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

In Defense of Towa

  • Please log in to reply
136 replies to this topic

#1 Chuck Hards

Chuck Hards

    You don't know Swift from Astrola

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 27,540
  • Joined: 03 May 2010

Posted 15 February 2018 - 08:43 AM

I've posted that my personal experiences in testing Towa objectives have shown a consistent lack of high-quality.  Others have agreed, based on their own experiences with the brand.

 

While it has been disappointing most of the time, I want newcomers to Classic scopes to know that all is not lost simply because of a Towa maker's mark.  There are several reasons why.

 

Early Towa seems to have a better track record at higher quality.  Pre-1960 manufacture dates seem to correlate with better objectives.  This has yet to be definitively demonstrated but it is a current idea based on member's experiences.

 

Refractor objectives aren't as viciously affected by small figure deviations as reflective systems.  A 1/4 wave surface error stays 1/4 wave after passing through the glass, for the most part, wheras a 1/4 wave deviation on a mirror surface can mean a 1/2 wave error on the reflected wavefront.  

 

Resolution limits by aperture are pretty easy to hit with small objectives.  This is one reason many of us have had nice "sharp" views with small refractors, even though the glass may not be figured to aerospace tolerances.  You won't be cranking up the magnification to 400X with a 60mm objective.  150X is pushing it, and that's just barely enough to see the bigger details on Mars at opposition, for instance.  

 

Some Towa scopes have fairly nice mechanical features.  The scopes can be enjoyed for those attributes even if the objective is only in the 80th percentile as far as quality goes.  

 

And every once in a while, a nice Towa objective surfaces!  I have one in a humble 50mm Milben, another in a Tasco 6TE.  A couple of 60mm are pretty good.  

 

Now, single-digit "good" objectives out of dozens tested doesn't sound like good odds, and for random purchases probably isn't.  But if the price is right, it may be worth taking the chance.   The objective might not be excellent, but it may be good enough for a grab-n-go, "quick look" scope.  Or a modern replacement objective might be found, of better quality, and then you can enjoy the nicer features of the scope without being handicapped by poor optics.

 

There may be instances where a ten-dollar find at the thrift store turns out to be a fairly nice telescope- and it's good fodder for practicing one's restoration skills before making a more high-dollar purchase.  These can be terrific scopes for learning the ropes of restoration.

 

The entire point of this post is that sometimes, it might be worth taking a chance on buying an untested Towa.  Just don't have high expectations going-in, and don't pay a lot of money for it.  If the stars align, you might get a nice objective.  Don't place any bets on it, but there is a chance.  And if you don't spend a lot of money on it, you should still be able to make it all back, and then some, if you part it out.  There is no sin in parting-out a common Towa with a poor objective.  Just be honest when you sell the objective, if it never gave you top-notch views.  Some folks will buy bum lenses just to repair a display-only model.

 

Comments on your experiences with Towa are welcome.  


  • Vesper818, DreamWeaver, deepwoods1 and 8 others like this

#2 roscoe

roscoe

    curmudgeon

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,049
  • Joined: 04 Feb 2009
  • Loc: NW Mass, inches from VT

Posted 15 February 2018 - 09:07 AM

Good points, Chuck!!

 

Also, it is import to remember that most of us have expectations far higher than most folks, have nearly perfect performers to test against, and usually EP's that cost three times what the scope did to use in our testing.

I've found that the quality of the image of these mass-produced scopes can often be doubled with some better, but still affordable, EP's.......a better diagonal and a couple of $30 Kellners will go far toward producing an enjoyable scope.

 

I usually end up putting some shim-stock (can be as easy as beer-can metal) and some rubber washers, or whatever, into the yoke mounts, which will cut the wiggle-factor in half, and also add to the ease-of-use of the system.

 

I feel that, with a couple hours of work and a $50 bill, they can turn from tag-sale finds into scopes plenty fine enough to pass on to friends and their kids, who could care less about spherical abberations and secondary color, they just think that looking at the moon or seeing the rings of Saturn, however tiny, is simply amazing.

 

What we need here is for someone to dig into some forgotten warehouse, and find a container-size stack of decent .965 EP's!


  • DreamWeaver, deepwoods1, Chuck Hards and 10 others like this

#3 Chuck Hards

Chuck Hards

    You don't know Swift from Astrola

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 27,540
  • Joined: 03 May 2010

Posted 15 February 2018 - 09:40 AM

Excellent point, Russ.  I've often given-away Towas with less-than-spectacular objectives, to kids who can't otherwise afford a scope yet have an interest.  I supply a hybrid diagonal and at least three 1.25" Kellners or Plossls.  The kids are thrilled and get views they never thought possible.


  • deepwoods1, Terra Nova, paulymo and 3 others like this

#4 Defenderslideguitar

Defenderslideguitar

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,580
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2016
  • Loc: Connecticut

Posted 15 February 2018 - 09:42 AM

The best Towa is the one that was free....

 

As i would frequently point out Venus to folks waiting for the train to go home from the Stamford courthouse.....A  Judge who was about to retire asked me if I could find someone who would benefit from having an old telescope. He explained that his son had bought it decades ago while living in Japan.and he found it difficult to use and no one used it and it was a shame ...etc. No charge just find a good home for it... 

 

I told him a friend had a farm in Maine and grandchildren were coming of age to learn the night sky and we could find a home for it there. The next day he told me that he was heading to new york but he left the scope for me in his old station wagon at the Fairfield train station and I should just go get it. He said he left the car unlocked...yikes. I thought I might get hasseled by security for taking something out of someones car   but   I was ok.

 

Finally I got it home and it was all there   original Towa 339  80/1200 nicely places in all the styrofoam seemingly perfect original and barely used condition...nice untouched wood tripod....  I brought it to Kitehill Farm in North Berwick Maine where we grow hardneck garlic    and this is where it resides today. It is not bad...but I have nothing similiar to compare it to.....

 

had to share the story

Barry


  • Jon Isaacs, roscoe, deepwoods1 and 11 others like this

#5 paulymo

paulymo

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 773
  • Joined: 10 Oct 2014
  • Loc: Vermont

Posted 15 February 2018 - 10:24 AM

Thank you Chuck!  I think you've really nailed the crux of the issue. 

 

First, discussions of Towas (due to when they were made) rightly fall under the umbrella of the Classics forum.  And the Classics forum, given the nature of what is being discussed, is populated by some of the most experienced and discerning observers on CN.  Most of you have had 40+ years of observing, have used some of the best equipment (and have higher expectations, as Russ said) and, forgive the bluntness, are of an age where your awareness of time as a precious resource is far greater than folks at the other end of the age spectrum.  So I think, therefore, that it is quite reasonable for most members of the forum to say "I've used Towas and X, Y, and Z give me better views so I'm buying those because I want to get the best views I can while I can."  So I think it is quite understandable why the things that are said in this forum about Towas are said.

 

Second, none of that means they don't have a place.  I'm the perfect example of what Chuck said about learning how to refurb these scopes using Towas as practice.  BomberBob and others have talked about giving them to kids or anyone else as a first scope or using at outreach.  To me, these are all perfectly valid uses.  And they are valid, to me, because with not all that much patience you can get 60mm Towas for $5-$35 on CL or at yard sales (I got both of mine for a combined $30).  I would absolutely NOT buy one (especially a yoke mount) for $75+ even if in immaculate condition nor would I recommend that to anyone else.  But that has less to do with optics and more to do with the ubiquitous yoke mounts stinking and the fact that most cheap Towas can't take the Vixen adapter and therefore folks are going to have to buy a cheap hybrid diagonal and some modern plossls to get the most out of them (my yellow Sears Kellner is an exception).

 

My experiences (since Chuck asked):  Two 60mm Sears Towas, both F/11s.  One late 60's, one early 70's.  Both about the same level optically, one was maybe a hair sharper so that's the one I kept for my daughter.  Neither what I would consider "a dog".  Both gave good sharp views of the moon up to about 120x before the details started getting soft.  I typically observe in the evening and at my location (yellowish green zone border) the seeing is generally not good at least at that time.  Both scopes in those conditions could split only 3 stars in the Trapezium at any mag.  One year ago I was over a club member's house (pure green zone) and the seeing was great (no twinkling).  Under those darker, much steadier skies it was a much different experience--there was a clear, obvious split of all 4 stars of the Trap using my lowest power eyepiece (25x).  So, mine were not scopes that could "cut through poor seeing."  So to my mind these details mean mine were definitely not anything great optically, but also not dogs.

 

I have also had a chance to do a shootout with the Towa against a mid-00's 60mm F/11 (so same specs) of Chinese make using the moon as my target.  The Chinese achromat had glass lenses but they were nowhere near as thick as the Towa, crown OR flint. The Towa was clearly the winner.  Sharper details, better contrast, and could be pushed to higher mags.  So, yes, I still think a cheap old Towa is a very cost effective quick peek scope for myself, and certainly a better starter option for a kid or a complete newbie who has less than $100 to spend to try the hobby.

 

One final point about oft-derided Towa.  I once had a friend who was a great beer lover.  Well before the American craft beer revolution in the 90's he had sampled hundreds of beers from many countries and had the bottle displays to prove it.  He was a certified beer judge and regularly served as such in competitions.  He was also a homebrewer.   And he would never disparage Budweiser.  "But it's AWFUL" we'd tell him.  He would always agree that it wasn't the best tasting BUT he said he always respected them because for all the millions of bottles they manufactured every week and all the locations they manufactured in, Budweiser always tasted the same.  They were able to maintain a consistent quality at a very affordable price despite a huge volume of manufacturing.  No it isn't "premium" product, but the accomplishment shouldn't be sneered at, was his point.  I feel pretty much the same way about Towa.


  • deepwoods1, BigC, TSSClay and 4 others like this

#6 Terra Nova

Terra Nova

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 23,114
  • Joined: 29 May 2012
  • Loc: Northern Kentucky

Posted 15 February 2018 - 10:33 AM

Any decent 60mm refractor should easily show four stars in the Trapezium at even low power. My (grandson’s) 50mm x 600mm Sears Tower (made by Towa, I am loath to say) displayed all four amidst a beautiful view of M42 with a 22mm green Sears eyepiece (22X) the other night. A decent 60mm should be able to split ε1 and ε2 in Lyra. Anything will show a fair to middling view of the moon. The Moon, unless you are looking for discrete subtle features is NO test of optics. The 60mm Towas that have regrettably come my way could pass neither!


  • leveye, oldmanastro, GreyDay and 1 other like this

#7 clamchip

clamchip

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10,822
  • Joined: 09 Aug 2008
  • Loc: Seattle

Posted 15 February 2018 - 10:35 AM

I agree buy that old Towa.

Look at this one I have, not pretty, it can be made pretty, it even has legs that look like they came from

the same supplier as Unitron's legs.

Now back to the lens, this 60 is rare indeed, it has resolved "the perforated thingy", it takes a very good

80mm and a good day to resolve the perforated thingy, I was stunned.

The perforated thingy is this gray cylinder on a cell tower 2-1/2 miles from my house. The cylinder is

perforated top to bottom with little stamped openings that are very difficult to see.

Robert

 

post-50896-0-35269000-1511999945.jpg

IMG_8314.jpg


  • Terra Nova, TSSClay and oldmanastro like this

#8 Bomber Bob

Bomber Bob

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 17,969
  • Joined: 09 Jul 2013
  • Loc: The Swamp, USA

Posted 15 February 2018 - 11:34 AM

The best Towa is the one that was free....

 

Yep.  The Tasco-branded 339 (80mm F15) that I won in 1978 was a very good sample.

 

Thanks for this thread, Chuck!   What I'd like to read are posts / reviews from members who've owned / used the Towa Newtonians of the 1950s - 1970s, including the Tasco 11T (114mm F8).


  • paulymo likes this

#9 paulymo

paulymo

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 773
  • Joined: 10 Oct 2014
  • Loc: Vermont

Posted 15 February 2018 - 11:59 AM

And the Towa-made cassegrains, please.  The 80mm F/10 sold in the states by Swift and B&L (and maybe others) specifically.

 

The best Towa is the one that was free....

 

Yep.  The Tasco-branded 339 (80mm F15) that I won in 1978 was a very good sample.

 

Thanks for this thread, Chuck!   What I'd like to read are posts / reviews from members who've owned / used the Towa Newtonians of the 1950s - 1970s, including the Tasco 11T (114mm F8).



#10 clamchip

clamchip

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10,822
  • Joined: 09 Aug 2008
  • Loc: Seattle

Posted 15 February 2018 - 11:59 AM

Here's when I bought the Mayflower, early Towa?

Are we sure these circle T's are Towa circle T's?

Around and around we go...

https://www.cloudyni...-new-mayflower/

 

Robert


Edited by actionhac, 15 February 2018 - 12:04 PM.

  • Bomber Bob likes this

#11 clamchip

clamchip

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10,822
  • Joined: 09 Aug 2008
  • Loc: Seattle

Posted 15 February 2018 - 12:19 PM

You can see the very similar shape of the knurl with the early circle T telescopes and

the Edmund circle T finders.

All the Edmund stuff I'm fairly certain is Tani, mainly eyepieces, and these finders, that

only appear on Edmund telescopes only and no where else.

 

post-50896-14073832526117_thumb.jpg

post-50896-0-01764000-1452647973.jpg

post-50896-0-33859600-1452648107_thumb.jpg


  • Terra Nova and Bomber Bob like this

#12 Chuck Hards

Chuck Hards

    You don't know Swift from Astrola

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 27,540
  • Joined: 03 May 2010

Posted 15 February 2018 - 12:26 PM

Here's when I bought the Mayflower, early Towa?

Are we sure these circle T's are Towa circle T's?

Around and around we go...

https://www.cloudyni...-new-mayflower/

 

Robert

 

My understanding is the circle-T on a focuser label means Towa.  On an eyepiece or finder, it's Tani.  AFAIK, Tani didn't make complete scopes, and Towa didn't make eyepieces.

 

But that's today.  Who knows what tomorrow may bring? :lol:   I've got some SPI's that look just like that Lafayette.

 

These early ones aren't too much of an issue.  Many have decent objectives, regardless of maker's mark or lack thereof.  Too many old brand names with shared components, I doubt it will ever be sorted-out 100%.

 

But if it has that circle-T on a focuser label, you can bet money that it's Towa.


  • Terra Nova, leveye and Bomber Bob like this

#13 leveye

leveye

    Aurora

  • ***--
  • Posts: 4,813
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2013
  • Loc: Metro Detroit Mi.

Posted 15 February 2018 - 12:33 PM

I rather enjoyed the views with my 70's 339. Excellent optics even on the finder.

 

947486-1.jpg

 

 


  • Jon Isaacs, Masvingo, Bomber Bob and 2 others like this

#14 ftwskies

ftwskies

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 886
  • Joined: 29 Jan 2015
  • Loc: Under Fort Worth skies...

Posted 15 February 2018 - 01:05 PM

My Molly (Towa-built Monolux 60x700) has only been out under the stars twice, both times mounted solidly in homemade rings on a sturdy Paragon Pro tripod so I could focus on optical performance.  Star tests show it's pretty badly over-corrected; I haven't gotten round to setting up a DPAC rig yet.  I'm moderately disappointed, but after putting so much love and effort into refurbishing it, I'm not about to get rid of it.  I'll just keep looking for a replacement objective, and in the meantime enjoy it for what it is -- more of a nostalgic experience than a real workhorse observing scope.  I'll stick with my C90 for more deliberate lunar / planetary views.

 

My other Towa is a pretty good performer, though.  It's a chopped-down f/6.67 click-zoomer with a Milben label.  It's got a 1.25" focuser, so the vintage eyepieces aren't a factor.  Low power tack-sharp views, including four in the Trap on clear steady nights.  I usually reserve it for white light solar, but it does pretty well as an RFT, too.  Just don't expect high power out of a 60x400!


  • paulymo likes this

#15 Bonco2

Bonco2

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 480
  • Joined: 01 Jun 2013

Posted 15 February 2018 - 04:17 PM

Personally I think the mechanical quality of the Towa 339 optical tube assembly is very good. Sturdy tube, good focuser, attractive dew shield, functional finder. Optically hit or miss but at the prices they now sell for it's worth a try and you may get one with good optics. The equitorial mount is functionally adequate especially for a beginner as it's simple to set up and operate.  I think the 80mm f15's frequently offered for sale are a good entry level choice into the classic world. 


  • Bomber Bob and GreyDay like this

#16 Kasmos

Kasmos

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,084
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2015
  • Loc: So Cal

Posted 15 February 2018 - 04:19 PM

As you can see my Crescent 60x800 is similar to both of Roberts telescopes. Not all of these have the circle T mark and those that don't might fair better. Maybe I need to retest it, but it has what I feel is a below average objective. I'd like to find a replacement lens since I do like the whole package plus it does have a glass objective for the finder. 

Cresent-Focuser.jpg

I'm also disappointed by the objective from my Mayflower 806 circle T click zoom cut down telescope. 

Two-Circle-T-Cells.jpg

The cell style indicates they were both made from the 1959-'61 time frame so you'd think they'd be old enough to be better.

 

One was free and the other was dirt cheap so no harm done. I'd still only take a chance on a Towa if it was a cheap find. 


Edited by Kasmos, 15 February 2018 - 04:26 PM.

  • Bomber Bob likes this

#17 clamchip

clamchip

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10,822
  • Joined: 09 Aug 2008
  • Loc: Seattle

Posted 15 February 2018 - 04:33 PM

I think the Japanese optical export inspections started in the late fifties, maybe trademark's on 

the scopes started about the same time.

Years ago I was very interested in binoculars, a big hobby for me. We would go to a lot of swap

meets and antique stores around that time and I would see a binocular, pick it up and look through

it, and know in about a minute if it was something special.

The quality was all over the place with the Japanese binoculars, there were some that were just

fantastic, most were just okay.

 

Robert


  • Bomber Bob likes this

#18 Bomber Bob

Bomber Bob

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 17,969
  • Joined: 09 Jul 2013
  • Loc: The Swamp, USA

Posted 15 February 2018 - 04:42 PM

I think the Japanese optical export inspections started in the late fifties, maybe trademark's on the scopes started about the same time.

 

Yeah, I think that's how it developed, too.  And in many cases, the MAKER of the maker's mark was really more the final assembler / packager who was responsible for the export process.


  • clamchip likes this

#19 Stargoat

Stargoat

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,237
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2005
  • Loc: Illinois

Posted 16 February 2018 - 01:22 AM

I think the Japanese optical export inspections started in the late fifties, maybe trademark's on the scopes started about the same time.

 

Yeah, I think that's how it developed, too.  And in many cases, the MAKER of the maker's mark was really more the final assembler / packager who was responsible for the export process.

Based on this Japanese Export Standard Optical Goods Inspection JIS B7123 tag dated 1956_1_14, I believe it is safe to say inspections were under way by Jan 1956. Been a while since I did a search on JIS B7123, so can't recall the dates at the moment. I do recall that in a late 50s maybe 1958 Astro Optical catalog that the wording of JIS B7123 is listed. See ref photo of this earliest tag I've seen by one of our members.

 

I'm sure many of you have visited this web site. MINIATURE BINOCULARS

 

There is a tremendous amount of information with respect to trademarks and distribution/exporting for binoculars...but much can be learned about the origins of who exported our favorite classic telescopes as well.

Attached Thumbnails

  • Export Tag_1956_1_14_.jpg

Edited by Stargoat, 16 February 2018 - 01:47 AM.

  • clamchip, Masvingo, Bomber Bob and 1 other like this

#20 PBEvans

PBEvans

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 60
  • Joined: 22 Aug 2017

Posted 16 February 2018 - 01:23 AM

I'm wondering if I'm seeing things. I'm much newer at this than a lot of you. Based on this thread I got out my Sears/Circle T 60mm f/11 to see what I could see in the Trapezium tonight. We had been looking at the Orion Nebula through a friend's 8" Dobsonian with beautiful views.

 

I could easily see three and maybe four stars with the HM 6mm eyepiece. That is a hard eyepiece to use but it worked tonight. I tried the Barlow with the Ke 20mm - nice view but I think the HM 6mm is better. 

 

For fun I also tried the HM 6mm with the Barlow. As I understand it that should be well beyond the practical power of this telescope. True that the stars are not pinpoints with that set up, but I think I could see the shape of the six Trapezium stars. Is this wishful thinking for this scope, or does that sound right? 


Edited by PBEvans, 16 February 2018 - 01:24 AM.


#21 aa6ww

aa6ww

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,608
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2011
  • Loc: Sacramento, Calif.

Posted 16 February 2018 - 01:40 AM

I love the classic long tube F11 to F17 refractors, 60mm, 80mm and 100mm, but I have to use modern 1.25" or 2" eyepieces. Only then can they compete optically with the modern scopes, and win on what refactors do best. 

 

...Ralph



#22 deSitter

deSitter

    Still in Old School

  • *****
  • Posts: 12,129
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2004

Posted 16 February 2018 - 02:13 AM

I like my 60/800mm alt-az Towa. It's brain-dead simple and it works. You can actually follow things around at 133x. The optical performance is at least extremely good and I would say excellent. I call it a Penncrest but I dunno, I've never seen the drawtube lock on any Penncrest. It might be SCOPE.

 

Anyway this and a 50/600mm are nice scopes.

 

-drl

 

 

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

  • focuser.png

  • GreyDay, paulymo, jf-red and 1 other like this

#23 deSitter

deSitter

    Still in Old School

  • *****
  • Posts: 12,129
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2004

Posted 16 February 2018 - 02:21 AM

I'm wondering if I'm seeing things. I'm much newer at this than a lot of you. Based on this thread I got out my Sears/Circle T 60mm f/11 to see what I could see in the Trapezium tonight. We had been looking at the Orion Nebula through a friend's 8" Dobsonian with beautiful views.

 

I could easily see three and maybe four stars with the HM 6mm eyepiece. That is a hard eyepiece to use but it worked tonight. I tried the Barlow with the Ke 20mm - nice view but I think the HM 6mm is better. 

 

For fun I also tried the HM 6mm with the Barlow. As I understand it that should be well beyond the practical power of this telescope. True that the stars are not pinpoints with that set up, but I think I could see the shape of the six Trapezium stars. Is this wishful thinking for this scope, or does that sound right? 

That's 200+ power so about 70x per inch of aperture which is not impossible. The Airy disks of stars would be the size of pizzas but a good scope will still have an obvious best focus. I have the 60mm f/13 Towa and it could easily resolve the Trapezium at low power. It spit Iota Cass easily.

 

-drl



#24 PBEvans

PBEvans

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 60
  • Joined: 22 Aug 2017

Posted 16 February 2018 - 03:22 AM

I love the classic long tube F11 to F17 refractors, 60mm, 80mm and 100mm, but I have to use modern 1.25" or 2" eyepieces. Only then can they compete optically with the modern scopes, and win on what refactors do best. 

 

...Ralph

Do you just use a hybrid diagonal?



#25 Wildetelescope

Wildetelescope

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,034
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2015
  • Loc: Maryland

Posted 16 February 2018 - 09:56 AM

I rather enjoyed the views with my 70's 339. Excellent optics even on the finder.

 

attachicon.gif 947486-1.jpg

And I am enjoying this very same scope very much right now(Thanks leveye! ;-)  I am not a big optics tester (beyond collimation), but this particular sample is very nice in my estimation. It holds up well with the rest of my herd. I have spent a number of hours last year observing  Jupiter with this scope and my set of Brandon's, which compliment each other well.    It also looks REAL pretty on my digital drive GM8 too(don't worry I am keeping the original mount hardware safe!;-) Eventually, plan to put a clock drive on the original mount.   I also have a 60 mm sears Towa that I think is pretty nice too(especially given the price:-). Certainly, both telescopes are of a quality that would catch a young person's imagination(as they have my children).  I am thinking of getting a quick release shoe for the Sears and take up to the Conowingo Dam to look at the Eagles.  Nice and light.  It is no Zeiss Telementor( a buddy has one of THOSE!) but it is still a lot of fun to play with.

 

 

Cheers!

 

JMD


  • Jon Isaacs likes this


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