Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums
Privacy Policy |
Please read our Terms
of Service | Signup and
Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu.... uh, User
kcolter
member
Reged: 06/04/03
Posts: 51
Loc: Missouri, USA
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Would you say that the view through the Tak 22x60 is a COOL bias, WARM bias, neutral, or....?
I don't know how much variation there is as this is the only pair I've ever looked through, but I would say it's pretty neutral, perhaps more on the cool side if anything.
Had my Tak 22X60 out looking at Jupiter and the moon this AM. My vote is "cool" for the image description. The lunar surface is white--the way it is in the Zeiss Abbe eyepieces, as opposed to the "warm" cream or slightly yellowish tint the lunar surface has in TeleVue plossls. I compared the image of the moon in the Tak's to the Fuji 16X70. The increased magnification and the lack of chromatic aberration (present in the Fuji) made the Tak image the better one.
|
pedro
super member
Reged: 09/28/04
Posts: 190
|
|
Hi
I just compared (some time ago) the Fuji 16x70 X the Takahashi 22x60mm mainly using the full Moon as my target – these were my impressions:
A) TRUE COLORS - While in the Fuji I could notice some very BUT (I need to confess) VERY slightly (just suggestive) ‘’salmon like’’ color on the entire Moon (I believe as a result of their deep green coating) she was REALLY very pure white in color in the Tak's...maybe I wouldn’t even notice that ‘’salmon like color’’ issue if I have just the Fuji there at those time…
B) FALSE COLOR/CA- The Fuji show a very evident CA / color fringe (for me) while in the Tak just only some slightly ''false color'' issue when with the eyes not properly centered with the optical axis - that ‘’false blue line’’ however comes from the eyepiece border and not from their objectives...so this is not a tragedy… with the eyes properly centered the Moon rim is really pure white and sharp.
C) SHARPNESS - I felt despite the high magnification of the Tak they are a step over the Fuji anyway regarding some fine sharpness - this was not a surprise for me since the Tak are (I believe) better corrected overall than the Fuji.- their objective carry 4 elements.
D) TRANSPARENCY - The transparency in the Tak is at the same league of the Fuji's if not better...The Tak coatings seems to be better than the Fuji IMO.
E) APERTURE - When looking at some dark part of the sky (to some faint stars) I didn’t feel the ‘’small Tak aperture’’ facing the 70mm...this was not just because the hig Tak power could suggest some better view on the same faint stars …I am talking about real brightness – I don’t know how but seems really like the Tak are not just a 60mm...maybe due their very high transmission/transparency.
Well this is what I found...
regards Pedro
|
ronharper
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 02/14/06
Posts: 891
|
|
Pedro,
Thanks for the comparison between this common workhorse and the rare exotic Takahashi, which I hope to try some day.
However, I would hesitate to subject my 16x70 to such an ordeal. I regard it as a specialty deep sky instrument. It offers excellent contrast and transmission. At full aperture however, sharpness is okay but not outstanding, and it shows more lateral color than many cheaper binoculars. I stop mine down when sharpness comes first. Looking at the moon with it at full aperture is probably the worst thing you could do with it, and I am surprised it came as close to the Tak as it did.
You didn't mention field of view, which is an important asset for deep sky observing. The 16x70 has it in spades. It is perhaps the only weakness of the 22x60.
Ron
|
pedro
super member
Reged: 09/28/04
Posts: 190
|
|
Hi Ron
I agree 100% with you regarding FOV- for me the BIG drawback in the Tak is just their narrow FOV when used as a deep sky instrument...this is why I don't have one of these anymore.
I like at least 3.5º when at 22X with a AFOV around 65º / 70º...unfortunatelly the Tak has just 2,1º/ 56º...not bad for some particular objects such as planets, Moon or some star cluster BUT their apparent narrow field of view bothers for me...just because I like to see the sky more as a ''big window'', but this is my personal feelings no doubt however about the Tak extremely high optical performance...for some who this ''field issue'' is not a nightmare they are quite fantastic...side by side with the Fuji they are optically a step over (the overall quality image forgiven here the field of view issue) IMO...I forgot to mention also their very better eye relief and comfort to use ''against the eye sockets'' when compared with the Fuji (very large eyepiece barrels with a short eye relief - a pain for some with narrow IPD or big nose) and they are also better balanced for some handheld fast sessions (for who have good steady hands).
regards Pedro
|
pedro
super member
Reged: 09/28/04
Posts: 190
|
|
Quote:
Tak has just 2,1º/ 56º
Just to correct my mistake - the Tak has a real FOV = 2,1º/ apparent = 46º.
Pedro
|
|
6 registered and 21 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: EdZ
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 1213
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
[Re: 
Edit
Reply
Quote
