nicoscy

Any time you are in Cyprus...

Chris, You are right about the Tak dissassebly. And also about the Tak 60 + 76 module. Kill two birds with one stone and I have heard great things about the small 60mm Taks... Not only that, but you can make the Tak a 76mm binofriendly scope in that configuration... Helen , The main concern would be to protect the lens assembly though, but one can get a plastic dustcap from eBay or Amazon for that. A shower cap would protect the back of the OTA from dust getting in, but you still end up with the OTA @ 19", a focuser and a dew shield to pack, so not very portable considering you want to take other accessories with you...

@ both Chris & Helen, Now for the dilemma!!! I must admit I am at crossroads. Just to explain, when I received the Tak, I found shortly afterwards a very small blem (like 1x1mm) on the coatings. But despite the guarantee, I did not return the scope. Why one might ask? After going through about 20 refractors with apertures ranging 50mm to 152mm, achro, ED and FPL-53 triplets, it was hands down a win for the Tak. Nothing I have touched (including the 20 scopes I mentioned as well as other scopes of friends) has come close to the color fidelity, the superb contrast, the super tight stars, the zero chromatic aberration, the lovely intra and exrtra focal pattern of the scope, the lovely depth of field - well, I could go on forever. BUT (yes, here it comes) it is long. Light, but long. I am considering (and will consider for some time), whether to actually sell it or maybe send the lens assembly to Mark of Moonraker Telescopes and ask him to make me something ultralight with a retractable dew shield and stick a FTF focuser at the back. I could make the Tak binoviewer friendly for example (have Mark make a shorter tube) and use an extension for mono viewing. I don't know really. All I know is that I have no need to sell the scope but I feel a certain pain at not using it.

Helen, These photos are for you. I misaligned the Tak relative to the measuring tape so take off 2 centimeters off its length as measured. There is no size comparison here - the Tak loses big time. The Borg should also ride very well on the Skywatcher Adventurer and I can even reduce its weight further by 100 - 120 grams by removing one of the findershoes and the extra securing screws on the rings. The Borg 71FL produces images like a very good ED scope of focal ratio of say 7 - 8. Considering that it is f5.6, I consider that most satisfactory. The Borg is mostly geared to the AP folk as when you mate it to its dedicated field flattener, it can become a f3.6 flatfield 5 element scope. In Japan it is also widely used for imaging birds e.t.c. The intra-focal pattern indicates no serious abberations, however the extra-focal pattern is a different story. I need to sit down one evening with my Suiter book and decide on the optics, as well as use my Ronchi eyepiece to assess the optics, but offhand, there is virtually zero color on the moon (a very slight yellowish tint at the rim of the moon), stars are nice and tight, contrast is excellent and Mars and Saturn are looking good for the aperture. Lacks depth of field due to short focal length and needs very good eyepieces to tame field curvature. I use Naglers and Pans - anything else and the result is not satisfactory.

Chris, I have 4 observing sites within a 50 minute drive with SQM readings between 21.1 and 21.3 which I try to frequent twice a month, so I consider myself blessed. Paradoxically, I find it more difficult to drag my very tired rear end out the door to observe from my back yard than it is to pack a 12" dobsonian and various accouterments and drive to a dark site

Chris, I still have the Tak and yes, it is far superior to the Borg p, but not as portable as the Borg. I am trying to keep as small a kit as possible and the Borg is portable enough to fit in my backpack as you can see. I also have a Borg 90FL objective so I can swap between 71mm and 90mm - 71 at home for mostly lunar viewing and the 90 under dark skies, but I have a good mind to sell both the Tak and the 90FL as I am drawn to a compact kit. Everything is a compromise and I think I can accept optics which are pretty decent (vs simply flawless for my Tak) if I manage to get out more often in my back yard and enjoy the views. While this may sound "shocking", family, work, pets and life in general conspire to keep me away from the eyepiece (dentist this evening!!!) and therefore optimising my gear towards portability is paramount to me. But the Takahashi - oh my!

Haven't done any travelling with it yet, but here's my nearly complete kit (well, it IS complete but will do a couple of changes): Borg 71FL, Televue Everbrite 1.25" - Just the scope with rings, dovetail and 2 x findershoes weights less than 1.8 kilos. Plossl 32, Pan 24, Nagler T6 13 & 7, Nagler 3-6 zoom eyepieces IDAS Solar, Baader Moon & Skyglow, Baader Solar Continuum, Televue Bandmate, UHC, O III and Hb filters RDF, Sol searcher, 6 x 30 RACI, dew heater, observing hood All of the above in a photographer's backpack. And in another bag measuring about 50cm in length is a DSV-M mount, a Walker Stool and a Berlebach tripod with extension column. Only changes I expect to make is to swap the diagonal for a Baader BBHS diagonal as I love the Clicklock mechanism and replace the Berlebach and extension column with a Induro CTL304L tripod. I would not travel with a 2" diagonal and eyepiece as the Pan 24 gives 3.5 degrees TFOV, but at home when under dark skies, well, my Nagler 31mm gives 6.05 degrees TFOV and it's a stunning experience...

Each eyepiece will focus at a different point. Reflector focuses typically have a small range of travel as they cannot protrude into the optical hubs too much. Therefore thr easy solution is to preserve optical performance (I.e small travel distance) and optimise the focusser location on the OTA where you need more travel out to focus. Hence the extension. The good news is that an extension tube is a fairly cheap accessory!

Let's ignore collimation for a bit here. You need an extension tube to reach focus as you are running out of focuser travel. Most dobs/newts come with a 35mm extension to give you sufficient travel outwards to focus some eyepieces. Your comment that if you pull out the 2" eyepiece to manage to reach focus confirms this. Hit your local astroshop or the forum's sponsors FLO for an extension tube. Back to collimation: It apparently needs collimation, I.e. aligning the primary and secondary mirrors, but first let's resolve the focusing issue.

That's a well rounded review. I wish Celestron would sell the mount on its own...

The option to edit appears after a certain number of posts, 250 if I recall.