Looking for advice on Takahashi’s…

[Olli]

Hi everyone.  
 

As many people here the Takahashis have always been a dream scope and for me personally it has been one of my end game scopes so to speak and have always wanted to purchase a Takahashi refractor for visual use.Currently the scope I  am thinking of upgrading from  is a William optics z73. I have been looking at the fc 76 as well as FC 100 though that it is probably way out of my price range ant the moment  unless I save for a lot longer. If I were to purchase the 76 would there be a much improved upgrade in the z73 or would it be worth to try and save a bit more for the 100?

I also wanted to know what mounts would be best for these scopes and how do you mount them? As looking at flo I cannot see a dovetail on the photos .  I currently own a Az gti as well as a az5 would I need to purchase a different mount? This is all a bit of a pipe dream at the moment but looking for some advice for later on down the road.

TYIA

Edited October 20, 2023 by Olli

[John]

In your situation I would try and raise the additional funds for a Tak FC100.

I don't think the Tak FC76, lovely scope though I'm sure it is, would deliver much more than your WO73 does, apart from the 3mm of additional aperture.

 

 

[Mr Spock]

You definitely should save for one of these  A worthwhile improvement over any 70-something scope.

[Elp]

I'd tend to agree with the above, but also consider your observing environment. From where I am there's marginal difference going from my Z61 up to 6 inch on my C6, I can marginally see a little more but it's the difference between a "I think so" smudge to "there's definitely something there" smudge (obviously referring to DSO which is the ultimate test of aperture isn't it), it's not a night and day difference that you tend to see photographically where the aperture increases, the resolution also does and you actually see irrefutable difference in detail, you do however notice the details on planets but I'm still surprised how good planets look through my Z61 despite them being small, the details are sharp and crisp. Darker skies will likely offer a more defining visual difference. I did however like the performance of my Starfield 102, this size of aperture is popular for a reason.

 

Edited October 20, 2023 by Elp

[Sunshine]

Have you thought about the used market? your dream Tak could be a lot closer than you think, have a look at the Astro buy/sell UK webpage. Almost every scope I have ever owned was from the classifieds.

[dweller25]

@Olli

Of the scopes you talk about I would agree with others, a 4” refractor would give a meaningful improvement over your current scope.

Takahashi’s are nice and have great optics but I would suggest you read this, which is very accurate……

 

Edited October 21, 2023 by dweller25

[callisto]

1 hour ago, dweller25 said:

@Olli

Of the scopes you talk about I would agree with others, a 4” refractor would give a meaningful improvement over your current scope.

Takahashi’s are nice and have great optics but I would suggest you read this, which is very accurate……

 

You took the words right out of my mouth 

[callisto]

9 hours ago, Mr Spock said:

You definitely should save for one of these  A worthwhile improvement over any 70-something scope.

Hey... there's nowt wrong with the 'humble' Z73 😜

[JeremyS]

What’s a Takahashi? 🤔

Seriously, tho, save for the 4-inch. 

[bosun21]

Definitely another thumbs up 👍 for getting a 4". I find myself gravitating more and more to using my Starfield over my other scopes. I do prefer my 150 Maksutov for planets although the 102 certainly holds its own in this regard. Definitely an all rounder.

Edited October 21, 2023 by bosun21

[Stu]

Agreed, save for the FC100DC. It’s the best visual 4” scope out there I reckon. Lightweight, cools quickly, fab contrast and sharpness, airline portable, excellent for lunar, solar with a wedge, planetary, doubles and widefield deep sky. Obviously the limited aperture dictates performance on nebulae etc but it’s as good as it gets at 4”. 
 

I have the 60, 76 and 100mm, and there are noticeable improvements in resolution as you step up the aperture as per theory. The 100 shows significant improvements vs the 76 in planetary, lunar and solar detail, plus splits tighter doubles. If I could only have one, it would be the 100.

I know some of the other scopes run it close optically, but they tend to be heavier and bulkier so perhaps need larger mounts. I use a ScopeTech Zero on a Gitzo tripod which works really well. The ScopeTech is no longer made, but the new Sightron looks as good, if not better so will handle it no problem.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/alt-azimuth-astronomy-mounts/sightron-japan-alt-azimuth-mount.html

[Sunshine]

4 hours ago, JeremyS said:

What’s a Takahashi? 🤔

I like to describe them as the samurai swords of telescopes.

[dweller25]

1 hour ago, Sunshine said:

I like to describe them as the samurai swords of telescopes.

Best not fall on it then 😱

[Elp]

2 hours ago, Sunshine said:

I like to describe them as the samurai swords of telescopes.

They need to draw blood once released?

[Olli]

On 21/10/2023 at 08:22, dweller25 said:

@Olli

Of the scopes you talk about I would agree with others, a 4” refractor would give a meaningful improvement over your current scope.

Takahashi’s are nice and have great optics but I would suggest you read this, which is very accurate……

 

Thanks for this, great read, definitely throws a spanner in the works.. but it seems like a 4inch refractor is the way to go from all the replies. Thanks everyone for the help

[Olli]

19 hours ago, Stu said:

Agreed, save for the FC100DC. It’s the best visual 4” scope out there I reckon. Lightweight, cools quickly, fab contrast and sharpness, airline portable, excellent for lunar, solar with a wedge, planetary, doubles and widefield deep sky. Obviously the limited aperture dictates performance on nebulae etc but it’s as good as it gets at 4”. 
 

I have the 60, 76 and 100mm, and there are noticeable improvements in resolution as you step up the aperture as per theory. The 100 shows significant improvements vs the 76 in planetary, lunar and solar detail, plus splits tighter doubles. If I could only have one, it would be the 100.

I know some of the other scopes run it close optically, but they tend to be heavier and bulkier so perhaps need larger mounts. I use a ScopeTech Zero on a Gitzo tripod which works really well. The ScopeTech is no longer made, but the new Sightron looks as good, if not better so will handle it no problem.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/alt-azimuth-astronomy-mounts/sightron-japan-alt-azimuth-mount.html

Thanks stu  for the link and  the advice,  one of the reasons for choosing Takahashi was due to how light they were.

[Stu]

I think the thing with top notch scopes is that their benefits often only become visible when conditions are excellent or you are pushing the mag and everything else matches it optically. I’ve found the Tak gives better views of granulation than I’ve had with other scopes when I’m using a Baader Coolwedge, MaxBright II binoviewers and Zeiss orthos for example.

A one off comparison often doesn’t pick up on some of these differences; they need to be compared over a period of time to really understand any actual difference. I struggle with reviewing with any degree of consistency because I find sky conditions so variable it’s hard to know what is sky and what is kit causing any change. 

[IB20]

Taks are lovely but I’m not sure you’d see a massive difference between the z73 and the 76DCU. With the Q module addition, your magnification range would increase and the Tak will support those mags, obviously depending on sky conditions and you’ll suffer from reduced exit pupils.

I’ve started to love my 4” frac and am using it more but it’s a bigger beast and not quite as grab and go as my 76DCU/Q. It does great on the gas giants, moon, WL and can be used for lovely wide field views. There are some nights when my 3” and 4” haven’t been world’s apart in the images they’ve shown but I need to do some more comparisons to get a feel for what my average skies and local conditions are like (I’m veering towards not great at the minute 😅).

I’d say I’d probably edge toward a 4”. If you want the best 4” Tak doublet, get the 100DZ. If you want the lightest 4” get the 100DC, if you want a 4” at 95% (maybe even closer) of Tak performance at under half price or cheaper, then get a Starfield. I’m sure you’ll be delighted with any of them!

[IB20]

Had the Tak 76DCU+Q module out last night and soaked up some glorious views of Saturn and Jupiter, including a Jovian eclipse of Io. 

It’s a seriously special telescope with almost perfect correction. Think the whole thing with tripod and mount weighs about 6-7kg and is the ultimate grab and go.
Sorry, I know this doesn’t help…

Have you thought about owning a 3” & 4” Tak? 🤣🤣🤣

[Olli]

7 hours ago, IB20 said:

 

Have you thought about owning a 3” & 4” Tak? 🤣🤣🤣

Maybe if I sold my soul 😅

[uhb1966]

On 23/10/2023 at 21:42, Olli said:

Maybe if I sold my soul 😅

I'm afraid there's not a lot of demand for souls  but have you thought about a kidney? 😇

[900SL]

In the words of Nancy, 'just say No!'