Tak FC-100 - what will I gain?

[Stu]

1 minute ago, 25585 said:

@Stu "50 plus scopes"??!!

Yep, I’ve lost count but I think so

[Stu]

6 minutes ago, Doc said:

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  

I guess it depends what is important to you. With a 120 Esprit it is more about whether you want a lighter, more portable scope that cools down faster? 

[garryblueboy]

3 minutes ago, Stu said:

Yep, I’ve lost count but I think so

I don't think I'm far off that either ?

[GavStar]

I have to say that even when I’ve had my TEC160FL side by side with Stu’s fc100, I’ve been very surprised at how good the little Tak’s views were. (But the TEC did win on the trapezium ?) 

I still think the key advantage of the Tak is getting 100mm aperture in such a light, portable, easy to mount package.

One of my most memorable views was of the Veil in my FC100DF under lovely dark skies in the Isle of Wight.

[25585]

1 minute ago, Stu said:

I guess it depends what is important to you. With a 120 Esprit it is more about whether you want a lighter, more portable scope that cools down faster? 

Replace a great triplet with a  doublet. 

No. Does not compute. Doublet for Tak doublet maybe, but for an Esprit, a great scope too, noooo!

[Timebandit]

2 minutes ago, Stu said:

 

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. 

 

The problem with that is there is no a consistency across the board. If all or the vast majority of the Tak owners agreed that the 100mm Tak was so much better or a noticeable difference between a Tak 100mm and the SW120ed . Then I would probably not challenge this as much. But when you have the likes of John not really going along with this far superior instrument thinking. Then it does raise the question ,is the Tak really better due to it being a superior build or quality ,or is it the" Tak "name and the placebo effect ?

I raise this point more as I have a 1/10pv and 1/6 grade optics on the OOuk . I have tried to compare the optical performance and the "advantage". To my eyes at present under the conditions I have tested. I cannot see much difference ,if any  in the sharpness of quality. If to my eyes there was a +2% difference in the view when comparing the grade of mirror then I am sure I would notice this, and it would stand out.  I am sure if there was +2% difference in the quality between Tak v SW then i am sure all Tak owners would notice this and reported the " far superior " but that does not seem to be the case. The Tak club does seem to get their backs up when anyone challenges their views. But surely that is what the SGL members are here to do. Debate and challenge points of interest?

 

 

 

[Pig]

Try a Tak for 6 months if you don’t rate it just sell it.......... it will sell ? Kind of a cheap alternative way to kill the curiosity rather than bumbling your way through finding what’s a good fit. From my experiences with mine I doubt very much you would want to sell it ? They really are a pleasure to use ..... ?

[John]

25 minutes ago, Timebandit said:

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?  

 

I hope my post earlier in this thread made it clear that I'm still a great fan of the Chinese made ED120 (although I believe the glass used in the objective is Japanese). The optical tests of ED120 examples that I've seen published on websites such as Astro Foren have been consistently excellent and comparable with those for much more expensive optics. My understanding is that Synta went to great lengths to get the 120mm ED doublet objective right and delayed it's launch until they consistently achieved the standards that they knew were needed to convince a sceptical world that a £1000 Chinese produced refractor was worth serious consideration.

My Tak FC-100 DL is a truly excellent 100mm refractor, the best that I have owned or used in fact. It's still a 100mm refractor though and has not been a "game changer" in my enjoyment of the hobby, not that I expected that. I did wonder if my ED120 would become obsolete once I bought the Tak but thats not happened and the Skywatcher gets just as much time out as my other scopes

If I'm in the Tak club I'm also a fully paid up member of the Skywatcher, Orion Optics, Tele Vue, Vixen and TMB/LZOS fan clubs

BTW, I'm not sure if I've racked up 50+ scopes yet but I got to the mid-30's last time I tried to count up the ones I've owned but then realised that I'd forgotten a few from a decade or so back so gave it up as a bad job

 

 

 

 

[Stu]

Just now, Timebandit said:

 

The problem with that is there is no a consistency across the board. If all or the vast majority of the Tak owners agreed that the 100mm Tak was so much better or a noticeable difference between a Tak 100mm and the SW120ed . Then I would probably not challenge this as much. But when you have the likes of John not really going along with this far superior instrument thinking. Then it does raise the question ,is the Tak really better due to it being a superior build or quality ,or is it the" Tak "name and the placebo effect ?

I raise this point more as I have a 1/10pv and 1/6 grade optics on the OOuk . I have tried to compare the optical performance and the "advantage". To my eyes at present under the conditions I have tested. I cannot see much difference ,if any  in the sharpness of quality. If to my eyes there was a +2% difference in the view when comparing the grade of mirror then I am sure I would notice this, and it would stand out.  I am sure if there was +2% difference in the quality between Tak v SW then i am sure all Tak owners would notice this and reported the " far superior " but that does not seem to be the case. The Tak club does seem to get their backs up when anyone challenges their views. But surely that is what the SGL members are here to do. Debate and challenge points of interest?

 

 

 

I have no issues debating, but for instance I do not dispute your findings with a 120ED so why should you dispute mine with a Tak, given I have experience of 2 x 120ED aswell?

I have not stated that an FC100DC is dramatically better than a 120ED. For me, the performance is at least comparable in a package that is far more portable. I do not, however, recall seeing such good planetary views in my 120EDs though, the detail I have seen in the Tak is amazing for the aperture, I believe it is to do with the level of polish of the lens which allows wonderful high power views. The thing I love also is the stability of the views, allowing you to pull out the detail. My 8" SCT for instance showed more detail, and more colour, but I did not enjoy the way it was presented, and how you had to wait longer for periods of stability,

Likewise for solar, the views with a coolwedge are amazing, maintaining their sharpness and levels of detail up to silly powers.

Accusing a group of members of suffering from 'placebo effect' and wasting their money is not the best way to continue the debate. 

[garryblueboy]

Timebandit I'd like to know how you quantify 2% how are you able to measure it so accurately as to give it a % having never owned a Tak 100mm I think all us TAK owners and previous or owners of the 120 ED agree that the 120 ED is a great preformer but as far as I can see most of us see a noticeable difference between the two I'd say that was consistent  

[Timebandit]

8 minutes ago, Stu said:

 

Accusing a group of members of suffering from 'placebo effect' and wasting their money is not the best way to continue the debate. 

 

As I said . The Tak club does seem to get there backs up when their views are challenged.

I will therefore let the Tak appreciation society continue this thread themselves?

 

 

[Stu]

6 minutes ago, John said:

BTW, I'm not sure if I've racked up 50+ scopes yet but I got to the mid-30's last time I tried to count up the ones I've owned but then realised that I'd forgotten a few from a decade or so back so gave it up as a bad job

 

Mine is quite a rough calculation too John, but in the right ball park.

Situation makes a big difference to how much of an impact these scopes make. You have a better LP situation at home than me, and regularly get out in your garden with a whole range of scopes. For me though, far more observing is done away from home, or in quick snatched sessions. John, you have found recently that your 70mm scope has kept you going through a tougher period in your astro life. The Tak has been exactly that for me, but for a much longer period, giving great performance in a package which is quick to setup, use and break down.

Simon, I would say it's best to keep your comments away from accusing people of deluding themselves.

[Saganite]

7 minutes ago, Stu said:

I have no issues debating, but for instance I do not dispute your findings with a 120ED so why should you dispute mine with a Tak, given I have experience of 2 x 120ED aswell?

I have not stated that an FC100DC is dramatically better than a 120ED. For me, the performance is at least comparable in a package that is far more portable. I do not, however, recall seeing such good planetary views in my 120EDs though, the detail I have seen in the Tak is amazing for the aperture, I believe it is to do with the level of polish of the lens which allows wonderful high power views. The thing I love also is the stability of the views, allowing you to pull out the detail. My 8" SCT for instance showed more detail, and more colour, but I did not enjoy the way it was presented, and how you had to wait longer for periods of stability,

Likewise for solar, the views with a coolwedge are amazing, maintaining their sharpness and levels of detail up to silly powers.

Accusing a group of members of suffering from 'placebo effect' and wasting their money is not the best way to continue the debate. 

Taking Stu's point regarding the level of polish, is I think the crux of it, and surely is the reason why a Tak 4" is so much more expensive than my 4" Celestron ED. I accept that the general quality of build is going to play a large part, but the optics is what it is all about. 

I have never owned or looked through a Tak of any size, but enough people on this forum, who have my respect,  as observers, cannot all be wrong.

[garryblueboy]

 

2 minutes ago, Timebandit said:

As I said . The Tak club does seem to get there backs up when their views are challenged.

I will therefore let the Tak appreciation society continue this thread themselves?

I think it's the kettle calling the pot 

[Stu]

3 minutes ago, Timebandit said:

 

As I said . The Tak club does seem to get there backs up when their views are challenged.

I will therefore let the Tak appreciation society continue this thread themselves?

 

 

Not getting backs up, just annoyed when someone who hasn't used the scope tries to judge its performance, and worse than that, accuse owners of making it all up!

I could quote John's comment about my report indicating that I was seeing a comparable amount of detail as he saw in his 12". I'm not trying to say that is actually the case, but these scopes are very capable. Please stop trying to derail this thread by making it an argument between different owners.

[Pig]

This is why we all love our scopes

[niallk]

21 minutes ago, Pig said:

This is why we all love our scopes

Poor oul Van Gogh: he had lousy seeing conditions... those diffraction rings are all wobbly.

Wow 50+ scopes Stu!  I thought I was shamefully extravagent with 3 

I've never looked through a frac (besides my liddle Ha Lunt), but am intrigued.

A 120ED is going 2nd hand in Ireland for a good price at the mo, but I swore I'd spend nothing this year on astro stuff...

[Stu]

2 minutes ago, niallk said:

A 120ED is going 2nd hand in Ireland for a good price at the mo, but I swore I'd spend nothing this year on astro stuff...

Go on Nial, you know you want to  

[niallk]

7 minutes ago, Stu said:

Go on Nial, you know you want to  

  

I'm often a bit envious of the vibrant 2nd hand astro market in the UK - it seems to me that one could take a punt to try things out more and sell on without a massive hit.  It appears to me that the market is much much smaller and tougher here in Ireland.

[25585]

1 hour ago, Timebandit said:

 

The problem with that is there is no a consistency across the board. If all or the vast majority of the Tak owners agreed that the 100mm Tak was so much better or a noticeable difference between a Tak 100mm and the SW120ed . Then I would probably not challenge this as much. But when you have the likes of John not really going along with this far superior instrument thinking. Then it does raise the question ,is the Tak really better due to it being a superior build or quality ,or is it the" Tak "name and the placebo effect ?

I raise this point more as I have a 1/10pv and 1/6 grade optics on the OOuk . I have tried to compare the optical performance and the "advantage". To my eyes at present under the conditions I have tested. I cannot see much difference ,if any  in the sharpness of quality. If to my eyes there was a +2% difference in the view when comparing the grade of mirror then I am sure I would notice this, and it would stand out.  I am sure if there was +2% difference in the quality between Tak v SW then i am sure all Tak owners would notice this and reported the " far superior " but that does not seem to be the case. The Tak club does seem to get their backs up when anyone challenges their views. But surely that is what the SGL members are here to do. Debate and challenge points of interest?

 

 

 

I think a point here might be "guarantee" quality. The consideration that whatever you are looking at, a "guaranteed" quality instrument means it's ruling out your instrument as a factor if (say) seeing is poor, or Jupiter winks at you. 

Also a "Made in or with" comfort factor. Japanese or German made surety, as opposed to good Chinese product.

Placebo possibly, if for an identical FL & diameter, Tak lenses were put in a SW ED tube & the SW lenses in a Tak tube, and "experts" were looking through each, what would the verdict be, & what comments would be made. 

I have my Skytee mount now set up to compare my 100 Equinox 900mm F9 with my Tak DL. Same eye pieces, same diagonals, same target each time. Open mind. Just gotta do it. 

Then repeat but with the 120 Equinox. 

But say I had already tried the above out & found no difference, or the Tak was less good than the 100 Equinox. How many other FC100 owners anywhere would accept that?

It's like comparing similar cars by different makers. Lexus v Mercedes, Porsche v Honda, Ferrari v Williams. 

[Pig]

LoL what is all this placebo mumbo jumbo ? ?

[25585]

1 hour ago, Stu said:

Mine is quite a rough calculation too John, but in the right ball park.

Situation makes a big difference to how much of an impact these scopes make. You have a better LP situation at home than me, and regularly get out in your garden with a whole range of scopes. For me though, far more observing is done away from home, or in quick snatched sessions. John, you have found recently that your 70mm scope has kept you going through a tougher period in your astro life. The Tak has been exactly that for me, but for a much longer period, giving great performance in a package which is quick to setup, use and break down.

Simon, I would say it's best to keep your comments away from accusing people of deluding themselves.

I love my TV Genesis for its 30 year & continuing loyalty. No longer modern optics but I have kept it & used it for 3 decades. Same for some eye pieces. We have aged and seen wonders of the night sky together. A TV 101 might join the family one year. 

[25585]

2 hours ago, Pig said:

LoL what is all this placebo mumbo jumbo ? ?

It's you thinking your Tak has flouride lenses, because it says so on the tube. ? 

[John]

24 minutes ago, 25585 said:

It's you thinking your Tak has flouride lenses, because it says so on the tube. ? 

I use flouride toothpaste - will that help me see more ? 

You have to admire telescope manufacturers that make lenses from it ....... 

[Stu]

3 hours ago, Pig said:

LoL what is all this placebo mumbo jumbo ? ?

Well I’ve been taking a Tak FC-100 daily with meals for a few years now with no effect, do you think I should go back to my doctor and ask to switch to the other part of the trial?