Takahashi Scope and Mounts

[yoda776 (Matt)]

Telescope

After being spoilt going to Japan last year and using a 16" scope in our own private bungalow at Saji Observatory - good but you have to brush up on your Japanese ... mine was not that good - I have considered getting a Takahashi telescope and looking at a Mewlon.

After looking at a Mewlon 250 and considering my wallet with moths coming out of it, as well as the weight (back and shoulders not as good as they used to be), I am now looking to a Mewlon 210. The scope would be used as a portable scope, so it seems a good choice?

Any thoughts / sagely advice on why I would go a Mewlon 210 / 250?

Mount

I am looking at a mount for a Takahashi Mewlon 210 and wondered about a few things.

1) What is an appropriate Takahashi mount and tripod?
2) Would an AZEQ6 mount and tripod be enough?
3) Is there a history tree of which Takahashi mounts came evolving to current times? I ask as I have looked at a Takahashi EM200 Temma-2M mount and is said to be 2010 vintage - any later versions?
4) I realise this will be based on opinion and experiences for each individual, however what is the best Takahashi mount and why for a Mewlon 210?
5) I get the Takahashi tripods are wood but did wonder about uneven ground as the world is not often flat where I live - the wooden tripods do not adjustable. How do you get around this?

Many thanks in advance.

[AnakChan (Sean)]

Takahashi µ250CRS owner here. It is large but still manageable. I think the electronic focuser is a blessing compared to the 210's SCT-like focuser that's susceptible to image shift.

If you're looking at predecessor models, be careful with the electronic focuser of the 250. From what I understand if the electronics of the older focuser goes bust, repair's going to be very difficult as the OEM maker of the motor is no longer available (and therefore unsupportable). Granted low chance of broken electronic focusers but the risk exists.

As for mounts, Takahashi refreshed their mounts recently, now with Wi-Fi. Nothing revolutionary compared to other brands but Takahashi's rather slow to "catch up with the times" with their mounts. To -me- I'm very impressed with the Tak mounts as they're really smooth, however I wish they're a little bit more modern.

I'm using a Vixen AXD mount with my µ250CRS. I'm reasonably happy with it although it is a rather heavy single piece and I wished it had encoders.

[Atmos (Colin)]

I've quite briefly owned a M210 in the past and never got much use out of it due a several month run of horrid seeing and then moved onto a M250. I cannot say much about a visual comparison between the two but I've always been impressed by the views out of the M250 when the seeing cooperates.

My reason for wanting the M250 was to have the potential to do imaging (which is mostly what it's used for right now) although my original purpose was to use it for planetary viewing with binoviewers. I also wanted the electronic focuser which incorporates a non-moving primary mirror.

I'd say that the benefit of the M250 over the M210 is better mechanics as the difference in aperture isn't that dramatic.
In getting that extra aperture and mechanical design you do pay in the weight department... I'd estimate that the M250 is twice the weight of the M210. The M210 could comfortably be used on a HEQ5 where as the M250 requires the EQ6. If balanced the EQ6 or AZ-EQ6 works fine with the M250 but the dampening on the stock tripod isn't that great.

It's hard to fault the M250 though, optically it is excellent! I've done a LOT more imaging with it than visual but I've comfortably been able to get unguided exposures with FWHM close to 1".

[yoda776 (Matt)]

Thanks Sean for the advice on the older model scopes. I was looking at new as the secondhand market in Oz is a little scant (I know one came up recently but I believe I was second in line and it sold).

I probably should qualify my reason for the scope a little more.

I am mostly a visual astronomer with occasional imaging with DSLR and hoping a little CCD imaging. Mainly planets and some DSO if I can. The other reason is weight of the M250 which I suspect may be a limiter with my body and then become a looked at rather than a looked through scope. While I like the the idea of the fans and electronic focuser the weight is something I would possibly struggle with (bearing in mind I do not have an observatory or pier to permanently mount it on and do grab and go).

Does the image shift mentioned affect the viewing part?

[yoda776 (Matt)]

Thanks Colin for the heads up on the M250. I think both you and Sean do make a case for the M250 and appreciate the view points and your experiences. Still weight is a big concern for me. Mind you cost is a factor (think between $5000 for a M210 and something like $12000+ for M250 is a big jump). The only thought is showing off to the guys at a viewing site with a M250 but not really a reason to buy the scope. The extra light gathering though would bump it up to see a few more DSOs.

I only really have reference to that with my 8 inch Meade LX200 vs my friend's Meade LX90 10 inch with obvious improvement in brightness noted in my viewing.

The only thing I wish the M210 had was an electronic focuser and possibly the fans from the M250 to aid in normalising temp of the primary mirror. I wondered about negating primary mirror image shift by adding a Feather Touch or Moonlite focuser for visual. I understand that would be a difficult ask with imaging.

Are there any M210 owners with any experiences? Looking for any show stopper issues or reasons you may have moved on. Also whether there are any issues with eyepieces.

[multiweb (Marc)]

Originally Posted by yoda776

Thanks Colin for the heads up on the M250. I think both you and Sean do make a case for the M250 and appreciate the view points and your experiences. Still weight is a big concern for me. Mind you cost is a factor (think between $5000 for a M210 and something like $12000+ for M250 is a big jump). The only thought is showing off to the guys at a viewing site with a M250 but not really a reason to buy the scope. The extra light gathering though would bump it up to see a few more DSOs.

I only really have reference to that with my 8 inch Meade LX200 vs my friend's Meade LX90 10 inch with obvious improvement in brightness noted in my viewing.

The only thing I wish the M210 had was an electronic focuser and possibly the fans from the M250 to aid in normalising temp of the primary mirror. I wondered about negating primary mirror image shift by adding a Feather Touch or Moonlite focuser for visual. I understand that would be a difficult ask with imaging.

Are there any M210 owners with any experiences? Looking for any show stopper issues or reasons you may have moved on. Also whether there are any issues with eyepieces.

I had a Mewlon 210 and you will need the corrector to image with it. Not cheap. Apart from that it's a great scope. Sharp as which brings up a few questions about the guiding. You'll need a really good mount to make the most of it if you plan to do any astro photography with it. With an AZEQ6 I'd get an FSQ. Much more fun and portable.

[yoda776 (Matt)]

Thank you Marc - for me visual is the priority so would be happy with sharp for that. Imaging I would agree there are better options - I already have a refractor I could use well for this, although the aperture on the Mewlon might be good for planetary and some DSO work it seems. I am one of those like to view things nice and sharp and may take an image or two to have something I can put on my desktop on the PC and maybe hang one up on the wall to say 'I took that'. Not wishing to be a pro, so imaging is not terribly high in consideration.

What mount did you use with the Mewlon 210? What would you recommend?

I have an option for an EM200 Temma-2M mount although it is 2010, which was previously pointed out likely will not have the Wifi but from searching the interweb that mount needs to be driven by a computer / iPad if running goto.

[AstroApprentice (Jason)]

I recently acquired an old model u-250S and still have an old u-210. As Colin said, the 250 is much bigger, but if you have a tip-in saddle like a Rayox, then that can help make mounting easier. Both Mewlons are relatively big and require time to acclimatise thus making them more effort than a small grab & go refractor. I don’t think the 250 is much more effort to set up than the 210. Plus collimation with the three pairs of screws on the 250 is much simpler than the 210 with three screws only. The motorised secondary on the 250 is also a big plus over the 210. IMO, the 210 definitely requires a motorised Crayford focuser on visual back due to issues associated with moving the primary mirror. I also have one on the 250 for automated focussing as the 250S motor controller can’t be connected to PC/ASCOM, but the newer 250 controllers can.
The 210 is good quality, but the 250 is an improved design. Both give great views, but in use to date, I prefer the 250.
I mount both on Losmandy G11 - with the 210 I can use a short CW shaft and less CWs.
You’re likely aware of the lengthy discussion on CN of these scopes:
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/5...nd-mewlon-250/

[yoda776 (Matt)]

Originally Posted by AstroApprentice

I recently acquired an old model u-250S and still have an old u-210. As Colin said, the 250 is much bigger, but if you have a tip-in saddle like a Rayox, then that can help make mounting easier. Both Mewlons are relatively big and require time to acclimatise thus making them more effort than a small grab & go refractor. I don’t think the 250 is much more effort to set up than the 210. Plus collimation with the three pairs of screws on the 250 is much simpler than the 210 with three screws only. The motorised secondary on the 250 is also a big plus over the 210. IMO, the 210 definitely requires a motorised Crayford focuser on visual back due to issues associated with moving the primary mirror. I also have one on the 250 for automated focussing as the 250S motor controller can’t be connected to PC/ASCOM, but the newer 250 controllers can.
The 210 is good quality, but the 250 is an improved design. Both give great views, but in use to date, I prefer the 250.
I mount both on Losmandy G11 - with the 210 I can use a short CW shaft and less CWs.
You’re likely aware of the lengthy discussion on CN of these scopes:
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/5...nd-mewlon-250/

Thank you for the details Jason. I am aware of the discussion and Dr Who has had some valuable insights on some posts - the link you gave is the best one though and thank you for referring me to it again.

I do realise one thing I am a person with not a great deal of money to spend and I can scrape a Mewlon 210 but not the asking price of the 250. To be honest the M210 will be it for me. I have a Meade LX200 8 inch that I have enjoyed and spend time viewing through. I imagine the M210 is an upgrade on that and noting your motorised focuser point - do you have any suggestions on brand and model of motorised focuser?

Also what mount do you use? I was looking at an EM-200 Temma2M or 2Z if I can sell my other gear off, eyepieces, etc.

Many thanks to all for the help so far - advice is invaluable understanding limitations, pros and cons.

[muletopia (Chris)]

Matt.
I am a happy user of a 210. I have the .8 reducer/flattener which works well.
If you use an EOS canon the the Tak canon adapter probably works well
Since I use a QHY camera Joshua Bunn made me the appropriate adapter.
I have never touched the collimation .
It is on a pier mounted Messu 200 mount.
I found a HEQ5_pro OK for visual but hopeless for for photography.


Like you I would love 250 but it is not financially possible unless I find one second hand.


Just my experience
Chris

[yoda776 (Matt)]

Thanks Chris - experience is fine and welcome. I have decided the Mewlon 210 is for me weight, cost, portability on a dark site and dealing with medical conditions etc all being factors of choice I guess.

I have an AZEQ6 I would initially use this scope on. I intended to check out a Tak mount and certainly have looked at the EM200 Temma-2 mounts ... the cost though

Having spent the last two days pretty solidly reading forums and responses it seems collimation is not that much of an issue, so glad to hear you say collimation is still going strong.

I have a Canon 6D so might try to get the Tak wide T ring.

Is the 0.8 reducer/flattener the TKA70581?

Yeah the M250 might have to be something I view through as an OPT (Other Person's Telescopes) when we are actually going to have viewing nights again with the astronomy club with this yoyo open and close system of pandemic responses.

[Wilso]

Hi Matt,
I have a EM200 Temma 2m mount, excellent mount, tracks beautiful, fit and finish is superb.
I wouldn’t exactly call it a portable mount though, the mount alone weighs about 14kg. As for the timber tripod it’s quite large more suited to refractors so I went for a Tak metal adjustable tripod. If your buying second hand just be aware the polerscope is fixed in position and has a limited life, after that you’ll have to use a different method. I think mine expires 2026?
The new models have built in wifi and USB interface where as the earlier model’s you’ll probably want a wifi portal. Using wifi you can control the mount with Skysafari on your phone or iPad etc

Good luck with decision

[yoda776 (Matt)]

Originally Posted by Wilso

Hi Matt,
I have a EM200 Temma 2m mount, excellent mount, tracks beautiful, fit and finish is superb.
I wouldn’t exactly call it a portable mount though, the mount alone weighs about 14kg. As for the timber tripod it’s quite large more suited to refractors so I went for a Tak metal adjustable tripod. If your buying second hand just be aware the polerscope is fixed in position and has a limited life, after that you’ll have to use a different method. I think mine expires 2026?
The new models have built in wifi and USB interface where as the earlier model’s you’ll probably want a wifi portal. Using wifi you can control the mount with Skysafari on your phone or iPad etc

Good luck with decision

Thank you Wilso (and also Merry Christmas! ). That is an interesting point about the polar scope. For some reason I did not think about that expiring. So the newer model is the EM-200 Temma-2z? Might have to ask about the expiry or use on that seens the goto is heavily reliant on the polar alignment from my understanding of the manual in the Temma-2M.

I figured the tripod would be more suitable for refractors as well and you read my mind - I have been looking at metal tripods as the adjustability also works if you do not have an exactly flat surface to work off of (was my thought anyway).

[muletopia (Chris)]

Hello Matt,
Yes the reducer is TKA70581.
Some comments.
Before I bought the correcter (from AEC) is used an Orion thin off axis guider,initially with my Canon EOS 60Da and then with the QHY8L. Using an off axis guider is fiddly especially without a corrector as the edge stars are very coma effected, so the whole assembly usually has to be rotate to find a guide star. Once set up the guiding is good with the Mewlon moveable mirror.



When Joshua made the adapter for the QHY to the flattener it did not allow the off axis guider to be used,I am sure he could make one 10mm shorter with locating screws to take the guider. But I thought to keep it simple.
I bought as Saxon 700mm fl scope from Optics central, without the tripod and mount, a good price.
This scope is mounted in a home made wooden saddle with the correct radius cut outs for the two scopes. All in 12 mm marine ply, the two plates are joined by two 40 mm wide plywood boards which are a good tight fit in rectangular holes in the plates. My wife is into woodwork and has a magnificently accurate CNC router. The whole lot is
inelegantly attached to the Mewlon with miles of gaffer tape.
10 minute exposures give "round" stars but not as good as the OAG.


I use a plate solved model for the mount an scope so rotating the camera to use an OAG is not on.If I did use an OAG and still needed to rotate it with the corrector I would have to rebuild the model for each target. Not a big deal, say 30 minutes. So I will put that off until I need longer exposures than ten minutes.


Cheers
Chris

[Allan]

I’ve used all the different size Mewlons over the years, for visual only, including Colin’s nice 250 version. I stepped up to buy a 250 several times, but each time I looked through one it gave me cause to pause on the purchase.

I know they are extremely liked among Mewlon owners. However again just reading these threads, owners tend to come more from the imaging side of use. It is a great imaging scope, but in my opinion a good visual scope. All I do is visual, and in that sphere the Mewlons don’t compare to a dob with premium optics for the quality of the image it throws up.

I would look at it in two ways. If comparing side by side a 10” Mewlon and a 10” Zambuto dob, the dob will produce higher quality visual views. The dob will be half the price by the time you take into account the mount for the Mewlon, and will be much quicker/easier to setup.

Or, for the same investment you could buy a 14” or larger dob with premium optics, in which case it will be a long way superior to the 10” Mewlon.

That’s just my opinion based on using a lot of gear around the world with friends and at star parties. Take this in no way as putting the Mewlons down. They are very good scopes with masses of happy owners. My point is, from a purely visual point of view, there is a better option.

[astro744]

Originally Posted by Allan

I’ve used all the different size Mewlons over the years, for visual only, including Colin’s nice 250 version. I stepped up to buy a 250 several times, but each time I looked through one it gave me cause to pause on the purchase.

I know they are extremely liked among Mewlon owners. However again just reading these threads, owners tend to come more from the imaging side of use. It is a great imaging scope, but in my opinion a good visual scope. All I do is visual, and in that sphere the Mewlons don’t compare to a dob with premium optics for the quality of the image it throws up.

I would look at it in two ways. If comparing side by side a 10” Mewlon and a 10” Zambuto dob, the dob will produce higher quality visual views. The dob will be half the price by the time you take into account the mount for the Mewlon, and will be much quicker/easier to setup.

Or, for the same investment you could buy a 14” or larger dob with premium optics, in which case it will be a long way superior to the 10” Mewlon.

That’s just my opinion based on using a lot of gear around the world with friends and at star parties. Take this in no way as putting the Mewlons down. They are very good scopes with masses of happy owners. My point is, from a purely visual point of view, there is a better option.

I couldn’t agree more, Allan. A Newtonian with a first class custom mirror makes for an excellent planetary and deep sky telescope. My 10.1” f6.4 Suchting mirror gives me exquisite views when seeing permits. The only time I have seen better on Saturn and Jupiter was through a friends 16” f5 Suchting mirror.

However I think the OP has his heart and mind set on a Mewlon for sentimental reasons and that is reason enough to keep it as the discussion point. I’m not sure how much difference a 210 will be over an 8” SCT. It should be noticeable but whether it is cost effective I’m not sure. If sentiment is involved then I guess it really doesn’t matter.

[yoda776 (Matt)]

Originally Posted by astro744

I couldn’t agree more, Allan. A Newtonian with a first class custom mirror makes for an excellent planetary and deep sky telescope. My 10.1” f6.4 Suchting mirror gives me exquisite views when seeing permits. The only time I have seen better on Saturn and Jupiter was through a friends 16” f5 Suchting mirror.

However I think the OP has his heart and mind set on a Mewlon for sentimental reasons and that is reason enough to keep it as the discussion point. I’m not sure how much difference a 210 will be over an 8” SCT. It should be noticeable but whether it is cost effective I’m not sure. If sentiment is involved then I guess it really doesn’t matter.

I appreciate the feedback and view points and as with all things scope related there are differing view points for what is best. What is best can be defined for an individual based on circumstance, experience, certainly partly an experience leading towards sentiment, knowledge amongst other factors. Yes I would appreciate keeping to the topic as I have been spending a bit of time on this to determine some answers specific to Mewlons.

There are a few factors guiding my decision on this and would also mean it replaces several of my scopes (part of the deal with the boss).

I will digress and say I do agree dobs (good ones) punch above their weight and no matter what people say the Orion XX16g scope has been good as a goto dob and the views I have been happy with (people have been surprised when I have taken it to previous member's nights for the astronomy club). The weight of the components is an issue especially the base board with the motor. In referring to Suchting mirrors I am guessing you are referring to SDM scopes? I can imagine the Orion does not compare but have enjoyed it and looked after it as I do all my scopes.

For me I keep going back to the SCT / Mewlon design and just something I go back to and have given some thought to. The mirrors on the Takahashi gear in Japan when I viewed through the 16" scope were amazing (mind you the observatory 1.04m scope was nice ... so would be the price tag!). We saved for a very long time so enjoyed the only trip overseas we have had and likely to in the foreseeable future. I have good optics in my eyepieces and diagonals so do appreciate good optics in the whole system and certainly understand differing view points. I have found with refractors, SCTs and Dobs there are pros and cons for all (and by no means claiming to be a genius on it all, nor am I devoid of experience or knowledge).

Getting back to the Mewlon I am interested in Mewlon 210 users and experiences. What works and what does not and what accessories are best. The M250 just costs too much and I cannot justify that to the boss anyway, even after considering its weight where you also add tube rings and plates as well which comes back to the weight issue. Be great to view through them to make decisions easier but given today's environment and lack of star party's due to the same issue I would need to rely on experience from others. I am aware of cool down issues mind you I have that with the Intes scope and others. The primary mirror focusing and image shift give some concern but can be negated in some way.

I would be looking at:
* Mewlon 210
* A mount (looked at Takahashi EM200 Temma-2M and 2z, although I have an AZEQ6 which is likely to work also)
* An external focuser to help negate image shift and likely a Moonlite given forums answers and research - a Feather Touch again is pricey. The R&P focuser on the Mewlon you still need to add the 2 speed focusing knob as an extra cost and not sure this is actually better than the Moonlite / Feather Touch (current commentary I can find suggests this is the case, although may sacrifice more back focus - any comments helpful on this).
* A focal reducer / flattener which a forum answer on this topic has provided me the answer so will look towards this
* Changing the finder scope with one with illumination (I like a dimly lit finder to get the precise alignment)
* While a Tak TOE eyepiece would be nice I am not sure I would spring the $400+ for one - I have Zeiss, Leica, Nikon NAV HW, Docter 12.5, Meade 3000 series, Circle Vs, University Optics, Brandon, Televue Plossls, Naglers and Ethos etc to draw from (probably too many and may have to reconcile that too). Would wait to see what they yield before deciding on anything there.
* I have a Baader BBHS 2" diagonal I could use so would not get the Takahashi diagonal - I am not convinced it would be better without comparison unless there was a convincing factual argument to suggest otherwise.
* Are there other accessories / parts that are really crucial to the enjoyment of using this scope?

Regarding the mount and looking at the Takahashi Em200 Temma-2M / 2z mount
* I was a bit concerned about the polar scope time limit mentioned in this thread and how to get around it given the goto relies on this and not a 1 or 2 star alignment like other mounts do?
* Concerned about getting a polar alignment in a site that is not a dark sky site (best SQM rating is a little over 20 at 20.12) - it does not rely on one star, two star or three star alignment like other mounts and does appear more manual. Learning curve perhaps?
* Query about guiding with a mount like this (although understand SkyFi and Sky Safari on an iPad would work) - not sure if I need SkyFi on a Temma-2z if it has Wifi - finding it difficult to confirm this?
* Auto guiding when there is not really facility to place a guiding scope with the Mewlon - guessing either tube rings or a bar mount of some sort to mount side by side?

Any answers to these queries would be most helpful.

[astro744]

Originally Posted by yoda776

” In referring to Suchting mirrors I am guessing you are referring to SDM scopes? I can imagine the Orion does not compare but have enjoyed it and looked after it as I do all my scopes.”

Neither is an SDM telescope although I came close to owning one of Peter’s beautiful creations many years ago. My friends 16” f5 is all welded aluminium construction with Suchting primary mirror. Not sure what secondary but the views were so exquisite as is. Mine is a simple solid tube on a simple wooden Dob mount of early design. On an EQ platform I get tracking. The primary was a Coulter (thin Pyrex) blank that I ground and was never entirely happy with and I used it that way for many years. I then got Mark Suchting to refigure it for me and it have never looked back and it was the best money ever spent on my telescope. I picked up a 2.14” secondary the day I picked up my primary mirror from the aluminising guy (Isaac at Chi Qin Co; very nice gentleman) on his recommendation and have been very pleased. I may buy an Antares secondary one day but only to see if it makes any difference but I am not desperate to do so as I too am getting exquisite views as is. I also have an Astro-Ootical 1.83” secondary but prefer the greater fully illuminated field of the 2.14”.

I only reply here in answer to your question about SDM. I also have perhaps too many other telescopes but each serves its purpose. The telescope of choice for the recent Jupiter/Saturn conjunction was my Tele Vue 60 with 7mm Type 6 Nagler for the best framing.

I hope to get the advice you seek on your desired Mewlon 210 telescope and that it brings you much joy should you aquire one.

[Wilso]

Hi Matt,
Looks like there’s a EM200 Temma 3 on its way early next year.
It does come with the WIFI and USB as well. Here’s a link!

http://www.takahashijapan.com/ct-new...em200t3r1.html

[yoda776 (Matt)]

Originally Posted by astro744

Neither is an SDM telescope although I came close to owning one of Peter’s beautiful creations many years ago. My friends 16” f5 is all welded aluminium construction with Suchting primary mirror. Not sure what secondary but the views were so exquisite as is. Mine is a simple solid tube on a simple wooden Dob mount of early design. On an EQ platform I get tracking. The primary was a Coulter (thin Pyrex) blank that I ground and was never entirely happy with and I used it that way for many years. I then got Mark Suchting to refigure it for me and it have never looked back and it was the best money ever spent on my telescope. I picked up a 2.14” secondary the day I picked up my primary mirror from the aluminising guy (Isaac at Chi Qin Co; very nice gentleman) on his recommendation and have been very pleased. I may buy an Antares secondary one day but only to see if it makes any difference but I am not desperate to do so as I too am getting exquisite views as is. I also have an Astro-Ootical 1.83” secondary but prefer the greater fully illuminated field of the 2.14”.

I only reply here in answer to your question about SDM. I also have perhaps too many other telescopes but each serves its purpose. The telescope of choice for the recent Jupiter/Saturn conjunction was my Tele Vue 60 with 7mm Type 6 Nagler for the best framing.

I hope to get the advice you seek on your desired Mewlon 210 telescope and that it brings you much joy should you aquire one.

No worries and thanks - I used an ED80 for the recent Jupiter / Saturn conjunction event. Glad there were a few days as we had cloud most of the time ... again!