Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_4.gif.6a323659519d12fc7cafc409440c9dbf.gif

Taks - worth the premium over other brands?


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, johninderby said:

Why does this thread remind me of this? 🤔😁😁😁

551CA557-8961-4810-BE8F-04370711E0A7.jpeg

Because everyone likes the minty fresh views through a Tak?

Taks always come up smelling of roses?

You’re not sure if you prefer the original cool minty green Tak livery or the new baby blue version?

Edited by JeremyS
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 176
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This is an interesting thread and a nice reflection on the nature of the SGL community - on a different astronomy forum, this discussion might have descended into acrimony and thread-locking within th

A bit harsh Michael. For a smartphone shot it’s pretty good, any CA is likely to be either atmospheric or from the phone. I don’t think anyone is arguing that Taks are miracle scopes. Other premi

Just to upset all you refractophiles……. My Skywatcher 10” Newtonian gave way better planetary views than my FS128 😱

Posted Images

2 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

Because everyone likes the minty fresh views through a Tak?

Taks always come up smelling of roses?

You’re not sure if you prefer the original cool minty green Tak livery or the new baby blue Tak livery?

Pepper mint or Spear mint! Whats your preference? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, mikeDnight said:

Pepper mint or Spear mint! Whats your preference? 

I don’t mind, Mike, as long as it delivers my daily requirement for fluorite 👍🏻

Edited by JeremyS
  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

I don’t mind, Mike, as long as it delivers my daily requirement for fluorite 👍🏻

Youre quick man, youre quick!

:thumbsup:😀

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

I don’t mind, Mike, as long as it delivers my daily requirement for fluorite 👍🏻

Hmmm... Fluorite... 💘💋💋💋💞

1331753507_2021-05-0416_21_25.png.68e8f475041de8f83069ccea77ee93fd.png

Edited by mikeDnight
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, John said:

I've owned a Tak and a TMB / LZOS for the past 5 years. They are very much in the same league IMHO

What has been a (pleasant) surprise is that my Skywatcher ED120 has not been significantly outclassed by either of them. Maybe my ED120 is a particularly good one ?

I have an ES ED127 triplet which was hand selected for me and subjected to a battery of tests by Teleskop Specializten in Munich (booklet full of tests still in my files).

It's a particularly well figured example and gives lovely sharp views, which are comparable to my FC-100, but it weighs about 2.5 times as much and is 952mm FL, so not grab and go like the FC-100. It's also almost as expensive these days. I do wonder whether each one off the production line would have this good a set of optics. But I'm planning on keeping mine 😎

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dweller25 said:

This thread is lasting longer than an APO v SCT argument on Cloudynights 🤪😱😂

You really want to know why I bought a 120mm Tak?

Because I've never heard of a 100mm Tak showing more than it from the Takophiles! :grin:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rusted said:

I am reminded of "high end" hifi rooms at electronics shows.
Where one can never hear the music. For raised voices arguing over subjective quality.

Or indeed arguing about whether or not there's a difference between cheap and expensive speaker cable when clearly the difference can be massive :smile:

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, jetstream said:

😲

but why would you want one?:dontknow:

:grin::grin:

I knew it,.....:evil:

To sell it for a huge profit of course 🙂.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see the Tak premium over other brands of the same league (Zeiss APQ, Nikon, Pentax, Astro Physics, TEC, APM-LZOS). Sometimes, Takahashi even asks rather moderate prices (FS-60, FC-76, the smaller Epsilons and Mewlons).

Juergen

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

. As regards the extortionate high price of a Tak, an FC100DF costs around £6 per day over the first year. As the years fly by the Tak price pales into insignificance. Tak are as cheap as chips when viewed as a lifetime investment. 

Mmm - proper "man logic" Mike - I used something similar with my partner when discussing the LZOS 130  I bought ;).  I wonder how that figure per day would work out when calculated as "cost per night of clear skies" from this misty island off the NW coast of Europe....  :).

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Talked to my wife today about buying a new Tak and she asked how much it was. I said about 5000 Euro and she said, too expensive... But then I said, I will have it for the rest of my life! Just calculate how much that would be per day!

Then she said, per day for the rest of your life? Me: Yes! Her: 5000 Euro!

Damn she is good at maths....

  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/05/2021 at 03:35, Peter Drew said:

I've not seen the Alpine Valley Rille in anything smaller than a 16",  a 4" anything is of no use to me other than a finder or occasional solar telescope.  It's my problem, not the telescope's.  "A man needs to know his limitations" (CE)     🙂

Here are a couple cellphone pictures I took of the Alpine Valley Rille with my 4" FC-100DF. Pardon the black-spot photobomb in the first image.. Cursed camera is flawed.

IMG_20210123_175145-2.thumb.jpeg.3109d5d81ecc02a273b45a6e2f77a66e.jpeg

1836369045_IMG_20210123_175141(1)22.thumb.jpeg.c852db2d25af7ca5eb97b3ad91a5d2a0.jpeg

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rkelley8493 said:

Here are a couple cellphone pictures I took of the Alpine Valley Rille with my 4" FC-100DF. Pardon the black-spot photobomb in the first image.. Cursed camera is flawed.

There is a saying in Danish: "Tak skal du have." Meaning: "You should have thanks."
Alternatively: You should have [a] Tak. It's no wonder the Danes are rated as the happiest nation. :grin:

  • Haha 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, dweller25 said:

This thread is lasting longer than an APO v SCT argument on Cloudynights 🤪😱😂

No, it's getting as long as: 

"How much strehl difference is actually detectable?" on CN

It's quite common I'm told by dealers if they sell a scope for 0.98 and it gets reported on CN they get a return because another scope they sold of the same model tests at 0.96. 

For instance Vixens usual test at 0.96 whereas Takahashi will be higher 0.97 ish. I'm sure the differences being reported are other lens metrics.

 

Edited by Deadlake
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, John said:

There are far graver things in this world currently to feel insecure about than telescopes for goodness sake :rolleyes2:

I knew that I'd regret posting in this thread again.

 

 

17 hours ago, johninderby said:

Why does this thread remind me of this? 🤔😁😁😁

551CA557-8961-4810-BE8F-04370711E0A7.jpeg

I am starting to regret creating this thread........

I'll get my coat 🙃

  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Deadlake said:

No, it's getting as long as: 

"How much strehl difference is actually detectable?" on CN

It's quite common I'm told by dealers if they sell a scope for 0.98 and it gets reported on CN they get a return because another scope they sold of the same model tests at 0.96. 

For instance Vixens usual test at 0.96 whereas Takahashi will be higher 0.97 ish. I'm sure the differences being reported are other lens metrics.

 

We probably all pay too much attention to figures and statistics we don't fully understand. I've haven't yet looked through a Vixen fluorite that wasn't in every way the equal of any Tak I've used. Even their older ED's were outstandingly good, and better than some top end brands costing thousands of £ more. I'm sure their more modern triplets are every bit as top class. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, rkelley8493 said:

Here are a couple cellphone pictures I took of the Alpine Valley Rille with my 4" FC-100DF. Pardon the black-spot photobomb in the first image.. Cursed camera is flawed.

IMG_20210123_175145-2.thumb.jpeg.3109d5d81ecc02a273b45a6e2f77a66e.jpeg

1836369045_IMG_20210123_175141(1)22.thumb.jpeg.c852db2d25af7ca5eb97b3ad91a5d2a0.jpeg

Excellent images for a 4" but they show the Alpine Valley, not the Rille which is a very fine feature running along its centre.  Unless of course my computer resolution or my eyesight still fail to show it!       🙂

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

They have no Lanthanum? Then let them have Fluorite!  :p

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 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.