ED100-V-TAL100RS

[nightfisher]

Oh its ok, as long as I haven't offended any Newton owners, for DSO there's no contest.

On another subject the seeing round here was just fantasitc last night (11.30pm -1.00am) Saturn was superb and Mars was far better than I would have expected at the minute too, lots of detail considering it diminished size and alt.

I think im the main one for offending reflector owners, i just cant get on with them, the amount of time`s i have thought, "get another and try again" but it wont happen

[RikM]

I love my reflectors. To each his own.

I don't even notice diffraction spikes on planets apart from at very low magnification. I do always make sure collimation is bang on, so I don't know if that makes a difference or not.

I also use a 150P on an AZ4 and I find it a great combo for me. You do need to make sure it's balanced properly and I keep the alt clutch fairly tight, but it is still very easy to move about. It's not a high power tool though.

[Caldwell 14]

I love my reflectors. To each his own.

I don't even notice diffraction spikes on planets apart from at very low magnification. I do always make sure collimation is bang on, so I don't know if that makes a difference or not.

I also use a 150P on an AZ4 and I find it a great combo for me. You do need to make sure it's balanced properly and I keep the alt clutch fairly tight, but it is still very easy to move about. It's not a high power tool though.

I after using refractors on my AZ4 I was used to having everythings set nice a light, just enounghn to hold the OTA where I put it and no more, I couldn't do that with the newt, everything tightend up at any object appoaching the zenth. I was disapointed in the combo, it all looked very balanced until I actually started to use it. Anything higher the 18mm started to become an issue

[Caldwell 14]

I'm sure some where down the line I will get another newton, I just won't be pointing it at any planets.

[JamesM]

As others have said above, many thanks for taking the time to write up your experiences with your scopes. Nothing like a hearing a voice ciming from experience in the field - makes all the difference.

James

[F15Rules]

HI Caldwell,

Thanks for the review, I found it a great read. And, for what it's worth, as a past owner of 6 Tal scopes, I agree with pretty much all you said. I also owned a black CDR100ED, the Celestron badged forerunner of the DS Pro but with identical objective, and I was astounded by the quality of the views. I was also totally unmoved by the looks of the scope, whereas the Tals always made me smile just to look at them. This is silly in a way, after all we buy scopes to look through them don't we? Well, that raises an interesting point, as having thought about it, I have only once bought a scope that I really didn't like the look of, and that was the Celestron EDR100. The build, the paint job, the focuser, were all quite disappointing..but, hey, that's how they can offer such great glass for relatively low prices.. all the investment goes into the lens, which is probably sensible when you think about it.

I confess I also have lost a bit of patience with Tal the group...for years, people in the UK have asked for them to make their superb Tal 125mm achromat readily available in the UK: I owned one of the very few ever imported into the UK, and have always regretted selling it: it was a fabulous scope for the money, half as much power and light gathering again as the 100RS: but, they are being overtaken by the scopes coming in from the Far East, and now, with scopes like the Lyra Optic 4" F11 achromat being raved about, they are in danger of losing their crown as the best 4" achromat currently available.

One other point about the new influx of budget "apos"...the ED100 is one of a very few such scopes being offered with a relatively long (F9) focal length. And yet such Focal lengths give much better depth of focus: no need for a crayford if you have more depth of focus, ie it's easier to find that snap sweet focus spot..imagine an F11 Apo. No colour and great depth of focus - and shouldn't cost more than the F9 version! Food for thought, Mr Manufacturer

We have to move on and improve, or die, and it would be a shame if Tal sat on their laurels and allowed other brands to overtake them by letting their quality of views and specs fall behind due to neglect of their customer views (pun fully intended!).

Thanks again for a great review.

Dave

[AndyH]

...................I confess I also have lost a bit of patience with Tal the group...for years, people in the UK have asked for them to make their superb Tal 125mm achromat readily available in the UK............

Mmmm. Is that the right folks to be annoyed with? If the Italian Tal rep can stock 125R's at a decent price, why can't the UK's importer?

[John]

Mmmm. Is that the right folks to be annoyed with? If the Italian Tal rep can stock 125R's at a decent price, why can't the UK's importer?

Because the truth is that TAL's need a load of checking by the dealer before they can be released to the customer. That takes time, needs skills and costs money which undermines the small margins on astro equipment. I had two of TAL's flagship TAL Apolar 125's delivered to me for testing, the 1st came direct from TAL (seals intact on trunk) and the optics were scratched / smashed plus the finish was mediocre. It was totally U/S. The 2nd was better and had been checked by OVL (not tested - just looked over I reckon) but it's finish was still rough around the edges and lacking for a £1,500 scope - many customers would have returned it to the dealer. If TAL could up their quality checking then I reckon dealers would want to handle them again.

Fingers crossed for whoever buys from the Italian dealer - I'd want to see photos of all aspects of the scope before it's shipped personally.

[AndyH]

But surely that's exactly what the Italian chap is doing and is selling the 125R for a price only slightly higher than the UK importer quoted in 2007.

As a side note, I still reckon the Klevtsov range is the flagship offering from Tal, not the Apolars.

Cheers,

Andy.

[John]

The Apolars were the "big new thing" for TAL at the time so I would have expected TAL to work harder to get them "right" and to make a good impression on the early adopters.

As for the Itallian, well every business has to make it's own decisions.

[Neil English]

If you were to buy the Tal 100RS OTA, it would set you back £249 from this site. The no-frills Skywatcher ED100 retails(again on this site) for £635 - granted with a 0.85 FR, which is unnecessary for visual use.

That makes the Evostar Pro ED100 2.55x more expensive.

Now here's the question you should all ask yourself: Does the review posted by the OP warrant such a large price differential?

Regards,

Neil.

[Qualia]

That's exactly it, Neil. From what I've read here and to what has been alluded to, I'd answer in the negative. No, it doesn't seem worth it, especially at 2.5x to 3x the price difference. Okay, maybe there's a little less, even no CA with the ED glass, but is that worth an extra 400 quid when the Tal 100rs only reveals a hint, just a slight bluish tinge on a very few objects?

Regardless of how folk answer that question what is revealing about the Tal 100rs is that in just about all the reviews and threads on the scope, they can only end up comparing it with scopes clearly in another price range and supposedly in a class of better glass which, in the end, I think says more about the Russian scope than anything else.

- - - -

P.S: Thank you for the great reviews you have written and the book on refractors which I'm enjoyiing very much

[Caldwell 14]

If you were to buy the Tal 100RS OTA, it would set you back £249 from this site. The no-frills Skywatcher ED100 retails(again on this site) for £635 - granted with a 0.85 FR, which is unnecessary for visual use.

That makes the Evostar Pro ED100 2.55x more expensive.

Now here's the question you should all ask yourself: Does the review posted by the OP warrant such a large price differential?

Regards,

Neil.

Hi Neil

I'm sure if I got this right or not but does OP mean orginal poster? If that case that's me. I felt that I had made it clear that the TAL had really held its own against the ED100 and that one of the main advantages for me was that it was easier to mount on a AZ4, my mount of choice. CA is dramatically reduced in the views of Venus, and I do mean dramatic, its also reduced in Mars but as I wrote it was never an issue with the 100RS, Saturn produced very simular views in both scopes. In another thread I also made it clear that the ED100 was not worth spending the extra money on and that the only reason I had bought was that it was a second hand scope. I also wrote that I would have been disapointed if I had spend the best part of 700 quid on one new, as it happens, for me at least the £390 was money well spent, I enjoy my scope very much and I'm sure you do your 125R, a lovely scope, you are a lucky man.

Great book BTW, much enjoyed.

[Moonshane]

That's exactly it, Neil. From what I've read here and to what has been alluded to, I'd answer in the negative. No, it doesn't seem worth it, especially at 2.5x to 3x the price difference. Okay, maybe there's a little less, even no CA with the ED glass, but is that worth an extra 400 quid when the Tal 100rs only reveals a hint, just a slight bluish tinge on a very few objects?

Regardless of how folk answer that question what is revealing about the Tal 100rs is that in just about all the reviews and threads on the scope, they can only end up comparing it with scopes clearly in another price range and supposedly in a class of better glass which, in the end, I think says more about the Russian scope than anything else.

- - - -

P.S: Thank you for the great reviews you have written and the book on refractors which I'm enjoyiing very much

I bought a 6" f11 1/6 PV dobsonian for £150 and that included the mount! I'd back it against any 100mm frac for any object but I am biased. thankfully we all chop and change our gear and have different opinions and therefore this makes more gear available for us to try!

[Ant]

If you were to buy the Tal 100RS OTA, it would set you back £249 from this site. The no-frills Skywatcher ED100 retails(again on this site) for £635 - granted with a 0.85 FR, which is unnecessary for visual use.

That makes the Evostar Pro ED100 2.55x more expensive.

Now here's the question you should all ask yourself: Does the review posted by the OP warrant such a large price differential?

Regards,

Neil.

On this site? Which site Neil? SGL doesn't sell kit

[Caldwell 14]

I also wrote that I would have been disapointed if I had spend the best part of 700 quid on one new

That is just my opinion BTW

[Neil English]

Caldwell 14 and Qualia. Thanks for the thumbs up.

Always looking out for you guys!

Best wishes,

Neil.

[Caldwell 14]

I'm not sure what all that was about

[John]

Asking questions about whether it's worth spending quite a lot of money for a small performance gain is always an interesting issue with astronomy gear. Many times the answer is yes of course

[Caldwell 14]

I may well have not written this review for my latest outfit had it not been for a couple of messages and posts asking me to compare the Skywatcher ED100 DS pro and the TAL100RS

I should trust my instincts a little more I think...

[Moonshane]

I should trust my instincts a little more I think...

why so? it was a well written and honest review. there will always be dissenters like me who are obsessed with newts and others obsessed with fracs. like the science vs religion argument people tend to fall on either side but rarely both.

[AndyH]

Nooooo !

Don't be put off by eejits like me that often take a thread on a tangent

What's so great about reviews, be they full blown, mini or a few lines, is that they widen the knowledge base of everyone and, lets face it, provoke great discussions. A great thing in this cloudy country !

Cheers and here's to more reviews, two scope 'shootouts' etc !!

Andy.

[John]

I thought it an excellent piece and well worth posting. It provoked some discussion both on the specific instruments and a little wider but theres nothing wrong with that - it's a discussion forum after all

Thanks for taking the trouble to post it

[Marki]

It would be a sadder world if we were all the same any way. Plenty of room for 'frac fans, newt afficionados and even (hushed tones) the dob mob . Maybe one for a separate topic, but I'm curious how many folk have examples of each type in regular use (even side by side).

Enjoyed the review, Caldwell, and as John and Moonshane said, its provoked an interesting discussion which I for one have enjoyed following.

[Moonshane]

Perhaps some of us should organise a meeting, planning what scopes we will bring along to compare and then have a 'runaround' session comparing notes at the end and coming up with a general consensus. we could have set parameters maybe too - perhaps a fixed magnification in all scopes, say 150x using whatever eyepiece gets as close to that as possible. this would be 1) very enjoyable 2) very educational and 3) really quite valuable for others looking to buy a scope as a first scope or to compliment what they have. if anyone is at PSP, I am hoping to be more organised this time and take my 16" f4 (of course) and my 6" f11 as well as a suitcase dob.