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

Takahashi TSA120N

  • Please log in to reply
156 replies to this topic

#51 25585

25585

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,889
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK. Dark end of the street.

Posted 31 August 2019 - 04:40 PM

Update!  Good news:  My TSA-120N arrived.    Bad news:  I live in Florida and guys from my local astronomy group have named my Tak: "Dorian".

 

 

attachicon.gif tak_on_cgx2.jpg

Are those Tak tube rings?



#52 betacygni

betacygni

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 56
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2011

Posted 31 August 2019 - 04:43 PM

No, but thanks for asking. This is my newest scope. I had a regular TSA-120 a few years ago and regret letting it go. I like this "N" version because I actually like a fixed dew shield. It is one less thing for me to deal with when I go outside - it will not slip.

I still have my TEC 140, FS-128, and an FC-100D, but will be selling the TEC soon. I bought the TSA-120 because it is light enough for me to use when I cannot handle the bigger scopes, yet it has enough aperture that I don't feel "cheated" when I am observing. That simply means I can see the stuff I planned to see. lol.gif

The tiny Tak 100 is for winter grab and go sessions.

Cheers,

Ron

Tak TSA-120 083019.JPG


Would be curious how the tsa120 stacks up against your fs128. I very briefly had a fs128 that I had to sell for financial reasons, never really got a chance to use it much, but have always regretted selling it. Just received a Tsa120n myself, and hoping it will be a worthy replacement to the long gone fs128.

#53 Tyson M

Tyson M

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,362
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2015
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 31 August 2019 - 04:45 PM

No, but thanks for asking.  This is my newest scope.  I had a regular TSA-120 a few years ago and regret letting it go.  I like this "N" version because I actually like a fixed dew shield.  It is one less thing for me to deal with when I go outside - it will not slip.

 

I still have my TEC 140, FS-128, and an FC-100D, but will be selling the TEC soon.  I bought the TSA-120 because it is light enough for me to use when I cannot handle the bigger scopes, yet it has enough aperture that I don't feel "cheated" when I am observing.  That simply means I can see the stuff I planned to see. lol.gif

 

The tiny Tak 100 is for winter grab and go sessions.

 

Cheers,

 

Ron

 

attachicon.gif Tak TSA-120 083019.JPG

FS128 and TSA120N lol.  They will compete! 



#54 bobhen

bobhen

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,900
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2005

Posted 31 August 2019 - 05:00 PM

Would be curious how the tsa120 stacks up against your fs128. I very briefly had a fs128 that I had to sell for financial reasons, never really got a chance to use it much, but have always regretted selling it. Just received a Tsa120n myself, and hoping it will be a worthy replacement to the long gone fs128.

See my post number 41 in this thread.

 

Bob



#55 RAKing

RAKing

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,021
  • Joined: 28 Dec 2007
  • Loc: West of the D.C. Nebula

Posted 31 August 2019 - 05:01 PM

Would be curious how the tsa120 stacks up against your fs128. I very briefly had a fs128 that I had to sell for financial reasons, never really got a chance to use it much, but have always regretted selling it. Just received a Tsa120n myself, and hoping it will be a worthy replacement to the long gone fs128.

It should work fine.  I have done this dance before and the FS-128 will show a slightly brighter view.  It's simple math and any experienced observer should notice it.  I used my first TSA-120 a few years ago when I was recovering from spinal surgery and I learned that the TSA-120 is no slouch, either.  Since then I have felt that it worked like a "smallish" 5-inch scope and not as a "bigger" 4-incher.

 

My "hobby" is variable stars and two nights ago I had my FS-128 aimed at R Bootis.  It's dim, but I was able to make a decent estimate of it at 12.3 magnitude and could see and use a 12.4 mag comp star near it.  Last night was the TSA's turn and it did an equally fine job on R Draconis also at 12.3 magnitude.  I used a 12.5 magnitude comp star for it, so both scopes went deep enough for me to enjoy my observing and that is what counts for me.

 

I have told my friends that if you had one (FS-128 or TSA-120) you didn't need the other.  But that was before my latest spinal surgery that has taken almost two years to get over - and I don't feel 100-percent yet.  So I finally talked it over with the CFO and she agreed that I will use the bigger scopes when I am able to handle them safely, but now I can use the TSA-120 when I need a smaller scope.  For me, it's that simple.  I will always love my FS-128, but will not feel like I am missing out if I have to use the smaller TSA-120.

 

It's a partnership, not a competition! flowerred.gif

 

Cheers,

 

Ron


  • Scott in NC, Tyson M, jay.i and 2 others like this

#56 4esop

4esop

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 33
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2017

Posted 31 August 2019 - 07:51 PM

Are those Tak tube rings?

Parallax Rings with Losmandy Universal 14'' Dovetail


  • NC Startrekker and 25585 like this

#57 NC Startrekker

NC Startrekker

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 852
  • Joined: 28 Jan 2010
  • Loc: Sandhills of NC

Posted 31 August 2019 - 08:32 PM

Does the TSA-120N come with the MEF-3 focuser like the TSA-120? Or, is it different?



#58 RAKing

RAKing

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,021
  • Joined: 28 Dec 2007
  • Loc: West of the D.C. Nebula

Posted 31 August 2019 - 10:03 PM

Mine has the MEF-3 and it has been adjusted very well from the factory.

 

Ron


  • NC Startrekker likes this

#59 Marcus Roman

Marcus Roman

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 330
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2018

Posted 01 September 2019 - 06:04 AM

Yes becuase their is a wierd cult that has grow up mostly on US forums that has infected some victims in europe into thinking

that a doublet will beat out a triplet Apo even after Takahashi themselves has tried to put an end to it to no avail.

 

Takahashi of course doesnt like this crazyness because they are stopping people from buying a far superior Apo i watched

myself here on this very forum as this cult convinced and pressured a victim into not buying a new TSA-120 FT for a obsolete

doublet Apo.

I had at the same time Taka TSA102 and Taka FS102...I sold the TSA102 and still am keeping the FS102.

To my eyes, FS102 was giving more crystal clear and sharper views of planets, with very or no CA.

So, much depends on taste of visual observers.


  • doctordub, Erik Bakker and RAKing like this

#60 25585

25585

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,889
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK. Dark end of the street.

Posted 01 September 2019 - 06:29 AM

I had at the same time Taka TSA102 and Taka FS102...I sold the TSA102 and still am keeping the FS102.

To my eyes, FS102 was giving more crystal clear and sharper views of planets, with very or no CA.

So, much depends on taste of visual observers.

At which magnifications did the differences become most apparent?

 

It is possible for their era of development, the FS fluorite could be better than TSA ED. 

 

FS102 v FC100DL v FC100DZ, my money is on the FCs, but which if those 2, will be an imaging finish.    



#61 Marcus Roman

Marcus Roman

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 330
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2018

Posted 01 September 2019 - 06:54 AM

At which magnifications did the differences become most apparent?

 

It is possible for their era of development, the FS fluorite could be better than TSA ED. 

 

FS102 v FC100DL v FC100DZ, my money is on the FCs, but which if those 2, will be an imaging finish.    

Jupiter at 200x several times...more definite contrast in my FS102 (1999 sample) vs TSA 102 (2008 sample)...same happened on Saturn...I have no experience of new FCs, though.


Edited by Marcus Roman, 01 September 2019 - 06:56 AM.


#62 NC Startrekker

NC Startrekker

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 852
  • Joined: 28 Jan 2010
  • Loc: Sandhills of NC

Posted 01 September 2019 - 07:31 AM

Mine has the MEF-3 and it has been adjusted very well from the factory.

 

Ron

Thanks Ron. I had a TSA-120 with the MEF-3 focuser a while back. Opinions vary but, I really liked the MEF-3. The rest of my refractors have FeatherTouch focusers but found I was just as happy with the MEF-3 with the Tak. Could be that at f/7.5 (longest focal ratio of my refractors) the focal range was a little less critical. Don't really know but no complaints at all with the TSA-120 and MEF-3 pairing.


  • RAKing likes this

#63 25585

25585

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,889
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK. Dark end of the street.

Posted 01 September 2019 - 08:39 AM

Jupiter at 200x several times...more definite contrast in my FS102 (1999 sample) vs TSA 102 (2008 sample)...same happened on Saturn...I have no experience of new FCs, though.

You are lucky to get to such a high magnification and have seeing good enough to make a distinction!



#64 Daniel Mounsey

Daniel Mounsey

    Vendor (Woodland Hills)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 8,012
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2002

Posted 01 September 2019 - 10:23 AM

The FC's FS's and TSA's are all magnificent telescopes. To conclude one is superior to the other is almost an injustice IMO. smile.gif  

---drD 


  • doctordub, payner, StarDust1 and 2 others like this

#65 Scott99

Scott99

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,334
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: New England

Posted 01 September 2019 - 11:19 AM

Tak is great about publishing the color correction curves so we can all see the differences between lenses


  • aire likes this

#66 agmoonsolns

agmoonsolns

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,651
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2018

Posted 01 September 2019 - 01:03 PM

As far as the units I have seen and after many long nights of careful comparison, the FC-100N is the best then it comes out like this:

 

FC-100DL only the tiniest bit better than the current FC-100 (on most nights the same). I would place the DZ in this group. I would also place the older FC-100 here. While they tend to be sharper than the newer FC versions, they do show more color. It's six to one and half a dozen of the other.

 

Definitely rate the FS-102 last out of all of them. I still consider them to be outstanding though so please don't come after me with pitchforks! Unfortunately, out of the four FS I have owned, not a single one was as good as any FC lens of any type I have ever owned or tried. They're great scopes, but the FC tend to be better. There's a reason they're no longer made. The FS lenses are the only Takahashi scopes I won't buy again. This isn't a statement about their quality, it's a statement of personal preference.

 

At which magnifications did the differences become most apparent?

 

It is possible for their era of development, the FS fluorite could be better than TSA ED. 

 

FS102 v FC100DL v FC100DZ, my money is on the FCs, but which if those 2, will be an imaging finish.    


  • Tyson M and 25585 like this

#67 25585

25585

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,889
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK. Dark end of the street.

Posted 01 September 2019 - 11:40 PM

http://scopeviews.co.uk/TakFC100s.htm

 

I am very happy with my TSA120. Hoping for some good usage now its dark by 8.30pm. 


  • RAKing likes this

#68 Daniel Mounsey

Daniel Mounsey

    Vendor (Woodland Hills)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 8,012
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2002

Posted 02 September 2019 - 09:34 AM

As far as the units I have seen and after many long nights of careful comparison, the FC-100N is the best then it comes out like this:

 

FC-100DL only the tiniest bit better than the current FC-100 (on most nights the same). I would place the DZ in this group. I would also place the older FC-100 here. While they tend to be sharper than the newer FC versions, they do show more color. It's six to one and half a dozen of the other.

 

Definitely rate the FS-102 last out of all of them. I still consider them to be outstanding though so please don't come after me with pitchforks! Unfortunately, out of the four FS I have owned, not a single one was as good as any FC lens of any type I have ever owned or tried. They're great scopes, but the FC tend to be better. There's a reason they're no longer made. The FS lenses are the only Takahashi scopes I won't buy again. This isn't a statement about their quality, it's a statement of personal preference.

 

Just an FYI. At these levels, the performance of these telescopes rely more on sample quality. For example, you could have a DF, DC sample give slightly higher contrast than a sample of a DL and a DL give slightly better contrast than a sample of a DF or DC. Same with the FS vice versa. The spot diagrams help for marketing purposes but again, this is mostly theoretical stuff. Until the observer actually uses it in the field side by side, they will have a very difficult time predicting the outcome. Then there's the magnification factor whether you are viewing stars or planets that can come into play.

 

Another example is a 1920's Zeiss 6" F17.8 achromat I recently tested. Because of several factors it has going for it, it could easily compare and even surpass some of todays 6" ED triplets. Also for some skeptics, to look at false color is only one factor of many factors that determines how good the contrast will yield itself. Today we live in a world of marketing, most of which I ignore because all too often, enthusiasts buy into it without really having experienced it. 


  • doctordub, eros312, StarDust1 and 3 others like this

#69 Scott99

Scott99

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,334
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: New England

Posted 02 September 2019 - 10:16 AM

FWIW I just compared brand new FC76 f/7.5 and FC100 DL f/9 carefully, IMO there is a significant and easily detectable difference in color correction - so easy to see.  Go to Vega at 150x-200x.  Look at trees during the daytime.  Look at the color of Saturn or Jupiter's disk.  

 

FC76 is a very nice sharp, high-quality apo lens with some false color - slightly more than the false color evident in my old FS102.  Also slightly more than the FS78 f/8.   f/9 FC100 DL has no false color around the Airy disk, or during the day, and shows pure white planet disks.

 

The FC76 f/7.5, FS102, and FS78's all had less color than my trusty Star 12 ED f/8.5, which I"ve been told is more like the FS128 or FS152, exactly what you'd expect from the design specs.  (These doublets with a little false color are outstanding high-res apo performers btw)

 

Will never understand why people keep going in circles over this - just look at the color correction curves!   Sample variations's got nothing to do with it IMO, Tak's pubished specs have been very reliable IME.  If there's any variation I suspect it's with observer's eyes or perhaps preconceptions?


Edited by Scott99, 02 September 2019 - 10:20 AM.

  • StarDust1 likes this

#70 Daniel Mounsey

Daniel Mounsey

    Vendor (Woodland Hills)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 8,012
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2002

Posted 02 September 2019 - 12:24 PM

Will never understand why people keep going in circles over this - just look at the color correction curves!   Sample variations's got nothing to do with it IMO, Tak's pubished specs have been very reliable IME.  If there's any variation I suspect it's with observer's eyes or perhaps preconceptions?

 

Have you ever seen refractors at these levels with some degree of inferior color correction produce nicer contrast or detail than one with less color?


Edited by Daniel Mounsey, 02 September 2019 - 12:37 PM.


#71 25585

25585

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,889
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK. Dark end of the street.

Posted 02 September 2019 - 12:29 PM

I am glad the TSA120 has no rival except the old FS128 doublet. The 120 is unchallenged in Takahashi's current catalogue, as 130s (FSQ, TOA) are the next size up & closer to 128...than 120.  lol.gif

 

 


Edited by 25585, 02 September 2019 - 12:30 PM.


#72 Derek Wong

Derek Wong

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,271
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2008
  • Loc: Glendale, CA

Posted 02 September 2019 - 01:33 PM

Just an FYI. At these levels, the performance of these telescopes rely more on sample quality. For example, you could have a DF, DC sample give slightly higher contrast than a sample of a DL and a DL give slightly better contrast than a sample of a DF or DC. Same with the FS vice versa. The spot diagrams help for marketing purposes but again, this is mostly theoretical stuff. Until the observer actually uses it in the field side by side, they will have a very difficult time predicting the outcome. Then there's the magnification factor whether you are viewing stars or planets that can come into play.

 

Another example is a 1920's Zeiss 6" F17.8 achromat I recently tested. Because of several factors it has going for it, it could easily compare and even surpass some of todays 6" ED triplets. Also for some skeptics, to look at false color is only one factor of many factors that determines how good the contrast will yield itself. Today we live in a world of marketing, most of which I ignore because all too often, enthusiasts buy into it without really having experienced it. 

A clarification, it is a Zeiss type A doublet which has approximately thrice the color correction of an achromat.  The figure is superb, and from an old discussion with Markus it sounds like the color correction is roughly on par with the newer 6" f/8 ED doublets.  The Zeiss is likely optimized for planetary viewing and there is purple visible around Jupiter and the newer scopes are optimized to suppress purple at the expense of red correction.  The images in the Zeiss on Jupiter and Saturn are superb, though, and as Daniel says it could beat some ED triplets depending on figure.  There is also an advantage with having the objective high off the ground.

 

Derek


  • Daniel Mounsey likes this

#73 Auburn80

Auburn80

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,098
  • Joined: 01 Apr 2013

Posted 02 September 2019 - 01:39 PM

Have you ever seen refractors at these levels with some degree of inferior color correction produce nicer contrast or detail than one with less color?


At about the same aperture; no.
  • bobhen likes this

#74 Daniel Mounsey

Daniel Mounsey

    Vendor (Woodland Hills)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 8,012
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2002

Posted 02 September 2019 - 02:01 PM

Derek, thanks for chiming in and clarifying. 



#75 Scott99

Scott99

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,334
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: New England

Posted 03 September 2019 - 01:56 PM

Have you ever seen refractors at these levels with some degree of inferior color correction produce nicer contrast or detail than one with less color?

Yes!  Definitely yes.  As I've said I don't see a tiny bit of false color as a "defect" - it's just a way to describe the lens design. 

 

I was referring specifically to color correction - I have not seen any "sample-to-sample" variation there.   

 

I am fond of the ED/FL doublets - I would expect the FS128 to show more on all targets over the TSA120 - aperture is more important.  When I ran my old Star 12 against a "perfect" TEC110 lens with no false color the Star 12 easily showed more detail on Mars. Mars looked whiter and a bit sharper in the TEC110 but the increase in image scale and resolution in the 120mm was very clear and easy to see.

 

However from what I've seen with Tak lenses - all the ones I've used are post-2005 - I would take the better color-corrected lens every time in a given aperture.  They seem very consistent to me.  FWIW, I think longer f-ratio lenses have more advantages over short ones beside color correction too.  


  • Daniel Mounsey and 25585 like 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