Jump to content

Banner.jpg.39bf5bb2e6bf87794d3e2a4b88f26f1b.jpg

Takahashi CCA-250, HOW MUCH??!!


Recommended Posts

I think the car analogy is a good one. I have the best car that I can afford - or rather for what I wish to spend on a car rather than other things. I occasionally wonder what a better one would be like but still stick with what I have .

I currently also have what I think is the best telescope for what I wish to spend. I also wonder what a better one might be like.

One day my circumstances may change. When (not if!) I win the lottery the best that I can afford (car or scope) will change and I'll go for it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I were to win the lottery (unlikely since, like Dr Johnson, I consider it a tax upon imbeciles) I would just have more FSQs with full frame cameras on an enormous and accurate mount. I'd take bigger and bigger widefield mosaic images and donate vast house-sized prints to huge public spaces like science museums. Then I'd pop my clogs feeling I'd done a fizzling bit of nearly nothing for astronomy. I'm easy to please!

Olly

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone who has used a CCA-250, FSQ106ed, CDK's, a RH200, and an AP130, I can honestly say the CCA-250 with reducer and Aspen 16m is the most impressive imaging set up by a good measure. It is an expensive set up but it is definitely gathering better data in less time without the frustrating focus shifts of the FSQ, the difficulty of set up of the RH, and the narrow field of view of the 17" AND 20" CDKs.

Everything comes at a cost.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

almost certainly its not 13 x better than a skywatcher but thats not the way it works with improvement. They reckon it costs over a million pound to shed 1/10 second on a lap time for formula 1 can you go 3x faster on a carbon bike  than you can a 1000 aluminium one  no. its the extra percent that matters to some people and an extra percent costs at the top end. perfection is unattainable and getting close is hard there are some people who will pay the premium and its fortunate that they do. How many things do we own now that once were only the province of the super rich. these things trickle down eventually once one has done it someone else will produce nearly the same at a cheaper price. In astronomy several things come to mind 100 degree eyepieces mounts that can guide accurately, sct's, maks even apo's its a good thing that there are premium manufactures without them all the things we take for granted wouldn't have happened

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Dave,

It comes back to the same old answer, it is probably worth what people are willing to pay, although as Matthew mentioned above, strict quality control regimes can be costly for companies and they have to re-coup some of these extra manufacturing costs.

Having owned very good quality equipment myself over the years (Paramount ME, several Taks and a plethora of eyepieces) I can comment that Takahashi telescopes are on 'another level' in terms of quality of optics and robust build. Whether the TOA130 I used to owned was worth the 6k I paid over an alternative from Meade / SW / Celestron open to debate. For me it was worth the extra, hence why I purchased it. 

So in anwser to your original questipon is the CCA-250 worth 13k and significantly better than a an equivalent SW, probably to some people, and probably not to others.

I like the idea of a dual fsq system though and if I had 13k to spend on, that would be my preference, the rest spent on a good holiday!

Edited by Neil27
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

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
 Share

  • 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.