Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_annual.thumb.jpg.3fc34f695a81b16210333189a3162ac7.jpg

Recommended Posts

I bought a few month ago a tal 100RS. After a few observations, I noticed that I lose many contrast when a bright object at the center. The image can be beautiful and contrasting but when the object (like Saturn) is in the center, image becomes low contrasted. After trying to understand the phenomenon, I found that there were many more diffusion in centre (with all eyepieces). I thought chromaticism was involved, but thebut the low contrast would be in the whole field and not just the center. It's when the objetc is the the brightest that the lost of contrast can be detected. So I examined the lens with a strong light, and I have just realized that there were many little scratches. In addition there are traces of cleaning INSIDE. Then, I think that lost of contrast is done by a strong diffusion in center caused by scratches.

I don't know if the problem is from Russia or from German dealer, but I have waited too long to return the glasses and get a refund. 300 euros for an instrument that can be used only for the moon is high price to pay. Big deception. Luckily I also have a newton.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 32
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I think that the OP is quite capable of making his own judgement on his own telescope Karsten, certainly more capable than you are of making a judgement on his telescope for him. My Tal shows very lit

Be fair. It's a £250 achromat. If you want the above you need to spend quite a bit more money. I have a TAL100 and consider it good value on the moon and planets for the price. I also have a top line

Glad you managed to sort it, tal scopes do have a reputation for their solid construction

That must be very disappointing after a long wait to get the scope. I would definitely get the dealer to supply a replacement though and at no expense to you. The scope you have been supplied with clearly has damaged optics. They should be pristine, assuming it was sold as a new scope.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was this bought by yourself as a new telescope ?

In the UK, and if you are certain that the scope had problems that were there at purchase, then many dealers would sort out the issue, even if the scope had been purchased a while back.

I'd contact the supplier, and see if the problem can be resolved.

If the scope was second hand, it's a different story. Morally, the seller should have mentioned the scratches, but it could be hard to get a refund, if they are not willing.

Hope you find a solution, Ed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will try again to contact, but I have few illusions. The seller is not in the same country as me, and I didn't see the problem immediately: scrtchess are visible only with a strong light (we call it "filandre" in French, I haven't the english word for those scratches wich are only visble with a strong light), and with the bad weather It was impossible to do a good observation to see the problems. Thanks :)

The fact that the contrast is just collapsing in the center is strange. It is because of this fact, that I initially suspected the cause was the reflections in the eyepieces, but after the constatation of the scratches.... :sad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I try to contact the seller before to do that.

I also try to get a polarizing filter before to remove the lens cell: if reflection in eyepieces are reponsibles, the problem will disappear. If the problem persists, it's the objective which is guilty.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was not so impressed by the views a 4" f/10 TAL gave.

The aperture is limited and the views are further compromised by visible colour aberration.

I prefer views free from visible colour aberration and with more detail.

Cheers, Karsten

Be fair.

It's a £250 achromat. If you want the above you need to spend quite a bit more money.

I have a TAL100 and consider it good value on the moon and planets for the price. I also have a top line 6 inch triplet apo, and it's a lot better, but cost vastly more.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Rob,

because of the colour aberration free views I even prefer the TAL 110mm Newt to the TAL achromat.

If I add a bit more aperture like with a 150mm f/5 TAL newt or 150mm f/8 Synta Newt

I get both colour aberration free views and higher resolution.

To be fair I have to say that all these Newts need to be collimated welll

and a user who cannot collimate or does not want to collimate

should better buy a refractor (and hope it will come perfectly collimated).

Of the achromatic refractors I prefer the classical long ones,

like the japanese 80mm f/15 or a 4" f/15 over the somewhat short 4"f/10.

The modern 4" f/9 ED refractors are not very expensive,

but they cost about twice the price of the TAL achromat.

Cheers, Karsten

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Rob,

because of the colour aberration free views I even prefer the TAL 110mm Newt to the TAL achromat.

If I add a bit more aperture like with a 150mm f/5 TAL newt or 150mm f/8 Synta Newt

I get both colour aberration free views and higher resolution.

To be fair I have to say that all these Newts need to be collimated welll

and a user who cannot collimate or does not want to collimate

should better buy a refractor (and hope it will come perfectly collimated).

Of the achromatic refractors I prefer the classical long ones,

like the japanese 80mm f/15 or a 4" f/15 over the somewhat short 4"f/10.

The modern 4" f/9 ED refractors are not very expensive,

but they cost about twice the price of the TAL achromat.

Cheers, Karsten

How does this help the OP with his problem ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I got TAL 100 RS, also, and for me, is a good value for money: is heavy, it has a bad focuser, and a yellow dominant due the optical treatment, but is a pleasure to watch through it (despite the limitations, it is not a 140 TEC). I'm sorry for your experience, I hope you reach to contact the dealer for the refund or for a change.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thread title drew me in as it suggested a negative view of the TAL100RS. My initial interest was in reading a different opinion on the telescope, but what I've found is a reminder to take extra care when checking a new astro purchase. Hopefully the op will get a positive response from the supplying dealer, so they can enjoy their TAL.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've no answer from seller (hollidays?)

But even if there's some scratches visible only with strong light I'm not sure that the refractor is really guilty. The constrast is very good when the object is not exactly at the center of the field. Then reflection in eyepieces when when the brightness is strongest could be the cause. But I've not this probleme with my reflector. Then I don't understand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would examine the assembly of the two lens elements, the problem you describe suggests to me that the front element may have been replaced the wrong way round possibly subsequent to cleaning if the telescope is a used one, The front element should have the least curvature facing the sky. :smiley:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Test with an ortho. I'm very reassured, the problem is no longer therewith a such eyepiece: and the picture is really nice contrasted. I Think It was just a ghost image problem due to bad eyespieces.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

With a correct eyepiece I've seen the quality : good contrast, little chromatism, then I've bought a astro Hutech to have my own ortho to enjoy the qualities of my refractor :) (the little scratches are apparently not a problem)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

A night without turbulence, a good eyepiece (ortho astro hutech 9mm) and it's a real revolution : with an extraordinary eyepiece, I've seen the real capacities of the tal :

-chromatism : at 120x, there's no false colours on moon (first quarte) and saturn. For an achro it's very good.

The contrast is very excellent, and for only 100mm, the details are very good.

I've no more the problem of lose of contrast at centre of the field with this eyepiece.

With the 25mm (tal) and 35mm (baader eudiascopic) I haven't problems but at high and middle magnifications, I had those problems. At middle magnification, the refractor is now pefect. Then I recommand now the tal 100mm after bad begining due to bad plössl eyepieces.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad you are sorted. I've only just come across this thread but thought it odd that the surface of the lens was the cause of your problems - I've looked through lenses which were, by the sound of it, much worse than yours and have noticed very little, if any, image degradation.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.