Toa 130 over Tsa120 wau effect or not?

[Fedele]

hi 
In your opinion, for visual purposes only, is it worth buying a TOA130 instead of a TSA120? the telescope will be mounted every time.
in other words, for those who have both, the difference between the two visually on planets and dso is definitely in favor of 130?
thank you

[mikeDnight]

I'd prefere the 120 TSA. My personal experience with various Tak's, I found there's a very noticeable jump from 4" to 5",  but not such a big jump from 5" to 6". I haven't used a TOA but I spent years using a FS128. As far as lunar and planetary observing goes, I genuinely doubt you'll notice very much of a difference given only a 10mm difference. When I moved from my FS128 to my FS152, I noticed little difference in the amount of detail seen. In other words, from my perspective, the increased aperture and mass of the scope, plus having to move from a GM8 to a G11just wasn't worth the extra effort. I did try an EQ6 but the 152 was hopelessly under mounted. I suspect a TOA130 would need a G11 to do it justice. 

FS128 on Losmandy GM8.

Undermounted FS152. Kind of sapped my joy because of its weight.

[dweller25]

I agree with Mike, there is a very noticeable improvement in my FS128 over the FC100DZ as the difference is 28%

The 10mm difference between the TSA and the TOA is just 8% and the TOA is very heavy - not sure it’s worth the extra expense for visual ?

Edited January 6, 2022 by dweller25

[Highburymark]

If money and weight are irrelevant, then get the TOA. Whether you’d see any improvement in views apart from the extra 10mm aperture, I’m not sure. I’ve only experienced the TSA-120 and it’s pretty much perfect to my eyes. I also wouldn’t want the considerable extra bulk of the TOA.  But if you think you’ll always hanker after it, then best make the decision now and go for the TOA.

[johnturley]

4 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

 When I moved from my FS128 to my FS152, I noticed little difference in the amount of detail seen. I

 

I notice a substantial difference in the amount of lunar and planetary detail visible, and the sharpness of the view, between my Esprit 150 Refractor and my Explore Scientific 127 FCD 100 Refractor, which I put down partly to the superiority of the Esprit lens (which according to Es Reid was one of the best he had tested), in addition to the extra 23 mm of aperture. 

John 

Edited January 6, 2022 by johnturley

[Stu]

4 minutes ago, johnturley said:

I notice a substantial difference in the amount of lunar and planetary detail visible, and the sharpness of the view, between my Esprit 150 Refractor and my Explore Scientific 127 FCD 100 Refractor, which I put down partly to the superiority of the Esprit lens in addition to the extra 23 mm of aperture. 

John 

Yes, I wasn’t blown away by an ES 127 I looked through some years back, so I’m sure optical quality comes into it as well.

I think if mounted permanently I would go for a TOA130. I opted for my LZOS 130mm f6 over the TOA130 because of the size and manageability. I have to setup each time and wanted something I would actually use.

[JeremyS]

Tak 120 vs 130. Tough decision. I had the same dilemma and went for the TSA as it’s lighter and I’d be setting up and taking down each night.

If you really are thinking about visual and planets, and you don’t seem too worried about weight, why not have a much larger step up and go for a mirror scope? You already have a Mu180, so what about a  Mu 250?

[Fedele]

mirrors are not annoptions. just tsa vs toa. 

[JeremyS]

29 minutes ago, Fedele said:

mirrors are not annoptions. just tsa vs toa. 

I am with you on that 😊

[Fedele]

hi friends and masters

Being able to afford both telescopes, I made my choice, thought through in detail according to my needs and requirements. it was not an easy choice
Unboxing tomorrow.

[JeremyS]

12 minutes ago, Fedele said:

hi friends and masters

Being able to afford both telescopes, I made my choice, thought through in detail according to my needs and requirements. it was not an easy choice
Unboxing tomorrow.

You were lucky to find one so quickly 👍🏻

[Deadlake]

On 06/01/2022 at 14:51, Stu said:

Yes, I wasn’t blown away by an ES 127 I looked through some years back, so I’m sure optical quality comes into it as well.

I think if mounted permanently I would go for a TOA130. I opted for my LZOS 130mm f6 over the TOA130 because of the size and manageability. I have to setup each time and wanted something I would actually use.

Me too. The LZOS has 220 mm of back focus making them very BV friendly and cool down is not much slower then my 4”. To be honest set up time compared to the 4” is only a couple of more minutes that I’ve not used the 4” in months.

BV last week on the moon was very rewarding.

[Robindonne]

After months of following Fedeles overthinking almost every scope model available, im very curious what he bought😍

[HollyHound]

I have a feeling that watching this thread is likely going to end up being potentially expensive for more than just @Fedele 🤔

Must keep repeating "a Mewlon 180 is more than enough..." 🤣

[dweller25]

3 hours ago, HollyHound said:

I have a feeling that watching this thread is likely going to end up being potentially expensive for more than just @Fedele 🤔

Must keep repeating "a Mewlon 180 is more than enough..." 🤣

Gary,

We have similar tastes, I have Pentax XW’s, Celestron Plossl’s, Classic and Fujiyama Ortho eyepieces, Vixen mounts, Berlebach tripods, an FC100DZ and a Mewlon 180C.

Oh and an FS128 😈 ………….. 

[Sunshine]

On 06/01/2022 at 14:00, JeremyS said:

I am with you on that 😊

Not at all surprised

[Sunshine]

The is is an interesting thread, though it seems to have stalled but regardless, in my future there surely is a larger refractor and I’ve often thought about the TSA120 vs TOA130. I really cannot see there being such a WOW factor going to a 130 especially considering the thing weighs a full seven pounds more, this is a lot.