13491 replies to this topic

[DJ N]

Hi everyone

 

Decided to do some upgrades to my TSA-120. I previously had the More Blue tube rings with a vixen style dovetail, but decided I really prefer to use a D-series type. With that in mind, decided I might as well go all the way and purchased a set of K-Astec rings. I worked out that by changing over the K-Astec and the wider plate, there would be nil weight increase to the setup. This has also provided an opportunity to mount the finder scope almost on the central balance point, which enables me to use the scope with or without the finder and not have balance issues. In addition, I find this cental position to be much more ergonomic.

 

Of course, the other new inclusion is my recently arrived Supermount W-Master. To put it simply, I am impressed! So easy to use - for a while now, I have dispensed with using object locators/encoders and really wanting to get back to basics. I spend most of my time observing the moon, and then the odd 'peek' at planets or the brighter deep sky objects. In addition, as I am fairly time-poor, I prefer to be able to set up at a moments notice, and in most cases, only for a short session. This set-up really ticks all the boxes for my viewing habits and it is such a pleasure to use. 

 

Cheers

 

Daniel

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 

Edited by DJ N, 21 April 2025 - 08:46 PM.

[brischy]

Fellow Tak owners, i have a question. I recently purchased a Takahashi FC-76 MC Classic and I want to use binoviewers with them but they seem to be too much weight for the compression ring that came with it. I am going with an 1.25" system, do you guys have any recommendations on connectors that would be able to handle the increased weight?

[Rasfahan]

A Baader ClickLock holds my Binoviewers well, even when combined with a Quark Daystar. Check if they are available with the correct threads.

[Arhymage]

Hello to all Tak owners. I would like to supplement my mewlon-210 with a small FC-100 fluorite refractor. I really wanted the FC100DZ, because I thought if I was going to buy a 100mm, it would have to be the best 100mm I could buy for uncompromising quality, but the seller informed me that they only have the FC100DF. I am only a visual observer, I plan to look mainly at the planets and the Moon at magnifications of 200-250x (maybe sometimes 300x), when I am too lazy to wait for Mewlon to cool down. I've heard that the DZ version is sharper at higher magnifications compared to the DF version. Can someone tell me if they've been compared and how big the difference is?? Does it make sense to wait for DZ, or can I take DF without worrying about losing productivity on planetary/lunar parts at high magnifications?

Edited by Arhymage, 22 April 2025 - 01:03 AM.

[balcon3]

I have the FC100DF and I can tell you that it fantastic at 214x on Jupiter in a binoviewer. I haven't tried higher but I don't feel that I was at the limit. I just don't have eyepiece pairs of shorter focal lengths and I typically use a binoviewerr for planets. True, the DZ is supposed to be slightly better corrected, but I have never viewed through a DZ so I don't know if that is noticeable in actual use. I can tell you that I don't find myself second-guessing buying the DF. I also have a Mewlon (180c). Ever since I got the DF, the Mewlon has seen less use because the FC100DF is so much more versatile and puts up such a good image on so many types of targets, although of course the Mewlon can go deeper. One plus for the DF is that it can go slightly wider than the DZ.

[bobhen]

Hello to all Tak owners. I would like to supplement my mewlon-210 with a small FC-100 fluorite refractor. I really wanted the FC100DZ, because I thought if I was going to buy a 100mm, it would have to be the best 100mm I could buy for uncompromising quality, but the seller informed me that they only have the FC100DF. I am only a visual observer, I plan to look mainly at the planets and the Moon at magnifications of 200-250x (maybe sometimes 300x), when I am too lazy to wait for Mewlon to cool down. I've heard that the DZ version is sharper at higher magnifications compared to the DF version. Can someone tell me if they've been compared and how big the difference is?? Does it make sense to wait for DZ, or can I take DF without worrying about losing productivity on planetary/lunar parts at high magnifications?

You will absolutely not be disappointed with a FS-100DF. I've had mine for a couple of years and it is the best grab-and-go or portable telescopes that I have owned. The 100DF acclimates very quickly, has excellent color correction, is extremely lightweight at 6.3 pounds, will ride on just about any mount (alt/az or GE) and of course has killer sharp Takahashi/Canon Fluorite optics.

 

I've had mine up to 330x on the moon with the view staying razor sharp. The scope could have taken even more power. The 100DF also makes a great solar scope. I even use mine (reduced down to F5.2) with my image intensifier for superb, night vision, deep sky views. There's not much the FS-100DF can't do.

 

The FS-100DF would make a perfect companion to your Mewlon; mounted side-by-side or separately.

 

I've owned LZOS, Astro-Physics, Celestron/Vixen Fluorite, Tele Vue and Takahashi refractors and currently also have a TSA 120. I like the way you think when considering a 4" refractor, you do want the best. With the 100DF you won't ever have to question your decision.

 

Just go get one!

 

Bob

[Scott99]

 Does it make sense to wait for DZ, or can I take DF without worrying about losing productivity on planetary/lunar parts at high magnifications?

You're not going to lose productivity, I think you'll see the same stuff in both scopes.  If you do obsess over the finest possible lens and you're going to keep the scope long-term it might make sense to wait for the DZ....also f/8 vs. f/7.4 if you have a preference for longer or shorter you could choose accordingly...
 

[nic35]

A Baader ClickLock holds my Binoviewers well, even when combined with a Quark Daystar. Check if they are available with the correct threads.

My FC-76MC takes the m56x0.75  Baader  threaded adapter.  Note that it is a 2" adapter, so you may need a 2" to 1.25 insert as well.  Commonly available.   

[mikeDnight]

Hello to all Tak owners. I would like to supplement my mewlon-210 with a small FC-100 fluorite refractor. I really wanted the FC100DZ, because I thought if I was going to buy a 100mm, it would have to be the best 100mm I could buy for uncompromising quality, but the seller informed me that they only have the FC100DF. I am only a visual observer, I plan to look mainly at the planets and the Moon at magnifications of 200-250x (maybe sometimes 300x), when I am too lazy to wait for Mewlon to cool down. I've heard that the DZ version is sharper at higher magnifications compared to the DF version. Can someone tell me if they've been compared and how big the difference is?? Does it make sense to wait for DZ, or can I take DF without worrying about losing productivity on planetary/lunar parts at high magnifications?

I had the DC version for 5 years and was out observing with it on nearly every clear night during that time. The DC and DF have the same optics and the views through that amazing little scope were vibrant and planetary detail laser etched.  The DC/DF will take 120X per inch on a good night depending on target and its brighter deep sky views are surprisingly bright for the scopes aperture.  I now have the DZ and it too is superb. The DC/DF has a slightly warmer tone than the DZ, other than that I feel they are pretty close as visual scopes. By all means wait for the DZ if thats what you want, but if you go for the DF I'm sure you won't be disappointed. 

[RAKing]

Yikes! 120x per inch?!  I wish my skies or my eyes were good enough to handle that.  I could easily do 60x with my old FC-100DC but have only pushed the DZ to 55x so far this year.  Maybe with better weather.... 

 

Cheers,

 

Ron

[Rick Runcie]

I have a Tak 100mm DL and a few years ago my buddy Albert and I had a little 4" shoot out with his at the time late 50's 4" Unitron, my 100mm DL and my TMB 92mm.

The seeing that evening in the Summer was excellent. His 4" Unitron put up sharp views to about 375x. Very impressive for sure. The TMB held up to 300x, maybe a little better. The Takahashi would not break down. At 500x Jupiter still had color in the bands and looked good. At 600x, which was my highest magnification possible, it looked like a black and white image but still distinct with no image breakdown but of course nothing gained.

These tests were done only for fun. Up to 300x is where I regularly use this scope on the planets in good seeing. It still keeps its color fidelity at this magnification and is very sharp.

Best regards, Richard

Edited by Rick Runcie, 27 April 2025 - 06:57 PM.

[norvegicus]

I've had my DF up to 480X many times.  The scope wasn't even breathing hard, it was always the seeing that let me down.

[Scott99]

Wow....for me 200x is the usual limit w/ 4-inch - in exceptional seeing (5% of the time) maybe 225-250.  Above 200 the planets get dim to my eyes....very unusual for me to exceed 200x.  

 

That number is 150x for a 3-inch, 250x for a 5-inch, 300x for a 6-inch refractor.  Planets get dim above that.......your mileage will vary of course

[bobhen]

Wow....for me 200x is the usual limit w/ 4-inch - in exceptional seeing (5% of the time) maybe 225-250.  Above 200 the planets get dim to my eyes....very unusual for me to exceed 200x.  

 

That number is 150x for a 3-inch, 250x for a 5-inch, 300x for a 6-inch refractor.  Planets get dim above that.......your mileage will vary of course

Try the moon. Dimness will not be an issue. Then you can see just how high of a magnification you can use and still have a razor sharp image. 

 

Bob

[Bomber Bob]

ALL 5 of my Classic TAKs -- ACH - S-APO - APO -- are sharp at 80x / in on Mars-Jupiter-Saturn in 7 / 10 or better seeing...

 

Jupiter is the trickiest of the 3 -- simply maxing-out a TAK's power doesn't guarantee more or better fine details.  Some nights, using an old Meade / Orion Broad-Band Filter will > the contrast at 100x / in or higher.  Yeah, it wrecks the Belt Colors!  But it works.  At The Swamp, calm air matters more than clear air for high power planetary, for ALL the old scopes in my Collection.

 

One reason I always start at low power is to observe how rapidly the Galileans are twinkling.  Strobe Flashing or Faster?  Seeing will limit magnification with my TAKs.  These crazy nights favor my TS-50 F14; or, one of my other High F-Ratio ACHs.  That long depth-of-focus means I won't mess with the knobs too much...

 

I can push my TS-65S / 1000 Triplet to crazy high powers on Double Stars -- above 200x / in this TAK runs out of light before it hits The Wall...  I don't keep the scope up that high for long.  For one thing, I have to concentrate more on tracking / corrections than on observing.   I can rely on my TAKs for sharp views from 150x (TS-50) to 350x (FC-100) most nights, and I can live with that.

Edited by Bomber Bob, 28 April 2025 - 12:14 PM.

[Dr Arnheim]

I also like to do these high magnification tests. However, I have the feeling that not much detail is won under a 1mm exit pupil and definitely not under 0.5mm. And this is also what physics would predict. However, maybe you can gain more details on specific targets or my seeing conditions were never good enough. So my question to everyone who is cranking up the magnification over 50x per inch here: can you see more details and if yes on what targets?

[Scott99]

Now we know who was buying those dept. store 1146X refractors

Edited by Scott99, 28 April 2025 - 01:24 PM.

[Bomber Bob]

I also like to do these high magnification tests. However, I have the feeling that not much detail is won under a 1mm exit pupil and definitely not under 0.5mm. And this is also what physics would predict. However, maybe you can gain more details on specific targets or my seeing conditions were never good enough. So my question to everyone who is cranking up the magnification over 50x per inch here: can you see more details and if yes on what targets?

Yes -- I've tested it MANY times over the decades with Side-By-Side Sessions.  Seeing 8 / 10 or better, which on BB's Scale means at least 80x / in is still sharp, popping-up briefly will turn a large Barge on the NEB's fringe into a Festoon with Tail.  Or, the ragged tip of Syrtis Major resolves into several Crow's Feet.

 

Seeing must cooperate.  Optics must be clean & aligned.  I can't be too fatigued -- can't be dozing-off at the eyepiece.

[RAKing]

I crank up the power for splitting double stars.  I am looking at two airy disks, and don't need much detail beyond that.

 

Ron

[Lookitup]

On a yellow and blue double I just found, X290 with the F/11 Planeta 101 with binoviewer is perfect. Compared to the Tak100DF at X250 it looked just as sharp but showed more detail due to bigger image scale. It's much easier for me to jack up the power in a longer FL scope. 

Edited by Lookitup, 28 April 2025 - 05:50 PM.

[Lagrange]

I crank up the power for splitting double stars.  I am looking at two airy disks, and don't need much detail beyond that.

 

Ron

I think double stars are a special case because the observer often wants to be able to closely examine the diffraction pattern itself.

 

In that context very high magnifications can be useful even if they wouldn't show any additional detail on other targets.

[DHurst]

If I go to extremes of magnification, my floaters frustrate me.  So…if seeing is good, I usually find my max mag is where the floaters don’t start to **** me off!

[bobhen]

I crank up the power for splitting double stars.  I am looking at two airy disks, and don't need much detail beyond that.

 

Ron

I never use double stars as targets to test the quality of my optic or to see how high I can push magnification. There are no low contrast details to see to test the quality of an optic with a double. And there are no details of any kind to go soft when testing how high one can push magnification.

 

Double stars are more of a test of that night's seeing than they are optical quality tests. A mediocre 10" optic will split closer doubles than a high quality 5" optic, if the seeing allows. And I've had F5 achromats split doubles to their aperture limits. But those F5 achromatic lenses were no competition against high quality apos of the same size when it came to lunar and planetary observing.

 

Bob

[RAKing]

Bob,

 

I never waste my time trying to see how much magnification I can use on any given target - or how much detail I can see.  I rarely look at the planets, except for public outreach.  And if I am playing "Space Tourist", I find a happy medium power and enjoy looking at the Messier objects and DSO objects that are in my window of observation that night.

 

As you mentioned, I only push the magnification on my doubles to see if I can split some doubles that I used to split with bigger scopes - and check seeing conditions at the same time.  Unfortunately, I can no longer split many of the doubles I saw years ago.  My eyesight is still fine, but my physical frame cannot handle the bigger refractors anymore.

 

Last night I was able to separate Zeta Cancri AB in my FC-100DZ.  These stars needed my TEC 140 fifteen years ago, but they are slowly widening, and I caught them with a TSA-120 a couple of years ago.  The sky conditions allowed me to use a 3mm DeLite for the job last night (267x, with a 0.38mm exit pupil).  It was worth the effort!

 

Cheers,

 

Ron

[norvegicus]

I can't stop looking at planets.  Ogling Saturn is an addiction;  if it's visible while I'm out there I'm going to check it out, and then Jupiter.