Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_solar_25.thumb.jpg.f1d5d01d306644f613efd90ef96b314c.jpg

dweller25

Tak TSA102 v Tak FC-100DF

Recommended Posts

On 05/02/2019 at 12:44, dweller25 said:

I am thinking about selling my Tak TSA102 and getting a Tak FC-100DF for grab and go visual use only.

I need to keep weight down so will use my lightweight Vixen GP (rated at 7kgs capacity) on it's Hal aluminium tripod.

The TSA pushes this mount at high power - which is what I mostly use.

The TSA weighs 6.4kgs, the FC-100DF weighs 3.4kgs, visual performance should be the same.

"If Carling made 4" telescopes it would probably be a TSA102" ?

Thoughts - am I insane ? ?????

For strictly visual, it makes sense as faster cooling and less weight make it easier to go with the FC series. The slightly better color correction (the stark pure view of the TSA  Vs the slightly warmer view from the FC) is possibly not worth it.

You will be taking a hit on the TSA, but Marcus is parting with one of his scopes, so you could end up negating the hit if you go down the pre-owned route. I would seriously recommend swapping the focuser for a FTF. No need for any extensions then, buttery smooth and IMHO it makes the scope that much better to use.

If however the thought of parting with your TSA is too much and you just want something for quick views, then yes, the Vixen 81 or even the Skywatcher 72 would make great companions to the TSA. Think it through - I still regret a year later because I sold what amounted to a perfect sample of a TAk FC-76 and I still get slightly upset when I keep seeing photos of it and commentary from the new owner on Cloudynights...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes you don't know just how good a scope is, until it's gone :rolleyes2:

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Especially when the new owner keeps posting beautiful photos of it ?

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Switching to the FC100DF will cut the cooling time by a third, weight also by a third. Visually the difference is really only seen when side by side with identical diagonals and eyepieces.

I was tempted to do the same to make my binoculars lighter but in the end the TSA102s won the argument......

 

MIS_6956.jpg

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Photos like that ought to carry a warning of some sort Matt :icon_biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎07‎/‎02‎/‎2019 at 06:46, nicoscy said:

The slightly better color correction (the stark pure view of the TSA  Vs the slightly warmer view from the FC) is possibly not worth it.

Have you compared the two scopes directly? I have to admit, that I have not, but I find my FCs have a rather cooler tone compared to other scopes. I never considered them to have a warm tone. The TSA however impresses with snow-white out-of focus star images.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had and viewed through scopes of the FC and FS series which both show a "warmer" view to my eyes Vs any other triplet of decent pedigree I have seen through, and I have chatted extensively with folks who have had scopes from the TSA / TOA series and FC / FS series regarding results as I was interested in jumping to either the TSA or TOA category.

So, no, I have not compared the two directly, but I think it is a valid inference based on both personal experience and extensive chats with others. However, one critical factor is how my eyes perceive color Vs how others perceive it. Unfortunately, this is a personal experience and does not translate well from one person to another. As usual, any feedback must be taken with a pinch of salt, including my own!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the end by the way, I chose to move forward with a Tak FS-128. A decision that took quite some time and a lot of digging and chatting back and forth, and I have zero regrets! I also added the AP 92 Stowaway to the lineup. I felt that I wanted a large scope that cooled faster than a triplet and had a sufficiently long focal length to ensure it is Apochromatic. The Stowaway is a different animal and should take care of the needs for a smaller APO, where cooling is faster at 92mm than 128mm.

If I am to pull a scope to the balcony for some serious viewing, I am comfortable waiting for about 30 minutes or so for the Stowaway to cool down, Vs the FC-76 I had which was ready in 5 minutes! The FC-76 I had now resides with a person in the US who frequently posts on CN and raves about the scope. I regret letting it go because it was incredibly sharp, with a contrast that rivaled anything else I have tried (AP 92 not tested yet due to weather). But, there is a bit of "warmth" to the views to my eyes, which I do not find objectionable at all. Not CA, just a slight warmer tone. 

In retrospect, I should have kept the FC as well ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, nicoscy said:

In retrospect, I should have kept the FC as well ?

I always regret selling my FC-76 too Nicos!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.