Tak FCT owners

[LewisM]

Just like to see how many Takahashi FCT owners there are here in Australia, and add you all in to the global FCT poll - we have VERY VERY VERY few reported still so far! Please let us know your full serial number to add to the list.

I know there is at least an FCT-150 here, unless it went overseas again (it was in North QLD, then sold via Claude). I own an FCT-100, recently imported from the USA, and I know of ONE other FCT-100, that sadly disappeared after the death of the owner (his wife gave it to his friend, and now who knows where it is).

The FCT series are fluorite triplets. The FCT-100 in particular is an astonishing piece of optical craftsmanship - Roland Christen (AstroPhysics founder, owner and master optician) will even tip his hat to the FCT-100 acknowledging even he could not surpass it. The FCT series were basically Tak custom telescopes, though did appear in their catalogues as purchase items, though even in 1990, an FCT-100 cost $3700 US - a LOT for a telescope back then.

The FCT series :

FCT-65
FCT-76
FCT-100
FCT-125
FCT-150
FCT-250 (:eyepop::eyepop::eyepop:)

My FCT-100 was imported directly from the USA from a close friend of Art Campiani (US Tak dealer) - this one was hand selected by Art and kept in his own collection, before he sold it to Brian S, who sold it to me (I had actually enquired about a signed TSA-102 he had advertised on Astromart, when he mentioned the other Taks he had - my heart missed a beat when I read FCT-100. I thought nothing ventured, nothing gained, and asked if he would sell it, and after some negotiation, the rest is history). As some may recall, I sold my ENTIRE collection of scopes to afford it, but it was worth EVERY sacrifice. Yes, I am finally satisfied enough with a telescope.

[issdaol]

Nice :-) First time I have seen a picture of a FCt100. It looks like a very short trip. What is the FL on that??

You might have to paint your clamshell to match that older Tak colour doesn't go with the new Tak colour very well :-P

[LewisM]

Yeah, but the NJP is green too, and I don't fancy repainting THAT. MAYBE just the clamshell and foot extension.

The FCT-100 is f/6.4, with dedicated FR reduces to f/4.5 (faster than the FSQ-106N). The FR - IF you can ever find one - costs more than the new TOA reducer, and yet it's 30 years old... sheesh! I will be trying my Vixen FL FR reducer on it (which was even hard enough to find!)

Here's an arty-farty shot...

[issdaol]

Excellent kit like this keeps it's value thats for sure :-)

Considering the NJP is the wrong colour. It's probably best to send it down to me where it will match my TOA150 colour much better :-P

[atalas]

Congrats Lewis!this was my dream scope for many years.

[Larryp]

Should be a great scope, Lewis :thumbsup:

[Neutronstar]

Lewis, I read with interest your FCT adventure here and on Cloudynights. I did a bit of research into these and there seems to be a few links about them.

This one - http://www.astrosurf.com/ilizaso/Takahashi%20FCT-100/FCT.htm
has some nice images detailing the variants.
Thanks for introducing them to me.

[gregbradley]

Is the FCT an oil spaced triplet or air spaced?

Greg.

[Hans Tucker]

Airspaced. I believe Takahashi does not and has not ever had an oil spaced refractor in their product line.

[LewisM]

Air.

I believe Tak's ethos is NEVER to use oil, hence the orthoscopic TOA series etc.

[Astromelb]

Dear IIS team,
The unit Lewis is referring to has been sold to myself.
I will be holding onto it long term, it is a very nice telescope.

PS: Technical - the FCT100 is a Canon Optron, Japan manufactured lens with an air spaced design with a 640mm focal length.
It is as all Tak refractors are a standard air spaced design, this one being an air spaced triplet, very similar in design to many triplets today (such as the Canon Optron triplet lenses used by Vixen & Sky Rover).
The FCT100 also includes a Fluorite lens element as the central lens element. It also uses Canon's premium manufacturing processes enabling a very capable optic, this unit is much better than any of the other Taks I have owned. It also uses Canon's class leading multi coatings, which are exceptional, as good as available commercially globally today.
This FCT100 optic I took to Carl Zeiss Germany when I visited them last year and had tested - it enabled a Strehl of 0.95, the highest Strehl the head of the Metrology Department at Zeiss has achieved in a Tak in his 35 years with Zeiss :)

Takahashi never made oil spaced refractors. Takahashi have always and only ever used Canon lenses - and Canon do not do any oiled's.

On to oiled's : Oiled's have higher resolution that aired's, optical physics demands this.

Are there are oiled's available today, Yes :

1. Carl Zeiss (used 2nd hand) - they always cost a lot, but they are much more than merely exceptional, they beat everything in their aperture class in performance. You should expect a price for a good condition APQ100 oil spaced fluorite triplet of around the $14k at today's costings plus import costs (appreciating in the future as they always have since manufactured). You need to see through an APQ to appreciate what an APQ is, those that haven't do not know what they are missing, seriously, there is no comparison. Many guess, and many talk about APQ's - not trying to upset you here guys - but if you haven't seen through an APQ you are unable to comment as you haven't achieved the summit of Everest and do not "know" the view :)
OR
2. CFF : today you have one bespoke hand crafting manufacturer - this is CFF - who currently manufacture fully oiled triplets. The Aust distributor delivered a brand new CFF 160mm f6.5 to a keen enthusiast in Perth last week, a hand crafted fully oiled - test certified Strehl 0.992, same as my CFF 140mm f6.5 also test certified 0.992, and also same as my Carl Zeiss APQ100 test certified 0.992, these are all documented test certified optics. Yes test certified "real" documented certification.
OR
3. TEC USA do one (only) model which is "semi" oiled, between one pair of lens elements, not both. IMHO this is not a design I would personally pursue from my decades in optometrical metrology - if you are doing an oiled you do the whole thing oiled, or leave it at the less costly and much easier to manufacture air spaced. IMHO it's a bit like getting in a car, you do not stop with the door open, you either get in or you don't.

TEC (and most telescope manufacturers) do not have test certification available. They do not have access to the necessary test equipment, same as Takahashi. Where you see quoted TEC, Tak, TeleVue, AP and many others quoting Strehl's these are not test certified and should be viewed with extreme caution as they are not measurements and are often guesses or sellers trying to keep up with offers from those that actually do have the test equipment - as example the test equipment at Officina Stellare was an investment of many hundreds of thousands of EUR. Those that do have tested certified optics usually have telescopes on offer with much greater quality, thereby justifying the investment in the metrology system with which to measure their optics. There are only a few manufacturers that have/ have access to test certification, they are the only test data that should be trusted, as everything else is heresay.

[issdaol]

I don't wish to get into a longwinded trade off on barbs but some of the mis leading quotes on this post need to be corrected so people can make a balanced judgment:

The first obvious misleading statement is Strehl of 0.95 being the highest Tak Strehl ......this might have actually been the case for that particular unit for that test facility ......but one has to ask how many Tak samples they actually test ???

Especially when other Tak scopes have tested 0.992 and higher for the TOA series.

Also can you PLEASE clarify who the CFF and OS distributor is for Australia ??

Is is not the fact this this is your business run from your home lounge room ?? That business being Astronomy Alive??

The important consideration for this being clarified is that Resellers/Vendors/Distributors will often make what seem to be impartial statements but are actually statements that are misleading and designed to promote the products that they sell and disparage alternative products.

Also what qualifications and experience do you actually have for making all of the claims you make here?? especially since you claim many decades in "optometrical metrology"

On a recent visit to your "Showroom", I actually saw this FCT unit you mention sitting face down on its dew shield covered in dust, and you claimed multiple times during the visit (in the presence of another well know honest and reliable IIS member) that you were:

1. The Head Optical Designer for Takahashi: This claim was so extraordinary that I contacted Takahashi Directly to verify and they deny this completely

2. A Part Owner and Silent Partner of Takahashi Japan: Again an extraordinary claim that was refuted by Takahashi

3. Head Optical Designer for Stellarvue: Another Extra Ordinary Claim so I contacted Stellarvue to confirm. Vic Maris replied to me directly and has refuted this claim as well.

Both Manufacturers have authorised me to release a copy of their email communications proving this.

Going back to your claims of decades of experience, one has to ask about the quality and accuracy of this experience.

If I take a recent example of a CN212 scope that you advertised being in excellent condition after being in your care for some time, then one might assume the quality and accuracy is not very high at all.

The CN212 in question was prior owned by Kunama in Canberra. After being in your care the following problems were found:

1: The Starlight Instruments micro focuser was incorrectly adjusted. This was discovered in your office and had to be adjusted before I took possession of the scope.

2: The Secondary Spider had been adjusted so far off centre that it could not be collimated

3: The Newtonian Secondary was completely out of collimation

4: The Cassegrain Secondary was completely out of collimation

5: The Newtonian Turret had been moved and misaligned

6: The Tak Finder Illuminator had been replaced with a cheaper unit


So based on the condition as delivered the scope was completely unusable and definitely NOT in the claimed excellent condition as it was sold to you in.

[LewisM]

All I hear is circus music...organ grinders...caged apes...

Why the pretence? The entire astronomy community knows who AstroMelb is, so why talk in whispers and subterfuge? Be honest and upfront - PLEASE! "CFF dealer"...yes, Astronomy Alive aka AstroMelb aka Cris Ellis. No secret.

And why was a long-dead 4 year old thread SUDDENLY brought up again??? Yes, the FCT was good, but it's contrast is NO WHERE near as good as modern Taks, AP's or probably even CFF. I can guarantee it is MUCH sharper than any CFF, but the CFF will show better contrast due to the more modern coatings. The FSQ-106N I had had better contrast (NOT as sharp).

As far as I have been told, my former FCT-100 now has the useless Feathertouch add-on, it's standing on it's dewshield covered in dust and potentially going to fall over into something. Probably had shoddy flocking paper added into the dewshield as I have seen too often. What high regard for a $4000 4" scope... :(



I’ve been awaiting this release of information with bated breath for too long. And I don’t even have to add anything.

I heard the EXACT claims re Tak and SV from 7 different and isolated persons. 7!!!!!!!!!!!! Including some that have been in this arena longer than myself and know a LOT better than the claimant.

The worm turns

[Astromelb]

The comment was to correct Lewis.
His comments on this thread gave the impression he still owns the unit. His comments were out of date, he no longer owns this telescope, I do. Or is that not permitted ?

Plus:
Problems with the CN212 eh ?
This thread isn't about a CN212, is it about a FCT100, what the ?
The CN212 was used "once" when first received from Kunama and then left on an Eq - and then onsold - as is. Like many Tak products I wasn't as impressed as I hoped I would be, I am used to better gear such as Questar & Quantum, and Officina Stellare.
The buyer asked about documentation after buying and nothing more, so these "problems" you now claim - are all brand new, where did they come from, and now they surface - a year later, what a joke.
If you had questions of a technical & performance nature you should have requested assistance immediately following purchase, not claim "new issues" and criticise the seller a year later. Bad form mate, you are a bully :)
Congratulations on being so inappropriate.
Get a life :)

[LewisM]

Cris, look at the DATE I posted that thread, and does it matter who owns it NOW?

Dog chasing it's tail...

Yes, I, along with Matt "Kunama" witnessed the issues with the CN212 - issues that would not present themselves without actually using the "Unit" (gawd I hate the word "UNIT" - sounds so tosh!). It was so GROSSLY out of spec.

[Lognic04]

Sounds similar to what happened with my MT-160... :question:

[issdaol]

Hi Chris,

I note you selectively did not address any of the questions related to your claims and experience.......a very convenient oversight.

As for the CN212 .......You claimed on your add that it was in Excellent Condition as sold to you by Kunama....which it clearly was not.

As it was a second hand purchase and you clearly and no idea about how to service and maintain such a scope ....Kunama and I fixed all of the issues together ourselves.

Kunama being a friend of mine .....can verify that the condition sold to you was Excellent (as new) which you claimant in your add......he can also verify that the condition as sold to me was completely unusable.

Also your recollection of events is incorrect ...it was only in the latter half of 2017 that you sold the CN212 not a year later ....again more misleading and dishonest statements from you.

Also the IIS member that visited your showroom with me to pick up the CN212 was actually Kunama ..........At the time you claimed you had met him and that he was a great friend of yours ....however you didn't even know that he was standing right in front of you in your own lounge room :rofl:

As to the relevance of these comments with regards to the original thread:

They are to as stated to clarify the Experience and Expertise you claim in your original post (as well as clarifying your status as the owner of Astronomy Alive and therefore not impartial) so other IIS members can judge the relevance and veracity of your claims for themselves.

[LewisM]

I'm framing this one for posterity.

[LewisM]

Sadly.

[Paul Haese]

Where's the jaffers and popcorn?:cheers::fight:

[LewisM]

Jaffas are projectiles and are banned under the Geneva Convention.

Popcorn is fair game :P

[Astromelb]

Your comments are (as always) biased.
Make up whatever you want to. You and Lewis usually do.
I didn't touch the CN212, but now this extends into a much broader level of criticism of any used gear I have ever touched, must have butter fingers eh, what a joke.
By the way guys - I simply do not procure used gear anymore, as I have had enough of giving people anything up to a 100% refund - and then them keeping the gear - after their unrealistic criticisms of gear I have not even used once, then onsold as is, including gear that Lewis sold me that was seriously not worth a fraction of what he scoffed out of me for it, you owe me big time Lewis, I paid you over $30k for gear that I ended up selling at under half that - as half the gear was not worthwhile when I received it, but did I complain to you, no, you are the teflon man Lewis, you are untouchable, you criticise me instead, what the. I will never buy from you again, you gave me crap.
The people that have received this treatment from me and gotten free multi thousand $ systems know who they are, and are reading this, you know who you are. You just enjoy your girls club on IIS :) This webpage and those that spend all their days trolling it, looking for self adulation and for stirr, what a joke.
BTW: Lewis, want your FCT100 back, make me an offer ..... free maybe, Lol

[LewisM]

I don't think I will even attempt to answer that load of codswallop.

Be true to yourself Cris. Please. No need to BS your way through the astro community, as everyone KNOWS the reality. You dug the craters, now get out of them with grace. Why the continual schoolboy need to utilise the frame of "silent background people" and "thanks guys for the support - you know who you are". Why?

You still won't retort to your claims of Tak optician/silent partner (a lie you even told me) nor SV. I think Phil should post the emails from both Tak and SV to clear this one up once and for all. Your absolute silence in this regard speaks volumes as to the truth.

[issdaol]

Not sure who's comments you are referring to as Biased ??

When a Vendor such as yourself (the owner of Astronomy Alive) disparages competitive products and promotes the products they they sell under the guise of impartial advice...that would seem to be the definition of bias to me.

You are on this form making statements and claims about products you don't seem to know or understand anything about (especially how to maintain and service them) and selling them supposedly in excellent condition, when they are not.

If you can live with your on false claims and dishonesty then I feel pity for you.

However I am more concerned with other IIS users that dont have much experience and get caught out by your misleading claims and statements.

The immaturity of your response combined with the avoidance of answers and additional misleading comments are evidence of themselves.

[LewisM]

Refer to post #16 above (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showpost.php?p=1367196&postcount=16)



Indeed. Complete avoidance in answering the questions.

When one tells lies often enough in life, one starts to personally believe those lies. As Goebbel's used to say, a lie repeated a thousand times becomes the truth.

[issdaol]

Since I am Authorised to do so....I will attach copies of Vic Maris Reply to my Enquiry

[Astromelb]

Stellavue, who ever told you I had anything to with Stellarvue, I didn't, I never mentioned Stellarvue to you whatsoever, and you then go out of your way to make yourself look stupid asking Stellavue USA about me, I do not have any dealings with them, you are so so wrong here. Check before making obtuse claims mate.
Get your data correct before shooting your mouth off, you sound like a member of the USA Gun Lobby.
I have a Stellarvue unit in my collection, but I wont tell you which model or you will bag that as well. Get a life mate.
Going public with trash like this ????? What the ?????

[FlashDrive]

Com'on Lads , Kiss and Make Up .... :lol:

:D

[LewisM]

My former LOMO SV102...no doubt irreparable upon receipt

[issdaol]

Cris,

Kunama was with me in your lounge room when you made this claim to both of us.

Which was why I contacted StellarVue to confirm your claims.

So you are now calling both myself and Kunama liars ??

[Kunama]

As much as I hate these internet battles and really wish the forum was free of them, I feel I need to address this one.

I will make just this post on this topic and this thread.

The points raised by Phil (issdaol) in relation to the conversation that took place at Bentleigh, Melbourne in my presence are a true account of the discussion.

[LewisM]

Thank you Matt

[LewisM]

Conversation closed IMHO.

[issdaol]

I don’t relish battles like this either.....unfortunately I am sick of seeing outright lies and misleading claims by certain people and everyone remains silent on the issues.

People need to be honest and speak up more to protect the integrity of the hobby, forum and give real advice to beginners who are just starting out.

[LewisM]

Concisely said Phil

[Astromelb]

It would appear that you may actually be the buyer of the CN212.

The CN212 was checked and purchased from myself at the time of purchase, following checks mechanical and of the optics and condition it was regarded by the buyer and his partnering assistant as being in good order and condition, so much so that the unit was purchased on the spot without any additional concerns being raised by the buyer.

The buyer called me a couple of days later and asked about adjustment of the focuser, I gave him guidance. He then did what I recommended and called me back saying all Aok now, he complimented me on the condition of the telescope.

He then called a third time asking about documentation.

I have not heard from him since. Thus clearly making the statement that the unit is all Aok.

Why make this all public, what IS your problem ? Is it all suppliers, do you just hate everyone and anyone that makes a living in astronomy ?

If the unit has been adjusted or something else happened to it - after it was purchased and left my possession by the current owner, and thereby needs adjustment or some other process, this is nothing to do with me, it is the owners questions to answer to. Why you are going out of your way to bag me out when it is not my issue is frankly typical of behaviour on this webpage.

Plus:
Again, why are you publishing all this to the whole community, what IS your problem ?

Your questions are not only unreasonable, they are also defamatory. If you do not like myself that's your problem, not mine. If the new owner buggered the telescope subsequently to getting it from me that's also his problem, not mine.

It would appear that the visit was actually with the original owner Kunama (Matt Saarikko), then why when I was introduced to this other person announcing another name, not Matt Saarikko ? I was introduced to someone that was named as another name, why ?

Both the buyer and assistant checked the telescope and were happy enough to purchase on the spot.

With respect, you are fabricating other new elements of this purchase to inflame a situation which is not my problem, it is likely that you as buyer stuffed up the telescope and are trying to blame others for your own incompetence :)

What the ??

[LewisM]

Oh what a fairytale.

Cris just stop

[Astromelb]

Lewis, mind you own business, this is not your webpage, you do not own IIS (you must think you do by now) - you spend far too much time on it, leave it be.
Lewis, you sold me over $30k of gear that I subsequently had to sell with a loss of over half this $ value due to quality and issues, it is you that should be the target of this grief, you have a lot to answer for :(

I have had enough of being crapped out by you and your cronies on this webpage, it is time to defend myself. When I have done nothing wrong and am bagged out with BS from your flock then I am now going to defend and attack, I have had enough of patiently waiting back and being criticised by you and your disciples !!

You say enough, I have just gotten started mate !!

You even approached me three months ago with another "bulk package" you wanted me to buy, and then when I said enough and you owe me and asked for a better price you advertised the whole shebang on IIS at a much lower rate, you have not been fair with me and you ripped me off :(

[Astromelb]

Lewis, do you need a stocktake from me, what the ?

I still have the Lomo SV102, the FCT100 and the Pentax SDUF100. I do not report to you, I do not have to account for what I own to you or anyone, none of your business !!

FYI - I gave the Tak mount away for free, that's $5k worth of Eq which you charged me for it for nicks, as the unit was that badly treated by you although you said it was sublime.

[Kunama]

Actually when Phil introduced himself to you, he also said "This is my mate from Canberra". I then tried to introduce myself but you chose not to listen, you just turned and followed Phil into your "Showroom".... probably too keen to get the sale done...

I thought that was rather rude of you so then decided to say no more about who I was.... The only other name you could have heard was me answering my phone to talk with my son.

As for your claims that Claude Voarino works for you and you allow him to run the Takahashi retail only because you are too busy as you are the chief designer of Takahashi Seisakusho optics....????

The comments that Phil, who bought the CN212 from you, related are indeed a true version of the conversation you had.

The CN212 on our arrival hung rather precariously on a mount and was held on by two loose bolts. The FT MPA focuser was attached and was rather notchy in its feel, you told Phil that that is how they should be. It was only after I insisted that there was something wrong that you produced a screwdriver and loosened the retaining screws which were on so tight they were bending the pinion shaft.

I have since re collimated the scope and it is once again in fine fettle, I also managed to straighten the pinion and the FT now resides on my Bino-TSA....

I hope this clears up any misconceptions,

Kunama

I will say no more about the matter and no doubt we will no longer communicate. Please feel free to place the username 'Kunama' on your 'ignore' list as I will do to the username 'Astromelb'

[LewisM]

Cris, just FYI all your lies and erroneous statements have been HTML saved.

Astromelb also added to my Ignore User list.

[LewisM]

The best defence is not offence but outright lies hey buddy.

I actually had NOTHING to do with Phil's statement - I was drawn to it by yet another of your very satisfied customers.

As to 3 months ago...just what was I selling or trying to sell to you? I haven't offered you anything for 2 years, or are you forgetting time lines now?

[issdaol]

I have no problem with anyone that makes a living from Astronomy........there are many honest, reliable, reputable Astronomy Manufacturers and Retailers that are members of IIS.

I do have a problem with people that Lie, Misrepresent or take advantage of others for their own advantage, gain or self aggrandisement.

The open forum is the appropriate place to post these experiences and issues so other IIS members can weigh and judge the responses for themselves and make informed decisions.