Takahshi FC100DF

[ukskies]

5 hours ago, jock1958 said:

Congratulations @ukskies on your purchase, I'm sure you will be very, very pleased with it!!  

I plumped for the FC-100DL and absolutely love it, the only thing I've added is a Starlight Instruments Feather Touch Pinion Focuser as the standard Tak focuser whilst good didn't provide that extra micro tweak I need, also its beautifully engineered, easy to fit and IMO compliments the original Tak focuser housing, on the downside is the cost!  

More Blue do a FT focuser similar to the MEF-3 and used to be cheaper? I've fitted one to my Tak FS-60Q and am very happy with it, there's a thread I started last year all about it.

Further to this I had my Tak for over a year before I added that FT focuser, others have commented that they find the stock focuser entirely adequate and you might have same thoughts after you have some time with it.

hi and thanks for your helpful post. Your post poses a question:

Aren't FC100's beautiful, your DL looks gorgeous doesn't it and I do like the look of that Starlight Instruments focuser on it too.

[jock1958]

3 hours ago, ukskies said:

hi and thanks for your helpful post. Your post poses a question:

Aren't FC100's beautiful, your DL looks gorgeous doesn't it and I do like the look of that Starlight Instruments focuser on it too.

Thanks, yes my DL is a superb scope and you’ve probably guessed I’ve had absolutely no regrets in buying it! 

Before I replaced the original focuser I spent ages researching suitable alternatives and for me the Starlight FT focuser ticked all the boxes, it’s an expensive upgrade but well worth it in my opinion! 
Whatever you decide enjoy 😉 
 

[ukskies]

12 hours ago, jock1958 said:

Thanks, yes my DL is a superb scope and you’ve probably guessed I’ve had absolutely no regrets in buying it! 

Before I replaced the original focuser I spent ages researching suitable alternatives and for me the Starlight FT focuser ticked all the boxes, it’s an expensive upgrade but well worth it in my opinion! 
Whatever you decide enjoy 😉 
 

Yes from owners comments the DLs are all highly regarded and I imagine due to the limited numbers produced and them being no longer available they could even become a future classic.

My wish was to get a DZ but I'd waited from April and recently I was driving home every clear evening watching the solar system spectacular thro the van windscreen I finally cracked and ordered the DF with FLO still showing 60-90 days on the DZs.. 

On the very day the DF was delivered FLO showed stock of 2 DZs, honestly you couldn't make it up!🤦‍♂️

[HollyHound]

11 minutes ago, ukskies said:

On the very day the DF was delivered FLO showed stock of 2 DZs, honestly you couldn't make it up!🤦‍♂️

As I've said before, the real world difference optically between these two is quite minimal (in normal skies)... however, I'm sure that if you wanted to, FLO would happily let you return/exchange 🤔I notice the DZ has jumped up in price dramatically though 😮

But again... you will be superbly happy with the DF I'm sure 😁

[ukskies]

5 minutes ago, HollyHound said:

As I've said before, the real world difference optically between these two is quite minimal (in normal skies)... however, I'm sure that if you wanted to, FLO would happily let you return/exchange 🤔I notice the DZ has jumped up in price dramatically though 😮

But again... you will be superbly happy with the DF I'm sure 😁

Yes Gary I agree I could still get a DZ if I wanted to however as the DF came from RVO it's not a straightforward swap.

Bearing in mind I haven't even looked through the DF yet plus it's beautiful it's here and it's 700 pounds less than the DZ I'm not planning to swap it yet.😉

 

[HollyHound]

11 minutes ago, ukskies said:

Yes Gary I agree I could still get a DZ if I wanted to however as the DF came from RVO it's not a straightforward swap.

Bearing in mind I haven't even looked through the DF yet plus it's beautiful it's here and it's 700 pounds less than the DZ I'm not planning to swap it yet.😉

 

I'd say that's an excellent move... you don't be disappointed for sure 😁

I'd also say, that I'm not sure I'd pay the current retail for the DZ over and above the DC/DF either, no matter how much I love mine 🤔

Enjoy it, have a great Christmas and hopefully some clear skies over the festive break 🤞

[johnturley]

20 minutes ago, HollyHound said:

I'd say that's an excellent move... you don't be disappointed for sure 😁

I'd also say, that I'm not sure I'd pay the current retail for the DZ over and above the DC/DF either, no matter how much I love mine 🤔

Enjoy it, have a great Christmas and hopefully some clear skies over the festive break 🤞

I had some thoughts of getting a 100 DZ as a potable instrument possibly to take on holidays to Tenerife, and possibly to the 2024 Mexico Total Solar Eclipse.

If there is no discernable difference in performance, maybe the cheaper DF (which I understand is also more readily available) would be a better option with its shorter tube length, which could make the difference regarding what you are allowed in cabin luggage. Takahashi claim that the 100 DZ on be easily carried on most commercial flights, but someone advised me that this is NOT in fact the case.

[HollyHound]

2 minutes ago, johnturley said:

I had some thoughts of getting a 100 DZ as a potable instrument possibly to take on holidays to Tenerife, and possibly to the 2024 Mexico Total Solar Eclipse.

If there is no discernable difference in performance, maybe the cheaper DF (which I understand is also more readily available) would be a better option with its shorter tube length, which could make the difference regarding what you are allowed in cabin luggage. Takahashi claim that the 100 DZ on be easily carried on most commercial flights, but someone advised me that this is NOT in fact the case.

I think I should clarify... on paper, the DZ is optically superior to the DC/DF and DL... however, my own experience is that there is little (to no) discernible difference in my skies. That is not to say that if we get an exceptionally good night of seeing, or it's taken to somewhere where the seeing is exceptional, that it wouldn't out perform those other scopes. Just that for "most" nights in the UK, I'm not sure it gives much extra optically... other more experienced observers, who've had both, might agree or not 🤔

For a reviewers perspective, this might also help... http://www.scopeviews.co.uk/TakFC-100DZ.htm

I note in this review, that Roger does mention it's more portable than the other FC-100s, but it is still quite heavy... the sliding dewshield would help though 👍

Certainly can't go wrong with either, but the question of whether to spend the additional for the DZ will arise... I was fortunate to get mine used in superb condition... in fact mine is the exact same scope that Roger reviewed on that site 😁

[ukskies]

Well just after lunch I decided to get the new DF mounted and balanced. As it was raining I thought I'd build it in our lower hall.

[JeremyS]

12 minutes ago, ukskies said:

Well just after lunch I decided to get the new DF mounted and balanced. As it was raining I thought I'd build it in our lower hall.

Looking good 👍🏻 

[Stu]

18 hours ago, johnturley said:

Takahashi claim that the 100 DZ on be easily carried on most commercial flights, but someone advised me that this is NOT in fact the case.

I’m not sure I would say any of them are ‘easy’ but the FC100DC is certainly doable by removing the dew shield and focuser. From reading Roger Vine’s review it looks like the DZ, whilst heavier, just needs the focuser removing to get to 540mm.

[ukskies]

Once it was set up I thought a quick peek through it was in order as I had unkowingly lined it up with the porch window.😆

I was looking through a closed double glazed window so didn't expect much and the Baader zoom gives 92.5x on the 8mm setting.

It was very dull and raining out but there are trees visible between houses opp ours and they are about 60 yds distant. I found the focus point and the detail visible on the branches was astonishing. Detail in little mould spots and bark was just breathtaking. I elevated the scope to highlight the branches against the sky but could see no false colour at all.

I then felt I should try more power so fitted the 2.25 dedicated barlow to the zoom and rigged it up with the 1.25" adapter giving 208x but still I could not see any halo to the branches. The view was much darker and looked maybe a little soft but I was amazed at it given the closed window so I put the scope away again hoping for a first light this evening which according to the local forecast looked a possibility.

about 7pm I had the mount and tripod in the back garden and the skies cleared so I quickly grabbed the scope and started viewing. Jupiter was starting it's descent to the horizon but was still quite high so what a start for the DF. Now in a twist of fate I had mislaid my extension reel and couldn't power the mount without it but determination had set in so I had to view Dob style. I also didn't fit the finder for this first test run in case the scope needs to be returned so even locating the target in the zoom at 24mm (30x) was a bit tricky.

Jupiter looked lovely, a bit bright and washed out but the 2 main belts were immediately obvious even tho the image looked tiny. I zoomed to the 8mm setting and tho still a bit bright and washed out more detail was evident. The Galilean moons were bright points of light and I was beginning to make out little bits of detail in the equatorial belts too. I reached for the barlow and zoomed back out. after locating the planet again I played for a while on different zoom settings adjusting the focus a lot and the image was larger but no more detail was evident. There were hints of detail in the belts but as the seeing seemed a bit variable the detail wasn't visible for more than a fraction of a second, then it was gone. About 150x  was the sweet spot I would say.

Mars was gaining altitude all this time and was next up. No barlow ,locate Mars and gradually inceased power to 92.5x was the order of play and Immediately it appeared that I was able to make out some darker shading on the surface. I stuck the barlow in and over about 150x the shading faded so I sat a while on about 140x trying to decide if it was surface markings I was seeing or not.

I now turned to Polaris for a star test with the barlow still in it took a few minutes to locate the target but once found I tightened the clutches and zooed to full.

This is when I knew something was wrong! I defocused the star and the fresnel rings inside and outside of focus were identical and I do mean identical so obviously there was something wrong here, it never looks like this!. Now I wouldn't consider myself an expert at star testing but I have done a fair few over the years and I know what it should look like but this was just so perfect, like the page out of Suiters book perfect. The outer ring was brighter but the same brightness both sides of focus I had eight inner rings and they were all evenly spaced and perfectly round too. 

I was amazed tbh at this and as a few spots of rain hit me I decided to get the scope back indoors sharpish. In all I managed over two hours with it and I know Taks are good but heck!! In focus the airy disc looked beautiful but there appeared to be two diffraction rings around it and they were not complete but appeared broken, I imagine the seeing was causing this. I also noticed a purple halo around both Jupiter and Mars and couldn't explain this.

Anyway everyone that is my first light report.

Edited December 24, 2022 by ukskies

[ukskies]

58 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

Looking good 👍🏻 

Thanks Jeremy the tripod is too light I think, vibration damping is way too slow and i tap on one leg takes over 5 secs to stabilize. It does look good on the SP tho.😀

Edited December 24, 2022 by ukskies

[Franklin]

14 minutes ago, ukskies said:

Now I wouldn't consider myself an expert at star testing but I have done a fair few over the years and I know what it should look like but this was just so perfect, like the page out of Suiters book perfect.

You've got a Takahashi now, they are perfect, it's like looking through the best scope you've ever looked through but in HD.

[Franklin]

Although I am a Vixen man myself (Vixen being a poor mans Takahashi and I am a poor man) I have had the pleasure of owning and observing with a couple of Taks. I will never forget the first time I looked through that FS-78, white light solar with a Lunt wedge, I was lost for words. The only way I could describe it, is that the view just exploded with detail, quite amazing. The FC100DC was simply superb, everything I pointed that scope at looked etched, outstanding! I'd love to have a session with a DL at F/9. 

[MalcolmM]

9 hours ago, ukskies said:

Once it was set up I thought a quick peek through it was in order as I had unkowingly lined it up with the porch window.😆

I was looking through a closed double glazed window so didn't expect much and the Baader zoom gives 92.5x on the 8mm setting.

It was very dull and raining out but there are trees visible between houses opp ours and they are about 60 yds distant. I found the focus point and the detail visible on the branches was astonishing. Detail in little mould spots and bark was just breathtaking. I elevated the scope to highlight the branches against the sky but could see no false colour at all.

I then felt I should try more power so fitted the 2.25 dedicated barlow to the zoom and rigged it up with the 1.25" adapter giving 208x but still I could not see any halo to the branches. The view was much darker and looked maybe a little soft but I was amazed at it given the closed window so I put the scope away again hoping for a first light this evening which according to the local forecast looked a possibility.

about 7pm I had the mount and tripod in the back garden and the skies cleared so I quickly grabbed the scope and started viewing. Jupiter was starting it's descent to the horizon but was still quite high so what a start for the DF. Now in a twist of fate I had mislaid my extension reel and couldn't power the mount without it but determination had set in so I had to view Dob style. I also didn't fit the finder for this first test run in case the scope needs to be returned so even locating the target in the zoom at 24mm (30x) was a bit tricky.

Jupiter looked lovely, a bit bright and washed out but the 2 main belts were immediately obvious even tho the image looked tiny. I zoomed to the 8mm setting and tho still a bit bright and washed out more detail was evident. The Galilean moons were bright points of light and I was beginning to make out little bits of detail in the equatorial belts too. I reached for the barlow and zoomed back out. after locating the planet again I played for a while on different zoom settings adjusting the focus a lot and the image was larger but no more detail was evident. There were hints of detail in the belts but as the seeing seemed a bit variable the detail wasn't visible for more than a fraction of a second, then it was gone. About 150x  was the sweet spot I would say.

Mars was gaining altitude all this time and was next up. No barlow ,locate Mars and gradually inceased power to 92.5x was the order of play and Immediately it appeared that I was able to make out some darker shading on the surface. I stuck the barlow in and over about 150x the shading faded so I sat a while on about 140x trying to decide if it was surface markings I was seeing or not.

I now turned to Polaris for a star test with the barlow still in it took a few minutes to locate the target but once found I tightened the clutches and zooed to full.

This is when I knew something was wrong! I defocused the star and the fresnel rings inside and outside of focus were identical and I do mean identical so obviously there was something wrong here, it never looks like this!. Now I wouldn't consider myself an expert at star testing but I have done a fair few over the years and I know what it should look like but this was just so perfect, like the page out of Suiters book perfect. The outer ring was brighter but the same brightness both sides of focus I had eight inner rings and they were all evenly spaced and perfectly round too. 

I was amazed tbh at this and as a few spots of rain hit me I decided to get the scope back indoors sharpish. In all I managed over two hours with it and I know Taks are good but heck!! In focus the airy disc looked beautiful but there appeared to be two diffraction rings around it and they were not complete but appeared broken, I imagine the seeing was causing this. I also noticed a purple halo around both Jupiter and Mars and couldn't explain this.

Anyway everyone that is my first light report.

Great report; really enjoyed reading it. Love the enthusiasm a Tak brings out 

Call me deranged but there is 'something' about a Tak ... they have a personality 

Malcolm 

[ukskies]

5 hours ago, MalcolmM said:

Great report; really enjoyed reading it. Love the enthusiasm a Tak brings out 

Call me deranged but there is 'something' about a Tak ... they have a personality 

Malcolm 

I don't think you are deranged at all Malcolm unless we all are. 🤔

[Nakedgun]

14 hours ago, ukskies said:

Thanks Jeremy the tripod is too light I think, vibration damping is way too slow and i tap on one leg takes over 5 secs to stabilize. It does look good on the SP tho.😀

~

Is that the Report tripod? In the photo it appears a bit overmatched by the load, but that could be the impression given by the angle of view. Perhaps try a set of vibration suppression pads?

 

 

.

[ukskies]

 

11 minutes ago, Nakedgun said:

~

Is that the Report tripod? In the photo it appears a bit overmatched by the load, but that could be the impression given by the angle of view. Perhaps try a set of vibration suppression pads?

 

 

.

Yes it is a Report 112 modded for EQ5/Vixen. I had my suspicions it wouldn't quite be up to the job before I tried it.

[mikeDnight]

On 23/12/2022 at 11:54, ukskies said:

On the very day the DF was delivered FLO showed stock of 2 DZs, honestly you couldn't make it up!🤦‍♂️

 Don't let it trouble you too much. I bought a DC in March 2015, which is optically identical to the DF, and it rapidly became my most used scope. In fact the darn thing nearly wore me out. Together we had five years of non-stop awesome adventures. Then in April 2020 I recieved my DZ. It too is a superb scope, but with hand on heart, in real terms it is no better than the DC. The differences are so miniscule its not worth losing sleep over, so never imagine you have a poor cousin. As far as I'm aware, all Takahashi lenses are produced by Cannon Optron, and are truly world class. Takahashi themselves are just an engineering company, and though very well engineered, they are set in time. Personally I love their look as they stand out from the rest for good or bad.

[ukskies]

9 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

 Don't let it trouble you too much. I bought a DC in March 2015, which is optically identical to the DF, and it rapidly became my most used scope. In fact the darn thing nearly wore me out. Together we had five years of non-stop awesome adventures. Then in April 2020 I recieved my DZ. It too is a superb scope, but with hand on heart, in real terms it is no better than the DC. The differences are so miniscule its not worth losing sleep over, so never imagine you have a poor cousin. As far as I'm aware, all Takahashi lenses are produced by Cannon Optron, and are truly world class. Takahashi themselves are just an engineering company, and though very well engineered, they are set in time. Personally I love their look as they stand out from the rest for good or bad.

Thanks Mike, I'm not too worried tbh and yes I love the way they look too plus they are beautifully engineered.

[jock1958]

17 hours ago, ukskies said:

 

Yes it is a Report 112 modded for EQ5/Vixen. I had my suspicions it wouldn't quite be up to the job before I tried it.

Been thinking of replacing my steel leg AZ4 tripod with a wooden Berlebach or similar for sometime, would need to do some research in regards which model to get as it sounds like your Report 112 wouldn’t work for my DL 🤔

[ukskies]

54 minutes ago, jock1958 said:

Been thinking of replacing my steel leg AZ4 tripod with a wooden Berlebach or similar for sometime, would need to do some research in regards which model to get as it sounds like your Report 112 wouldn’t work for my DL 🤔

Merry Christmas.

The report 112 is really a photographic tripod but mine has a modified EQ5 head fitted. My original idea was to use it with a pier extension and not to extend the legs thinking it would be sturdy enough but now I don't think this is a good idea. No I wouldn't recommend the 112 for your DL having tried it. I don't know if the Report 112 is still available tbh.

I think this may be the newer version. https://www.firstlightoptics.com/berlebach-tripods/berlebach-report-312-tripod.html

Something sturdier is what is required and I'm in the same boat as you having to research for a suitable one however there is lots of help on SGL.

Edited December 25, 2022 by ukskies

[JeremyS]

2 hours ago, jock1958 said:

Been thinking of replacing my steel leg AZ4 tripod with a wooden Berlebach or similar for sometime, would need to do some research in regards which model to get as it sounds like your Report 112 wouldn’t work for my DL 🤔

 

1 hour ago, ukskies said:

Merry Christmas.

The report 112 is really a photographic tripod but mine has a modified EQ5 head fitted. My original idea was to use it with a pier extension and not to extend the legs thinking it would be sturdy enough but now I don't think this is a good idea. No I wouldn't recommend the 112 for your DL having tried it. I don't know if the Report 112 is still available tbh.

I think this may be the newer version. https://www.firstlightoptics.com/berlebach-tripods/berlebach-report-312-tripod.html

Something sturdier is what is required and I'm in the same boat as you having to research for a suitable one however there is lots of help on SGL.

I have used my FC100 DZ on a ScopeTech Zero mount with BB Report 312 and it’s borderline. I think the DC might be slightly lighter which would help.

I prefer my BB Uni with a beefier head with the DZ

[jock1958]

2 hours ago, ukskies said:

Merry Christmas.

The report 112 is really a photographic tripod but mine has a modified EQ5 head fitted. My original idea was to use it with a pier extension and not to extend the legs thinking it would be sturdy enough but now I don't think this is a good idea. No I wouldn't recommend the 112 for your DL having tried it. I don't know if the Report 112 is still available tbh.

I think this may be the newer version. https://www.firstlightoptics.com/berlebach-tripods/berlebach-report-312-tripod.html

Something sturdier is what is required and I'm in the same boat as you having to research for a suitable one however there is lots of help on SGL.

Hi Gary and a Merry Christmas to you

Thanks for that bit of info. I was going to suggest to you about not extending the legs and getting a pier extension but you were already on the case.

My AZ4 is rock solid but found it a faff to take outside and extend the legs so bought the 16" skywatcher extension tube, however I found it far too heavy and long so I experimented and settled with a shorter DIY aluminium tube using the end fittings from the skywatcher tube. I find it much easier taking my Tak, Skytee 2 & tripod outside in a oner. 

The idea of getting a Berlebach was mainly for aesthetic reasons and hope that it would save some weight, the AZ4 does the job very well but I do like the look of those wooden tripods.

Cheers Iain

 

Edited December 25, 2022 by jock1958