Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Why is Takahashi overly expensive?

  • Please log in to reply
268 replies to this topic

#251 Klitwo

Klitwo

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,868
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008

Posted 17 November 2017 - 10:32 AM

Yeah...A nice TAK FCT 250 (Sticker price > $277K + shipping in 1991) is like a painting by a master...the older it is, the more valuable it becomes...right Leonardo?...>

 

https://www.washingt...m=.e112c7aaa6fe

 

http://www.astrosurf...shi/FCT-250.gif

 

P.S.  Any used 1991 TAK FCT 250's in good factory condition for sale out there?.... 

 

Klitwo 


Edited by Klitwo, 08 March 2018 - 11:11 PM.


#252 samovu

samovu

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,519
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2013
  • Loc: So CA

Posted 17 November 2017 - 04:03 PM

Thinking about it, I don't own a premium anything.  Perhaps it would own me instead.  Lately, I've been considering buying a lens and building my own refractor around it.

Yeah, I know what you mean about it owning me instead. But I can’t help myself. My workaround since I can’t afford premium (new) is buying used. 

 

I’ve got some Taks only because someone else at one time had the luxury of buying new. I drive a ‘premium’ SUV too but had to buy it when it was 3 years old. It’s now 15 years old and still going strong! And old truck for an old fart, lol!

 

Cheers,

John


  • Scott in NC likes this

#253 Klitwo

Klitwo

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,868
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008

Posted 22 November 2017 - 07:34 PM

 

Thinking about it, I don't own a premium anything.  Perhaps it would own me instead.  Lately, I've been considering buying a lens and building my own refractor around it.

Yeah, I know what you mean about it owning me instead. But I can’t help myself. My workaround since I can’t afford premium (new) is buying used. 

 

I’ve got some Taks only because someone else at one time had the luxury of buying new. I drive a ‘premium’ SUV too but had to buy it when it was 3 years old. It’s now 15 years old and still going strong! And old truck for an old fart, lol!

 

Cheers,

John

 

I guess there is no better time than the present to buy TAK if you're going to buy one at all. The current TAK models at today's big $$$$ prices will seem cheap compared to what they're going to sell for five or ten years from now....or am I missing something here?  

 

Klitwo


Edited by Klitwo, 08 March 2018 - 11:12 PM.


#254 Klitwo

Klitwo

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,868
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008

Posted 22 November 2017 - 07:35 PM

 

Thinking about it, I don't own a premium anything.  Perhaps it would own me instead.  Lately, I've been considering buying a lens and building my own refractor around it.

Yeah, I know what you mean about it owning me instead. But I can’t help myself. My workaround since I can’t afford premium (new) is buying used. 

 

I’ve got some Taks only because someone else at one time had the luxury of buying new. I drive a ‘premium’ SUV too but had to buy it when it was 3 years old. It’s now 15 years old and still going strong! And old truck for an old fart, lol!

 

Cheers,

John

 

I guess there is no time better than the present to buy a TAK if you're going to buy one at all. The current prices for the various TAK models at today's prices will seem cheap compared to what they're going to sell for five or ten years from now....or am I missing something here?  In five or ten years it would be hard to imagine a TAK selling new for a price less or the same as it is now.... 

 

Klitwo


Edited by Klitwo, 08 March 2018 - 11:12 PM.


#255 photoracer18

photoracer18

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,212
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2013
  • Loc: Martinsburg, WV

Posted 23 November 2017 - 04:22 PM

As you can see from my signature I own at least one of each major type of scope. Every type is a compromise at some types of astronomy and the best at others. Newtonians are the best bang for the buck while APOs are the best bang for the size. SCTs are good at everything but not best at anything. Like others have said the difference between achromats and true APOs (not always scopes described as APOs) means that a 10% increase in performance requires a 1000% increase in price. Mass-produced verses craft builders. Ferraris verses Chevys. While a Corvette is the best bang for the buck, one ride in a Ferrari and you will know why it costs so much more.

If you want to see the best a Newtonian can do you need a craft built 20" and larger one which coincidentally is in the same price range as the 6" and up APOs. And don't even think about the mount issues. Same price ratio holds true when comparing AP mounts verses mass-produced mounts. On the other side of the equation not everyone needs, wants, or can afford the best of everything. That is why the market covers every price range. The mass-producers don't make high end items because they can't make them that well while the craft makers don't make low end ones because they couldn't make them fast enough. High end equipment holds its value over time while mass-market things don't.

If you want to know the difference you need to look thru some of the high end scopes. But I caution you that without realistic expectations you will suddenly find your equipment likely suffers in comparison. Might cause you to suddenly want something better. Luckily these days there are scopes in the middle ground that can give you a smooth progression towards the high end without having to take a big leap all at once.

My philosophy in astro gear used to be "no type of telescope smaller than the last one". But by the time I got to 16" Newtonians, 11" SCT/Maks, and 6" APOs/EDs I got old enough that I could not go larger due to the physical requirements to setup and use them (70yo). While I still have a lot of that gear I am downsizing to what I know I can handle physically. Still buying and selling gear to figure out my limits.


  • MGD and Radioamateur like this

#256 The Ardent

The Ardent

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 4,781
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Virginia

Posted 23 November 2017 - 04:31 PM

16" Newtonians, 11" SCT/Maks, and 6" APOs/EDs

 

won't fit in a Ferrari or Corvette , unless they're coming out with an SUV like every other carmaker! lol.gif


  • photoracer18 likes this

#257 samovu

samovu

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,519
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2013
  • Loc: So CA

Posted 23 November 2017 - 04:32 PM

There’s no telling what Taks will be selling for in 5 to 10 years. My guess is that the prices will go up but not by whole lot. If  I were to buy a new Tak now, the depreciation hit I’d take upon selling in a few years will likely more than offset the increase in selling price or value, but that’s just a guess. 

 

All of my scopes have been purchased used and the ones I’ve sold fetched roughly the same as I paid for them, sometimes less, sometimes more. This aspect of paying “rent” for the use of some great performing scopes has helped me rationalize the purchase of more than I could otherwise afford. 

 

Cheers,

John


  • Scott in NC and CounterWeight like this

#258 photoracer18

photoracer18

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,212
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2013
  • Loc: Martinsburg, WV

Posted 24 November 2017 - 02:54 PM

16" Newtonians, 11" SCT/Maks, and 6" APOs/EDs

 

won't fit in a Ferrari or Corvette , unless they're coming out with an SUV like every other carmaker! lol.gif

I doubt it would fit in a Porsche Cayenne S either. Maybe the old Lamborghini LM007 off road vehicle.lol.gif



#259 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 44,669
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 24 November 2017 - 03:29 PM

 

16" Newtonians, 11" SCT/Maks, and 6" APOs/EDs

 

won't fit in a Ferrari or Corvette , unless they're coming out with an SUV like every other carmaker! lol.gif

I doubt it would fit in a Porsche Cayenne S either. Maybe the old Lamborghini LM007 off road vehicle.lol.gif

 

Where there's a will, there's a way.

An acquaintance used to show up at our dark sky site with his 6" AstroPhysics refractor and Losmandy GEM, all loaded in a Corvette.

I've seen a 22" dob in a VW Beetle and a 30" dob in a Ford Festiva.

I have no problem with a 12.5" dob and 700 pounds of additional gear in my VW GTI.



#260 denny-o

denny-o

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 555
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2015
  • Loc: hemlock, mi

Posted 27 November 2017 - 04:08 PM

TAK, et. al. Will sell new for far more money in the future - 15 to 20 years or more  -  because the deficit spending of the Congress will never stop (party in power has nothing to do with it). Politicians buy their votes by promising you, More Free Stuff.

Annual (average) inflation for the recent 20 year period is 2.12% a year.

No reason in this world to think it will be less over the next 20 year period.

Today's $5000 TAK will be a $7611 TAK in 2037 (+152%)



#261 CounterWeight

CounterWeight

    Star walker

  • *****
  • Posts: 10,964
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: PDX, OR.

Posted 27 November 2017 - 10:54 PM

"As long as we can still see the night sky, Takahashi telescopes will hold their place."

shameless quote of myself

 

 

After owning and "renting" a few, the reputation and the outstanding views match up every time.



#262 Klitwo

Klitwo

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,868
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008

Posted 27 November 2017 - 11:18 PM

If you're one of the many thousands of happy frac owners out there who have a little extra $$$ coming after taxes this year and are still looking around for thier dream scope...then this ultra-expensive TAK FET-300 12-inch f/8 APO is the one for you...if you got the money...big big money that is! See the following link. 

 

http://www.takahashi.../en/FET-300.php

 

P.S. Ultra-expensive? Any guesses? 

 

Klitwo


  • walt99 and nicknacknock like this

#263 nytecam

nytecam

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • In Memoriam
  • Posts: 12,692
  • Joined: 20 Aug 2005
  • Loc: London UK

Posted 01 December 2017 - 01:08 PM

Just a query ?   Are APOs or Taks completely free from chromatic aberration?

I ask as I don't eyeball but use a camera that is sensitive from UV through to NIR which I welcome free from any blocking filtration :)

 

Nytecam



#264 Klitwo

Klitwo

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,868
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008

Posted 01 December 2017 - 01:15 PM

Just a query ?   Are APOs or Taks completely free from chromatic aberration?

I ask as I don't eyeball but use a camera that is sensitive from UV through to NIR which I welcome free from any blocking filtration smile.gif

 

Nytecam

Read this past CN thread on the subject.... 

 

https://www.cloudyni...tic-aberration/

 

Klitwo



#265 Kent10

Kent10

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,883
  • Joined: 08 May 2012

Posted 01 December 2017 - 01:25 PM

Just a query ?   Are APOs or Taks completely free from chromatic aberration?

I ask as I don't eyeball but use a camera that is sensitive from UV through to NIR which I welcome free from any blocking filtration smile.gif

 

Nytecam

I asked a similar question a while back

 

https://www.cloudyni...tic-aberration/



#266 noisejammer

noisejammer

    Fish Slapper

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,731
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2007
  • Loc: The Uncanny Valley

Posted 01 December 2017 - 02:00 PM

Just a query ?   Are APOs or Taks completely free from chromatic aberration?

I ask as I don't eyeball but use a camera that is sensitive from UV through to NIR which I welcome free from any blocking filtration smile.gif

 

Nytecam

In short no but some are very good. The question really comes down to "what does 'completely free of chromatic aberration' actually mean.

 

My TOA-150 has no visible colour inside or outside focus. The on-axis spot size is smaller than the Airy disc and - assuming you have a flattener / reducer spaced correctly - the spot size is smaller than a typical pixel over the entire field. I use mine to routinely image in the 630-900 nm band.

 

I am not convinced that the objective / flattener are transparent to UV - I suppose this depends on the wavelength of interest. I don't know whether there's significant focus shift between UV, VIS and NIR ... I have never checked.



#267 nytecam

nytecam

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • In Memoriam
  • Posts: 12,692
  • Joined: 20 Aug 2005
  • Loc: London UK

Posted 02 December 2017 - 12:06 PM

APOs are much as I thought ie ok for visual but not corrected for CA beyond the visual range - hence Newton's scope :)

Nytecam



#268 waso29

waso29

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,537
  • Joined: 12 May 2010
  • Loc: Chi-Town, mother earth

Posted 03 March 2018 - 09:38 AM

BeatingADeadHorse.gif


  • ensign likes this

#269 Klitwo

Klitwo

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,868
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008

Posted 03 March 2018 - 11:48 AM

Makes for interesting Tak bino counter-balance....at least on this one anyway... >   Telescope.gif   

 

yay.gif https://www.astromar...99/797385-3.jpg yay.gif

 

 

 

Klitwo




CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics