Tak TOE - finally able to report back

[Highburymark]

I bought a Takahashi TOE 3.3mm a while (6 months-ish) ago, but have resisted posting any opinions because, frankly, I hadn’t had enough experience with it under steady skies to do it justice. But tonight that changed. For the first time this opposition, Mars was perfectly calm through my 4” refractor. Which meant I was able to test the TOE against my other planetary eyepieces - TV Delites 4mm and 3mm. 

The two Delites are the sharpest and most comfortable high power eyepieces I have ever used. They are the reason I sold my Nagler 3-6 zoom,  and Nagler T6 3.5mm and 5mm. But for the first time tonight, they were humbled by the TOE. 

The Delite 4mm delivered beautiful views at 185x, more detail and colour than I have seen on Mars ever, I think. My previous best results were in the Canaries several years ago. But tonight - when I inserted the TOE 3.3mm, I was amazed to not only see a larger disk, but a sharper and more detailed one too. It was exquisite. Eye relief was super comfortable, and a nice wide field was appreciated for my manual mount . I spent 40 minutes just drinking it in. I briefly tried the 3mm Delite, but it proved too much. 

Now it wasn’t perfect - it didn’t get rid of my floaters. or magically counteract the changes in seeing. But tonight I finally saw just how how good this eyepiece is, and why it’s getting such rave reviews from experienced observers in the States. 

 

[John]

Nice report

I have heard that the TOE's are something special and you seem to confirm that Mark.

Must be very close to the "top tier" of planetary performers.

Edited October 9, 2020 by John

[jock1958]

Very interesting and high praise for the TOE considering the other top notch eyepieces in your collection. 

My go to high powered eyepiece is the 3-6 NZ and very pleased with it but always on the lookout for something better....you’ve got me thinking now  🤔 

[John]

There is always "something better" out there, although generally the margins between quality eyepieces are pretty close. Unless you have Zeiss ZAO's and / or a Pentax XO which I think are the very, very best and have been for some time now.

I've tried to give up chasing now and I'm sticking to the Nagler 2-4 zoom, my Pentax XW's and an HD ortho 4mm. I'll just have to do the best that I can with those

It's interesting and helpful to hear that Takahashi have produced a really nice planetary eyepiece in the TOE's though

[JeremyS]

Thanks for the report @Highburymark. Good to hear that the TOE 3.3 is a stunning performer. Maybe sometime you'll get the opportunity to compare with the Vixen HR 3.4. I am sure both are superb: I know the latter to be, but is there anything between them....?

[markse68]

1 hour ago, JeremyS said:

Thanks for the report @Highburymark. Good to hear that the TOE 3.3 is a stunning performer. Maybe sometime you'll get the opportunity to compare with the Vixen HR 3.4. I am sure both are superb: I know the latter to be, but is there anything between them....?

and the xw3.5 and some tv offerings in same range- a 3ish mm shootout   🍿 would be very interesting

[Highburymark]

1 hour ago, JeremyS said:

Thanks for the report @Highburymark. Good to hear that the TOE 3.3 is a stunning performer. Maybe sometime you'll get the opportunity to compare with the Vixen HR 3.4. I am sure both are superb: I know the latter to be, but is there anything between them....?

I suspect the difference between them is wafer thin Jeremy. Of the reviews I’ve seen, they are both slightly ahead of the best widefields. It’s just a question of how often you get to use them. The 3.3 gives around 225x in my scope, which has been too much for Mars until last night, and too much for Saturn, Jupiter and Venus all year from my urban location. But clear now it’s worth waiting for that rare special night.

[Robindonne]

While searching for a keeper planetary eyepiece, i also saw this Tak being reviewed good.  Although, i remember the reviewer mentioning some differences when used with prims vs dielectric mirror diagonals.   Possible he also mentioned differences using different scopes.   
 

I hope to get a Toe soon.   The overall satisfaction should be good, and give the best and easy to use experience.

[Louis D]

7 hours ago, JeremyS said:

Thanks for the report @Highburymark. Good to hear that the TOE 3.3 is a stunning performer. Maybe sometime you'll get the opportunity to compare with the Vixen HR 3.4. I am sure both are superb: I know the latter to be, but is there anything between them....?

Here's a very recent thread on CN comparing these two eyepieces.

[Deadlake]

I have a TOE 4mm and the HR 3.4 mm. I've not had that many clear nights since getting the HR, but they are so close it will be hard to split them apart. Last observation was on Mars, however not the best seeing.  The TOE you can buy, the Vixen you have to be lucky to get hold of, but is a lot better value given the price difference. 

By the way the TOE over the summer gave some amazing views of the Moon, Jupiter and Saturn, so had some high exceptions for the HR.

Viewed with a SD103S. I'm near sighted, so no need of glasses at all.

Edited October 25, 2020 by Deadlake

[Deadlake]

Just thought I'd update this. Since last October I've managed to get hold all of the HR series and replace the Vixen supplied diagonal with a Baader prism. Last Thursday and Saturday night the moon took over the night sky, so took a look thru the Vixen HR's from 1.6 to 3.4 mm and the TOE 4 mm the following notes:

1) Amazed at the detail the HR's managed to render when used with a Vixen SD103S, a good but not top tier ED doublet. I spent some time drifting over the surface of the moon, however at the magnification really made use of electric mount.
2) Baader prism made a huge difference to the detail rendered.

The only really difference between the HR and TOE lines I can draw is with the HR you can use a 1.6 mm EP and the TOE will go down to 2.5 mm. The views are a little different, the TOE is smoother to look at while the HR show everything, warts and all. 

I'll update this once I've got a chance to look thru a new scope I've got on order.

[JTEC]

They’re fantastic aren’t they!  I have only the 4mm TOE and the 3.4mm HR and use them in a TEC 140 - don’t think the shorter ones would get much use.  I’ve tried to characterise the differences between them. I’d agree with your word ‘smoother’ for the TOE.  Perhaps paradoxically, the ‘smoothness’ doesn’t seem to entail any loss of available detail though. 

[Deadlake]

2 hours ago, JTEC said:

They’re fantastic aren’t they!  I have only the 4mm TOE and the 3.4mm HR and use them in a TEC 140 - don’t think the shorter ones would get much use.  I’ve tried to characterise the differences between them. I’d agree with your word ‘smoother’ for the TOE.  Perhaps paradoxically, the ‘smoothness’ doesn’t seem to entail any loss of available detail though. 

Smoother, I wonder if it's contrast related? I bought the other HR's EP's for use in a lower focal length scope, however to be honest to use on the moon and doubles I suspect a 2.5. mm and 4 mm TOE would suffice. Using the 1.6 mm HR on the moon was amazing because I didn't think the SD103S could support that magnification. 

[JTEC]

Both seem to me to have the capacity to take your scope to unexpected levels and show what it can ‘really’ do - at least, on the Moon.  Barlowing them is interesting  : ) 

[Deadlake]

On 25/01/2021 at 09:51, JTEC said:

Both seem to me to have the capacity to take your scope to unexpected levels and show what it can ‘really’ do - at least, on the Moon.  Barlowing them is interesting  : ) 

That did cross my mind. I have a 130 mm/F6 on order (600 mm focal length). I suspect it would able to go higher than x375 with a 1.6 HR however seems a little simplistic expecting it to work.

[jetstream]

On 25/01/2021 at 03:51, JTEC said:

Both seem to me to have the capacity to take your scope to unexpected levels and show what it can ‘really’ do - at least, on the Moon.  Barlowing them is interesting  : ) 

I find barlowing the Vixen 2.4mm HR interesting too. I used my VIP so not exactly sure of the mag-I think it was 1.5x- and my TSA120 gave razor sharp views of the moon at a suspected 600x. It might have been more...

Edited January 29, 2021 by jetstream

[JeremyS]

4 hours ago, jetstream said:

I find barlowing the Vixen 2.4mm HR interesting too. I used my VIP so not exactly sure of the mag-I think it was 1.5x- and my TSA120 gave razor sharp views of the moon at a suspected 600x. It might have been more...

600x ? The TSA is hardly breaking a sweat 😀

[jetstream]

53 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

600x ? The TSA is hardly breaking a sweat 😀

I can hardly believe how good this scope is! Its got great transmission- shows Barnards Loop no filter and goes higher than I ever expected on lunar. I use a 2" Zeiss/Baader prism diagonal which this scope loves, no scatter.

[Sunshine]

1 hour ago, JeremyS said:

600x ? The TSA is hardly breaking a sweat 😀

If it weren't coming from Jeremy's mouth I would not believe this could be attainable from a 120, i would have to see it to fully comprehend that much power from a 120.

Edited January 29, 2021 by Sunshine

[jetstream]

13 minutes ago, Sunshine said:

If it weren't coming from Jeremy's mouth I would not believe this could be attainable from a 120, i would have to see it to fully comprehend that much power from a 120.

I guess I shouldn't mention how my 15" dob handles this combination...😀

These are my 2 best telescopes, but the 24" eclipses the 15" on DSO eventhough it only goes about 500x on the moon.

[JeremyS]

41 minutes ago, jetstream said:

I can hardly believe how good this scope is! Its got great transmission- shows Barnards Loop no filter and goes higher than I ever expected on lunar. I use a 2" Zeiss/Baader prism diagonal which this scope loves, no scatter.

Interesting Gerry. I love my TSA too. Have you compared the Zeiss/Baader prism to the 2-inch BBHS mirror diagonal?

Edited January 29, 2021 by JeremyS

[jetstream]

21 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

Interesting Gerry. I love my TSA too. Have you compared the Zeiss/Baader prism to the 2-inch BBHS mirror diagonal?

No I just have a Skywatcher mirror diag, but it is actually good. I did compare straight through to the Zeiss diag and could detect no difference to my eyes. Do you have the BBHS Jeremy? Rumors say it is very good. APO triplets seem to like the prism diag, my 90mm APO does as well but my SW120ED does not.

[JeremyS]

29 minutes ago, jetstream said:

No I just have a Skywatcher mirror diag, but it is actually good. I did compare straight through to the Zeiss diag and could detect no difference to my eyes. Do you have the BBHS Jeremy? Rumors say it is very good. APO triplets seem to like the prism diag, my 90mm APO does as well but my SW120ED does not.

Yes the BBHS is very nice. But I’ve not compared it to a prism. So it leaves me wondering 🤔. Expensive to try out tho 😊

[jetstream]

32 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

Yes the BBHS is very nice. But I’ve not compared it to a prism. So it leaves me wondering 🤔. Expensive to try out tho 😊

A very interesting thing about the prism... it kills DSO in the SW120ED, OK I can understand this- the doublet ED at f7.5 deal but what puzzles me is the effect on my nice Stellarvue 90mm APO flp53 triplet. It also dampens the DSO views, but lunar/planetary is great. The SW120ED really doesn't like the prism at all.

For an unknown reason it does not hinder the TSA120 in any way. I purchased this scope after researching spot size and also reports of it giving "cool" or neutral tones, which in my limited experience could mean true APO colour correction and or high transmission.

The TSA120 shows IFN and much much more with the prism- I live in dark skies of rural northern Ontario. Is the prism equal to or better than the BBHS? I have no idea. This prism was said to be old stock of Zeiss glass that Baader had years ago, its 5 years old or older.

Jeremy this prism has excellent glass but all scopes don't seem to like it, my TSA120 does.

[Deadlake]

16 hours ago, JeremyS said:

Yes the BBHS is very nice. But I’ve not compared it to a prism. So it leaves me wondering 🤔. Expensive to try out tho 😊

I have the Baader prism. Depending which review you read on CN the Baader BHSS or prism wins. From my understanding a prism diagonal actually introduces a small amount of chromatic shift. It cannot do any other as light entering a prism will disperse due to refraction. Ironically this trait can be used to correct some chromatic shift in other devices such as binoviewers. In real terms a prism cannot be as good as a pure mirror and will always be less efficient with light due to dispersion.

The prism may have a beneficial  affect on certain telescopes and introduce a chromatic shift on others. 

Would you need a good nights seeing to observe the chromatic shift or just different diagonals to try out?

I'm planning on getting the 2" BHSS for a new APO scope, due to the faster cool down and the ability to use with EP field stops > 33 mm prism version I have. The cost difference between the Baader 2" prism/BBHS is not that much.

I also know some dealers favour the BHSS for collimation of APO's.

Martin

Edited January 30, 2021 by Deadlake