Nakedgun

Last year, quite a bit of internet buzz had been generated regarding the Tak FOA-60 & Q, which prompted me to get the f/8.8 version in May '19.

The reports are true, this thing is sharp and lacks unwanted color transmission on anything I point it at. I am completely satisfied with the performance at this aperture.

If Takahashi would produce a 5-inch version I'd add it immediately.

Here, getting ready for some Lunar action:

Tak 6x30 finder attached.

Wow!

An evening with that rig could have one entertaining the idea of selling off everything else.

Enlightenment. Better late than never.

Welcome!

I was going to suggest a Manfrotto product, but no need. Repurposing can be far cheaper.

Paz,

Nice eval. Thanks for taking the time to do so.

On 23/01/2020 at 13:40, F15Rules said:

Vintage '56 twins!!👍

Another 56er, here (August).

Too bad, Dave, these are no longer available:

OK, so there not waterproof, optically very nice, indeed.

On 16/01/2020 at 01:46, Frank the Troll said:

Celestron Ultima DX 9*63 clear & sharp, well worth having.  I Use mounted on an eq3 & photo tripod. Also just right for hand-held use

These are a keeper

These 10x50 Ultima are the only set of this Japan mfd. line I own.

Every time I use them I kick myself for not buying the entire line when they could be had.

Nothing quite like a missed opportuniyt!

Truly, grab-n-go.

5 hours ago, Stub Mandrel said:

You get an extra like for the 'Who needs Prima Luce anyway?' adaptor!

Just a piece of scrap aluminum I had collecting dust in the garage.😎

Moving up from 50mm aperture, I added this Borg 60ED f/5.8 to my group in July 2005:

A very fast ED doublet, it is intended more as a photographic tool and less as a planet killer, but the eyepieces I use with it get me to a little over 100x, so it is not pushed terribly hard for my astronomical pursuits.

I carry it in my Tacoma, as it is not one of my primary observing instruments and keep an erecting prism diagonal handy for daytime use as a spotter, also.

 I mount this featherweight on a Vixen Mini-Porta, for which I made an adapter, allowing attachment to a Manfrotto tripod.

8 hours ago, John said:

Just as a warning, I picked up a pair of those 10x-30x X 60 zoom binoculars that Aldi were selling, for a few quid from a charity shop just out of curiosity. They were really poor, even just for terrestrial at the lower ends of the zoom range. Not sharp, lots of false colour. Just to be avoided.

Not even going to give those away - not fair on whoever gets them, might put them off binoculars !

 

So, John,

Just give them away to someone you dislike.

5 hours ago, robbymain said:

I bought the Vixen adapter not realising the mismatch and ended up drilling and tapping the hole to 3/8"-16 UNC to match the stud on my new Manfrotto 055. 

I wonder why Vixen chose a 1/4"-20 hole when the mount would clearly be screwed directly to a medium to heavy duty photo tripod?! Seems odd to me!

Does seem odd.

11 hours ago, Peter77 said:

Played around a little during daytime today, tried out eyepieces + camera afocal mode. Couldn't resist to take a picture

There is something beatiful with a refractor all setup in daylight. Much more photogenic than during the time they normally come to life.

 

//P

How rural are you? Dark skies, there?

In another thread I posted images of the oldest scope I own, a Tasco 60 f/11, made, perhaps, as far back as the 60s. I found it April 2015.

My smallest astronomical scope, the Pocket Borg (posted previously), a 25mm f/7, came to me February '07.

I have a 40mm PST but will not include it here since everyone knows what they are, so that brings us to my next largest scope, a Borg 50ED f/10, owned since September '09.

It use it on a Manfrotto tripod with 410 geared head. Very sharp views from this little guy!

My smallest refractor, the smallest one made by Borg, called by them the Pocket Borg, is a 25mm f/7 doublet.

A novelty, I mount it on a slo-mo alt-az for views of the Moon or planets out as far as #6 for entertainment.

A 25mm Plossl acts as a finder while the TV zoom gets me up to 58x, enough to see Saturn's rings.

Focus is achieved by sliding the objective section.

Always fun to get something new.

Look forward to your impressions.

Here is the oldest scope I own, made perhaps during the 60s.

As shown in another thread, it came into my possession as a road find almost five years ago, and after some cleanup provides enjoyable views of the heavens.

I have many sizes/types for a variety of purposes, from a lowly 2.3x up to 32x.

For handheld astro use, from dark skies, for the last 20 years I have been continually satisfied with these 10x50s:

I had completely forgotten about this thread.

This was a toss-away, found with some other road-side trash.

It did clean up and provides views expected from its genre.

I even have a .965" observing set to use with it.

On 02/12/2019 at 12:47, Jiggy 67 said:

This discussion has got me a bit worried, my wife has got me the 40mm for Xmas, she's withholding it to Xmas Day though 😯

The TV32 will show the same true field as the TV40, but, at higher magnification, which makes it preferable, in my view. I sold the 40. 

Been only a few months since the DZ has been offered so it may still be a bit early but has anyone conducted a side-by-side shootout yet? Search came up empty.

I went for the DC specifically to have the lightest version of their 4" as I wanted to downsize not only my scope herd, but my mounting requirements, as well (sold my TSA102 when I got the DC). I'm as susceptible to marketing as anybody else, but in this case I think it would have to be a side-by-side comparison to get me to bite.

I do no imaging.  

And, I'm with  Stu on the 5-inch doublet request!

On 14/08/2019 at 00:39, Craney said:

In terms of the scope collective and size order........  would this be  "seven of nine"    ??

Of the strictly astronomical refractors, it would be currently #12 of 14. 

There, I've said it.

10 hours ago, Scott42 said:

Can you tell us more about this scope - how do you like it compared to the other Borg's you've had?   Is that an FT focuser - did you choose it over the Borg R&P focuser?

First let me say I've always been a strictly visual observer, so, cannot comment as to any scope's photo capabilities.

Previous Borg purchases include: 76ED f/6.6 (first Borg), 76ED f/10, 101ED f/6.4, 60ED f/5.8, 50ED f/10, Pocket Borg 25mm f/7. 

One thing that attracted me to them is their featherweight, go anywhere, easy mounting requirements, permitting you to keep one around just about anywhere, anytime.

The 76 f/10 and 101 were sold some years ago as they did not form an image as sharp as I was hoping from them, maybe it was sample variation, can't say for sure. At f/5.8, the 60 is no planetary scope either, but I keep it behind the truck seat for a daytime spotter or handy-scope if stopped somewhere at night for a brief look up. The 76 f/6.6 has been my favorite Borg performer (until now) and provides pleasing views of all objects. The 50 is always fun, too, limited only by aperture? The Pocket is a novelty, but will show Saturn's rings clearly at 58x.

Except for the Pocket (sliding objective tube), all came with Borg helical focusers which I find adequate. The 90 is offered with more than one focusing option and I took the r&p they have made available. This focuser is not equal to the OTA it is mounted on, but will do the job, workmanlike, if not impressive. I may get the Feathertouch, in due course.

I've had the 90 out twice, once doing some daytime spotting and again Saturday night with the planets. I used a prism diagonal, haven't compared with a mirror, yet. I was leery before buying, f/5.6 is fast for visual, even with fluorite, but I must say I have no regrets on this purchase, love the views. With diagonal, ep, finder, rings and dovetail it weighs all of 7 lbs. so mounting remains easy, though it is the heaviest Borg I own.

I envision it being a scope I will use mostly for sweeping up deep-sky objects, appropriate for the aperture, mounted alt-az.

Last fall I bought a SW120ED, and said, fully believing, that it would be my last refractor.  I should have stayed off these boards!

I have bought several Borg scopes from Ted Ishikawa, the U.S. importer, over the years, and have been pleased with them. I didn't need one this aperture, but somehow the Fluorite bug got under my skin, and 18 years to-the-month after Ted sold me my first one, I landed this gem. I tell myself it fills an aperture-gap in my arsenal, and that helps.

I admit, to myself, and to you my viewers, I am not to be believed regarding telescope acquisition limits henceforth and forevermore, Amen.