Jump to content


Photo

Tak copying Celestron?

  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 Nippon

Nippon

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 969
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2009
  • Loc: Central Florida

Posted 04 October 2013 - 04:15 PM

I was surfing the net and looking at Takahashi stuff on a site called Starbase. Anyway it showed some TAK GEMs with what they call stainless steel leg set. And from what you can see in the photo they look remarkably like the Synta made Celestron GEM legs.

#2 BWAZ

BWAZ

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1345
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2005
  • Loc: CA

Posted 04 October 2013 - 05:38 PM

I don't think Takahashi is doing that, instead, it's the vendor who is selling the Tak GEM head with the seemingly Sytna made tripods.

#3 Nippon

Nippon

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 969
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2009
  • Loc: Central Florida

Posted 04 October 2013 - 08:32 PM

I know Takahashi has no reason to copy Synta Celestron but it just struck me funny that an EM 200 is shown sitting on what is pretty obviously a Synta tripod painted Tak green.

#4 Nippon

Nippon

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 969
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2009
  • Loc: Central Florida

Posted 04 October 2013 - 09:26 PM

Take a look. Sure looks like a Synta sourced tripod. I mean no insult I have an AVX on what appears to be the same tripod and it is solid as a rock.
http://translate.goo...//www.mmjp.o...

#5 orlyandico

orlyandico

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5285
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2009
  • Loc: Singapore

Posted 05 October 2013 - 01:12 AM

Tak makes two types of tripods - a wood model and a heavy duralumin model. Both have the dubious distinction of being very expensive (the wood one is over $800, the duralumin one much more). So I wouldn't be surprised if some resellers decide to adopt the Chinese tripods for their more budget-conscious customers. Although frankly "budget conscious" and "Tak" doesn't compute..

#6 mark8888

mark8888

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1746
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2010

Posted 05 October 2013 - 01:44 AM

Tak makes two types of tripods - a wood model and a heavy duralumin model. Both have the dubious distinction of being very expensive (the wood one is over $800, the duralumim one much more). So I wouldn't be surprised if some resellers decide to adopt the Chinese tripods for their more budget-conscious customers.


That said though Starbase is the main outlet in Tokyo for Takahashi (and a really fun store to browse), not just another reseller...

#7 TxStars

TxStars

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1323
  • Joined: 01 Oct 2005
  • Loc: Lost In Space

Posted 05 October 2013 - 02:30 AM

With Takahashi in particular the EQ head does not come with a tripod or a pier.
You add the one you want (if any)at the time it is ordered from Takahashi.

Starbase Tokyo sells all sorts of astronomical items and some other things also.
If they have customers ask for something they will get it for them.
They often offer "Package" deals that they put together when they have several people ask for a particular option.

#8 waso29

waso29

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 477
  • Joined: 12 May 2010
  • Loc: Chi-Town, USA, mother earth

Posted 05 October 2013 - 07:14 AM

In Tak's own website, there is photo of new fc100d mounted on em11 with " synta" type legs?!
I personally wouldn't mind Tak having a more budget conscious line of scopes and equipment.

#9 M13 Observer

M13 Observer

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 991
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2006

Posted 05 October 2013 - 10:47 AM

I personally wouldn't mind Tak having a more budget conscious line of scopes and equipment.


and I can't think of a quicker way for Takahashi to commit economic suicide.

#10 tomcody

tomcody

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1698
  • Joined: 06 Jul 2008
  • Loc: Titusville, Florida

Posted 05 October 2013 - 11:31 AM

I know Takahashi has no reason to copy Synta Celestron but it just struck me funny that an EM 200 is shown sitting on what is pretty obviously a Synta tripod painted Tak green.

One thing to remember, what is sold in Asia and Europe may be different that what is offered in the US. (i.e. the FSQ106EDX , which is not listed on the Tak Europe site).
Rex

#11 Nippon

Nippon

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 969
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2009
  • Loc: Central Florida

Posted 06 October 2013 - 06:15 PM

I personally wouldn't mind Tak having a more budget conscious line of scopes and equipment.


and I can't think of a quicker way for Takahashi to commit economic suicide.


Nikon survived doing that with the Nikon EM and E series lenses back in the 80s and they still do it. There is a huge difference between a D3200 and a D4.

#12 T1R2

T1R2

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1561
  • Joined: 11 Jun 2013
  • Loc: NeverWhere, 35*N

Posted 06 October 2013 - 06:27 PM

Yep, it looks just like my Omni CG4 tripod, but it is rock solid like others have said, I like it.

#13 M13 Observer

M13 Observer

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 991
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2006

Posted 09 October 2013 - 04:37 PM

I personally wouldn't mind Tak having a more budget conscious line of scopes and equipment.


and I can't think of a quicker way for Takahashi to commit economic suicide.


Nikon survived doing that with the Nikon EM and E series lenses back in the 80s and they still do it. There is a huge difference between a D3200 and a D4.


Funny, but I have never heard of a Nikon D3200 or D4 telescope. Oh wait, you are talking about camera optics, something they sell tens of thousands of units of each year. Last I heard Nikon went running away as quick as they could after trying to build and sell telescopes. I'll reiterate. It would be economic suicide for Takahashi to water down its product line-up. It would be economic suicide to water down the Astro-Physics line-up. It would be economic suicide for ANY creator and purveyor of high end anything to cater to the lowest common denominator. They each have their niches. It is WHY there are companies such as Rolex and Lamborghini and Bugatti and Rolls Royce and Bentley and Astro-Physics and TEC and Panerai and Cartier and, and, and. There are LOTS of companies to choose from already selling the lowest common denominator goods.

#14 MartinTreadgold

MartinTreadgold

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 110
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2013
  • Loc: Netherlands

Posted 10 October 2013 - 02:19 AM

I think this kind of tripod is common for lots of manufacturers. Its probably a design under license to anyone who wants it... Why waste design RnD costs on a tripod, when there is a very good design already there.

#15 MartinTreadgold

MartinTreadgold

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 110
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2013
  • Loc: Netherlands

Posted 10 October 2013 - 02:51 AM

Nikon survived doing that with the Nikon EM and E series lenses back in the 80s and they still do it. There is a huge difference between a D3200 and a D4.


Funny, but I have never heard of a Nikon D3200 or D4 telescope. Oh wait, you are talking about camera optics, something they sell tens of thousands of units of each year. Last I heard Nikon went running away as quick as they could after trying to build and sell telescopes. I'll reiterate. It would be economic suicide for Takahashi to water down its product line-up. It would be economic suicide to water down the Astro-Physics line-up. It would be economic suicide for ANY creator and purveyor of high end anything to cater to the lowest common denominator. They each have their niches. It is WHY there are companies such as Rolex and Lamborghini and Bugatti and Rolls Royce and Bentley and Astro-Physics and TEC and Panerai and Cartier and, and, and. There are LOTS of companies to choose from already selling the lowest common denominator goods.


Nikon focus on sports optics such as field spotting scopes, binoculars, rifle scopes.

The Field spotting scopes are excellent for bird watching, and the optics are excellent for Astronomy, but the design of the scopes are not that ideal, since the eyepieces are not interchangeable and cannot be repositioned like a star diagonal can on an SCT for example..

However, they do have a digiscoping adapter between a field scope and a camera. I have taken some Astropics unguided with this set up, and the image quality was excellent for a few second exposure..

I think, it would not be too hard to find or make a dovetail mount to attach this setup to a CGEM, AVX.

But overall, I would stick to a purpose made astroscope and mount for Astro imaging.

For me personally, I would love to see Nikon come out with some Astro optics like an SCT or a Refractor, but sadly its not going to happen.

fyi ..Here's Nikon's Sports Optics range
Nikon Sports Optics

For Imaging with a Nikon Camera, well, you can piggyback a Nikon D3200, D5200, D7100, D610, D800, D4 with a really nice F2.8 lens and you will still get amazing images.

You don't have to image through the telescope for example, depends on the type of image you want to take. For me, I like taking wide angle shots of the sky with a AF-S 14-24mm F2.8 lens

#16 orlyandico

orlyandico

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5285
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2009
  • Loc: Singapore

Posted 10 October 2013 - 04:45 AM

Nikon used to make some extremely expensive refractors and EQ mounts. Markus Ludes is selling some. And by extremely expensive I mean more expensive than Takahashi.

#17 Nippon

Nippon

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 969
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2009
  • Loc: Central Florida

Posted 11 October 2013 - 01:03 PM

I'll guess you are probably right about Takahashi committing economic suicide by offering products at lower price points. Lord knows I'm no business man so I stand corrected. Just seemed like if they were using a Synta sourced tripod, that is actually pretty good quality, Then why not. Are they not doing that with the FC 100 D? is it not a lower cost alternative to the TOA 102 that still has Takahashi quality? My understanding is it gives up a little color correction being a doublet to the TOA 102 and it is limited to 1 1/4" diagonals and eyepieces.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics