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 fc100dl vs tsa 102

  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#26 Ihtegla Sar

Ihtegla Sar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 523
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2019
  • Loc: Pacific Northwest

Posted 19 March 2020 - 01:23 PM

I also read in scopereviews that in comparison between tsa and dl tsa is the best, and dl is the worst, but I don't understand if this is to ca and colour or to the planetary detail.


Do you have a link to that review? I checked the scopereviews website and there were some old reviews of the old FC models but I couldn't find any reviews of the DL. I also have never heard any reviewer say that the DL was worse for planetary than any other telescope of a similar aperture.

#27 Daniel Mounsey

Daniel Mounsey

    Vendor (Woodland Hills)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 7,750
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2002

Posted 19 March 2020 - 06:36 PM

Just a bit of history here. You can have several FC100DL's and several TSA102's. Even if you compared a TSA102 to another TSA102, each will yield subtle differences to "experienced eyes". In other words, ever-so-slight differences in planetary contrast. A-, A+, A. Even I myself would not be able answer this question because both the DL's and TSA's are so far up there at the pinnacle of performance, it gets to a point where you have to actually conduct comparisons side by side. At these levels of performance theory starts to get thrown out the window. These scopes are good enough for the most discriminating observers. The question I'd be more concerned about is ones own knowledge of air temperatures, seeing conditions, proper setup, timing, air currents, patience at the eyepiece, understanding of eyepiece selection, proper diagonal, transparency, moisture, altitude. There's just so many other factors far more important. It's really more about being a good observer at these levels.


Edited by Daniel Mounsey, 19 March 2020 - 06:36 PM.

  • John Huntley, Erik Bakker, m9x18 and 9 others like this

#28 vvv

vvv

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 54
  • Joined: 22 Aug 2012

Posted 19 March 2020 - 07:15 PM

Many thanks to all for the very useful comments and great experience.

It seems that tsa102 and 100DL are close in visual performance.

I recently read about the stunning contrast in the latest fs102nsv and i am a little bit confused If 100DL will be better for visual planetary performance than fs102nsv.



#29 waso29

waso29

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,538
  • Joined: 12 May 2010
  • Loc: Chi-Town, mother earth

Posted 19 March 2020 - 07:18 PM

foreheadslap.gif


  • NickWDavis and eros312 like this

#30 sunnyday

sunnyday

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,563
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2019
  • Loc: Ottawa,Canada

Posted 19 March 2020 - 07:21 PM

Just a bit of history here. You can have several FC100DL's and several TSA102's. Even if you compared a TSA102 to another TSA102, each will yield subtle differences to "experienced eyes". In other words, ever-so-slight differences in planetary contrast. A-, A+, A. Even I myself would not be able answer this question because both the DL's and TSA's are so far up there at the pinnacle of performance, it gets to a point where you have to actually conduct comparisons side by side. At these levels of performance theory starts to get thrown out the window. These scopes are good enough for the most discriminating observers. The question I'd be more concerned about is ones own knowledge of air temperatures, seeing conditions, proper setup, timing, air currents, patience at the eyepiece, understanding of eyepiece selection, proper diagonal, transparency, moisture, altitude. There's just so many other factors far more important. It's really more about being a good observer at these levels.

hi daniel, 

I ordered my tak 100dz.
since that you're talking diagonal and eyepeices.
what do you suggest for visual planetaryand a bit of dso. m42 ....

 

thank you.


  • alpha_centauri and mikeDnight like this

#31 Kunama

Kunama

    Aussie at large

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,457
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Canberra, Australia

Posted 19 March 2020 - 08:08 PM

There‚Äôs only one fair way to compare scopes..... cool.gif

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

  • B8A9AC3B-FD5A-4DF5-8C17-FAEE3C53C22C.jpeg

  • payner, NickWDavis, m9x18 and 6 others like this

#32 Ihtegla Sar

Ihtegla Sar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 523
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2019
  • Loc: Pacific Northwest

Posted 19 March 2020 - 08:49 PM

Many thanks to all for the very useful comments and great experience.
It seems that tsa102 and 100DL are close in visual performance.
I recently read about the stunning contrast in the latest fs102nsv and i am a little bit confused If 100DL will be better for visual planetary performance than fs102nsv.

I am going to go out on a limb here and say that you are almost certainly not going to notice a difference between an FC100DL and any other 4" Tak (including the TSA-102 and the FS-102nsv) when used visually. Based on what Daniel said, the very minor differences between different models of 4" Takahashi refractors will be even less noticeable than the very minor differences between individual samples of the same model.

Edited by Ihtegla Sar, 19 March 2020 - 08:51 PM.


#33 Nakedgun

Nakedgun

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 673
  • Joined: 30 Mar 2014
  • Loc: Southwest

Posted 19 March 2020 - 09:21 PM

Many thanks to all for the very useful comments and great experience.

It seems that tsa102 and 100DL are close in visual performance.

I recently read about the stunning contrast in the latest fs102nsv and i am a little bit confused If 100DL will be better for visual planetary performance than fs102nsv.

 

Look buddy, just flip a coin and get on with life, already!


  • Daniel Mounsey, 3 i Guy, Erik Bakker and 3 others like this

#34 barbie

barbie

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,188
  • Joined: 28 Jan 2013
  • Loc: Northeast Ohio

Posted 19 March 2020 - 09:24 PM

I have two Tak Fluorite doublets of 76mm, one an F8 classic and the other a newer 76mm F12 and they are both easily the closest to perfection in their aperture class. The F8 is a 1987 vintage 76mm and the new one is the current FC76 DCUQ. They are both equally superb instruments and are lightweight and easy to setup and transport. I've also had a FC100DF and years ago a TSA 102S and they were superb as well but for my needs, the doublets are preferred.  I don't think one can go wrong with a doublet or triplet.


  • Erik Bakker, eros312 and 25585 like this

#35 Erik Bakker

Erik Bakker

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 8,743
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2006
  • Loc: Netherlands, Europe

Posted 20 March 2020 - 04:27 AM

Just a bit of history here. You can have several FC100DL's and several TSA102's. Even if you compared a TSA102 to another TSA102, each will yield subtle differences to "experienced eyes". In other words, ever-so-slight differences in planetary contrast. A-, A+, A. Even I myself would not be able answer this question because both the DL's and TSA's are so far up there at the pinnacle of performance, it gets to a point where you have to actually conduct comparisons side by side. At these levels of performance theory starts to get thrown out the window. These scopes are good enough for the most discriminating observers. The question I'd be more concerned about is ones own knowledge of air temperatures, seeing conditions, proper setup, timing, air currents, patience at the eyepiece, understanding of eyepiece selection, proper diagonal, transparency, moisture, altitude. There's just so many other factors far more important. It's really more about being a good observer at these levels.

This +1 waytogo.gif


  • Daniel Mounsey likes this

#36 Erik Bakker

Erik Bakker

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 8,743
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2006
  • Loc: Netherlands, Europe

Posted 20 March 2020 - 04:31 AM

vvv,

 

You seem to have become victim of analysis paralysis. Just follow your heart and pick the one you are attracted to the most. Or else flip a coin, or choose the one available locally, or the best deal. Whatever. You will be happy with any Tak 4" regarding it's performance, unless there is something really wrong with it. But that would be easy to see.


  • Daniel Mounsey, John Huntley, payner and 3 others like this

#37 mikeDnight

mikeDnight

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,119
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2015
  • Loc: Wild Wild West - North West England

Posted 20 March 2020 - 04:56 AM

I observed at length with both the FC100DC and FC100DL on the night the "sopeviews.co.uk" reviewer Roger Vine (great guy), came to my observatory to assess the new DC & DL. The night was absolutely top class as regards seeing and transparency, and both scopes performed to perfection. The DL at F9 has a cooler look to the image while the DC at F7.4 has a slightly warmer hue. Both are utterly free of CA to my eye and both will deliver razor sharp views at 400X and some (on a steady night).

 

Both the above scopes gave the same level of detail throughout most of the night, but there was an issue brought about by a local heat source. Jupiter was rising and the DL, being separated from the DC by 5 metres or so, was showing a spectacular view of the planet's festoons and garlands, white ovals and a shadow transit. The DC which was pier mounted and couldn't be moved was looking directly over a neighbours chimney.  At first we all thought the DC had fogged over but looking at the lens it was still clear. It took me a while to come to terms with the DC's sudden image softening, and I didn't see the problem until the morning after. From the DC's perspective Jupiter had been directly over the neighbours heat source, which was very mild but enough to wash out detail. While the DL, being farther down the garden, avoided the line through the gentle but blurring heat plume. The DC had many other opportunities to play alongside the same DL and both always gave the same level of detail, with the only real difference being one of tone. 

 

Perhaps the most important thing to take from this, is that even when scopes are only a few yards apart, local influences can create differences in performance, so to get a true feel for a scope like a Tak - especially when trying to compare Tak's - its important to do so over an extended period of at least several days, and under good conditions. Looking through one, then driving a few miles to look through another, doesn't work!

 

In the attached pic you can see my neighbours chimney cowel just above my observatory roof, that caused the difference in seeing. It's the only thing I know of that interferes with my otherwise excellent south eastern view, so I guess I shouldn't complain.

IMG_5430.jpg


Edited by mikeDnight, 20 March 2020 - 06:29 AM.

  • Daniel Mounsey, John Huntley, Edrow10 and 6 others like this

#38 Erik Bakker

Erik Bakker

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 8,743
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2006
  • Loc: Netherlands, Europe

Posted 20 March 2020 - 06:23 AM

I observed at length with both the FC100DC and FC100DL on the night the "sopeviews" reviewer Roger Vine came to my observatory to assess the DC & DL. The night was absolutely top class as regards seeing and transparency, and both scopes performed to perfection. The DL at F9 has a cooler look to the image while the DC at F7.4 has a slightly warmer hue. Both are utterly free of CA to my eye and both will deliver razor sharp views at 400X and some (on a steady night).

 

[...]

 

The DC had many other opportunities to play alongside the same DL and both always gave the same level of detail, with the only real difference being one of tone. 

 

Perhaps the most important thing to take from this, is that even when scopes are only a few yards apart, local influences can create differences in performance, so to get a true feel for a scope like a Tak - especially when trying to compare Tak's - its important to do so over an extended period of at least several days, and under good conditions. Looking through one, then driving a few miles to look through another, doesn't work!

 

In the attached pic you can see my neighbours chimney cowel just above my observatory roof, that caused the difference I seeing. It's the only thing that interferes with my otherwise excellen south eastern view, so I guess I shouldn't complain.

attachicon.gifIMG_5430.jpg

So true, excellent advice waytogo.gif  


  • Daniel Mounsey and mikeDnight like this

#39 m9x18

m9x18

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,812
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2007
  • Loc: Abilene, Texas USA

Posted 20 March 2020 - 09:15 AM

So it looks like it isn't just a matter of one's eyesight and atmosphere being the major limiting factors between Taks, but also one's own legs and feet. Legs and feet to move the scope to a better part of the yard or field to get superior views.  : )


Edited by m9x18, 20 March 2020 - 09:46 AM.

  • mikeDnight and 25585 like this

#40 25585

25585

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,496
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 20 March 2020 - 09:19 AM

So it looks like it isn't just a matter of one's eyesight and atmosphere being the being the major limiting factors between Taks, but also one's own legs and feet. Legs and feet to move the scope to a better part of the yard or field to get superior views.  : )

+1

 

The one big disadvantage of a fixed observing position, is it being fixed. 


  • mikeDnight likes this

#41 Daniel Mounsey

Daniel Mounsey

    Vendor (Woodland Hills)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 7,750
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2002

Posted 20 March 2020 - 09:29 AM

Wise words. We had a similar issue here. 

https://www.cloudyni...ceravolo-hd145/

 

Sometimes it's easy to make some errors and a lot of times when I'm on a phone or listening to an observation that was made when one was judging a scope they got, I'll often find clues to problems simply by listening to what an observer may or may not have been making pertaining to setup, location etc. This is why I've always advocated that the amount of experience the observer has is paramount. When observers first start out getting into these shootouts, some may not even know what it is they don't know, and premature decisions can happen and it's happened to me as well. 

 

I remember a big awakening I had when I started viewing with the guys at Charlton Flats during the mid and late 90's on into the early 2000's. Those guys were way out of my league. 


Edited by Daniel Mounsey, 20 March 2020 - 09:42 AM.

  • payner, m9x18, Edrow10 and 1 other like this

#42 Daniel Mounsey

Daniel Mounsey

    Vendor (Woodland Hills)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 7,750
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2002

Posted 20 March 2020 - 10:01 AM

I observed at length with both the FC100DC and FC100DL on the night the "sopeviews.co.uk" reviewer Roger Vine (great guy), came to my observatory to assess the new DC & DL. The night was absolutely top class as regards seeing and transparency, and both scopes performed to perfection. The DL at F9 has a cooler look to the image while the DC at F7.4 has a slightly warmer hue. Both are utterly free of CA to my eye and both will deliver razor sharp views at 400X and some (on a steady night).

 

Both the above scopes gave the same level of detail throughout most of the night, but there was an issue brought about by a local heat source. Jupiter was rising and the DL, being separated from the DC by 5 metres or so, was showing a spectacular view of the planet's festoons and garlands, white ovals and a shadow transit. The DC which was pier mounted and couldn't be moved was looking directly over a neighbours chimney.  At first we all thought the DC had fogged over but looking at the lens it was still clear. It took me a while to come to terms with the DC's sudden image softening, and I didn't see the problem until the morning after. From the DC's perspective Jupiter had been directly over the neighbours heat source, which was very mild but enough to wash out detail. While the DL, being farther down the garden, avoided the line through the gentle but blurring heat plume. The DC had many other opportunities to play alongside the same DL and both always gave the same level of detail, with the only real difference being one of tone. 

 

Perhaps the most important thing to take from this, is that even when scopes are only a few yards apart, local influences can create differences in performance, so to get a true feel for a scope like a Tak - especially when trying to compare Tak's - its important to do so over an extended period of at least several days, and under good conditions. Looking through one, then driving a few miles to look through another, doesn't work!

 

In the attached pic you can see my neighbours chimney cowel just above my observatory roof, that caused the difference in seeing. It's the only thing I know of that interferes with my otherwise excellent south eastern view, so I guess I shouldn't complain.

attachicon.gifIMG_5430.jpg

Good post Mike. Ohhh the stories I could tell.


  • mikeDnight likes this

#43 mikeDnight

mikeDnight

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,119
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2015
  • Loc: Wild Wild West - North West England

Posted 20 March 2020 - 11:44 AM

Wise words. We had a similar issue here. 

https://www.cloudyni...ceravolo-hd145/

 

Sometimes it's easy to make some errors and a lot of times when I'm on a phone or listening to an observation that was made when one was judging a scope they got, I'll often find clues to problems simply by listening to what an observer may or may not have been making pertaining to setup, location etc. This is why I've always advocated that the amount of experience the observer has is paramount. When observers first start out getting into these shootouts, some may not even know what it is they don't know, and premature decisions can happen and it's happened to me as well. 

 

I remember a big awakening I had when I started viewing with the guys at Charlton Flats during the mid and late 90's on into the early 2000's. Those guys were way out of my league. 

  I suspect as a vendor Daniel, you are the primary punch bag when a disgruntled customer believes he's been sold a duff scope.

 

  When I bought an FS128 back in early 2003, I took it round to a friends, set it up in his back garden and aimed the scope at Jupiter. The view was perfection!  Then I swung the scope round and looked at Vega. The view horrified me, as although it was circular and steady, it didn't focus to a point source. My friend said "There's nothing wrong with that scope, its the best planetary view I've ever seen", but I wasn't listening. I'd paid a fortune for a scope that didn't bring Vega to an Airy disc. I was very upset and phoned the vendor the next morning. He arranged for the scope to be collected the next day after I'd assured him I'd been an observer for many years and I knew what I was talking about. 

  The currier didn't arrive and it was now weekend. I decided to take the FS128 to my local astro club so as to get some moral support and sympathy.  Who was I kidding!

  As I walked up the hill to the main observatory with the FS over my shoulder, and looking like a very angry version of Ken Fulton, I was greeted by complete hysterics. My supportive friends were literally rolling round on the grass, blood red with laughter, and assuring me that "Takahashi don't make bad optics".

  Peter, who runs the astronomy centre, took the refractor off me and mounted it on a Vixen GP. Then aiming it at Vega said "That's about as perfect a star image as I've ever seen!" I climbed over the laughing bodies, that were at this point almost wetting themselves and were unable to breathe. Then looking through the eyepiece I saw a perfect Airy disc. 

 When I explained the scope had given the best view of Jupiter I'd ever seen, but couldn't produce a star image, the ridicule accelerated to a whole different level. Even today they love to remind me of that fateful evening, and how I nearly gave the poor vendor a heart attack. I phoned the vendor on his mobile first thing on Sunday morning to apologise, and strangely, struck up a good friendship that has lasted almost 20years. He's a thoroughly nice guy and he's also my first port of call when I want to buy anothe scope. And yes, he still sells to me! lol.gif

The FS128 gave superb views of all objects, and never again showed the blurry star image it did on that first night. Looking at the site from which that first look at Vega was made, there was a line of glass conservatories that may have been the cause of the blurring due to gentle heat rising from the. 

It certainly taught me a valuable lesson in both humility and observing experience. I used to think that heat always caused turbulent images, but it doesn't always.

 

Detail in M1 as seen through the FS128

2019-04-21 17.56.17.png


Edited by mikeDnight, 20 March 2020 - 11:44 AM.

  • Daniel Mounsey, Erik Bakker, payner and 6 others like this

#44 m9x18

m9x18

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,812
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2007
  • Loc: Abilene, Texas USA

Posted 20 March 2020 - 01:38 PM

Mike, you're an excellent writer, teacher and storyteller. There is so much to learn from your words and wisdom.


  • Daniel Mounsey and mikeDnight like this

#45 Daniel Mounsey

Daniel Mounsey

    Vendor (Woodland Hills)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 7,750
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2002

Posted 20 March 2020 - 02:51 PM

  I suspect as a vendor Daniel, you are the primary punch bag when a disgruntled customer believes he's been sold a duff scope.

 

  When I bought an FS128 back in early 2003, I took it round to a friends, set it up in his back garden and aimed the scope at Jupiter. The view was perfection!  Then I swung the scope round and looked at Vega. The view horrified me, as although it was circular and steady, it didn't focus to a point source. My friend said "There's nothing wrong with that scope, its the best planetary view I've ever seen", but I wasn't listening. I'd paid a fortune for a scope that didn't bring Vega to an Airy disc. I was very upset and phoned the vendor the next morning. He arranged for the scope to be collected the next day after I'd assured him I'd been an observer for many years and I knew what I was talking about. 

  The currier didn't arrive and it was now weekend. I decided to take the FS128 to my local astro club so as to get some moral support and sympathy.  Who was I kidding!

  As I walked up the hill to the main observatory with the FS over my shoulder, and looking like a very angry version of Ken Fulton, I was greeted by complete hysterics. My supportive friends were literally rolling round on the grass, blood red with laughter, and assuring me that "Takahashi don't make bad optics".

  Peter, who runs the astronomy centre, took the refractor off me and mounted it on a Vixen GP. Then aiming it at Vega said "That's about as perfect a star image as I've ever seen!" I climbed over the laughing bodies, that were at this point almost wetting themselves and were unable to breathe. Then looking through the eyepiece I saw a perfect Airy disc. 

 When I explained the scope had given the best view of Jupiter I'd ever seen, but couldn't produce a star image, the ridicule accelerated to a whole different level. Even today they love to remind me of that fateful evening, and how I nearly gave the poor vendor a heart attack. I phoned the vendor on his mobile first thing on Sunday morning to apologise, and strangely, struck up a good friendship that has lasted almost 20years. He's a thoroughly nice guy and he's also my first port of call when I want to buy anothe scope. And yes, he still sells to me! lol.gif

The FS128 gave superb views of all objects, and never again showed the blurry star image it did on that first night. Looking at the site from which that first look at Vega was made, there was a line of glass conservatories that may have been the cause of the blurring due to gentle heat rising from the. 

It certainly taught me a valuable lesson in both humility and observing experience. I used to think that heat always caused turbulent images, but it doesn't always.

 

Detail in M1 as seen through the FS128

attachicon.gif2019-04-21 17.56.17.png

 

 

waytogo.gif  You are not alone! I've made some of the worst blunders too and it's what helps us grow as observers. Absolutely beautiful sketch. bow.gif  


  • m9x18, Edrow10 and mikeDnight like this

#46 Bill Barlow

Bill Barlow

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,584
  • Joined: 03 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Overland Park KS

Posted 21 March 2020 - 11:28 AM

Can you still buy the DL new? I thought by now they would be long gone with only used ones coming up for sale.

 

Bill



#47 sunnyday

sunnyday

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,563
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2019
  • Loc: Ottawa,Canada

Posted 21 March 2020 - 11:45 AM

Can you still buy the DL new? I thought by now they would be long gone with only used ones coming up for sale.

 

Bill

two weeks ago when i ordered my tak 100 dz, it was still in stock.




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