Taks - worth the premium over other brands?

[Earl]

On 25/04/2021 at 10:18, Jonny_H said:

Hi all,

As above - I am curious to get views on Taks and whether the additional premium over other brands that are highly regarded is 'worth it'.

Appreciate that it is up to the buyer as to what they spend their money on - as with most premium/quality products, and for them to judge whether they are worth the premium or not.

But take the FSQ-85 for example at circa £3.5k+ once accessories have been added. For 1/2 the price you can get a very well respected esprit 100ed. I know that's not a true 1-2-1 comparison but the point being you can get a very good quality and highly regarded triplet, larger aperture and focal length scope at 1/2 the price. The Esprit 80ed is almost 3 times less.

I just wondered if the extra cost of the Tak in the example above gives you twice the quality and performance?

THe  FSQ-85 is a killer imaging telescope and designed as such, the esprint is a very good telescope but not as good. is it worth the extra money? Debatable, the size of your wallet or how much of it you wish to use makes that decision.

[Rusted]

1 hour ago, johninderby said:

Or for a really cheap Takahashi 😁

https://www.etsy.com/uk/market/takahashi_teapot

£41 quid? Are you made of money?

I got mine from a [posh] charity shop.

[kirkster501]

Only the individual concerned can decide if it's worth the premium.  What is worth it to me may not be to you.  It applies to anything; cars, houses, holidays, clothes, bathroom taps....  That's why we have choice.  You alone must decide if it is worth paying the premium to have a higher end product.

[Ken82]

3 hours ago, Earl said:

THe  FSQ-85 is a killer imaging telescope and designed as such, the esprint is a very good telescope but not as good. is it worth the extra money? Debatable, the size of your wallet or how much of it you wish to use makes that decision.

The fsq 85 is a super scope but really needs the additional flattener for aps-c sensors and above. A bit disappointing when you consider it’s supposed to have a 42mm imaging circle. Kind of defeats the purpose of using a petzval ?? With the flattener it’s awesome, I have one 😀

But pound for pound the 100 esprit is probably the better option. That being said, time to contradict myself,  I’d still buy the fsq 85. Just cause I love it ! 
 

Ken 
 

 

[Ken82]

In terms of the FSQ 106 (If you get a good focuser 🤪) I’d say there’s no other scope for this price point that will be as flat across a 43mm diagonal 3.75u pixel camera (asi 6200mm) 

 

 

[vlaiv]

6 minutes ago, Ken82 said:

In terms of the FSQ 106 (If you get a good focuser 🤪) I’d say there’s no other scope for this price point that will be as flat across a 43mm diagonal 3.75u pixel camera (asi 6200mm) 

https://www.orionoptics.co.uk/ODK/odk12.html

for example

Cheaper and larger flat field

[Stu]

9 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

https://www.orionoptics.co.uk/ODK/odk12.html

for example

Cheaper and larger flat field

Is there such a term as ‘size point’? 🤪🤪

[Ken82]

7 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

https://www.orionoptics.co.uk/ODK/odk12.html

for example

Cheaper and larger flat field

Ah yes I should add widefield! 

3.89° x 2.59°

 

[Ken82]

Also flat field is 52mm ? Fsq has imaging circle of 88mm. 
 

Nice galaxy scope no doubt but honestly I’d really like to see some raw images with a 43mm sensor before passing judgment. 

[Chris]

My word, I've just noticed these appear on FLO's site! it looks like Takahashi have thrown the budget conscious a bone  Plus it comes with two nice Ortho's I notice. What a classy looking grab n go setup, I think I want one!

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/scopetech-telescopes/starbase-80-refractor-and-mount-package.html 

EDIT: Well it's made in Japan and has the livery even if it's not strictly a Tak. 

Edited May 6, 2021 by Chris

[Earl]

18 hours ago, Ken82 said:

The fsq 85 is a super scope but really needs the additional flattener for aps-c sensors and above. A bit disappointing when you consider it’s supposed to have a 42mm imaging circle. Kind of defeats the purpose of using a petzval ?? With the flattener it’s awesome, I have one 😀

But pound for pound the 100 esprit is probably the better option. That being said, time to contradict myself,  I’d still buy the fsq 85. Just cause I love it ! 
 

Ken 
 

 

Yeah i did too and a 106 (both with flatteners) which was better once i replaced the focuser.

[Rusted]

2 hours ago, Chris said:

My word, I've just noticed these appear on FLO's site! it looks like Takahashi have thrown the budget conscious a bone  Plus it comes with two nice Ortho's I notice. What a classy looking grab n go setup, I think I want one!

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/scopetech-telescopes/starbase-80-refractor-and-mount-package.html 

EDIT: Well it's made in Japan and has the livery even if it's not strictly a Tak. 

Ahah! Does this mean all those with genuine Taks can now afford to upgrade their focusers?

[jock1958]

1 hour ago, Chris said:

My word, I've just noticed these appear on FLO's site! it looks like Takahashi have thrown the budget conscious a bone  Plus it comes with two nice Ortho's I notice. What a classy looking grab n go setup, I think I want one!

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/scopetech-telescopes/starbase-80-refractor-and-mount-package.html 

EDIT: Well it's made in Japan and has the livery even if it's not strictly a Tak. 

Hi Chris, noticed this on an American website 18 months or so ago and was wondering when and if @FLO would add it to their site, it certainly looks the part and maybe an ideal starter package for someone 🤔

 

 

[ollypenrice]

20 hours ago, Ken82 said:

The fsq 85 is a super scope but really needs the additional flattener for aps-c sensors and above. A bit disappointing when you consider it’s supposed to have a 42mm imaging circle. Kind of defeats the purpose of using a petzval ?? With the flattener it’s awesome, I have one 😀

But pound for pound the 100 esprit is probably the better option. That being said, time to contradict myself,  I’d still buy the fsq 85. Just cause I love it ! 
 

Ken 
 

 

Surely not for APSc? For more than that, yes. I know people using APSc with the Baby Q. And do you mean flattener or reducer? I had a reducer but not a flattener for mine.

Olly

 

[ollypenrice]

1 hour ago, Earl said:

Yeah i did too and a 106 (both with flatteners) which was better once i replaced the focuser.

Again, flatteners for the FSQs? I only know of reducers. (My own FSQ106 is an early fluorite so I can't use the reducer.) Unlike the Baby Q it easily covers 35mm. A friend uses his with the 35x35 Kodak chip.

Olly

Edited May 6, 2021 by ollypenrice

[ollypenrice]

32 minutes ago, Rusted said:

Ahah! Does this mean all those with genuine Taks can now afford to upgrade their focusers?

I upgraded mine for about sixpence...

lly

[Earl]

14 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

Again, flatteners for the FSQs? I only know of reducers. (My own FSQ106 is an early fluorite so I can't use the reducer.) Unlike the Baby Q it easily covers 35mm. A friend uses his with the 35x35 Kodak chip.

Olly

yeah reducer my bad

[Earl]

10 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

I upgraded mine for about sixpence...

lly

thankfully the  far more focus stable version  drift on mine was bad over the session.

[Rusted]

36 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

I upgraded mine for about sixpence...

lly

Cheapskate! A nice bit of stainless steel studding wouldn't have broken your piggy bank.

[ollypenrice]

1 hour ago, Earl said:

thankfully the  far more focus stable version  drift on mine was bad over the session.

Yes, it is has more vignetting but less focus drift then the ED versions.

Olly

[Chris]

1 hour ago, jock1958 said:

Hi Chris, noticed this on an American website 18 months or so ago and was wondering when and if @FLO would add it to their site, it certainly looks the part and maybe an ideal starter package for someone 🤔

 

Hi Jock, good spot! I was rather pleased to see FLO adding this to their site too  Even though the Starbase 80 is contracted out rather than made by Takahashi themselves, the quote below from Takahashi America shows that the Starbase 80 is intended to get people into the Tak ecosystem. Therefore it makes sense that the Starbase 80 would need to be decently put together, with nicely figured and mounted optics etc in order to achieve that goal. I also don't think they would throw Ortho's at bad optics 😃  

The Starbase 80 is not manufactured or designed by Takahashi Japan.  It is made for them under contract by an optics company in Japan.  It is sold in Japan through Takahashi's company-owned telescope store, Starbase.  

 

In conjunction with Takahashi Japan, Takahashi America introduced this telescope at NEAF this past April.  It is Takahashi's goal to introduce beginning astronomers to Japanese quality optics, with the hope that one day they may become Takahashi customers.  Takahashi prides itself on being 100% Japanese made, and is continuing that tradition with the Starbase 80.

 

Thanks for your interest!

Takahashi America

   

[jock1958]

1 hour ago, ollypenrice said:

I upgraded mine for about sixpence...

lly

Like it Olly never seen anything like that, you’ve got me hooked...I assume by pushing or pulling on the black knob you get incremental small movements on focuser or am I totally wrong?? 🤔

[IB20]

10 hours ago, Chris said:

My word, I've just noticed these appear on FLO's site! it looks like Takahashi have thrown the budget conscious a bone  Plus it comes with two nice Ortho's I notice. What a classy looking grab n go setup, I think I want one!

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/scopetech-telescopes/starbase-80-refractor-and-mount-package.html 

EDIT: Well it's made in Japan and has the livery even if it's not strictly a Tak. 

I've been looking at refractor set-ups for about 4 weeks, I've flip flopped between 102mm and 80mms and more recently decided that 80mm was what I wanted. Then it was short faster APO vs slower achro but the budget just kept going up and up for diagonals and mounts. This is exactly what I have been looking for! Such weirdly perfect timing and looks the absolute business. Cheers for the heads up!

[kirkster501]

I am using APS-C for my BabyQ (85).  THis was with no flattener and the scope at native FL.  2013 FSQ build.

 

 

[Ken82]

6 minutes ago, kirkster501 said:

I am using APS-C for my BabyQ (85).  THis was with no flattener and the scope at native FL.  2013 FSQ build.

 

 

Lovely image ! Yea I wouldn’t want to use a sensor any larger than aps-c without the additional flattener. 
 

But your image proves aps-c is a good combination. 
 

interesting at the very edge of your image I can see stars starting to have tangential astigmatism whereas mine has sagittal astigmatism. 
 

Ken 

But 42mm imaging circle nah maybe vignetting wise.