Jump to content


Photo

Takahashi TOA 130 vs. TEC 140

  • Please log in to reply
175 replies to this topic

#1 Hypnotist

Hypnotist

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 496
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2010
  • Loc: San Diego, CA, US

Posted 18 November 2010 - 09:00 AM

Hi,

I'm interested in buying a Takahashi TOA 130, for viewing but also for imaging (I have a Canon EOS 5D Mark II). I hear Takahashis are very well known for their quality (studiness, accuracy etc.). Now yesterday I was reading some stuff on it and people mentioned they'd rather have a TEC 140 which is also good in quality, but seemingly not quite up to Tak standards. That left me debating on if I wanted a Tak or a TEC. :question: What do you think? (I've never really heard a complaint about the TOA 130, except that it's rather heavy!)

I'd appreciate your honest opinion!

Thanks and clear skies

Bart

#2 t.r.

t.r.

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4393
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2008
  • Loc: 1123,6536,5321

Posted 18 November 2010 - 09:10 AM

I'll keep it short and sweet...

1. TEC140 has a 10mm advantage. Yes it can be easily seen.
2. TEC140 is oil-spaced. Advantage in cooling down.
3. TEC140 is lighter and subjectively easier to handle.
4. TOA130 will have superior color correction.

Which factors are most important to you?

Qualifiers: I had a TEC140 for three years and compared it directly to an AP130GT for a year. I have never looked through a TOA130. I chose the AP130 for its extreme portability. The TEC was a phenominal performer for visual.

#3 Theodore Mattas

Theodore Mattas

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 143
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2004
  • Loc: Thessaloniki, Greece

Posted 18 November 2010 - 09:21 AM

The TOA-130 is supposed to have slightly better color correction (in fact as far as I'm concerned there is no refractor out there with better color correction than the TOA series).
Other than that I doupt it if anyone could find any difference by doing a visual side by side test between a TOA-130 and a TEC-140.

Regards
Teo

------------------------------------------------
Takahashi TOA-130S
Zeiss Abbe II ortho set + 2X Barlow

#4 Theodore Mattas

Theodore Mattas

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 143
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2004
  • Loc: Thessaloniki, Greece

Posted 18 November 2010 - 09:42 AM

1. TEC140 has a 10mm advantage. Yes it can be easily seen.


I doupt it!
Dennis Di Cicco did an extensive review of a TEC-140 at Sky@Telescope's December 2003 issue.
At the end of the review he displays a side by side test between a TEC-140 and a TEC-160 on Jupiter and Moon...here is what he says:

" I wasn't expecting there to be a profound difference between the eyepiece views with the two scopes, since the aperture difference was 20mm. BUT I also wasn't expecting the difference to be so subtle that I'd actually have to remind myself which refractor I was looking through (especially since the focusers are identical on both).
When I mentioned that to TEC's president Yuri Petrunin, he didn't seem surprised."The difference", he said will be on deep sky objects...then , pausing for a moment, he added...and on the invoice :lol:"

Well I guess that according to Dennis Di Cicco's experience the even smaller 10mm difference between a TOA-130 and a TEC-140...should be even more subtle...maybe practically non existent ;)

Regards
Teo

--------------------------------------
Takahashi TOA-13OS
Zeiss Abbe II ortho set + 2X Barlow

#5 Hypnotist

Hypnotist

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 496
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2010
  • Loc: San Diego, CA, US

Posted 18 November 2010 - 09:50 AM

Recommendations?

#6 Theodore Mattas

Theodore Mattas

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 143
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2004
  • Loc: Thessaloniki, Greece

Posted 18 November 2010 - 09:58 AM

Here is a link which will definitely answer your question ;)
http://www.sbig.com/mb/tak/takpics.htm

Regards
Teo

-------------------------------------
Takahashi TOA-130S
Zeiss Abbe II ortho set + 2X Barlow

#7 t.r.

t.r.

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4393
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2008
  • Loc: 1123,6536,5321

Posted 18 November 2010 - 10:18 AM

Well, I guess that a YEARS worth of SIDE-BY-SIDE comparison can't trump an expert reviewer's ONE night of evaluation! Everyone should also run out and sell their 160mm scopes and downsize to the 130's, your not missin' anything and look at the money you'll save! Good luck with getting them to do that. :doah: I'll stand by my observations...10mm's difference CAN be seen at first glance. I never said it was a HUGE diferrence.:smirk: Don't forget that on a so-so night, even a 90mm and a 150mm can apear to show the same level of detail...check out some of TODD GROSS's reports. ;)
As for recommendations...I'd go with the TEC140 again anytime.

#8 Theodore Mattas

Theodore Mattas

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 143
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2004
  • Loc: Thessaloniki, Greece

Posted 18 November 2010 - 10:44 AM

"If I may also chime in for the Gran Turismo...see here the size difference with the TEC140. Yes,10mm less, but I'am so far having a hard time seeing the loss in typical seeing conditions. The portablity factor goes way up,1/2 foot and 5 lbs less than the TEC. Sweet spot in this size... "



--------------------
Kmart 40mm(first scope @ age 8-Thanks Mom)Jason60mm-Thanks Dad,C80SS-Thanks Wife,PST,C6XLT,AP130 "Gran Turismo" C-11XLT
EQ-2,CG-4,ASGT,DenkII's,TV(zoom,plossls,Ethos,Nag),Pentax XW's,Brandon 50th Anniversary sets, ZAOII 4mm,BaaderZoom and other un-notables


"For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring"
Carl Sagan


Well,I'm a bit confused...is this 10mm aperture difference finally CLEAR to be seen...or not?

Attached Files



#9 Hypnotist

Hypnotist

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 496
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2010
  • Loc: San Diego, CA, US

Posted 18 November 2010 - 10:46 AM

Does anyone else have experience with these scopes. Would be nice to hear some more opinions.
Bart

#10 jrbarnett

jrbarnett

    Eyepiece Hooligan

  • *****
  • Posts: 19847
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Petaluma, CA

Posted 18 November 2010 - 10:52 AM

I understand that the TOAs (at least the 150s) have been susceptible to misalignment due to jarring. In fact, I think Takahashi made changes to the TOA-150 cell early on to combat this. You're talking big, heavy lens cells with large (glass-insulated) air pockets between them. The difficulty of execution of this design was undertaken for one purpose - color correction for imaging. I suspect the TOAs will be more apt to come out of alignment over time as a result, but who knows.

For visual or a mix of observing that includes a high percentage of visual use, I think the TEC is the better choice. It has greater resolving power, is color corrected specifically for visual use, and has a simpler, lighter lens design that cools quickly. In other words, you'll never see less in a TEC than in a TOA-130, likely won't detect differences in color correction visually, and will be observing at potential sooner in the session.

Regards,

Jim

#11 Mike Clemens

Mike Clemens

    Frozen to Eyepiece

  • *****
  • Posts: 7575
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2005
  • Loc: Alaska, USA

Posted 18 November 2010 - 11:16 AM

Someone who downsizes from a TEC140 to an AP130 is not an endorsement for anything but the rarity/desirability/panache of AP and the fact most of us could not afford to own two scopes so close in size.

Someone who downsizes from a TEC140 to a TOA130 is a glutton for punishment or a real overboard extremist when it comes to color correction.

I'd go for the TEC140 in a heartbeat. I'm on my second TEC now, both have been ED scopes.

> a TEC 140 which is also good in quality,
> but seemingly not quite up to Tak standards.

You may safely, completely, disregard that idea. I've owned 3 Taks and 2 TEC's over the years and these days I have a TEC parked in my "garage", not a Tak. I've only owned one scope that had mechanical focuser problems by the way, and it was a new Tak.

The TOA130 color correction is undeniably awesome. Side by side with a TEC140, pointed at a star like Vega or Sirius, you could probably see the difference. No other target is my guess.


#12 Theodore Mattas

Theodore Mattas

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 143
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2004
  • Loc: Thessaloniki, Greece

Posted 18 November 2010 - 11:29 AM

I understand that the TOAs (at least the 150s) have been susceptible to misalignment due to jarring. In fact, I think Takahashi made changes to the TOA-150 cell early on to combat this. You're talking big, heavy lens cells with large (glass-insulated) air pockets between them. The difficulty of execution of this design was undertaken for one purpose - color correction for imaging. I suspect the TOAs will be more apt to come out of alignment over time as a result, but who knows.


I wonder where did you find information regarding this..."misalignment" issue.
As a member of Yahoo Tak users, and Takahashi community on Facebook...I have never ever heard a TOA-150 user complaining about lens misalignment.
Please provide "evidence" (a link or something), I'm interesting in learning more.

Teo

---------------------------------------------
Takahashi TOA-13OS
Zeiss Abbe II ortho set + 2X Barlow

#13 Ira

Ira

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2624
  • Joined: 22 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Mitzpe Ramon, Israel

Posted 18 November 2010 - 11:33 AM

I think the misalignment issue may stem from a misunderstanding. I believe the lens cell on all Tak APOs is not user adjustable - no screws are user accessible. This also appears to be the reason that Tak requires their scopes to be shipped by 2nd day air. If the scope arrives decollimated due to shipping handling, it cannot be fixed in the field. Not to say that any given scope will ever become decollimated. And if I still have it wrong, please forgive me. I'm still trying to put it together.

/Ira

#14 t.r.

t.r.

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4393
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2008
  • Loc: 1123,6536,5321

Posted 18 November 2010 - 11:36 AM

My my Theodore, you have idle time on your hands...your repost is taken out of context. Nice try though :p
To "clear" it up for you...Clearly seen on planetary/lunar. Not clearly seen on DeepSkyObjects/brightness. If the difference is WORTH it to YOU or not, I cannot say, but certainly, it is SEEN by my eyes and confirmed by another observers.YMMV :grin: FYI, don't take my avatar's pic too seriously as to my eyesight. ;)

#15 Mike Clemens

Mike Clemens

    Frozen to Eyepiece

  • *****
  • Posts: 7575
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2005
  • Loc: Alaska, USA

Posted 18 November 2010 - 11:41 AM

You can shake a TEC140 and might hear the lens knocking around in the cell a bit. This is normal. In the Tak TOA, the cell is a complex arrangement of metal pieces holding glass in critically exact positions and alignment. In the TEC, the cell is just a metal cylinder the lens drops in, but is not held overly tightly in. The lens has a small freedom of movement.

#16 Theodore Mattas

Theodore Mattas

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 143
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2004
  • Loc: Thessaloniki, Greece

Posted 18 November 2010 - 11:53 AM

My my Theodore, you have idle time on your hands...your repost is taken out of context. Nice try though :p
To "clear" it up for you...Clearly seen on planetary/lunar. Not clearly seen on DeepSkyObjects/brightness. If the difference is WORTH it to YOU or not, I cannot say, but certainly, it is SEEN by my eyes and confirmed by another observers.YMMV :grin:


I have noticed in your signature that you own a Denkmeier bino.
I'm really interested in knowing how a 5" APO performs in planetary viewing with a binoviwer...is the loss of light (?) due to the binoviewer significant?
Other than that are the rumors that the views are 3D...true?

Teo
------------------------------------------
Takahashi TOA-130S
Zeiss Abbe Ii ortho set + 2X Barlow

#17 Hypnotist

Hypnotist

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 496
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2010
  • Loc: San Diego, CA, US

Posted 18 November 2010 - 01:25 PM

Guys, you know I've read a lot of reviews on the TOA 130 and many of them said that this scope is so clear that you might think it has an aperture larger than 5". I've never heard that from TECs. Please tell me what is true.

Bart

#18 johnnyha

johnnyha

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6500
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2006
  • Loc: Sherman Oaks, CA

Posted 18 November 2010 - 01:29 PM

The TEC is so clear you might think it has the aperture of a larger scope.


:grin:

Seriously though I have owned a TOA 130 and if I were to do it over, being a visual observer primarily, I would prefer the TEC 140. If I were a dedicated imager I wouldn't even think twice, the TOA is unbeatable. And if weight is a serious issue the TSA120 weighs half what a TOA130 does and is fully it's equal in color correction and "performing bigger than-ness."

#19 Theodore Mattas

Theodore Mattas

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 143
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2004
  • Loc: Thessaloniki, Greece

Posted 18 November 2010 - 01:34 PM

Guys, you know I've read a lot of reviews on the TOA 130 and many of them said that this scope is so clear that you might think it has an aperture larger than 5". I've never heard that from TECs. Please tell me what is true.

Bart


Why do I have a feeling that deep down... you already know which will be your next refractor? :lol:

P.S.: Yes the views through the TOA-130 are THAT clear

Teo
------------------------------------------------
Takahashi TOA-130S
Zeiss Abbe II ortho set +2X Barlow

#20 t.r.

t.r.

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4393
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2008
  • Loc: 1123,6536,5321

Posted 18 November 2010 - 01:55 PM

[Quote]
I have noticed in your signature that you own a Denkmeier bino.
I'm really interested in knowing how a 5" APO performs in planetary viewing with a binoviwer...is the loss of light (?) due to the binoviewer significant?
Other than that are the rumors that the views are 3D...true?

Teo [Quote]

A 130mm scope and quality binoviewer is a wonderful planetary observing experience. There is light loss, however it is not objectionable with the perceived detail that a binoviewer provides. Incidentally, I prefer to binoview ALL objects even though I am losing light. I won't chase limiting magnitude galaxies with them, but my general outtings are for casual viewing (planetary mostly) anyways. It does give the effect of 3-D that I am hooked on! :bigshock:

#21 jrbarnett

jrbarnett

    Eyepiece Hooligan

  • *****
  • Posts: 19847
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Petaluma, CA

Posted 18 November 2010 - 01:59 PM

http://www.cloudynig...ll/fpart/2/vc/1

"Be wary of the TOA-150. It is going through some growing pains, though the more recent samples might have fixed the original problems with the new lens cell design. I use one of the more recent samples, and it's exquisite. We (www.3rf.org) went through three early samples as well prior to getting one that works "good enough." So, we now have two TOA-150s, and the first sample isn't quite up to the level of the second one. Likewise, I know two other people who suffered similar problems.

As I said, recent samples seem to be producing fewer issues, which I guess we should expect with any new Tak design...the TOA-130 had similar problems early on."

"There have also been problems with early TOA-150's collimation due to the cells not fully set inplace. But my personal preference is air spaced glass. I also agree both TEC and TAK give great views."

http://www.cloudynig...rev=#Post982366

" Jay Ballauer had a post about his a few weeks ago. I guess his had some problems so they sent it back to Japan so they could fix it. Probably a fluke, I'm sure. Even Tiger Woods hits it in the water sometimes...



Actually, that was the first of our (3RF) TOA-150s to be delivered. That particular scope went to David Ryle in Wichita Falls. It had an optical alignment issue which is susposedly fixed and waiting for David in Houston. I took the instrument down for him to be fixed, but he'll have to pick it up...we aren't going to risk having it shipped.

Of course, the first views, with the alignment issues, looks like pure poo. Hopefully, the "real" TOA-150 will look much better.

But I'll say this...I'm susposed getting my TOA-150 this month, after having waited 18 months...and having fully paid for the scope. I'm tired of getting pushed back on it. If I get pushed back again, I'll ask for a refund. Besides, after looking through my first TEC 160FL last month, I'd rather be waiting on that scope. I doubt very seriously that the TOA can compare with it."

If you need more, I'm sure I can find additional reports. I'll add that I bet I can find more reports of troubled TOA lens cells than you can find reports of problems with lost oil in an oil-spaced objective. :grin:

Regards,

Jim

#22 Hypnotist

Hypnotist

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 496
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2010
  • Loc: San Diego, CA, US

Posted 18 November 2010 - 02:58 PM

Yeah I get your point. But that stuff is only on the TOA 150, not the TOA 130. ;)

#23 edif300

edif300

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 192
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2007
  • Loc: Basque Country

Posted 18 November 2010 - 03:00 PM

for viewing but also for imaging (I have a Canon EOS 5D Mark II).


Go for a new TOA-130F with 67FF and you will be happy :grin: .

#24 edif300

edif300

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 192
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2007
  • Loc: Basque Country

Posted 18 November 2010 - 03:04 PM

Yeah I get your point. But that stuff is only on the TOA 150, not the TOA 130. ;)


Yeah Yeah... TOA series has a lot of problems... I like to hear this by competitors :smirk: .

#25 Mike Clemens

Mike Clemens

    Frozen to Eyepiece

  • *****
  • Posts: 7575
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2005
  • Loc: Alaska, USA

Posted 18 November 2010 - 03:06 PM

TEC owners proclaim "Buy TEC!" Tak owners proclaim "Buy Tak!" it sounds like a happy outcome is in your future no matter which path you take. (buy the TEC!!!)






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics