Jump to content

740427863_Terminatorchallenge.jpg.2f4cb93182b2ce715fac5aa75b0503c8.jpg

Tak TOEs 👉 Jupiter 🥂


Recommended Posts

Another great night for the gas giants. I thought upgrading from a 100mm to 120mm refractor would mean using less powerful planetary eyepieces, not more. And yet again tonight it was clear that under decent skies, my two Tak TOE EPs (3.3mm and 2.5mm) are on a different level to anything else I’ve used for the Moon or planets.
Moving from 5mm XW and 4mm Delite - two evenly-matched EPs giving 180x and 225x - to 272x with the 3.3mm TOE, and the view clearly improves. The planets get slightly sharper, more detailed and more involving - an odd experience when you’re dialling up the power. Going up to the 2.5mm under steady conditions, no detail is lost on either planet at 360x - a considerably higher magnification than I was ever able to use with an 8” SCT. And they’re 52 degrees and as comfortable to use as a mid range plossl.
I have no experience with any of the hallowed Zeiss/TMB/XO planetaries. Neither have I tried the clearly outstanding Vixen HRs. But I cannot recommend the TOEs highly enough. They don’t get written about much on SGL, but deserve a wider audience, particularly among apo owners.


 

  • Like 16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a Tak TOE 4 mm and it gives me the best views of Jupiter when coupled with a LZOS 130 mm scope (Strehl 0.98 green wavelength). I also have all the Vixen HR’s, however on Jupiter I don’t get the same level of detail as the TOE and am tempted to get a TOE 3.3 mm to compare with the HR at some point. On the moon the HR’s do not disappoint.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Deadlake said:

I have a Tak TOE 4 mm and it gives me the best views of Jupiter when coupled with a LZOS 130 mm scope (Strehl 0.98 green wavelength). I also have all the Vixen HR’s, however on Jupiter I don’t get the same level of detail as the TOE and am tempted to get a TOE 3.3 mm to compare with the HR at some point. On the moon the HR’s do not disappoint.

That LZOS scope of yours is a seriously lovely thing.

I’m tempted to get the 4mm TOE and sell my 3mm and 4mm Delites. The only justification for keeping them is wider fov for lunar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect the TOE are better but more expensive then then HR’s. The HR’s are the only real competitors to the TOE’s, Tele Vue has never fielded a competitor to either EP IMHO.

Edited by Deadlake
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting report Mark :thumbright:

The seeing tonight was excellent and judging by the views I had with my 130mm F/9.2 LZOS, I'll need to buy all 3 TOE's :icon_biggrin:

I had to "slum it" with the XW 5mm and 3.5mm and the Nagler 2-4mm zoom tonight though :rolleyes2:

 

 

Edited by John
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Highburymark said:

Moving from 5mm XW and 4mm Delite - two evenly-matched EPs giving 180x and 225x - to 272x with the 3.3mm TOE, and the view clearly improves.

Totally agree and is my experience as well but with differing eyepieces.My Delos are sharp but there are sharper... it takes top optics and excellent seeing to bring out the differences IMHO.

Ps- what scope you using again?:grin:

Edited by jetstream
Top optic clarfication
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Deadlake said:

The HR’s are the only real competitors to the TOE’s

Lets put the TOE's up against my Zeiss zoom/VIP! :grin:

This zoom is a seriously good eyepiece for lunar/planetary with no Televue standing up to it so far.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jetstream said:

Totally agree and is my experience as well but with differing eyepieces.My Delos are sharp but there are sharper... it takes top optics and excellent seeing to bring out the differences IMHO.

Ps- what scope you using again?:grin:

It must be the TSA 120 !

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Deadlake said:

Do they come up in the secondhand market, not seen any?

Only seen them up once and not since, if I did I would be at the head of the line.

Thanks for the report Mark, sounds like I have been on the right track for some time, amazing how some eyepieces just deliver, I feel my Pentax XW’s do that but stopped at 5mm as they get so darn long.

 

Edited by Alan White
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great to hear your excellent experiences with the TSA and the TOEs @Highburymark 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
These scope can certainly handle high mags when seeing permits.

Woukd certainly be interesting to compare the Tak TOEs with the Vixen HRs. I have the latter but not tried a TOE yet

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, John said:

Interesting report Mark :thumbright:

The seeing tonight was excellent and judging by the views I had with my 130mm F/9.2 LZOS, I'll need to buy all 3 TOE's :icon_biggrin:

I had to "slum it" with the XW 5mm and 3.5mm and the Nagler 2-4mm zoom tonight though :rolleyes2:

 

 

Would be interested in your views if you ever get the chance to test one John. 
 

7 hours ago, Voyager 3 said:

It must be the TSA 120 !

Yes, was using TSA-120.
 

Someone, somewhere should line up the HRs and TOEs against the best orthoscopics and see how they compare. Would make a nice feature for one of the astro mags.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have much experience with different eyepieces but I very much prefer the Tak TOE's over Vixen SLV's and the 3-6 Nagler Zoom; both for the sharp contrasty views and for ease of viewing.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Highburymark said:

Would be interested in your views if you ever get the chance to test one John. 
 

Yes, was using TSA-120.
 

Someone, somewhere should line up the HRs and TOEs against the best orthoscopics and see how they compare. Would make a nice feature for one of the astro mags.

Well my Fujiyama orthos and, especially, my Pentax XP 3.8 are right up there, but they are nothing like as comfortable to use as the HRs, Nags etc.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Deadlake said:

 Send it over for a comparison, my LZOS is to heavy to ship… 😃

I'm kinda liking the idea of you sending me your scope!:grin:

Maybe the f6 is showing preferences in eyepieces itself? Most fracs that use the TOE's and Vixens are F7 and up, just a thought. My Zeiss zoom is like this- the center FOV will be top sharp at f4.8 but the edges are compromised. At f7.5 it is fantastic cross the FOV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, JeremyS said:

Woukd certainly be interesting to compare the Tak TOEs with the Vixen HRs.

A buddy did using a 100mm Tak but liked the HRs better IIRC. Many used to say the Leica zoom competes with ZAOII- it is a great eyepiece, warmer than the Zeiss but under the best of conditions not quite as sharp as the Zeiss 25.1-6.7mm zoom IMHO.

To me, any meaningful conclusion to the TOE vs HR would result from many experienced observers, using top refractors under ideal conditions- and over time. Of course this must be straight through as our Japanese astro brothers do...

The diagonal is just too big a variable no matter how good it is.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, jetstream said:

The diagonal is just too big a variable no matter how good it is.

I've noticed the LZOS is giving more detail on Jupiter using a mirror over a prism diagonal.
I'm going to order a BBHS T2 for BV use and then I can do a better comparison, no T2 click locks anywhere.
Viewing was over around 3-4 nights, with seeing ranging between good to medium.
To be honest this could be related to the diagonal as the HR in the SD103S using the BBHS prism diagonal is showing the same level of detail (to close to call or really make a difference you would be very happy with either) as the TOE.
So many variables to work thru....
 

Edited by Deadlake
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Deadlake said:

I've noticed the LZOS is giving more detail on Jupiter using a mirror over a prism diagonal.
I'm going to order a BBHS T2 for BV use and then I can do a better comparison, no T2 click locks anywhere.
Viewing was over around 3-4 nights, with seeing ranging between good to medium.
To be honest this could be related to the diagonal as the HR in the SD103S using the BBHS prism diagonal is showing the same detail as the TOE.
So many variables to work thru....
 

Seriously, try observing straight through- I do comparisons like this even if the conclusion is the diag makes no difference. Sometimes it does though...

My Zeiss prism would send the SW120ED into fits- a mirror diag straightened it right out - after confirming the scope was vg straight through...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've compared a Baader T2 Zeiss diagonal with an Astro Physics Maxbright in my F/9.2 LZOS 130 a few times on a variety of targets but I have not seen any tangible differences.

Off the original topic though so apologies to the OP.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jetstream said:

f6 and prisms can be a challenge IMHO, no matter how good the glass.

Good point Gerry. I found the Zeiss prism better than BBHS diagonal in the Tak @ f7.4 but it may be a different story at f6. Will give it a try.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Stu said:

I found the Zeiss prism better than BBHS diagonal in the Tak @ f7.4 but it may be a different story at f6. Will give it a try.

Interested in your result.
I've ordered a BBHS T2 mirror diagonal for BV usage. Given the result of the 2" mirror diagonal I have interested if you can confirm the same result, the T2 BBHS prism made my Vixen into a totally different scope. 
Also, have you managed to find your HR 3.6 mm yet? Amazing what you find when re-organising the garage after moving in a month ago... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My observing eye is clearly not as acute as some here. I've compared my T2 BBHS prism with my AP and TV diagonals quite often and I just can't see any differences in performance in any of my refractors :rolleyes2:

Probably not much point in me trying a TOE - I probably won't see any differences over my current high power eyepieces !

I struggled to see much difference between a TMB Supermonocentric 5mm and a University Optics HD 5mm ortho when I had those in my eyepiece case. Only perhaps on the nights of very best seeing and then the differences were very subtle indeed.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
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
 Share

  • 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.