TakFS-60CB vs WO star 71 vs SW ED80 vs 150-600mm lens?

[Lognic04]

I am looking for a widefield scope to get in the future, around 400mm and ~1k budget, which of these would suit me best?
TakFS-60CB vs WO star 71 vs SW ED80 vs 150-600mm lens?
:thanx::question:

[LewisM]

All have pros and cons.

None, new, will be under $1000 - all are over. Second hand you can get the ED80 under $1K, but usually not the Tak or WO.

[glend]

You can buy a Teleskop-Express TS80 Photoline f7 (f5.5 reduced) APO, FPL-53 for less than $1k, in fact you can get it shipped to you for less than $1k, i know because i just did it.

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p8637_TS-Optics-PHOTOLINE-80-mm-f-7-FPL53-Doublet-Apo---rack-and-pinion-focuser.html

I already had the 3" Photoline Reducer Corrector for my larger APO so i did not need to buy that to run at f5.5.

Focal length is 560mm at f7, 432mm at f5.5.

It has a good strong rack and pinon focuser, the same 2.5" focuser used on the 115mm APO.

With the Tak your paying a premium for the name

[LewisM]

You may rethink those choice of words if you ever own or seriously use a Tak Glen. Just sayin'...

WO71 doublet - wouldn't go near one again. TERRIBLE CA and astigmatism. Very hard to balance it on a mount.

The tak FS-60 is my least favourite Tak ever made, but many love them. Still, it is a better scope than the old WO 71 and the ED80.

I would have gladly traded my Esprit 80 for the MT160, until I kept reading of the woes and modifications done by a prior owner/seller... :(

[glend]

I have looked through a Tak, and i would never own one. While nicely made, from a performance perspective, i regard them as over priced. I saw a quote recently that summed it up nicely, it was in an article on flourite verses FPL-53 and it went like this:

" If there is a difference it is most likely seen in the Takahashi profit figures". In other words, they are very successful in elite branding. There probably was a time when there was a performance advantage but those days are gone.

I will try to find the article for you.
Of course the wolfs will be after me now for daring to question Tak supremacy.

[Kunama]

I doubt there will be any wolves after you Glen ;) You are perfectly entitled to voice your view as is your Guide Dog no doubt :lol:

[LewisM]

Thanks Matt, you owe me leather cleaning after soft drink came out my nose all over the car...:lol:

[LewisM]

Wolves vs Chows I guess :)

Come to Canberra one fine night. We'll gladly show you what Tak and A-P show you. You may be surprised rather than regurgitate someone else's view.

[Camelopardalis]

Always worth reading the original post before bashing the competition, Lewis ;)

The Star 71 is a quadruplet, no CA, 45mm flat field.

This is NOT the same as the WO Zenithstar 71, cheap doublet, which has plenty of CA...it's actually fine for visual, you just get blue halos when imaging.

[LewisM]

I was making reference to Beren and the 71 doublet

[LewisM]

Reference to the original 71s I bashed. They were AWFUL even visual

[Camelopardalis]

Scary muff :D

[glend]

Anyone wanting a less biased appraisal of performance might find these interesring:

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/507960-fluorite-vs-ed/

And this comprehensive look at various objective materials in combination (note the Strehl figures from #15 onward).

http://telescope-optics.net/semiapo_and_apo_examples.htm

Eddgie's examples of comparative Strehl figures for FPL-53 and Flourite are worth a look, see posts # 13 and 14 in the CN thread.

What i take from the chart is that any historical (or hysterical) flourite advantage is no longer relevant if your choosing FPL-53, even to my guide dog,

[Camelopardalis]

Maybe that's why they redid 'em in 2013...

In contrast, the Z61 I have now has no CA, even with a camera behind it...FPL-53 doublet.

[Lognic04]

Shame isn't it lewis :(

[issdaol]

So Glen......we have gone back to quoting the "Theoretical Sacred Scrolls" and some third hand comments.

So you have had look through a Tak ......once ?? more ...how long?...how many different Tak? Observing location and Conditions? Did you do extensive side by side observations with the same EP's and Diagonals on the same targets on the same night and location???

The fact is Tak produces both Flourite and FPL-53 scopes so a potential purchaser can buy what optical configuration best suites their purpose and/or their preference. So where is the argument for or against Tak given they offer both ??

In the link to the Telescope Optics test website .....and the table you refer to...the highest Strehl Ratio was a F10 scope ....so better corrected refractor due to FL and a great achievement......but still not comparing apples to apples in terms of FL's

In fact the next highest Strehl in that Table is the FPL53 -BSL7-FPL53 triplet and only one manufacturer in the world makes 2 versions of that design i.e. TAKAHASHI ....so how does that support your anti Tak argument !?!?!

Rohr Tests have shown TOA 150 samples with Strehls of .99 which again does not support your Tak bashing.

So can you please provide detailed information and real work practical examples to support your argument ???

Or is this just the case of some very poorly and misread bashing due to being disgruntled because some people make a personal choice to pay a little more for a Tak for that extra bit of mechanical and optical quality??

[Steffen]

It does make for a nice finder scope, I suppose :lol:

[LewisM]

Don't forget the perfect Tak FSQ-85ED/106ED/106EDX/106EDXIII/106EDX IV/130ED.... all incredible telescopes, highly coveted by top imagers globally (almost as much as the FSQ-106N Fluorite).

I joined the A-P side recently, and find them every bit as wonderful as the Taks.

[LewisM]

It's called justification of choice :)

[LewisM]

Might get one to put on the A-P :P

[casstony]

Some of the Chinese scopes give you most of the premium scope performance for half the money but it's common knowledge (and in my experience) Takahashi is a little better, offering consistently excellent optics. TS, WO, etc can be great scopes too though.

I wouldn't buy a new Tak but I did buy a new Esprit. Lots of choices to suit different wallets :)

[casstony]

Logan, if you can find a used Esprit 80 they are a nice scope, with an included flattener and adapters. Maybe haggle with Lewis a little :)

[sharpiel]

In the riiiight corner weighing in at...is Takahashi...

In the left corner...

Let's get reeeadddy to ruuuuuuuuuuumble!

:rofl: :scared3:

[Atmos]

Not sure what the price is like but there is probably a Borg or two that would fit in there.

[Lognic04]

:rofl:

:scared3:

:fight:

[LewisM]

Hmmmm....MT-160 plus $200 cash would do it.

[Lognic04]

Hmm, Lewis ive got no idea if I want to keep the 160 or get your esprit, I'm just not sure about using a 400mm scope compared to the mt at 1330mm

[LewisM]

Guiding at short focal lengths is VERY easy compared to longer ones. f/5 vs f/8.3 guiding...like night and day.

[Wavytone]

OK some serious competition does exist for small APO's and depending on the value of our stupid peso, can be had under the $1k mark landed here.

For starters the TS Photoline quad APO which I have - http://www.apm-telescopes.de/en/telescopes/refracting-telescopes-ota/apochromates/ts-imaging-star-70-mm-f-678-ed-quadruplet-flatfield-apo-refractor.html Flat fully corrected and diffraction-limited field 32mm diameter, no colour whatsoever visually and quite capable of stupid magnifications that you wouldn't expect from a 70mm, and resolving the disks of Uranus and Neptune for example. Mechanically beautifully built and the TS focusser makes Taks look primitive.

There are several other APOs on the APM site under $1k in the range 60-80mm f/5-f/7, some FPL-53, ED doublets and triplets or quads. Ditto the TS site.

Only reason to keep a small refractor sub 100mm is sheer convenience or photography.

But if you are a visual observer a better buy is a 127mm ... 150mm SCT or Mak which can be had for around $1k.

[SkyWatch]

Back to Logan's original post, and ignoring all the Tak bashing and defence (although I must say I have a Tak TSA 102, and am very happy with it, plus I got it a few years back from Claude at a price that was very competitive... oh: and check out the Strehl diagram: Tak is the only manufacturer I have ever seen that gives Strehl across the visible spectrum) ;)

Sorry, back to Logan: have you seen the post in the classics for an ED80: http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=159828

(Disclaimer: I don't know anything about it and I have never met Zane (the seller): I just noticed it was for sale.)

All the best,

Dean

[DJT]

I found that for visual the Tak is really versatile especially with the extender q module( FS60Q). A very good grab and go with mount or tripod and a pleasure to view through.

With the Q module you get a very flat field, not so with the native FL so you would need the flattner as well if you plan to image.

So you could consider getting the basic ota then adding the q later when budget allows or when one comes up on classifieds but depends on what you will use the scope for.

The takettes rack up the cost though so check what you are in for based in purpose.

Can't comment on the others

Cheers

[rcheshire]

The little experience I have with the FS60CB reflects the preceding post. I was fortunate to buy a package with many of the tackettes and added a camera rotator - as you own a Tak you will be aware of the routine.

Had it not been for the offer, I might have settled on something else, but I do like the flexibility of the system. It's an OK wide field instrument with a flattener or reducer.

Compared to a Canon 200mm USM and an explore scientific ED80, the FS60 has better resolution, though not immune from wobble in the focus draw tube and will need support with a heavy camera, if you use it for AP. Lenses don't suffer from this.

It's not an fsq and focus is not as sensitive to temperature, from what I can tell and neither is it as difficult to set as the Canon. Focus is locked and hasn't changed over several uses. It won't slip. The ES was problematic. The tractor like rack and pinion on the 60 ain't perfect but it is very functional.

[Lognic04]

If I got the esprit, what would I miss from my MT? Are the optics as good as a tak in the esprit? (from what I've read yes)

[Lognic04]

Also, after what's been said here I'm a bit weary of Chinese scopes :)

[gregbradley]

There are 2 main advantages of fluorite and one big disadvantage.

Fluorite has way less dispersion. If you get a green laser and shine it through an FPL53 triplet you will see each lens. If you do that with a fluorite the laser will be invisible in the fluorite lens component.

Fluorite also enables the optical designer an extra degree of freedom. It lets them make a faster scope with the same levels of chromatic aberration.

The disadvantage is its soft.

I noticed in my uses of fluorite versus FPL53 that fluorite based scopes tended to produce more colour in the images.

I noticed it immediately when I went from an FSQ106EDX111 to a TEC110 F5.6 fluorite. The TEC produced much richer colours. Of course processing comes into this but I am saying with similar levels of boost etc.

I have used both fluorite and FPL53 and I would take Fluorite lensed scopes over FPL53 if I could get it but I would not care too much if I couldn't.

Greg.

[The Mekon]

At the risk of being "uninvited" to the next Tak attack, I tend to agree with Tony here. Hard to tell the difference between some of the chinese offerings and the premium makes these days. Comes down to mechanical features and the "strehl" claim which you pay the premium for. Me, I like Taks but not the weight or complication that comes with them. Almost bought an Esprit 150 (Tak copy) but put off by the weight.

[casstony]

It's just a different image scale from the different focal length - depends what you want to image. The Esprit optics are plenty good enough for imaging. Some of the early Esprits had issues with uneven pressure on the lens edges causing pac man star halos, but that is fixed in the current model and Skywatcher is good about replacing any defective units under warranty.

The uneven star halo has been a problem in many other Chinese refractors from time to time too, including some from WO. WO does have good warranty practices though.

[casstony]

You get a better deal with a Chinese scope but quality control is less consistent. Warranty issues are easy to deal with if you've purchased in Australia (eg. Skywatcher Esprit). If you're buying from overseas you need to stick with more reliable models and buy from a reliable dealer. The TS triplets which Glen refers to have a reputation for being of good quality in general.

[LewisM]

Seriously , whatever floats your boat. Chinese scopes don't thrill me yet as IMHO they are NOT good enough still. Getting better though. Your mileage may vary

[gregbradley]

I don't really know not having one but I thought the usual problem with the Chinese scopes is more the rigidity of the focuser, how wide the corrected illuminated circle is, quality of the correctors/reducers?

Not an issue with a smaller camera. As soon as you go to a larger sensor all these things become of major importance.

Greg.

[Camelopardalis]

This time last year, I was imaging with my trusty Canon 6D on my Esprit 100. Nice flat field/round stats right across. The 80 doesn't claim to accomodate a full frame though.

It all depends on what FOV you want. There's always more than one way to skin a cat. Don't be afraid to experiment, after all, it's only money :shrug: :lol: I've recently been experimenting with chasing galaxies and small objects with tiny pixels on my 550mm F/L scope, heresy to the traditionalists. The detail possible on a good night has astounded me.

[LewisM]

The Esprits optically are hard to beat in their class. In fact, you can't amongst any of he other Chinese scopes.

And mechanically, after fiddling, that too is really good.

[Andy01]

I notice no one has mentioned the Stellarvue SV70 T in this thread. Nice piece of kit, f4.8 336mm FL with reducer.
It's got a solid r&p focusser that holds up my QSI wsg8 at zenith with no slipping.
Nice imaging scope :)