before EP's or barlows etc IMHO. I need a settling time of a second or less to be happy...

8 minutes ago, 25585 said:

It's mechanical things that can affect losing high power targets. Slight wobble from a mount, focuser, eyepiece or any combination. 

I would like to go higher but find myself getting tenser trying to keep a target centered. So settle for compromise until I have had more experience maybe. 

An extender is expensive, especially a Tak one, so will keep to Barlows for the time being. 

What high power eyepieces do you have?

29 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

It really depends on the target. I think X200 is a safe bet on most nights on pretty much anything, but your Tak will easily exceed X400 on a good night. The Moon, Mars, Mercury and Venus all take power well on a steady night. Jupiter and Saturn are better viewed at around X200. Obviously you'll have to match the power with the local seeing.

I bought a 1.6 extender Q a few years ago and it was superb, but more than a bit fiddley at times. It was without a doubt the best image amplifier I've ever used, being completely transparent! However, the Tak is so good that it doesn't need the Q to reach high powers. Star images and colour correction are perfect with or without the Q in the light path, so it may save you an awful lot of money if you can try one out before buying. 

Off topic a bit but I've had my best refactor view of M13 using the TSA120/Nikon HW 14(EIC), it shows the characteristic "spider plant" look very well. I must say this telescope is amazing on stars and Antares, among others, shows unbelievable color in it. So far Jupiter is taking 250x-300x using the 3.4mm HR and the zooms. The detail is superb for 120mm... and it splits stars so well, I was on the doubles hunt last night and I can actually find a bunch now with the AZEQ6.

This triplet scope loves the Baader/Zeiss prism diag on stars and solar system objects. It has been a great purchase Mike.

On 07/06/2018 at 17:39, 25585 said:

As a FYI snip the Japanese site does not show a FC100DL as a current model, but here is the page on DL http://www.takahashijapan.com/ct-news/news_topics/newst_170530_fc-100dl_17.html . Production it says was based upon orders made in 2017, presumably from retailers.

So to another Tak topic. Extenders for DLs. Ian King is asking T'hashi Europe which is the best for strictly viewing. The Japanese site has this chart http://www.takahashijapan.com/ct-products/prod_topics/products_ex.html that shows a TOA 1.6x is best viewing, while the Q 1.6x (50.8) is standard. 

The Q 1.6x is that shown on a DL system diagram, and is the model IK gave, however he is running it by Tak UK.

Whichever is best, my DL would be a 1440mm F14.4 with an ED 1.6x extender, the purpose being use of longer FL eye pieces for higher magnifications, specialising the Tak further as a lower weight longer FL telescope.

 

What is your max mag you observe with now regularly?

7 hours ago, Don Pensack said:

You must have a long focal length scope.

Nah, just dark skies

24 minutes ago, Piero said:

In my DF a 1.5mm metric Hex key can unscrew them.  

Thanks Piero, I knew you would come through with the info.

15 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

Yes Gerry. Unscrewing the locking screw, being careful not to lose the small bass disc that may be loosely attached to the locking screw by grease, you can access the hex screws. 

Thanks Mike, I lucked out as I don't have to remove the locking knob, any idea what size those grub screws are for reference?

I just saw them on top of the TSA120 focuser, there are 3 grub screws with glue over them. I need an explanation as I'm a bit daft... the brass box holding the pinion shaft in place- is that its primary function or does it also provide tension or reduced backlash or something? Are those grub screws on the top the primary tension adjustment?

I'll wear mate mine in to see how it is before touching the focuser.

42 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

situated on the top of the cast focuser body are too tight.

Do you have a picture of these Mike?

I have a clamshell for the 120mm Tak and it looks robust. The Losmandy dovetail by Farpoint has a recess for the boss on the bottom of the holder providing good security. I'm not so sure I would use a bar without this recess, just me.

 So many top imagers ie Astroavani, Kokathaman , Peach etc use those pesky SCT's to great effect! I guess refractors can't compete in this realm...

The article does have some valid points ie benefits of aperture, cost vs aperture. Mind you I think I want a magic Tak that doesn't need dark skies to perform well !

I wonder how much weight and scope length the central column can support? I sure looks handy- does the Planet offer one?

9 minutes ago, disciplus55 said:

Here is a DL on SW AZ GTi + EQ5 extension column and UNI 18, very stable and super heavy...

 

What is the settling time of this set up?

Perfect John, congrats!

Awesome findings!

You might find that, like me the Tak LE series is not in the same league as your better eyepieces...

Great eyepieces

The 42mm LVW is a favorite of mine as is the HR2 2.4mm.

7 minutes ago, ngwillym said:

"While the Quark has a blocking filter in its nose which should kill any residual energy"

Great post and I know this isn't quoting you Neil but I wanted to mention something.

This mention of the "blocking filter" in the nose of the Quark is misleading IMHO. This front filter is the induced transmission filter (ITF) which serves a completely different role than the blocking filter. As the etalon is a "comb" filter the actual blocking filter isolates one line for us to see or image.

To me this ITF is the fail safe energy reducing "broadband" filter and not the actual blocking filter.

I thought it might be worth mentioning this.

1 hour ago, spaceboy said:

I don't always think "people can do what ever they want" is the best advice!

Some make choices and hopefully they are informed ones....

A few have tried the reflective filters but the con to this is the reflected light- I wouldn't want to inadvertently look at a D-ERF while its tracking the sun.

BTW there are more choices for the full  aperture ERF and not all are reflective I believe.

20 minutes ago, spaceboy said:

they can fail due to absorbing the heat and expansion

Very true- but having a filter that "rattles" ( a bit loose in its cell) and figuring out the energy from the solar disk size can prevent this. My 120ED has no issues with this filter (with my diags). I chose KG3 because the nature of the KG3 allows it to filter IR regardless of coating. If the KG3 breaks I'll know it immediately vs a coating failure with the other types which may go un-noticed.

The reflective filters shoot light out the objective...

I guess its all about choices-to each their own.

Edit- I use this filter for keeping IR from reaching my eye as well as protect the Quark or wedge...

BTW I use this filter for solar use. Mr Smie did calculate if it was safe based on the f ratio (solar disk size) at the distance inside the tubes using my diagonals. It is an absorptive IR filter (KG3) vs a reflective (Baader UV/IR).

http://beloptik.de/en/left/if-uv-ir-cut-on-kg3-infrared-blocking-filter/

Just now, spaceboy said:

I think moonshane has removed his rusty itf

People can do whatever they want- its a free country (ies) so to speak. I personally like the metallic ITF features better (ie they block more light when they fail).

Whatever we do here we must not ever consider removing the "little silver" filter (ITF) from the bottom of the Quark.  I believe the goal of a true front mounted ERF and a "mini ERF" (UV/IR,35nm Baader 2") is to keep heat (energy) from the Quarks filters.

https://www.andovercorp.com/products/bandpass-filters/standard/600-699nm/

27 minutes ago, Pingster said:

I assume this would greatly change the look of the sun?

The Quarks filters let deep red-656.3 nm through (in "steps down to it") so the wide Baader 35nm Ha filter will not cause a color difference.

Be very careful when considering and using filters ahead of your diagonal for solar.

Piero, congrats for a fine purchase! Great scope!