Tak FC-100 - what will I gain?

[Moonshane]

I have only ever briefly looked through a Tak once (Stu's) and it was very nice but I was not convinced enough to sell my 120 to fund one. Maybe one day I will but not yet.

[AstroPhil]

I have the FC100-DL and am very happy with it - although it's certainly a hit in the wallet. However, had I had a 120mm frac I likely would not have bought it, if that's any use, as a comment? I did briefly consider the Esprit120, but the lightness/portability of the Tak won me over.

[Star Struck]

Many thanks to everyone who shared their thoughts. I do not intend to sell the 120ED.

However, if I want a light 100mm scope to use on my AzGTi and AZ5 mounts. then the tak DC or DF will give me different views than the 80ED I currently use on those mounts.

I will have to give this some more thought. I wonder if Tak will produce a FOA100????

[25585]

10 minutes ago, Star Struck said:

However, if I want a light 100mm scope to use on my AzGTi and AZ5 mounts. then the tak DC or DF will give me different views than the 80ED I currently use on those mounts.

I will have to give this some more thought. I wonder if Tak will produce a FOA100????

I suspect Takahashi will stay with doublets for visual. 

Try other makes for light 100mm scopes with great lenses. Borg, Vixen, WO & others. Or (for more £s) a TV 85, which some here think are great for rich field IIRC. 

[mikeDnight]

I did find the FC100DC gave a noticeably more detailed view of Jupiter's belts and zones when I first bought it. However, my Equinox 120 was an amazing all round performer. As I'm primarily a lunar and planetary observer, I felt the Tak was all the scope I'd need to observe the things I like the most. It's also a lot lighter to carry and easier to mount than the Equinox 120, and as such I use it far more often than I did the Equinox.

The Tak has the better colour correction but the difference between it and the Equinox is not that great, so colour wise you'd only fractionally improve your lot. I have been amazed at just how bright some of the dso's are in my FC100DC, but that could be due to me pushing it to its limit. If I were a visual dso observer I certainly would not replace the 120ED with an FC100. The FC will give some very good views of dso's but a 120ED will beat it.

Is the Tak FC100 optically superior to the 120ED? Yes!  Is it worth the increased cost? Well to me it is!  Do you get a thousand poundsworth more in performance? No!

Takahashi's FC100D series of refractors are probably the best 4" class refractor currently in production, with the DL as the pinnacle, so if you're after a 4" apo, then look no further. If youd like a little more aperture, then grab a 120ED as they are superb and hold their own against some of the finest high end apo's.

[25585]

And yet Taks are relatively unknown about compared to the big photo ad brands. Much like hi fi in a way, superb connoisseur kit that sells on reputation more than ad mass splash.

[mikeDnight]

I know Takahashi dont seem to advertise like many other manufacturers do, so may be thats why it may appear they are relatively unknown outside Japan. However, in the strange world of the refractor they always seem to be a hot topic of conversation. Another strange thing about Takahashi, is that they rarely offer anything but the most basic info about their scopes, and very rarely speak up themselves, but rather they let their fans bash out the intricacies, good or less good, between themselves. I remember minimalist adverts in astro mag's back in the 90's that said little more than "TAKAHASHI". Unlike the loud double page spreads of Televue and Meade, Tak were much less in your face, showing how confident Tak were in their brand.

[25585]

48 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

I know Takahashi dont seem to advertise like many other manufacturers do, so may be thats why it may appear they are relatively unknown outside Japan. However, in the strange world of the refractor they always seem to be a hot topic of conversation. Another strange thing about Takahashi, is that they rarely offer anything but the most basic info about their scopes, and very rarely speak up themselves, but rather they let their fans bash out the intricacies, good or less good, between themselves. I remember minimalist adverts in astro mag's back in the 90's that said little more than "TAKAHASHI". Unlike the loud double page spreads of Televue and Meade, Tak were much less in your face, showing how confident Tak were in their brand.

Vixen was the only reasonably known Japanese make in the 80s onward. That may still be the case, though I expect some think of them as another Chinese brand. 

Camera lenses still have more Japanese makers recognised as such, but that's as much whole systems as for components. 

[garryblueboy]

I have owned x2 Equinox 120s both excellent but the Tak is better lighter brighter you can really push the magnification new their is not that much price difference and the best bit as already said very portable.

[Stu]

4 hours ago, Star Struck said:

I wonder if Tak will produce a FOA100????

Well these is the TSA102 but I think a triplet would miss the mark. Heavier, slower cool down and probably slightly lower transmission due to the extra elements. I would stick to a doublet at this sort of focal ratio, I would move to a triplet if down at f5/f5.5 or so for the better correction.

[Timebandit]

15 minutes ago, garryblueboy said:

I have owned x2 Equinox 120s both excellent but the Tak is better lighter brighter you can really push the magnification new their is not that much price difference and the best bit as already said very portable.

 

Brighter ? I take it you mean the image you are seeing is brighter. As the 120 has a lot more light gathering ability. Then I find it difficult to see how the Tak 100mm can produce a brighter image than the 120mm Equinox? ?

Compare the second hand values(when you could get them) of the 120mm Equinox and a Tak 100mm . The Tak was always so much more even second hand , the Equinox was a great optical scope and great value second hand. I would be very very surprised if the sharpness optics of the Tak are even 2% better than the 120ed. Ohara and Scott glass means the 120ed had great quality glass in them. The 120ed were and are such good value , and opened up the market for the average Joe to have a quality Frac at sensible money .

 

 

 

[garryblueboy]

Like I said having owned x2 120 the image is brighter and more Contrast in the Tak to my eyes agree secondhand the Equinox are great but if new you loose a lot where with the Tak you don't so buying new makes sense secondhand maybe not , aperture doesn't always win as for the sharpness I'd say it was more than 2% just my opinion.

[Timebandit]

23 minutes ago, garryblueboy said:

Like I said having owned x2 120 the image is brighter and more Contrast in the Tak to my eyes agree secondhand the Equinox are great but if new you loose a lot where with the Tak you don't so buying new makes sense secondhand maybe not , aperture doesn't always win as for the sharpness I'd say it was more than 2% just my opinion.

 

Aperture does win for light gathering ability every time. So I would still be very doubtful on "brighter" .

As for optics more than 2% sharpness. That would absolutely blow the 120ed away. From John and avtar feedback I am sure they would of certainty noticed a + 2% improvement in the optics quality??

All sounds to good to be true ?

 

[garryblueboy]

4 minutes ago, Timebandit said:

?

Perhaps you should try nobody argues the 120 has more light gathering but the Tak processes the light better than the ed 120 fact the original poster asked what he would get we are only giving our opinions having owned both scopes 

[Stu]

3 minutes ago, Timebandit said:

All sounds to good to be true ?

Ah, but consistently people who own them find them to live up to their reputation. We can’t all be wrong.

I know that John was quite dubious of some of the reports, even some of mine when I was describing what I could see on Jupiter. I think he now knows that it was an accurate representation of the facts and that even as a 4” scope it doesn’t give anything away to the 120ED in most situations. It is probably about contrast as much as brightness though.

Don’t get me wrong, the 120ED/Equinox is an excellent scope and one I would be quite happy to own, but each time I consider whether to get another, I just don’t think I would end up using it very much. I would want to go to 130mm or a little more to be a big enough step up.

[Stu]

This is one thread I was referring to...

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/267201-jupiter-in-excellent-seeing-what-is-visible-visually/?tab=comments#comment-2926464

[25585]

1 minute ago, Stu said:

Ah, but consistently people who own them find them to live up to their reputation. We can’t all be wrong.

I know that John was quite dubious of some of the reports, even some of mine when I was describing what I could see on Jupiter. I think he now knows that it was an accurate representation of the facts and that even as a 4” scope it doesn’t give anything away to the 120ED in most situations. It is probably about contrast as much as brightness though.

Don’t get me wrong, the 120ED/Equinox is an excellent scope and one I would be quite happy to own, but each time I consider whether to get another, I just don’t think I would end up using it very much. I would want to go to 130mm or a little more to be a big enough step up.

Processing light is the thing. Less scatter, more concentration, more contrast/resolution as a result. Newtonian v SCT same points for end result for same apertures. 

Whether an observer actually notices a difference, imagines so or can't face the reality of a cheaper scope equalling or bettering his/her pride & joy, is  very emotional. 

[Stu]

1 minute ago, 25585 said:

or can't face the reality of a cheaper scope equalling or bettering his/her pride & joy, is  very emotional. 

I think the majority of us mere mortals would rather have the cash in the bank if it were really a case of the emperor’s new clothes. It is not  

[Timebandit]

3 minutes ago, garryblueboy said:

Perhaps you should try nobody argues the 120 has more light gathering but the Tak processes the light better than the ed 120 fact the original poster asked what he would get we are only giving our opinions having owned both scopes 

Processes the light better , with a 20mm aperture advantage ? So brighter?

 

3 minutes ago, Stu said:

Ah, but consistently people who own them find them to live up to their reputation. We can’t all be wrong.

 

 

I am not saying the Tak does not have a better optical configuration( they cost many many hundreds more , so I would expect something better as you are getting a smaller scope and less aperture scope). But the amount or advantage I would think would be minimal. I still think a +2% seems a bit wishful thinking. As we all know the Tak SGL club do like singing the praises of their optics against us with  lower class Chinese offerings?  

 

9 minutes ago, Stu said:

 

Don’t get me wrong, the 120ED/Equinox is an excellent scope and one I would be quite happy to own, but each time I consider whether to get another, I just don’t think I would end up using it very much. I would want to go to 130mm or a little more to be a big enough step up.

 

This raises my point. Obviously with the SW 150ed due out soon. Due to the small advantage the 100mm may have over the 120ed in sharpness?. The 150ed if skywatcher can get it in the same optical league is going to be a winner. I would much rather spend my money on getting a 150ed than a 100mmTak. And I would have change to spare ?

 

 

 

 

[garryblueboy]

If it were down to budget I'd say every time buy the Equinox 120 secondhand every time but if you can afford it Buy the Tak 

[garryblueboy]

3 minutes ago, Timebandit said:

his raises my point. Obviously with the SW 150ed due out soon. Due to the small advantage the 100mm may have over the 120ed in sharpness?. The 150ed if skywatcher can get it in the same optical league is going to be a winner. I would much rather spend my money on getting a 150ed than a 100mmTak. And I would have change to spare 

Think your missing the point of the thread really 

[Stu]

14 minutes ago, Timebandit said:

Processes the light better , with a 20mm aperture advantage ? So brighter?

 

 

I am not saying the Tak does not have a better optical configuration( they cost many many hundreds more , so I would expect something better as you are getting a smaller scope and less aperture scope). But the amount or advantage I would think would be minimal. I still think a +2% seems a bit wishful thinking. As we all know the Tak SGL club do like singing the praises of their optics against us with  lower class Chinese offerings?  

 

 

This raises my point. Obviously with the SW 150ed due out soon. Due to the small advantage the 100mm may have over the 120ed in sharpness?. The 150ed if skywatcher can get it in the same optical league is going to be a winner. I would much rather spend my money on getting a 150ed than a 100mmTak. And I would have change to spare ?

 

 

 

 

I don’t disagree, if that is the size of scope you want. I would love a 150ED, really would, and if I could permanently mount it somewhere then I would buy one, otherwise I fear with my lifestyle I would rarely use it.

I find your implication that Tak owners just sing the praises of their scopes because they are Taks, implying some form of snobbery, challenging shall we say. I give realistic appraisals of my kit. My FC100DC does as good a job, if not better in terms of performance, portability, convenience and enjoyment as any scope I’ve owned between 60 and 120mm, in fact it replaces them all pretty much. I can take it anywahere, Mount it on a tiny Giro-WR Mount and the views are tremendous, particularly planetary and white light solar. Having owned around 50 plus scopes, it is the one I have used most by far, and enjoyed most. Barring bankruptcy it ain’t going nowhere!  

[25585]

@Stu "50 plus scopes"??!!

[Doc]

I'm glad this topic has been posted as this is something I have been considering for a while.

As you know I have a Esprit 120ED and have considered the TAL FC100DL as a replacement. And guess what after reading this whole thread I'm still undecided.

Do I or do I not  

[garryblueboy]

I was fortunate to own several very nice 150 APOs and a Vixen ATLUX as has Stu and I'm sure he'd agree the views were stunning but these are big heavy scopes that need substantial mounts With the Tak 100 you get fantastic views and a great portable scope how did we get to comparing it to a 150 APO