Tak TOEs 👉 Jupiter 🥂

[JeremyS]

7 hours ago, Andrew_B said:

From what I remember Jeremy, extenders and flatteners are less fussy about which scope you pair them with, but reducers are best if they're matched for the particular scope they're going to be paired wit, while other combinations can perform noticeably worse.

I haven't been able to test it personally but I've seen it mentioned and I notice that on Astrograph they advise that the reducers they sell are designed to operate with specific telescopes and are not interchangeable unless another scope falls within the tolerances of that model. Takahashi have a multi-flattener that works with all current FS and FC models (and many older ones apparently), but the FS-60 has its own reducer and there's a separate one for the FC-76 and FC-100 models so presumably the focal ratio of the 60mm (f5.9) compared to the larger scopes (f7.4 and slower) is what makes the difference.

Yes, that’s right. Shown by the Tak compatibility chart:

 

[JeremyS]

Or here: https://www.takahashijapan.com/ct-products/prod_topics/products_ex.html

[Highburymark]

4 hours ago, JeremyS said:

Or here: https://www.takahashijapan.com/ct-products/prod_topics/products_ex.html

Very interesting - thanks Jeremy. Looks like the ED 1.5x is the most flexible of the extenders. 

[Andrew_B]

I wonder if that chart means the current FC models when it says that the best match is the Extender TOA 1.6x, or whether they just mean the pre-FS series scopes from the 80s.

On the system charts it always shows the Extender-Q 1.6x [TKA00595] as the best match (or the C2x), except for the FC-100DZ which has the Extender-Q 1.6x (50.8) [TKA36595] - also listed as being for the FSQ106ED.

Those system charts might be a bit confusing at first but once you're used to them, you realise how useful they are. No messing around trying to calculate backfocus distances to work out which adapters to use in different configurations; it's all right there on the chart.

Edited October 5, 2021 by Andrew_B

[Deadlake]

@Highburymark Did you get a 3.3 mm TOE, how does it compare with you other EP's?

Is my wallet going to regret asking??? 

[JeremyS]

1 minute ago, Deadlake said:

Is my wallet going to regret asking??? 

No. That happens when you invest in binoviewers.

🤣

[Deadlake]

2 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

No. That happens when you invest in binoviewers.

🤣

I've already had that wallet hit 😄. I'm awaiting a 2.6 GPC to be delivered but UPS has trouble with new address...

[Highburymark]

17 hours ago, Deadlake said:

@Highburymark Did you get a 3.3 mm TOE, how does it compare with you other EP's?

Is my wallet going to regret asking??? 

Yes - the 3.3 was the first one I bought a couple of years ago. Virtually all my praise for the TOE range is based on this eyepiece - though the 2.5 is just as good and I have the 4mm on order - but  a long wait ahead. FLO is saying 60-90 days.

[Deadlake]

1 hour ago, Highburymark said:

FLO is saying 60-90 days

I could argue a Christmas present then??? 😀 

[Highburymark]

35 minutes ago, Deadlake said:

I could argue a Christmas present then??? 😀 

Definitely - worth it for those Boxing Day views.

[Highburymark]

4mm TOE arrived last week. Had a couple of sessions on the Moon so far. Seems very nice - produces an icier view than the 3.3 I thought, but it takes time to see these eyepieces at their very best. Need to test them on different targets under excellent conditions to make them really sing. 
I wonder what their life expectancy will be? Will Takahashi keep them in production for many more years, as they have with the LE for example? Still feels like Vixen killed off the HR range too quickly. Perhaps that’s created enough space in the market for the TOEs to hang around for years to come?

 

[Stu]

Just now, Highburymark said:

4mm TOE arrived last week. Had a couple of sessions on the Moon so far. Seems very nice - produces an icier view than the 3.3 I thought, but it takes time to see these eyepieces at their very best. Need to test them on different targets under excellent conditions to make them really sing. 
I wonder what their life expectancy will be? Will Takahashi keep them in production for many more years, as they have with the LE for example? Still feels like Vixen killed off the HR range too quickly. Perhaps that’s created enough space in the market for the TOEs to hang around for years to come?

 

Very nice set Mark. How do you find the 2.5mm? I saw there was one available but I suspect my eyes wouldn’t like the small exit pupils except for doubles. May be tempted at some point, but will spend more time with the 4mm and 3.4mm HR, plus 2 to 4mm Nag Zoom first I think.

[Highburymark]

4 minutes ago, Stu said:

Very nice set Mark. How do you find the 2.5mm? I saw there was one available but I suspect my eyes wouldn’t like the small exit pupils except for doubles. May be tempted at some point, but will spend more time with the 4mm and 3.4mm HR, plus 2 to 4mm Nag Zoom first I think.

I’ve been surprised how often I’ve used it Stu, considering it gives 360x in the TSA120. Like the 3.3, it seems to boost magnification without diminishing the view. I’ve even had 360x on Jupiter on a couple of occasions, with the planet staying sharp and bright enough to justify the extra magnification. Obviously the scope has a large part to play in this, but the TOEs are the first planetary eyepieces to show me a modest but clear improvement in detail over Delites and XW. I think already you’ve seen hints of that with your 4mm TOE over the Nagler zoom - hopefully you’ll get a chance to see its full capabilities when seeing allows. 
 

 

[Stu]

Thanks @Highburymark

Interesting! Do you get floaters at that sort of exit pupil (0.33mm)? I think for doubles it would be good, just not sure about planetary with my eyes! Would be 0.4 in the LZOS so maybe manageable.

Yes, have seen improvements over the Nag Zooms when using both Vixen HR and TOE. Would be a good challenge to my OCD having a Vixen 3.4 in between the 2.5 and 4mm HR! 😱🤪🤣

 

[Highburymark]

5 hours ago, Stu said:

Thanks @Highburymark

Interesting! Do you get floaters at that sort of exit pupil (0.33mm)? I think for doubles it would be good, just not sure about planetary with my eyes! Would be 0.4 in the LZOS so maybe manageable.

Yes, have seen improvements over the Nag Zooms when using both Vixen HR and TOE. Would be a good challenge to my OCD having a Vixen 3.4 in between the 2.5 and 4mm HR! 😱🤪🤣

 

S*d the OCD. Far more authentic to have a diverse eyepiece collection. Floaters haven’t been a problem fortunately.

[Stu]

3 hours ago, Highburymark said:

S*d the OCD. Far more authentic to have a diverse eyepiece collection. Floaters haven’t been a problem fortunately.

Good then. Oops, my finger slipped. FLO now don’t have any stock of the 2.5mm left 😱😱🤪🤪🤣🤣

[Highburymark]

6 minutes ago, Stu said:

Good then. Oops, my finger slipped. FLO now don’t have any stock of the 2.5mm left 😱😱🤪🤪🤣🤣

Congrats!! 🥂🥂

[Deadlake]

On 20/10/2021 at 13:05, Highburymark said:

4mm TOE arrived last week. Had a couple of sessions on the Moon so far. Seems very nice - produces an icier view than the 3.3 I thought, but it takes time to see these eyepieces at their very best. Need to test them on different targets under excellent conditions to make them really sing. 
I wonder what their life expectancy will be? Will Takahashi keep them in production for many more years, as they have with the LE for example? Still feels like Vixen killed off the HR range too quickly. Perhaps that’s created enough space in the market for the TOEs to hang around for years to come?

 

Is the Q extender new? I’m trying to convince myself that I do not need a pillar for my az100 as the money would be better spent on a TOE 2.5 mm. I’ll wait for report from @Stu. I also feel the Q extender would make a big difference to all my EP’s so want one…

[Highburymark]

Yes - it’s the 1.5x ED rather than the Q, Martin. I bought it for a range of reasons, but in particular to use with a pair of lovely 25mm Zeiss OPMI microscope eyepieces for higher power solar/lunar/planetary binoviewing. They are special eyepieces, but require a long stack for many applications. 
Early signs are the Extender works nicely with the TV85 too. 
Out tonight with the TOEs on Jupiter, but seeing terrible. Hope others had better luck.

[Deadlake]

1 hour ago, Highburymark said:

Out tonight with the TOEs on Jupiter, but seeing terrible. Hope others had better luc

Unfortunately not, seeing was disappointing here as well, especially as bright blue sky at dusk..

[Stu]

Both seeing and transparency were poor here last night unfortunately.

[Deadlake]

On 22/10/2021 at 10:59, Stu said:

Both seeing and transparency were poor here last night unfortunately.

Was a disappointment.

[MetroiD]

On 20/10/2021 at 15:05, Highburymark said:

I wonder what their life expectancy will be? Will Takahashi keep them in production for many more years, as they have with the LE for example? Still feels like Vixen killed off the HR range too quickly. Perhaps that’s created enough space in the market for the TOEs to hang around for years to come?

This comment brings me to a question that's been on my mind for some time now... I sold my Nirvana 4mm to finance the purchase of a Takahashi LE 5mm - fortunately, I managed to track down a Tak pretty swiftly. However, I've always wondered how my LE would compare to the 4mm TOE - not least of all because I still haven't moved on my 5.5mm Meade 5000 UWA... One could say that viewing at such high magnification in my 12" flex dob won't be a regular occurrence -- but in all honesty, I did find much use for my 4mm UWAN eyepiece. Of course, ever since the Takahashi LE arrived, conditions for planetary observation have been subpar at best.

So - can anyone share their viewing experience in terms of comparing the TOE to the LE E/P lines, especially the LE 5mm vs TOE 4mm?

[Deadlake]

I have a LE 18.5 mm and the TOE 4 mm (plus a full set of Vixen HR's). So not quite want you want, but the stand out features of the TOE 4 mm is:

• Super sharp, sharper then the LE's I own.
• Comfortable to view
• As noted above, seems to have an icy colour to it.

Main point is it a goldilocks EP. For most nights in the UK when you cannot push pass a 4 mm EP it's the most rewarding EP to use and will give the most detail for planetary work. Hence it's worth the investment. My HR's stay in the box on these nights.

 
The only EP's I can compare with the TOE are the HR's, the LE's are just not as sharp or as pricey. 

 

Edited November 8, 2021 by Deadlake

[Highburymark]

12 hours ago, MetroiD said:

This comment brings me to a question that's been on my mind for some time now... I sold my Nirvana 4mm to finance the purchase of a Takahashi LE 5mm - fortunately, I managed to track down a Tak pretty swiftly. However, I've always wondered how my LE would compare to the 4mm TOE - not least of all because I still haven't moved on my 5.5mm Meade 5000 UWA... One could say that viewing at such high magnification in my 12" flex dob won't be a regular occurrence -- but in all honesty, I did find much use for my 4mm UWAN eyepiece. Of course, ever since the Takahashi LE arrived, conditions for planetary observation have been subpar at best.

So - can anyone share their viewing experience in terms of comparing the TOE to the LE E/P lines, especially the LE 5mm vs TOE 4mm?

I haven’t used the 5mm LE. But I think Jeremy has a set, so he might chime in. I see lots of positive reports about particular focal lengths within the LE line up - including the 5mm. But suspect the TOE range would represent a small step up in detail and sharpness. Haven’t seen much feedback from dob owners though as TOEs were mainly developed with refractors in mind, I believe