FS-60 Tak ?

[Elp]

I own a Z61, the difference from 70mm will be minimal. As my next refractor I just got a Starfield 102 which fits the medium FL I was after. The 60mm is a great tiny scope, I've used it for everything, visual, imaging, planetary (they're tiny but sharp), lunar, solar (WL and HA) and it's performed excellently. But your current scope is too close to get any differentiation from the smaller aperture, the only reason to get one would be for a smaller/lighter setup and slightly wider FOV.

[JeremyS]

I love my Tak FC 76DCU, especially as it can be taken on a plane so easily (well, airlines with proper hand luggage sizes). 
Im not sure it will show you a whole lot more than your 70mm. It’s a lovely scope of course, and it is a Tak, but I’m still not clear in my mind exactly what you are seeking in terms of performance or characteristics.
This is probably the sort of discussion we should be having over a beer 😊

[John]

I have a Starwave 70.  I've been very impressed by what it can do. Taks show you everything that the given aperture can show and their images are very, very refined. They are still subject to the constraints that aperture brings though in terms of light grasp and resolution. 

I bought a Tak 100mm F/9 a few years back, probably for reasons similar to those you might have - curiosity being the main one. It has turned out to be exactly what I hoped and expected - a truly superb 100mm refractor for visual use (which is what I do). No more, no less 🙂

My Skywatcher ED120 goes fainter, splits tighter double stars and shows a little more planetary and lunar detail than my Tak 100, but then it should with 20mm additional aperture to play with.

My whole Starwave 70 outfit (scope, finder, diagonal, fitted case) cost as much as the focuser upgrade that I put on my Tak, which is sometimes a sobering thought !

Edited August 21, 2023 by John

[Nicola Fletcher]

I also love my Tak FC76 DCU. It’s an amazing grab and go scope. I bought it for travel but use it at home so much, it’s a real all-rounder. I appreciate it’s close in aperture to your 70mm but the fact that it splits in two makes it truly portable even on the smallest planes.

Mine is off to the Serengeti on Sunday. Only six more sleeps!

Edited August 21, 2023 by Nicola Fletcher

[Stu1smartcookie]

18 minutes ago, John said:

I have a Starwave 70.  I've been very impressed by what it can do. Taks show you everything that the given aperture can show and their images are very, very refined. They are still subject to the constraints that aperture brings though in terms of light grasp and resolution. 

I bought a Tak 100mm F/9 a few years back, probably for reasons similar to those you might have - curiosity being the main one. It has turned out to be exactly what I hoped and expected - a truly superb 100mm refractor for visual use (which is what I do). No more, no less 🙂

My Skywatcher ED120 goes fainter, splits tighter double stars and shows a little more planetary and lunar detail than my Tak 100, but then it should with 20mm additional aperture to play with.

My whole Starwave 70 outfit (scope, finder, diagonal, fitted case) cost as much as the focuser upgrade that I put on my Tak, which is sometimes a sobering thought !

Hi John , I think you nailed it ..even if it’s something I didn’t particularly want to read  lol . I think the last paragraph summed it up . The 70mm starwave is , a great little scope and just as important… for £379 including the visual pack makes it a third of the price of the 60mm Tak ( including the tube clamp and finder) . I feel like a drunk who’s finally sobered up lol . Yes I still want to buy a Tak … but , not at the expense of my 70mm starwave !  Itch scratched for now … hmmmm but what about a larger Tak … er , nope … not now ! 
Thank you everyone that posted . If I go back to the first reply @JeremyS had it right . And @Johnconfirmed it . 
I still want one … I WILL GET ONE . But the basket is empty at FLO . Yes , even after your post @Nicola Fletcher  

[DirkSteele]

That is probably the right call. Think about and perhaps save for one of the Tak 100mm scopes.

But I will leave you with an image of the FC-76. This is in a Think Tank Photo Airport Essentials backpack which complied with the most stringent carry-on I have found. Even helicopters in the middle of Africa.

 

And when it can do that, you get stargaze under skies like this (Mozambique).

[Nicola Fletcher]

12 minutes ago, DirkSteele said:

That is probably the right call. Think about and perhaps save for one of the Tak 100mm scopes.

But I will leave you with an image of the FC-76. This is in a Think Tank Photo Airport Essentials backpack which complied with the most stringent carry-on I have found. Even helicopters in the middle of Africa.

 

And when it can do that, you get stargaze under skies like this (Mozambique).

Yours was the inspiration for mine @DirkSteele - as you might notice from the post above!

[John]

Get practically any scope under skies like that (including the Starwave 70) and the views will be superb 🙂

 

Edited August 21, 2023 by John

[DirkSteele]

16 minutes ago, Nicola Fletcher said:

Yours was the inspiration for mine @DirkSteele - as you might notice from the post above!

Ha, thought it looked familiar 

[philj]

I have had an fs60c for just over a year now and although I use it primarily for imaging, i do enjoy taking it out for a bit of visual. I have had many scopes over the years and this little scope has impressed me. It may be a 60mm but the views are crisp and clear. As a wide field visual scope its good but I have the extender which makes it a bit more versatile.

[Stu1smartcookie]

19 minutes ago, philj said:

I have had an fs60c for just over a year now and although I use it primarily for imaging, i do enjoy taking it out for a bit of visual. I have had many scopes over the years and this little scope has impressed me. It may be a 60mm but the views are crisp and clear. As a wide field visual scope its good but I have the extender which makes it a bit more versatile.

Lol stop it !! That looks a great little set up !  

[johnturley]

17 hours ago, John said:

I have a Starwave 70.  I've been very impressed by what it can do. Taks show you everything that the given aperture can show and their images are very, very refined. They are still subject to the constraints that aperture brings though in terms of light grasp and resolution. 

I bought a Tak 100mm F/9 a few years back, probably for reasons similar to those you might have - curiosity being the main one. It has turned out to be exactly what I hoped and expected - a truly superb 100mm refractor for visual use (which is what I do). No more, no less 🙂

My Skywatcher ED120 goes fainter, splits tighter double stars and shows a little more planetary and lunar detail than my Tak 100, but then it should with 20mm additional aperture to play with.

 

That's interesting, I have for some time been tempted by a Tak 100 DZ, which I would be able to fund if I sold both my Celestron CPC 9.25, and Explore Scientific 127 FCD 100 Refractor, which to be honest I don't use very much these days. In particular the CPC is getting rather heavy for me to move around these days at my age (73), plus my wife keeps pressurising me to reduce the number of telescopes in the conservatory (my 14in Newtonian and Esprit 150 are in my observatory shed).

According to some posters the Tak fluorites perform like magic, permit 100x per inch of aperture to be used, and outperform other scopes of significantly larger aperture, in particular on planets.  So like yourself I have been curious as to how one would perform, for about the same price as the 100 DZ I could obtain an APM 140 Refractor, which would almost certainly be superior to the ES 127, but less portable. 

The Tak 100 DZ, would however be a very high quality, plus much lighter and more portable instrument, and according to the spec I would be able to take it in the cabin on aircraft, although I have heard from a couple of sources that the latter in not actually the case.

John 

 

Edited August 22, 2023 by johnturley

[JeremyS]

3 hours ago, johnturley said:

That's interesting, I have for some time been tempted by a Tak 100 DZ, which I would be able to fund if I sold both my Celestron CPC 9.25, and Explore Scientific 127 FCD 100 Refractor, which to be honest I don't use very much these days. In particular the CPC is getting rather heavy for me to move around these days at my age (73), plus my wife keeps pressurising me to reduce the number of telescopes in the conservatory (my 14in Newtonian and Esprit 150 are in my observatory shed).

According to some posters the Tak fluorites perform like magic, permit 100x per inch of aperture to be used, and outperform other scopes of significantly larger aperture, in particular on planets.  So like yourself I have been curious as to how one would perform, for about the same price I could obtain an APM 140 Refractor, which would almost certainly be superior to the ES 127, but less portable. 

The Tak 100 DZ, would however be a very high quality, plus much lighter and more portable instrument, and according to the spec I would be able to take it in the cabin on aircraft, although I have heard from a couple of sources that the latter in not actually the case.

John 

 

The Tak FC 100 DZ is a wonderful and compact, light instrument. I don’t think it would be airline portable though, unlike the DC. The dewcap retracts a bit, both not enough to make it short enough.
FLO had a DZ for sale until recently, for a surprisingly long time, but I think they are unobtainable for quite some time to come. They still have 3 TSA 120s in stock though (!)

 

[The60mmKid]

I think that most telescopes made today are excellent. And I think that many observers can discern a difference when using a premium telescope vs. an excellent non-premium telescope. What isn't acknowledged enough, in my opinion, is the psychological aspect of our decision making processes. What I am getting at is that, if you want a Takahashi, I question whether a Starwave will satisfy you... not because it lacks optical quality, but because it isn't a Takahashi.

I currently use two telescopes and own a few more, intending to gradually sell off the ones I don't use. The two that I use are optically phenomenal. There are other telescopes that may be quite similar and that would satisfy others to the level that my two satisfy me, but I don't care because these two do it for me. I don't have to keep buying and selling, which I'd be tempted to do if I had other telescopes.

I think it's more about me and my idiosyncrasies than the telescopes and their attributes, at the end of the day. It probably all boils down to, "Know thyself."

Edited August 22, 2023 by The60mmKid

[Roy Challen]

Having owned a Starwave 70 in the past, and an FS60-CB currently, I know which I prefer. The Tak is surprisingly capable for planetary observing despite its small aperture, but it won't show any more than a 70mm.

I have two other scopes that are arguably better for that purpose, but maybe the Q extender would change that.

[JeremyS]

28 minutes ago, The60mmKid said:

IWhat I am getting at is that, if you want a Takahashi, I question whether a Starwave will satisfy you... not because it lacks optical quality, but because it isn't a Takahashi.

No, I’m totally dispassionate. It’s that @mikeDnight you must be thinking about 😊

[IB20]

I have the 76DCU. In its native configuration it’s 570mm f7.5 and weighs about 1.6kg. Optically at that aperture there’s probably not much currently available that would be better, the contrast and star diffraction patterns are superb. On an objects like the moon and double stars, it will eat up magnification for breakfast. I have watched many a Jovian moon transit through it, not a splash of CA anywhere.

I added the 1.7q module to it to transform it to a f12.75 954mm super APO (quadruplet?) that is now pretty much optically perfect, however it’s obviously much longer in this configuration (810mm) albeit not much heavier but might not fit your portability criteria. I found the length creates more vibes on a lighter capacity mount so have upgraded to a more stable mount. The 76Q is very small optical improvements on an already quite remarkable little scope.

I have the Starwave which is an iteration of the Starfield 102ED. Yes the 4” will have more resolution but in average seeing I’m finding it doesn’t accept magnification like the Tak 76 does.

Another option of course is the Tak 100DC; about 2kg OTA and a 4”, but you could buy both Starfield and 76DCU for that cost.

[johnturley]

48 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

The Tak FC 100 DZ is a wonderful and compact, light instrument. I don’t think it would be airline portable though, unlike the DC. The dewcap retracts a bit, both not enough to make it short enough.
FLO had a DZ for sale until recently, for a surprisingly long time, but I think they are unobtainable for quite some time to come. They still have 3 TSA 120s in stock though (!)

 

FLO are still stating on their website that it can be carried out on most commercial flights, but I've had this contradicted from a couple of sources.

They are stating currently out of stock, but available in 15-20 working days. 

Takahashi FC-100DZ (OTA) tube only with 50.8/31.75 adapter | First Light Optics

[Stu1smartcookie]

11 minutes ago, The60mmKid said:

I think that most telescopes made today are excellent. And I think that many observers can discern a difference when using a premium telescope vs. an excellent non-premium telescope. What isn't acknowledged enough, on my opinion, is the psychological aspect of our decision making processes. What I am getting at is that, if you want a Takahashi, I question whether a Starwave will satisfy you... not because it lacks optical quality, but because it isn't a Takahashi.

I currently use two telescopes and own a few more, intending to gradually sell off the ones I don't use. The two that I use are optically phenomenal. There are other telescopes that may be quite similar and that would satisfy others to the level that my two satisfy me, but I don't care because these two do it for me. I don't have to keep buying and selling, which I'd be tempted to do if I had other telescopes.

I think it's more about me and my idiosyncrasies than the telescopes and their attributes, at the end of the day. It probably all boils down to, "Know thyself."

When i started this thread my intention was to gauge opinions on one scope in particular ( as i love small fracs) it wasnt intended to be a "what is better" post but it may have been interpreted as such . Maybe i gave that impression . Anyway , my question was answered in a lot of different ways , but i still haven't looked through a Tak . 

I love my Starwave ... its a fine scope . I can view the planets with it through my 3-8 Zoom Ep and the views are clear and sharp although of course small . But there is a reason why people gravitate to Takahashi . 

I've always been in the camp that believes , like you , that there is a great choice of fine scopes out there . And i doubt there is a massive difference between a lot of them . 

But , if i can use this analogy ... I drive a BMW , but i would love a go in a ferrari 

 

[The60mmKid]

1 minute ago, Stu1smartcookie said:

But , if i can use this analogy ... I drive a BMW , but i would love a go in a ferrari 

 

Yes, exactly. And, if you had to choose between your BMW and my Prius, would you be equally content with either? I wouldn't care because I don't care about cars. But I wouldn't be equally content with a Starwave (which I am not criticizing) and a Takahashi.

It's the psychological bit...

[bosun21]

5 minutes ago, The60mmKid said:

But , if i can use this analogy ... I drive a BMW , but i would love a go in a ferrar

There’s also no point in buying a Ferrari if you then find you have no money left for petrol.

[Stu1smartcookie]

Just now, bosun21 said:

There’s also no point in buying a Ferrari if you then find you have no money left for petrol.

TBH i wouldnt want one anyway lol

[Stu1smartcookie]

9 minutes ago, The60mmKid said:

Yes, exactly. And, if you had to choose between your BMW and my Prius, would you be equally content with either? I wouldn't care because I don't care about cars. But I wouldn't be equally content with a Starwave (which I am not criticizing) and a Takahashi.

It's the psychological bit...

I will let you into a little secret,  BMW is overated  😃. Whereas i doubt the Taks are 

[JeremyS]

15 minutes ago, johnturley said:

FLO are still stating on their website that it can be carried out on most commercial flights, but I've had this contradicted from a couple of sources.

They are stating currently out of stock, but available in 15-20 working days. 

Takahashi FC-100DZ (OTA) tube only with 50.8/31.75 adapter | First Light Optics

Suggest you email them for accurate availability info. 
 

[IB20]

I don’t even think Taks are that expensive. They will last a lifetime of observing if you’re into visual astronomy. They don’t become obsolete like a £2500 MacBook or depreciate like a brand new (any) car does.