No one has mentioned the Mewlons...Phil and John and Colin all have Mewlons. As an interested future Mewlon buyer how do they compare to the refractors?
No one has mentioned the Mewlons...Phil and John and Colin all have Mewlons. As an interested future Mewlon buyer how do they compare to the refractors?
No idea yet! Clouded every time I bring it out and even in the clear moments the seeing hadn't been good enough to even see a single diffraction ring!
So far I haven't been able to justify spending enough to buy my dream Tak but I've heard the apparent Strehl of a cheap chinese refractor improves if you give it a coat of Tak green. Haven't seen it through my own eyes yet. Anyone know where I can buy some green paint?
No one has mentioned the Mewlons...Phil and John and Colin all have Mewlons. As an interested future Mewlon buyer how do they compare to the refractors?
It's hard to say a favourite apart from ...............all of them
Mewlon 300:
Positives:
Excellent on everything once cooled down, Awesome with binos on Lunar, Planets and Bright DSO's, truely "Refractor Like"
Downside:
Takes ages to cool, not wide field
TOA150:
Positives:
A true all-round APO that performs well on DSO's, Awesome with Bino's, Very Sharp and Colour free
Downsides:
Perhaps a little heavy for a 150mm APO but the performance makes up, takes a little time to cool but not too bad
TSA120
Positives:
I class this as my "Grab & Go", Awesome with Bino's, Very Sharp and Colour free, Very light, Very quick to cool
The one I sold to another person in a fit of stupidity
Gary
Gary, you were suffering seller's remorse before I got out of the door with your 120, if it's any consolation it is being well looked after and has this week received a present in the form of Zeiss binos
Dave Cooke
This will be a short list of the Taks I have had [chokes on own silly joke]
1. FS-60C and Q - didn't grab me. Too much false colour. Q was OK. Real PITA with adaptors, backfocus etc
2. FC-60 (VERY different to an FS-60) - superb, absolutely the best 60mm scope I have ever used
3. FC-76 - good scope, just very limited in what it can see
4. FS-78 - better than the FC-76 by a good margin. VERY enjoyable scope!
5. FSQ-85ED: a joy! A pure joy. Best 80mm class scope out there, and to top it off, it's a quad flatfield scope
6. Sky-90II (or FCL-90 if you prefer) - MUCH better than it's axiomatic reputation. In fact, another joy to use scope.Doesn't go out of collimation unless you drop it 3 stories unlike the BS rumours
7. FC-100 (OLD model) - very close to perfection that a 4" scope can be. Much better than the current crop of FC-100's in many ways. A true stunner all round.
8. FCT-100 - with a measured Strehl of 0.998, it's kind of hard to beat it in a 4" scope. Only downside is the MC's aren't as good as modern MC, so the contrast suffers some. Absolutely positively incredible telescope! Well and truly as good as the reputation that precedes it.
9. FS-102 - almost an FC-100, but NOT quite (said in a Maxwell Smart voice)
10. TSA-102: my current scope. Can't fault it but haven't used it much. Hey, Paul Haese used one, so it must be good A FANTASTIC all-rounder - couple it with the flattener, reducer/flattener and the extender and you have everything covered.
11. FSQ-106N: the fluorite quad flatfielder that has no rival, even it's newer brother. Colour is deep, sharp, light, sexy. Makes the Chinese attempts at astrographs look like farces (which they are )
12. FSQ-106ED/EDXIII: VERY sharp, good contrast, but heavier than the N and more prone to weird focuser flex/tilt issues
Probably missing a couple...and factor in having owned a few samples of each in some cases
And then there are the others I have used but never owned...
Just paid for my first Tak today a Sky 90II (on its way soon - thanks Beren). Wife is going to kill me as I have gone where no man should, into joint savings!
Read a few mixed reviews on this scope, but was glad to see that Lewis, with his extensive experience seems to think it can perform reasonably well.
I am hoping this might satisfy my Tak curiosity/desire for now and I don't get suckered in down a slippery slope!
Although, I still also want to get a FC-76DCU, or a FS-60Q, maybe a FOA-60Q, then again an FC-60C sounds nice. But, I definitely want to eventually replace my Saxon ED120 with somethings like a TSA120. Oh, here I go again!
This will be a short list of the Taks I have had [chokes on own silly joke]
1. FS-60C and Q - didn't grab me. Too much false colour. Q was OK. Real PITA with adaptors, backfocus etc
2. FC-60 (VERY different to an FS-60) - superb, absolutely the best 60mm scope I have ever used
3. FC-76 - good scope, just very limited in what it can see
4. FS-78 - better than the FC-76 by a good margin. VERY enjoyable scope!
5. FSQ-85ED: a joy! A pure joy. Best 80mm class scope out there, and to top it off, it's a quad flatfield scope
6. Sky-90II (or FCL-90 if you prefer) - MUCH better than it's axiomatic reputation. In fact, another joy to use scope.Doesn't go out of collimation unless you drop it 3 stories unlike the BS rumours
7. FC-100 (OLD model) - very close to perfection that a 4" scope can be. Much better than the current crop of FC-100's in many ways. A true stunner all round.
8. FCT-100 - with a measured Strehl of 0.998, it's kind of hard to beat it in a 4" scope. Only downside is the MC's aren't as good as modern MC, so the contrast suffers some. Absolutely positively incredible telescope! Well and truly as good as the reputation that precedes it.
9. FS-102 - almost an FC-100, but NOT quite (said in a Maxwell Smart voice)
10. TSA-102: my current scope. Can't fault it but haven't used it much. Hey, Paul Haese used one, so it must be good A FANTASTIC all-rounder - couple it with the flattener, reducer/flattener and the extender and you have everything covered.
11. FSQ-106N: the fluorite quad flatfielder that has no rival, even it's newer brother. Colour is deep, sharp, light, sexy. Makes the Chinese attempts at astrographs look like farces (which they are )
12. FSQ-106ED/EDXIII: VERY sharp, good contrast, but heavier than the N and more prone to weird focuser flex/tilt issues
Probably missing a couple...and factor in having owned a few samples of each in some cases
And then there are the others I have used but never owned...
What a great post. Thanks for that writeup.
I have had a few Taks:
1. FS102 - my first Tak, built like a tank, but 4 inch scope is only really good for widefield views. Deep sky objects are way too dim. For imaging not bad a bit of CA.
2. FS152. I got this as the TOA150 was not really available as it was too new and this one was. A fantastic scope for visual and some of the best views ever using it. For imaging its really only a semi APO and some blue fringing on bright stars occurs. Nice and light. I'd call it a great visual scope.
3. FSQ106N, built like a tank, those gorgeous green coated fluorite lenses.
Great colour rendition, no flex focuser, strong, it suffers from some vignetting expressed as dark bars through bright stars on the edges of the image. Overall an exceptional scope.
4. FSQ106EDX3; mine was great, no focuser issues/tilt/flex. The micro focuser lock was a joke poorly implemented. The Captain's wheel was a bad design choice and was locked off the whole time.
As an imaging instrument I loved it. Round stars like sand to the corners, small scope, windproof. But colour rendition whilst largely in your hands in post processing its less colourful to start with and the internal paint gives a slight greenish colour bias. Flocking the interior corrects that.
Too bad Tak don't make a TOA110, that could be a nice scope if it were fast enough.
Sheesh after that lot Lewis I'm surprised you didn't stop farnarkling with small refractors and step up to something larger and more esoteric, like a Questar 7, Matt's TEC mak, or (ahem...) my Santel MK91.
Either that or bag yourself a serious collectible refractor like a Thomas Cooke (a real one not the rubbish one we saw recently) in full working order. I can say the one I used was indeed optical perfection.
I can safely say I am immune to refractoritis, including the Takahashiitis strain.
Didn't like them (always some issues I disliked, like dew issues, weight, focus shift, bulk, mirrors eventually need recoating, collimation and so on...)
So, it's refractors for me. I like Maks, but not enough to rid myself of refractors.
How long is a piece of string - you need many different Taks to survive !
My favourite is the TOA150 near perfect strehl great focal length - Big heavy and not always easy to manage but its my all time favourite and still love it, Im finding it very hard to part with
For visual I love my CN212 - its two scopes in one a Newtonian and a Cassegrain - I just leave it in Cassegrain mode - only scope I have had where I've seen a textbook perfect airey disc - ie a diffracted defocussed star split into 4 quadrants
The FC76 flourite is a great grab'go visual scope and got used at school star parties, its my son's now but hes not using it so I'm selling that to fund other things
My FSQ106N was a great scope even for visual it was truly perfect
However the FSQ106EDXIII is better for imaging, easy to set up and didnt suffer from the peripheral 'dark angels' the "N" series had (I think it was due to an internal aperture pinch on one of the Petzval elements)
I sold my Epsilon e200 before I got to use it for asteroids and comets (health reasons) so can't really comment (but its a big heavy scope)
My Epsilon e160 is much smaller but had a bigger imaging circle so it was better for imaging I think Im swapping it back for the e200 !
The Mewlon 180 never got much use as I found I was using the CN212 more even though it was bigger, but the views are legendary - better than my eyes could resolve.
My son got my MT130 thats Tak's little Newtonian - nice enough, very lightweight and way better than my first scope a Meade 114mm !
They all have a different place and role - as a non drinker, non smoker I have been able to gather them up over 2 decades, I used to run a few star parties for primary school kids and so they all got used at different times all visually and some for imaging too.
Some are better than others but they are all great
Just a shame I havent really been able to use them for the last 2 years hence my ads
apart from ...............all of them 
A FANTASTIC all-rounder - couple it with the flattener, reducer/flattener and the extender and you have everything covered.
)
Lewis that is a lot of taks! 
).
