Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

Takahashi scopes???


Recommended Posts

Hi

I want to know about Takahashi scopes, are they good? because all what i hear about is that they are one of finest top of the line and high quality brand, is it or just making it more than it should be?

And if you will choose from Takahashi, which scope you will take [only one] and why that one?

Thank you very much!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I read ALL the lab tests in Wolfgang Rohr's (a german optician and reviewer) site. So no subjectivity, only hard data measured by instruments, and Takahashi scopes show great results everytime. Excellent optical shaping, excellent polishing, accurate assembly, no spherical aberration to speak of, chromatic aberration reduced to the drastic minimum in refractors. So, yes, Takahashi scopes deserve their good reputation.

Rohr tested a number of Vixen refractors which performed just as good, and my personal experience with Vixen apo's and eyepieces confirms it. The blah-blah is Vixen is only a poor man's Takahashi but lab measurements are a tiny bit in favor of Vixen, really. By only a small margin but since they have the added bonus of costing a little less than Taka, if I had the will and the money, I'd take a 115mm Vixen over a 120mm Taka.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Takahashi, TEC, Astro Physics, APM and others all make excellent telescopes, BUT perhaps it would make more sense to tailor your scope choice to want you want to look at and how good your skies are rather than focusing (pun intended) on a brand name ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Takahashi scopes are right up there when it comes to optics and build, but it kind of depends on how discerning you are really? The reason I say this is that people often say you can get 85% of the performance of a Tak 100 with a Skywatcher ED100 which costs 1/3 of the price. You are basically paying a lot more for a small performance increase, but the build of the Tak is probably twice as good as the Skywatcher having owned both.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I have not ever looked thru Tak, having read a lot of reviews and opinions on scopes - two things come to mind that justify (or not, depends on your preference and depth of pocket) - such high price.

1. Performance - as other have said - scopes are about as good as it gets.

2. (Probably more important, since other vendors provide pieces that can sometimes match point 1.) - Consistent performance and "insurance" that you get what you pay for. If you buy TAK - it is bound to deliver - and if it does not - just send it back and you will get sample that is up to standard. With other scopes you can get varied quality, and there is no guarantee that you won't get scope that is a bit less. If that happens - tough luck - no one guaranteed that it will be top quality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you very much for all answers.

Actually talking about high end scopes is because first the optics quality and second the overall performance, from what i read i see that 99% of high end scopes are without issues or no complain, while with other brands as they call it as mass productions you can here issues here and there time to time.

In addition to above, i see so so many people upgrading from those affordable scopes to high end expensive one, i never saw the opposite, that also can tell something, at the end, so because those high end scopes are very expensive then they are a waste to buy them anyway?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ben the Ignorant said:

I read ALL the lab tests in Wolfgang Rohr's (a german optician and reviewer) site. So no subjectivity, only hard data measured by instruments, and Takahashi scopes show great results everytime. Excellent optical shaping, excellent polishing, accurate assembly, no spherical aberration to speak of, chromatic aberration reduced to the drastic minimum in refractors. So, yes, Takahashi scopes deserve their good reputation.

Rohr tested a number of Vixen refractors which performed just as good, and my personal experience with Vixen apo's and eyepieces confirms it. The blah-blah is Vixen is only a poor man's Takahashi but lab measurements are a tiny bit in favor of Vixen, really. By only a small margin but since they have the added bonus of costing a little less than Taka, if I had the will and the money, I'd take a 115mm Vixen over a 120mm Taka.

I will be honest with you, i looked at many many links and sites, even some known remote observatories around the world, i didn't read the name Vixen there much to be honest, but Takahashi is like in 90% of them, so if Vixen is that good really matching a TAK or even very slightly exceeding according to the tests you talked about then why i don't see more people getting it? and it is cheaper too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ibbo! said:

I will have a FS150 or a TAO if you are buying? (already have FS60 & 102 also an NJP mount)

I am expecting a big budget hopefully if everything is right, so that will allow me to get a Takahashi or similar scopes, and in fact i am thinking about FSQ-106 the most although there are another amazing one, it is because i don't have any wide field scopes, my ST80 isn't a great imaging scope, and because i didn't buy any APO refr yet so it will be my lifetime chance to immediately go with high end scope when possible, and i don't know if i should think about what i like to do now which is wide field or i have to think about future so getting something larger like 130 or 150 and such, after all i have to choose only one scope of high end for lifetime, and is it wise if i buy for example that high end in 130-150 and then buy a cheap one in 60-80mm one to compliment each? FSQ-106 has nice focal length and with reducer it can go so wide and fast too, just i have to know why i should skip and go directly to 130 or 140/150 refractor instead, i do have a Newtonian for 1000mm FL and i will buy RC later that will put me at 1625mm minimum or larger/longer, but i want to know others preferences as i may do the same or will have same interest and preferences by the time too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, TareqPhoto said:

I will be honest with you, i looked at many many links and sites, even some known remote observatories around the world, i didn't read the name Vixen there much to be honest, but Takahashi is like in 90% of them, so if Vixen is that good really matching a TAK or even very slightly exceeding according to the tests you talked about then why i don't see more people getting it? and it is cheaper too.

I think he's right regarding Vixen being comparable to Tak yet a bit cheaper. @F15Rules might be a good person to ask as a refractor connoisseur, and owner of Vixen and Tak scopes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lockie said:

I think he's right regarding Vixen being comparable to Tak yet a bit cheaper. @F15Rules might be a good person to ask as a refractor connoisseur, and owner of Vixen and Tak scopes.

I can go with Vixen instead if necessary, but the name TAK is stronger around regardless the quality between both are on par.

I don't know him, hope to get answers from him, but to me with a good budget it is really not a problem to get a Tak and never look back, in fact i like the huge image circle of a Tak so that may help for future larger sensors cameras and using reducers to make it even different scope, i don't know much about Vixen performance just beside it is super quality optics on same level of Tak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I looked at Vixen scopes, and only one scope that has all that whistles and rings and whatever, the price actually is more than Takahashi FSQ-106, then i am not interested, only Takahashi matching its price if i use the reducer with the Tak, for that i prefer to go with Tak then.

https://optcorp.com/products/vixen-vsd100-f-3-8-petzval-refracting-telescope

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to throw in an idea from the leftfield:

I have a Skywatcher AZ-EQ6, like you, with a SW Esprit 80 ED on top. Kind of a "relatively" budget setup. The Esprit has great optics - not as good as a TAK, but very usable.

As much as I'd love to own a Takahashi, If I had that amount of money to spend, I would upgrade my mount first, no question about it whatsoever. A Mesu 200 would be at the top of my list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Pompey Monkey said:

Just to throw in an idea from the leftfield:

I have a Skywatcher AZ-EQ6, like you, with a SW Esprit 80 ED on top. Kind of a "relatively" budget setup. The Esprit has great optics - not as good as a TAK, but very usable.

As much as I'd love to own a Takahashi, If I had that amount of money to spend, I would upgrade my mount first, no question about it whatsoever. A Mesu 200 would be at the top of my list.

I didn't start a thread here titled with "High end or premium mount", i did it in another forum or site, and it became like a war for me.

Someone who has AZ-EQ6 and started with Esprit scopes and TMP92 and now he upgraded to a Tak 106 recommended me to get Mesu 200, performance is nice, cheaper than most big high end mounts and its capacity load is incredible for that price, the main con he talked about was it is"So HEAVY", well, this is normal, a solid great mount should be heavy anyway, some could be lighter with high performance but i would mind that as i only imaging from my yard.

In that thread i started there and i told them the budget is about $10k, and i was hoping to divide this budget between a high end mount and a high end scope it turned out that this budget is nothing, and many brought 10Micron/AP/Paramount mounts as options, i told them about Mesu 200, few were agree about it and happy but major were like i am wasting time and money as i don't know what i am talking about or doing and better not buy anything yet, so i will upgrade the mount for sure, but if i have to spend over $10k for a mount that is in AP/10Micron level to handle up to 100Kg then i better start with the scope then, i can't afford more than $10k, and i have to use that for a nice scope anyway, having a high end mount like AP1600 and put only ST80 or 8" F5 cheap Newtonian is like a joke, definitely the mount is ultimate, but the imaging optics/scope aren't for the job much then, i can afford a high end scope before i can afford a high end mount for lifetime, and i like Mesu 200 really from its specifications, some told me that it is popular here, but i don't know how great is this mount if i will use it for different scopes even large heavy ones, or better to say how do you compare this Mesu against those high end names anyway? My thread there being locked as some offended me, so good i didn't start it again anywhere except Facebook which is fine with good bad posts anyway, but not forums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TareqPhoto said:

I didn't start a thread here titled with "High end or premium mount", i did it in another forum or site, and it became like a war for me.

Someone who has AZ-EQ6 and started with Esprit scopes and TMP92 and now he upgraded to a Tak 106 recommended me to get Mesu 200, performance is nice, cheaper than most big high end mounts and its capacity load is incredible for that price, the main con he talked about was it is"So HEAVY", well, this is normal, a solid great mount should be heavy anyway, some could be lighter with high performance but i would mind that as i only imaging from my yard.

In that thread i started there and i told them the budget is about $10k, and i was hoping to divide this budget between a high end mount and a high end scope it turned out that this budget is nothing, and many brought 10Micron/AP/Paramount mounts as options, i told them about Mesu 200, few were agree about it and happy but major were like i am wasting time and money as i don't know what i am talking about or doing and better not buy anything yet, so i will upgrade the mount for sure, but if i have to spend over $10k for a mount that is in AP/10Micron level to handle up to 100Kg then i better start with the scope then, i can't afford more than $10k, and i have to use that for a nice scope anyway, having a high end mount like AP1600 and put only ST80 or 8" F5 cheap Newtonian is like a joke, definitely the mount is ultimate, but the imaging optics/scope aren't for the job much then, i can afford a high end scope before i can afford a high end mount for lifetime, and i like Mesu 200 really from its specifications, some told me that it is popular here, but i don't know how great is this mount if i will use it for different scopes even large heavy ones, or better to say how do you compare this Mesu against those high end names anyway? My thread there being locked as some offended me, so good i didn't start it again anywhere except Facebook which is fine with good bad posts anyway, but not forums.

Maybe it's because good clear nights where I live are quite rare - I have lost many subs due to random glitches in the AZ-EQ6, so my priority lies with maximising the use of the available time. When it works properly, the AZ-EQ6 is more than adequate for the imaging scale that you'd get with a 4" TAK and if you don't feel that this is an issue, then spending more on a scope would make sense. :)

To answer your other question, I've seen a Mesu 200 in action with TWO FSQ 106's mounted side by side, operated by a very respected imager, and it works perfectly. I would say that it is a mount for life, unless you want to spend an order of magnitude more on your scopes and cameras.

Like I said, just an idea from the leftfield.

Clear skies! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://r2.astro-foren.com/index.php/de/10-beitraege/02-ed-optiken-halb-apos-und-frauenhofer-systeme/537-b015-vixen-ed-130-ss-farblaengsfehler-mit-ohne-korrektor

Okay, you can look at the whole lab result and comparo but if you don't read german, here is the main data about a Vixen SS 130mm apo Rohr tested:

FloeVixTMB_15.jpg

The most telling info is in the top yellow lines.

Peak-to-valley: 1/12 wave, simply unmatched. 1/4 is just acceptable, 1/6 is good, 1/8 is excellent but 1/12 is unheard of. Peak-to-valley ratio tells how well the overall shape of the lens has been executed.

RMS: 1/60 wave. Stupendous optics are in the 1/40 wave range, somehow the Vixen artisans reached this insane value in their great mastery of lens polishing. Science and espionage optics are in the 1/100 range but cost is obviously not in the amateur individual league. I have never seen another amateur optics report about a 1/60 wave scope. RMS tells the quality of the polishing. LZOS, Astro-physics and Taka are in the 1/32 to 1/40 range at best.

Strehl ratio: 0.99. Theoretical perfect optics have a 1.00 ratio that can't obviously be achieved in the real world, so 0.99 is the absolute best. This ratio expresses how tightly light is focused.

Of course not all Vixen apos boast these numbers but only Vixen has ever obtained them. A friend owns one of those rare 130SS apos, and when we viewed Mars (last Mars season, not this one) the planet's edge was the cleanest and sharpest I'd ever seen, and contrast was brutal. The greens and the reds looked like they were painted.

Now if your goal is only deep-sky photo ultra-high resolution is not needed, what you need is a large flat field. But if you also plan planetary Imaging, looking for the sharpest center-of-field is the must.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lockie said:

Vixen being comparable to Tak yet a bit cheaper. @F15Rules might be a good person to ask as a refractor connoisseur, and owner of Vixen and Tak scopes.

Hey Chris, hardly a connoisseur, but definitely a proud owner of both Tak and Vixen apos?. And I certainly do think that the Vixen ED doublets are optically right up there with Tak doublets. And I think Tak tubes are a bit  better than the Vixen ones. There again,  I think the standard fit Vixen focusers I have used are better than the Tak standard ones (the Vixen dual speed is very nice). But a Feathertouch is much better than either IMO! 

Tareq, having read through your thread, it seems you see imaging as your prime use for your new scope. 

If that's the case, I think a Tak will be your best bet from everything I have read, but our imaging friends can give you far better advice than I.

If you do go for a Tak, you will know that should you want to sell it in the future, you will get a far better resale price than you would with a Vixen - which is great for lucky people who have a $10k budget. .and great for the rest of us who don't!

Good luck with your choice:thumbsup:

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, imaging is my prime main use and goal here, that is why i put my mind on Tak scope over Vixen, and i wanted a wide field one, 130 i can think about AP and TEC which is 140 and Tak TOA130 and whatever, even Astro-Tech one, but i don't want to go that large yet and not with a refrctor but with RC instead.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Ben the Ignorant said:

http://r2.astro-foren.com/index.php/de/10-beitraege/02-ed-optiken-halb-apos-und-frauenhofer-systeme/537-b015-vixen-ed-130-ss-farblaengsfehler-mit-ohne-korrektor

Okay, you can look at the whole lab result and comparo but if you don't read german, here is the main data about a Vixen SS 130mm apo Rohr tested:

FloeVixTMB_15.jpg

The most telling info is in the top yellow lines.

Peak-to-valley: 1/12 wave, simply unmatched. 1/4 is just acceptable, 1/6 is good, 1/8 is excellent but 1/12 is unheard of. Peak-to-valley ratio tells how well the overall shape of the lens has been executed.

RMS: 1/60 wave. Stupendous optics are in the 1/40 wave range, somehow the Vixen artisans reached this insane value in their great mastery of lens polishing. Science and espionage optics are in the 1/100 range but cost is obviously not in the amateur individual league. I have never seen another amateur optics report about a 1/60 wave scope. RMS tells the quality of the polishing. LZOS, Astro-physics and Taka are in the 1/32 to 1/40 range at best.

Strehl ratio: 0.99. Theoretical perfect optics have a 1.00 ratio that can't obviously be achieved in the real world, so 0.99 is the absolute best. This ratio expresses how tightly light is focused.

Of course not all Vixen apos boast these numbers but only Vixen has ever obtained them. A friend owns one of those rare 130SS apos, and when we viewed Mars (last Mars season, not this one) the planet's edge was the cleanest and sharpest I'd ever seen, and contrast was brutal. The greens and the reds looked like they were painted.

Now if your goal is only deep-sky photo ultra-high resolution is not needed, what you need is a large flat field. But if you also plan planetary Imaging, looking for the sharpest center-of-field is the must.

Unfortunately i dpon't read German at all, and from your post it sounds like Vixen is top ultimate refractpor out there then, so why i don't hear much about it everywhere even among those experts or experienced with high end mounts and scopes and even observatories? i feel they really don't care about tests maybe or they don't believe it, otherwise from yout post this Vixen scope should be like a first choice and a dream scope, so i go with majority maybe more than a trusted lab test, after all maybe there are many other factors to determine and not only the lab test, i still have time, and the scope in the test isn't of my plan, i am not looking at 120-160 refractors, i want almost 4" Refr first, and i will buy an RC, in fact all the mind blowing images i liked the most of DSO are mostly from RC, so this will be my another scope next to a Tak FSQ106 if i buy that, and visual isn't my prime.

For planetary a Refractor isn't my choice, i know it is very sharp, but even big names are using reflectors, and reflectors are in my plan too for planetary, i have 7" Mak for now, and soon i will use my 8" F5 Newtonian, and for visual almost 98% told me there is no match to a large dobsonians, not even this Vixen refractors, and it is way much cheaper than this Vixen anyway, i can buy 18" Dobsonian before i can afford a Vixen 130.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want a Tak for imaging and you want it for wide field, how about this then:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/takahashi-epsilon-reflector-telescopes/takahashi-epsilon-180-ed-f28-newtonian-astrograph-reflector.html?quickview=1#about_this_product

If you want a 4" refractor, and you go down to about F/4.4 with it it will be ~450 mm focal length (ok for wide field), above scope is 500mm focal length - so a bit less of field but it's going to be superb imaging scope under dark skies.

For slightly wider field, and still Tak quality, but a bit less aperture there is:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/takahashi-epsilon-reflector-telescopes/takahashi-epsilon-130-ed-f3-3-newtonian-astrograph-reflector.html#specifications

On the other hand, if you really want very wide field - look for scope around or under 350mm focal length - get 80mm F/4.4 refractor - that would be 350mm (or look for something even faster).

There is one more point to make - if you are looking for wide field imaging scope - Tak sharpness and quality of figure is a bit overkill, in my opinion. Wide field usually means under sampling with average seeing - and average seeing is already blurring image enough that sharpness difference between Strehl 0.98 and 0.9 is not going to be noticeable anyway.

I'm super happy with wide field imaging with TS 80 Photoline Apo F/6 - reduced to F/4.8 by x0.79 field flattener. If I were looking now, I would probably take the same scope and Riccardi x0.75 reducer/flattener (was twice its present price back when I was getting my gear - almost the same price as scope - so too expensive at the time) - it would make very nice F/4.5 wide field platform.

This combination will leave you enough budget to get all the rest bits you will need (Mesu 200 - also on my "dream" list, suitable camera - if you don't already have one, filters, guide accessories, what ever you might need ...)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

If you want a Tak for imaging and you want it for wide field, how about this then:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/takahashi-epsilon-reflector-telescopes/takahashi-epsilon-180-ed-f28-newtonian-astrograph-reflector.html?quickview=1#about_this_product

If you want a 4" refractor, and you go down to about F/4.4 with it it will be ~450 mm focal length (ok for wide field), above scope is 500mm focal length - so a bit less of field but it's going to be superb imaging scope under dark skies.

For slightly wider field, and still Tak quality, but a bit less aperture there is:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/takahashi-epsilon-reflector-telescopes/takahashi-epsilon-130-ed-f3-3-newtonian-astrograph-reflector.html#specifications

On the other hand, if you really want very wide field - look for scope around or under 350mm focal length - get 80mm F/4.4 refractor - that would be 350mm (or look for something even faster).

There is one more point to make - if you are looking for wide field imaging scope - Tak sharpness and quality of figure is a bit overkill, in my opinion. Wide field usually means under sampling with average seeing - and average seeing is already blurring image enough that sharpness difference between Strehl 0.98 and 0.9 is not going to be noticeable anyway.

I'm super happy with wide field imaging with TS 80 Photoline Apo F/6 - reduced to F/4.8 by x0.79 field flattener. If I were looking now, I would probably take the same scope and Riccardi x0.75 reducer/flattener (was twice its present price back when I was getting my gear - almost the same price as scope - so too expensive at the time) - it would make very nice F/4.5 wide field platform.

This combination will leave you enough budget to get all the rest bits you will need (Mesu 200 - also on my "dream" list, suitable camera - if you don't already have one, filters, guide accessories, what ever you might need ...)

 

If i have to include a newtonian or reflector in the question then there is this RASA, faster than both Epsilons, and i think the price is within affordable, but i really was thinking about a refractor only first.

https://www.celestron.com/products/8-rowe-ackermann-schmidt-astrograph-rasa-8

Also with a Takhashi FSQ-106, i can use it as native at 530mm, or if i use their super reducer 0.6x one then i can get 320mm F3, not bad at all, i know some won't go that much, but when i read the posts here i keep asking myself then why other people being stupid or idiot to buy this or any Takahashi scopes if there are much cheaper or affordable scopes that can do the job perfectly anywhere? i don't think those who buy Takahashi scopes are doing this just pointlessly or no reasons, and sure they did read about all scopes available so they made their minds on AP/TEC/Takahashi scopes, i don't want to base my decisions only on budget, sure having cheaper and nice quality is good and many don't care about high end or super quality, but some are so obsessed with supreme quality maybe and i want to get a scope for a lifetime, and all said that Takahashi is well respected brand and their items are craftsmanship that you won't see issues or you can reliable on it forever maybe and have incredible service, the design is flawless too, so there is more to it maybe than just only Strehl pure glass tests, prove me wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can hear the same about many affordable scopes such as Stellarvue and William Optics even Skywatcher Esprit and ES scopes, all those producing amazing results i saw, very nice, i was planning to buy one of those, but everywhere i see that those who are willing to upgrade from those are moving to Astro-Physics or Takahashi or TEC or whatever, but i never saw anyone with AP or even the cheap Takahashi for example moved to those affordable one from Takahashi, so even it is a wring idea but i think no one will upgrade from better to lesser even for budget, and i got some members also told me if i don't have budget then buy something like Skywatcher or TS or Stellarvue, but if i have a budget then go to AP and Tak level even in LP red zone and the difference isn't huge noticeable, i already mentioned above about someone who moved from TMB92 which was a gem scope and Esprit 120 which is a fine scope itself to a Takahashi and never look back, i saw amazing very nice results from his TMB and Esprit, is he stupid to go with a Tak if he already producing stunning images with those scopes?

Don't get me wrong, when i started this thread and asked i wanted to know how much great is this Takahahsi really, i didn't ask what is the cheaper alternatives, i could do that before when i can, and i don't worry about other accessories, i already have some and i put another budget for those accessories separated from Scope/Mount budget, and i also mentioned that i saw some observatories remote on the net having Tak scopes beside another scopes too, and i didn't see like TS or Skywatcher or WO/Stellarvue under their telescopes lists, i don't think they are either showing off or they are doing wrong buying very expensive for no more gain, i still didn't buy anything and i can be happy with cheap scopes, but i don't want to upgrade later at all anytime in the future, i don't like spending twice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • 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.