Takahashi Fsq-130ed

[RickS]

No price yet: http://www.astromart.com/classifieds/details.asp?classified_id=870387

[Octane]

omg. I'm going to be broke forever.

H

[multiweb]

This one will cost a bundle and weigh 10kgs at least.

[RickS]

Me too, H ;)



Yes, it looks like a beast. Would go nicely with my Atlas/U16M.

[blink138]

where's lewis.........................?
pat

[Octane]

Yeah, where is he! He's got my N!

Lewis, when are you going to buy this one and sell it at 25%? :P

H

[multiweb]

Listing all his stuff in the classifieds.:lol: Probably a couple of kids for sale as well. :P

[DavidTrap]

That's going to weight a ton!

DT

[Paul Haese]

Hmmm, now that is interesting. I wonder what they will be charging for that.

[LewisM]

:nerd::2thumbs::prey:

I wonder if this one would be ok on my GPD2?

:D:P

[LewisM]

Surely you jest. It's el-crappio ED. If it was fluorite, then I may consider selling myself to the Astronomical Demon.

[LewisM]

I have your FSQ106N? I don't recall that your honour....

[Octane]

You very funny guy. That's why I kill you last.</schwarzenegger>

H

[LewisM]

I knew you were a terrorbomberist.

[dvj]

I'm in for one. No price yet. It will go great with my Atlas and Proline 16803 over in Coona. The FSQ 106 is IMO one of the best imaging scopes you can buy. I hope this one lives up to the legacy.

j

[SimmoW]

Looks purposeful. Ok, closest to the pin comp time. Claude's selling price! 1 child? 10 grand?

[RickS]

I think it will be a great combo with the KAF-16803, John! The KAF-50100 would be interesting too but the read noise is a bit high (12.5 e- on the Truesense spec sheet.)



Yes, I would have gone for $10K too but since it's already taken I'll pick $9.5K (OTA only...)

[LewisM]

$9765

A guess based on TSA vs FSQ106 vs TOA 130 proportional prices.

Do I want one? OF COURSE! But that will mean Gold Lotto win. Otherwise, not for a while :(

[FlashDrive]

:rofl:

[uwahl]

My guess - FSQ 106 is about 1.6 x price of nearest aperture "normal" Tak (TSA102super). Based on TOA 130 NFB price of $8490 that gives a price of about $14000 (to the nearest thousand). God almighty - I might have to go back to work!:eyepop:

[Kunama]

$ 10,495.ºº

I have started to save up for it already, so far I have the $5.ºº covered ........

[Hans Tucker]

Well I have the $10K+ for this scope :question: but then I did purchase an FSQ-106ED a few years ago which I have never used

[RobF]

I'm sure there's a lotto ticket here somewhere we haven't checked. Off to ask the wife now :thumbsup:

[Peter Ward]

Very cool.

But....Would it deliver images any better than say an AP130 F6.0 with an AP dedicated flattener? :question:

[RickS]

Probably not, but less chance of dying of old age while still on the waiting list :)

[multiweb]

:lol: So if you're let's say 10yrs younger than Roland look on Astromart instead?

[LewisM]

Waiting list? What waiting list? AP is rid of them now for new production, but honours the lists first

I will stick with my FCT-100. It is afterall a scope Roland even tips his hat to and acknowledges it as the best 4" scope ever made.

[Paul Haese]

Until the next piece of tinsel catches your eye Lewis. :P

[FlashDrive]

:lol: ....yah gotta love it .....smile :D Lewis...!! :thumbsup:

Col.

[LewisM]

Tinsel???!!! Where tinsel??!!!

[cometcatcher]

It looks out of place in that beat up office. Must be the engineers office, not the CEO's. :P

[RobF]

It is an interesting setting.
That digital camera looks like it has at least 3 MILLION pixels.

[LewisM]

I am actually fairly certain the photo was taken in Art Campiani's office - he's the USA distributor of Tak, operating out of TNR (Texas Nautical Repair/Tak America). There are other shots of Art holding the scope on CN at an astrofair too.

[beren]

Along with Art holding the new FSQ in that CN thread is that Yuri from TEC?

Impressive looking scope, wow that focuser....wonder what that rasied formation above the focuser holder is , has four bolt holes ?

Price anyone's guess but I reckon maybe twelve grand min :question:


Now Takahashi have got that out of the way they need to get onto the urgent manufacture of tube ring weights for the TSA-120....el pronto/avanti

[LewisM]

Yes, it is Yuri from TEC.

Tube weights for TSA120 - Vixen 125mm tube rings with a small weight screwed to them. Simple

[beren]

Yep good idea, but not sure if the vixen rings would fit over the rear of the scope into position with the funky way they work. I use a losmandy sliding weight dovetail thingy underneath the main dovetail plate as a temporay measure. Ok I am vain I would rather a dedicated weight ring from Tak to match the rest of the system......they really should have one with a scope that is front heavy.

{got the extra long bt dovetail coming which may help}

PS:congrats on the FCT Lewis .....im envious

[LewisM]

Just unscrew partilly the tiny locking screw in the focuser casting flange, then unscrew the focuser casting from the tube. Install the Vixen rings.

I take the focusers off all my Taks to fit the Vixen rings - MUCH lighter than the clamshell, and work better IMHO.

[gregbradley]

Now that's a nice evolution for Takahashi. I wondered when they would bring out a larger FSQ.

Its bound to be an awesome scope as long as they have sorted the focuser issues of the FSQ106ED type focuser.

Greg.

[Paul Haese]

What was the problem with that focusor Greg? I have that model but not noted any issues with the focusor yet.

[LewisM]

Image shift when locking the focuser "trigger". I didn't notice it much with the new FSQ-106EDXIII I had, if at all, but many others have. I think it is a lot more to do with focuser play due to age/use, so a new one won't necessarily show it. Routinely tightening the draw tube tensioners (4 on top of the casting) may alleviate this shift, but of that I am not certain. The teflon pad these tension is not an indefinite resource - it will wear microscopically each time it is used, causing changes.

The teflon pad on my Tak FCT-100 had not been adjusted since new (unless the prior owner resealed with lacquer each time), and needed some adjustment to prevent image shift and also improve the in/out drawtube tension and feel. It's a 28 year old telescope - maintenance was required :)

[RickS]

Some people had trouble with orthogonality of the focuser with heavy imaging gear, Paul.

[pmrid]

Curious that Tak persists with the R&P focuser paradigm. That said, I would cheerfully donate the proverbial leftie for one of these babies. I suppose it will mean a rush of 106s onto the market (wishful thinking of course).
Peter

[LewisM]

Actually Peter, MANY scope manufacturers are leaving the Crayford behind. Stellarvue is going mostly R&P (now that FT is making them again) and a few others. R&P is the best for imaging because of the weight it can hold without any form of slip, whereas a Crayford takes some efforts to make work really well for imaging - the Moonlite clutch pinion lock (which I have read reports of still slipping with any imaging rig over 3kg) and FT going R&P ans also additional tensioning locks on their Crayfords.

The Crayford design is basically just an R&P with the engagment teeth removed - smooth steel and ball bearings rubbing on (hopefully) flat surfaces to provide the friction required. Smooth, yes, "solid", not always.

I prefer the R&P by far over a Crayford. When you fit the MEF unit to a Tak, the focus precision is as good as a Moonlite, and close to a FT. The Tak standard focuser will hold a 5kg+ imaging load without any slip at all, at zenith angles.

[Hans Tucker]

I see Anacortes Telescope & Wild Bird, via Astromart, have advertised the first two FSQ-130ED up from grabs in North America.....the price.....$12,795.00..and that is in USD.

[gregbradley]

Missed this one.

Flex. It seems the fix was to tighten the little screws under the focuser to tighten it up. They used a Teflon pad on the drawtube and the latest model switched to a metal pad. I guess the Teflon could compress.

I didn't have a problem with my one but there were quite a few complaints on the Tak uncensored Yahoo Group.

The focuser lock also was a step backwards compared to the FSQ06N. The 106N was a simple screw that you tightened. The 106ED has a lever. If you manually focus that lever is a liability as when you engage it the focus shifts wrecking your focus that you just did. If you partially engage it then focus then fully engage it there was no problem. So poorly implemented.

Not an issue if you are using a Robofocus or some other focus unit.

Greg.

Greg.

[gregbradley]

Ouch. It will be interesting to see the initial images though. It could be an interesting scope.

The focal length is not massively different over the 106 from 530 to 650mm which is still very widefield. The extra aperture though should pick up more faint detail in less time and better resolution of stars which can be a bit vague on 106ED widefield images.

Greg.

[gregbradley]

Here is the link to the FSQ130 price.

http://www.buytelescopes.com/takahashi-fsq-130ed-flat-field-super-apochromat-refractor

So that makes it around AUD$19,000 landed including GST and no doubt that may not include the clamshell or mounting rings.

Add extra for the reducers and the 1.6 extender Q and the complete system is going to be about $21-22K, most likely. Wow. It'd have to be spectacular.

Greg.

[RickS]

Makes the AP140 look like a bargain, Greg :thumbsup:

[Hans Tucker]

I was contemplating the FSQ-130ED until I saw the price...now I am revisiting the idea of a TOA-150NFB with reducer which should perform as well as the FSQ.

[Paul Haese]

Those prices are stupid for an extra inch of aperture over the 106. I certainly will not be going down that rabbit hole. Surely those prices will come down in time. An 8" RH would be cheaper and produce better results so long as you don't try to hang a massive camera off the back. It is only 9-11K landed in Australia too.

[gregbradley]

With the TCC its like a 140mm FSQ.

Greg.

[AnakChan]

Aren't the FSQs meant to be for photography though providing flat fields for medium/large format, whereas the TOAs are more for visual? I'm not certain if one can be an alternative to the other rather than compliment each other?

[Paul Haese]

This image (http://paulhaese.net/M42andrunningmandeep.html) was taken through a TSA102 (the baby version of the TOA) which is probably also considered a visual scope by Takahashi and possibly a few people out there.

In short the answer to your question is no, all the TOA's are good for imaging. Just one scope is a Petzval which has a field flattener incorporated into the scope and TOA's require flatteners or reducers to obtain a flat field for imaging. They can be used for visual work and imaging.

[Slawomir]

That is certainly a gorgeous image Paul.

One never gets tired of looking at it...

[AnakChan]

Ditto. That is a nice image. Very nicely done.

NB: Mind you though I did say "...flat fields for medium/large format".