TV-60 or Tak FS-60Q?

[iPeace]

For airline travel, observing on holiday. Promised myself a TV60 someday, but find myself strangely leaning towards the FS-60Q which breaks down nicely for transport and may provide better lunar and planetary views in Q mode. Slightly better value, perhaps, with TeleVue prices where they are.

Thoughts?

[Chris]

I have no experience with either but have regularly fancied a Tak 60 or 76. Am I right in thinking that some TV scopes impart a slight colour cast? Apart from rightly or wrongly thinking this I just hear so many good things about the Tak doublets.

p.s I think they look the part too  

[Scooot]

Don't know about the TV60 but I'm very fond of my baby tak. Lunar observing is great with or without the Q. I've never used enough magnification on planets as my most powerful eyepiece is a 9mm delite but I've read it handles magnification very well. Transport wise it's very light and compact, I use mine on a star adventurer or mini giro.

[mikeDnight]

I've used neither of the scopes you mentioned, but I have owned several Tak fluorites and a TVNP101. The 101 was a very nice flat field RFT, but it did give a nicotine cast to the Moon, and made me work hard to obtain good planetary views. By contrast, every Tak I've owned has thrilled the pants off me, metaphorically speaking! The Taks were just cleaner, brighter and had better definition and contrast. Don't let me influence you in any way, but I only kept the NP101 for a year. The fact that it cost a fortune and could be greatly outperformed on the moon and planets by a SW ED and a Vixen F6.5 ED drove me to boot it down the road.

Mike

[iPeace]

35 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

Don't let me influence you in any way

Why else would I ask? Much appreciated!

[Stu]

I tend to agree that I think Taks are optically a step ahead of Televue.

I have had a whole range of small scopes

Tak FS-60C

WO ZS SDmm

Televue 76mm

Tak FC-76DC

Stellarvue 80ED

Televue 85mm

Tak Sky 90

There may be a few I've missed.

The Tak 60 was sharper and better than WO66.

The Tak 76 was sharper, less CA and less scatter than Televue 76. It broke down into pieces suitable for airline travel i.e. Hand luggage and was much lighter than the 76. That's not to take anything away from the 76 which is something which I would always enjoy owning, such lovely engineering and build quality, made to last a lifetime or two!

The Televue 85 is a gorgeous scope (you've got one, correct?) The aperture is a lovely compromise but it is too heavy and long for practical air travel (although perfect for taking in the car)

The Sky 90 I thought was awful, but I suspect perhaps the one I had was misaligned although I could not see it specifically. I bought it for widefield use, and suspect it is better at higher powers.

So, I think the Tak FS60Q is a great option, even better with a 76mm objective upgrade.

You may have read my Samos report using a FC-76DC, lovely scope.

[DRT]

I have a TV-60 and really like it but the Tak FS60Q (which I have never looked through) does seem to be much more versatile for only a couple of hundred pounds more.

[Scooot]

I know your're going to use it visually, and the view through an eyepiece is always much better than I can take with my canon dslr, but here are a couple of images I've taken with the Q extender attached at f10.

It's a very versatile little scope, and it can also be upgraded to a 76mm aperture at a later stage. 

Jupiter was very tiny with it when I viewed it recently without the Q attached on the evening it was very close to the moon. It was a fantastic view, with the little galiliean moons also complimenting the view as very tiny specs.

 

Mercury transit

[iPeace]

7 minutes ago, Stu said:

The Televue 85 is a gorgeous scope (you've got one, correct?) The aperture is a lovely compromise but it is too heavy and long for practical air travel (although perfect for taking in the car)

Indeed; it's just a bit too much for airline travel, hence...

P.S. Very well, it's WAY too much for airline travel. Need something much lighter and more compact; love the fact that the Tak breaks down for transport.

[Starlight 1]

Not much to add , any TAK will find a good home.

[jabeoo1]

http://alpha-lyrae.co.uk/2016/04/03/takahashi-fs-60-review/

[Racey]

http://scopeviews.co.uk/TakFS60Q.htm

I've got a rather nice, compact airline carry on friendly little scope Mike... 

[Highburymark]

Didn't realise the TV85 wasn't airline portable - TV actually markets the scope as such, and I've never known a telescope manufacturer make exaggerated claims in their advertising before..... 

Otherwise - nifty though the TV 60 is - it has to be the Takahashi. 

[Stu]

3 minutes ago, Highburymark said:

Didn't realise the TV85 wasn't airline portable - TV actually markets the scope as such, and I've never known a telescope manufacturer make exaggerated claims in their advertising before..... 

It may technically be, but size/weight limits vary and having taken a TV76 on a plane I would not want to take an 85. The Televues are built like tanks which is great in one respect, but they are pretty hefty.

[DirkSteele]

I see that @jabeoo1 already posted my review of the FS-60 so no need for me to do the same, but it is clear from my review that I am a big fan of the FS-60.  The one weakness (other than it being only a 6cm scope, though that contrast does allow it to punch above its weight class) was weaker performance on Mars.  However, I also own the 1.7x CQ module (not reviewed it yet) but it transformed the performance on our red neighbour.  I took the FS-60Q to Namibia last year, not long past opposition and with Mars reaching over 80 degree altitude I had some very impressive views, quite remarkable for a 6cm scope.  I should also point out that the 60Q is just about short enough that will fit in a bag that complies with very stringent baggage allowances so you will not always need to transport disassembled.  The fact that the FS-60 is so versatile would give it the win in my book (though I have heard amazing things about the TV60 as well).  Also in the future, you could buy the FC-76 Objective Unit and have an ultra portable FC-76DCU as well.  I am taking that set up with me to Africa later this year.  I just reviewed it:

http://alpha-lyrae.co.uk/2017/03/12/takahashi-fc-76-dcu-review/

Here is the FS-60Q in Namibia.

 

Just to show how portable the 76 DCU is, this backpack complies with the most restrictive luggage allowance I have come across (also used to transport the FS-60Q in one piece)

[Piero]

I have a tv60 and it's a nice little scope. A 60mm short tube is certainly great for travelling by plane, but also by bike if you need too. You can use a very light tripod for it, carrying 3kg in total (telescope + mount + eyepieces). Scanning the milky-way with a 24mm panoptic (4.3 deg fov) is a lovely experience, which shows us the context where those DSOs live! 

Going back to your question, tak60 vs tv60, I cannot really answer as I never looked through a tak60. Having read nearly if not all the comments about the two telescopes as well as reviews published online, it seems to me that the difference is more related to the focuser than the optics. At the time I opted for the tv60 because it was quite cheaper than the tak60. 

I sometimes wonder what I would buy between the two now, after knowing a little bit more. The answer is that I would buy the tak60. I don't think there is much difference between the optics. With mine, I pushed the mag up to 257x (Nagler 3.5mm + PM2.5x = 1.4mm), and apart from the very dim image due to the small exit pupil, there was no image distortion. Also, part of the loss in image resolution was due to the couple Nagler + PM, which in my opinion are good pieces, but nothing special, and surely not up for a test like that. I will run this test again as soon as my new HR 2.4mm arrives (HR2.4mm + VIP1.76x = 1.36mm). If you are interested, I can let you know. In my opinion, the great advantage of the tak60 compared to the tv60 is its modularity. You are free to change many things if you like to, and in particular 1) you can make it a slow refractor (F10 if I am not wrong), 2) you can change the focuser.

What ever you choose, you get a lovely little but capable telescope. Enjoy it!

[iPeace]

7 hours ago, Racey said:

I've got a rather nice, compact airline carry on friendly little scope Mike... 

It's all right for some...

Excellent input from you all, as always, much appreciated!

My TV85 is so great it makes me want a TV76 *and* a TV60. And people who have them love them. However, for the price of a new TV76, I can have a FS-60Q *and* the FC-76DC upgrade objective. The excellent reviews (Matthew - @DirkSteele - obviously deserves special mention here, as does @Stu ) of the Tak leave nothing to worry about - unless, perhaps, the possible variation between specimens; one hopes to acquire a good one, of course. And I'll have to see whether the focuser needs replacing.

The lure of the travel-friendly Tak package is quite irresistible, so I've requested a quote from a supplier for the FS-60Q to start with. If I like what I get, I'm pretty sure the FC-76DC upgrade objective will follow soon...

To be continued.

P.S. I will *not* promise not to get a TV76, and / or indeed a TV60, nonetheless... But it may have to wait a while, we'll see.

Thanks again!

P.P.S. If even @Piero would go for the Tak, that's hard to ignore....

[DRT]

Why not just get both and tell us what the right answer is?

[iPeace]

6 minutes ago, DRT said:

Why not just get both and tell us what the right answer is?

Now why don't I ever think of such things? Thanks, I'm sure that's the best option.

[iPeace]

7 hours ago, Racey said:

I've got a rather nice, compact airline carry on friendly little scope Mike...

You've obviously got your kit sorted quite a bit better than I have.

[Stu]

I would have another Tak FC76DC in a flash, but I now know the FC100DC would go in cabin baggage too, so that's my ultimate travel scope.

[iPeace]

1 minute ago, Stu said:

I would have another Tak FC76DC in a flash, but I now know the FC100DC would go in cabin baggage too, so that's my ultimate travel scope.

Yes, yes, for the price of a new TV76 I could also have a FC-100DC. Stop distracting me!

[Stu]

Mike, if you need to scratch your TV76 itch, do it secondhand! It's a bit like buying a Jaguar vs buying a Ferrari. You will lose a fortune on the Televue, you won't on the Tak.

[moriniboy]

Had a direct comparison between a TV60 and Tak 60 last week and no visible difference, TV60 is more compact though for travelling.

[iPeace]

15 minutes ago, Stu said:

Mike, if you need to scratch your TV76 itch, do it secondhand! It's a bit like buying a Jaguar vs buying a Ferrari. You will lose a fortune on the Televue, you won't on the Tak.

Indeed I already have a want-ad in the classifieds to this exact effect. Apparently my feeble mind has managed to clutch the coattails of your great one, in this instance.

Having said that, I may have to put the TV76 on a back burner for now; and if the Tak 60/76 should fulfil, then I would - perhaps - be inclined to leave off altogether, but we'll see whether the itch subsides. Surely one premium 60mm and 76mm frac should do? Surely.

Sounds hollow. Dingo's kidneys, I was just starting to savour the satisfaction of rationalizing the kit...