TAL no longer available?

[mikeDnight]

3 hours ago, nightfisher said:

The simple reason why you would choose a Tal 100 over an ED100 is price, £250 for the Tal new, and over £600 for a new ED, while I am a big fan of the Tal, i would never suggest it to be better than a nice ED100, but if buying new the price would dictate some what, an extra £350 just to get rid of a tiny bit of blue tinge on bright stars, and lets face it, a star on its own is sort of boring whether it has a blue tinge or not

It does seem rather a lot of money just to get rid of CA, but of course there's more to it than a mild colour fringing arount bright objects. In 2003 I also felt the apo's were over priced and couldn't have that much of an advantage over an achromat, that was until I saw a Vixen fluorite in side by side compares with a 4" Tal and a 6" SW achromat. The Vixen showed intricate detail on Saturn that far exceeded the detail shown in either achromat. So really the gain lies more in definition and contrast rather than colour free images. In order of highest quality of image, the Vixen soared ahead of the other two scopes, but the 4" Tal outstripped the 6" F8 SW achro quite noticeably.

Mike

[F15Rules]

If you really want a "new" 100RS, I'm sure there are a few in stock at the lesser known dealers.. I say "new" as I've seen a few of the later scopes (and bought one myself) that were all built in 2011 according to their manuals' quality sign off page (they used to print it as "Date of Slushing" - whatever slushing means!).So, in reality I doubt whether any truly recent build 100RS's have reached the UK for some years, they are mostly new old stock that's been sitting in an Optical Vision warehouse. And, for me, there is the root of the problem (actually, three roots):-

1) Sloppy Tal QC allowing annoying faults to get through, such a scratches, uneven paint, industrial build is fine, faults on new gear are not.

2) Lousy customer contact with end users, no customer satisfaction surveys,  no concept of marketing to "make what we can sell", but rather to " sell what we can make ". This truth is evidenced by Tal's seeming inability to research the UK distributor market as..

3)if they had, they would have ditched OV as a distributor long ago and appointed one who gives tuppence for the end user, who answers emails etc

I've often thought that if Tal had supported someone like our own Andy H, genuine Tal fan and all round guru on all things Tal - and a really good guy to boot! - to repesent them in the UK and distribute their products, they could have sold some real volume here. Sadly, I fear much of the goodqill towards Tal that was evident 6 or 7 years ago has now evaporated and the chinese producers have gleefully stepped in - in fairness with some great products, such as the ED100 and the Altair Starwave/Lyra F11.

For what it's worth I've had a few RS100s and liked them a lot. I also had a Lyra F11 and optically it had a slight edge, probably just being F11 rather than Tals F10, but build quality was well above the Tal, no question. I for one will be very sad if they have really gone though :-(.. for some years they brought good quality optics to us for very reasonable prices.

Dave

[F15Rules]

Pps..and I should add that Tal 100s come/came with some of the best accessories ever bundled with a new scope: superb finder scope with helical focusing, a really decent, if industrial diagonal, and in my view a Tele Vue quality (optically) 25mm plossl..only the 6.3mm plossls was what I'd call fairly average, and all these items so much better than the stock Synta ones supplied with skywatcher fracs:-)

Dave

[Fozzie]

On ‎11‎/‎02‎/‎2016 at 05:36, nightfisher said:

Fozzie we shall make this happen one night

Sooooooon im getting some itchy observing feet... or should that be eyes.

9 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

It does seem rather a lot of money just to get rid of CA, but of course there's more to it than a mild colour fringing arount bright objects. In 2003 I also felt the apo's were over priced and couldn't have that much of an advantage over an achromat, that was until I saw a Vixen fluorite in side by side compares with a 4" Tal and a 6" SW achromat. The Vixen showed intricate detail on Saturn that far exceeded the detail shown in either achromat. So really the gain lies more in definition and contrast rather than colour free images. In order of highest quality of image, the Vixen soared ahead of the other two scopes, but the 4" Tal outstripped the 6" F8 SW achro quite noticeably.

Mike

I have to say I was generally surprised at the quality of view of the ikle 72mm ED against the 100mm starwave on the moon, there was not an awful lot in the detail (to my inexperienced eyes) at reasonable (early 100's) magnification.. I guess light grasp is one thing but how a lens treats its captured photons afterwards is a completely different ball game "all together"

 

Still though a glorious big archetypal frac just screams telescope at you and I think that's what gives the like of the TALs some of there desirability, following and charm!

[Astrobits]

Some 20+ years ago I queried the then importers of Russian stuff, TOE ( a Russian government owned company ), if the eyepieces for their telescopes were available separately. After all, owners of their telescopes could loose/break an eyepiece and the design of the telescopes ( at that time ) was such that many other eyepieces did not fit properly and would not focus. The response from the Russian factory was in essence " we sell all our telescopes with eyepieces, why would you need replacements. Eyepieces are not available separately." 

A member of TOE staff did comment to me that they could not order what they wanted.  Instead, a container would arrive at TOE and they would find out what they were going to have to sell only when they opened it.  Obviously it depended on what the factory was making at the time.

Looks like not much has changed.

A lot of Russian optical products are based on the techniques and patterns that they got when they took over the Zeiss optical works during the second world war. That is why they were/are so good.

Nigel

[nameunknown]

Mmmm.. bad experience recently with the  TAL 200k - was concerned that it would not fit on the EQ5 so the camera shop that I bought it through made enquires with the the wholesaler as to compatability. Shop was told could fit on the eQ5, but no mention at all of having to have a Vixen/Synta bar specially modified to fit the TAL. After purchase, and "further enquires" we were given the phone number of someone who could make the "adaptor". However, it turns out he stopped making these some years ago. So, my seriously embarrassed camera shop is now trying to get holes drilled in a Vixen dovetail so I can actually use the 200k. I won't mention the wholesaler, but I shall never, ever, use them again.

P

[Roy Challen]

Nameunknown,

Sorry to hear about your experience with the dodgy wholesaler, I hope you get the dovetail for your Tal sorted.

On another note, I noticed that the roof on your obsy is "wench operated". Now that  is impressive!

[nameunknown]

Well, with a bad back my SO ("telescope assistant") has to "give me hand" with some things, and shifting the "lid" is one of them.

P

[spaceboy]

The Tal100 does seem to have gathered a cult following over it's time. I find it odd though as I have come across several TAL 100RS vs EVO120 threads both here and else where which all suggest that the EVO would be the better buy. I think the prices are roughly similar too aren't they?

I would like a TAL but mainly to see what all the hype is about for myself. I do think they look the part though and having owned a 200K I know the optics must be good in them but good enough to beat the extra 20mm light grabbing of an EVO ?? Just a shame the EVO has such a crappy R&P focuser.

[MAN or ASTROMAN]

3 hours ago, spaceboy said:

The Tal100 does seem to have gathered a cult following over it's time. 

Yes

Mine came with special robes to wear........(lol).

Seriously,it's their heavyweight 'industrial' presence,and extremely good optics for relatively little  money.

I'll not be selling mine soon.

[spaceboy]

lol I forgot to put 'almost' before "cult following."  

[nightfisher]

3 hours ago, spaceboy said:

The Tal100 does seem to have gathered a cult following over it's time. I find it odd though as I have come across several TAL 100RS vs EVO120 threads both here and else where which all suggest that the EVO would be the better buy. I think the prices are roughly similar too aren't they?

I would like a TAL but mainly to see what all the hype is about for myself. I do think they look the part though and having owned a 200K I know the optics must be good in them but good enough to beat the extra 20mm light grabbing of an EVO ?? Just a shame the EVO has such a crappy R&P focuser.

I have owned the 102 and 120 evostar Just my opinion but a good Tal 100rs beats these scopes, what is loses in aperture it gains in sharpness

[spaceboy]

I remember you having the EVO120 Jules but as with anything that comes out of mass production there is always a chance a lemon made it through QC. TAL are not immune from QC issues either but their bomb proof build quality mean your more likely to get a good one than a bad one. You have to think sky-watcher is every where so the chances of a poor example are higher. I think I have been fortunate in that both my EVO 120 (idiot for selling it) and 150 perform far beyond my expectations. I think that having a collimateable cell is a bonus as you can be sure the optics are always perfectly aligned so if the performance is lacking you know you got a poor example. You also have to consider that f/10 over f/8.33 is going to give the TAL a slight edge regards sharpness but the EVO will always have the advantage of 20mm more light grasp adding to greater if subtle depth.

I'm not knocking the TAL in anyway and there has been many a time I have almost purchased one myself hence why I am aware of 100RS vs EVO120 topics. I'm sure the TAL is hard to beat when pitched up against similar apertures and focal lengths.

[nightfisher]

38 minutes ago, spaceboy said:

I remember you having the EVO120 Jules but as with anything that comes out of mass production there is always a chance a lemon made it through QC. TAL are not immune from QC issues either but their bomb proof build quality mean your more likely to get a good one than a bad one. You have to think sky-watcher is every where so the chances of a poor example are higher. I think I have been fortunate in that both my EVO 120 (idiot for selling it) and 150 perform far beyond my expectations. I think that having a collimateable cell is a bonus as you can be sure the optics are always perfectly aligned so if the performance is lacking you know you got a poor example. You also have to consider that f/10 over f/8.33 is going to give the TAL a slight edge regards sharpness but the EVO will always have the advantage of 20mm more light grasp adding to greater if subtle depth.

I'm not knocking the TAL in anyway and there has been many a time I have almost purchased one myself hence why I am aware of 100RS vs EVO120 topics. I'm sure the TAL is hard to beat when pitched up against similar apertures and focal lengths.

Funny thing, there have been times when i have toyed withh getting another 120 evo.............but the Tal does every thing i really need from a frac with my budget limits

[spaceboy]

I don't think it would be worth getting another in truth though mate. From the off I'm sure out of the box an EVO120 for the cost offers more against the TAL but I doubt side by side it would bring much to the table when you already have a TAL. As I say it's nothing against the TAL as I'm sure it is an excellent scope it's just from the advice I have read on the net when the question is asked (mainly due to the close cost) the larger scope is always favoured. I just wish you lived closer and I still had my old EVO120 as we could have had a side by side shoot out. I have tried buying the EVO120 back but the present owner isn't interested in letting it go any time soon which is a shame as I don't think it is currently mounted.

[John]

2 hours ago, spaceboy said:

.... TAL are not immune from QC issues either....

Thats an understatement !

[nightfisher]

As a fan of the Tal`s i have to admit to looking through good ones (mine) and  a not so good one so yes QC does vary. In the past i have toyed with selling mine but its going to stay put 

[nameunknown]

20 hours ago, MAN or ASTROMAN said:

Yes

Mine came with special robes to wear........(lol).

Seriously,it's their heavyweight 'industrial' presence,and extremely good optics for relatively little  money.

I'll not be selling mine soon.

Special Robes? - I didn't get those - safety shoes in case you drop it on your foot, yes, a large hammer for collimation (Think "Armagedon "Russian Engineering"), yes, an anti-rupture truss to wear while lifting it onto the mount, yes, a guarantee that your telescope will most likely win against a Tiger IV tank, yes,  but special robes , no - am I missing out? I do note that since I set it up my telescope has reverted to a Russian Orthodox calender, but seriously....

...special robes ..

[MAN or ASTROMAN]

Well, they ARE trimmed with the finest Siberian Ermine....................

[PeterW]

Not good news.. I was hoping for a TAL to give me more aperture and focal length for solar calcium imaging. Many scopes do not do well when imaging in the extreme blue end of the spectrum. Don't want an apo or other expensive scope, just something that is known to work.

maybe have to keep and eye out....

 

peter

 

[AstroAdam]

I bought one of Stu's TALs last week, and have to say I'm really impressed. I'm really enjoying it the pin sharp views and am glad I grabbed it when I did going by the availability forecast!  

I also have a Starwave 102ED, which is excellent but only f/7. The f/10 of the TAL really makes a big difference, and I can't say the CA is an issue at all for me.  Not noticeable in most situations. Maybe I'm just not very sensitive to it...!

[John]

8 minutes ago, AstroAdam said:

I bought one of Stu's TALs last week, and have to say I'm really impressed. I'm really enjoying it the pin sharp views and am glad I grabbed it when I did going by the availability forecast!  

I also have a Starwave 102ED, which is excellent but only f/7. The f/10 of the TAL really makes a big difference, and I can't say the CA is an issue at all for me.  Not noticeable in most situations. Maybe I'm just not very sensitive to it...!

Does the TAL 100 show less CA than the 102 ED F/7 ?

I'd be suprised if it did. Even the most basic ED glass (FPL-51 or equivalent) paired with a suitable mating element should show around 75% less CA than a crown / flint achromat of the same specs. Even allowing for the focal ratio difference I'd expect an ED102 F/7 to beat a 100mm F/10 achromat on that aspect.

 

Edited March 25, 2016 by John

[AstroAdam]

8 minutes ago, John said:

Does the TAL 100 show less CA than the 102 ED F/7 ?

I'd be suprised if it did. Even the most basic ED glass (FPL-51 or equivalent) paired with a suitable mating element should show around 75% less CA than a crown / flint achromat of the same specs. Even allowing for the focal ratio difference I'd expect an ED102 F/7 to beat a 100mm F/10 achromat on that aspect.

 

No - you're right.  The TAL does show more than the 120ED, but a lot less than I was expecting.  The F/10 of the TAL is great for planetary viewing though, and like I said, the CA is below the threshold where it begins to bother me.

Cheers,

Adam

[F15Rules]

On 24/03/2016 at 22:10, John said:

Thats an understatement !

In defence of the Tal 100RS, I think I have owned 6 or 7 over the past 10 years and have never had a bad one. I also had a 125R which was a peach.

But with their venture into "Apo-land", ie the 125 Apolar, they do seem to have got it badly wrong. But I blame their UK distributor as much for that...if you are a distributor selling equipment that you know has travelled 1000's of miles overland and is going to sell at (originally) c£1500 per scope, why would you not open up each unit to check it over before re-selling it? It could well be that the scopes left Russia in good order but were mishandled en route- in which case if OVL had bothered to check them, they would have immediately spotted things such as the broken element that John reported on his test sample.

I can't imagine FLO doing business like that..

Dave

[F15Rules]

18 hours ago, John said:

Does the TAL 100 show less CA than the 102 ED F/7 ?

I'd be suprised if it did. Even the most basic ED glass (FPL-51 or equivalent) paired with a suitable mating element should show around 75% less CA than a crown / flint achromat of the same specs. Even allowing for the focal ratio difference I'd expect an ED102 F/7 to beat a 100mm F/10 achromat on that aspect.

 

I agree. Any proper ED scope should show much less CA than the Tal 100RS. However, sharpness and resolution could be better in the Tal, depending on the figure and polish of both lenses.

Dave