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

Pity Takahashi owners who are forced to buy other accessories

  • Please log in to reply
87 replies to this topic

#26 DavidNealMinnick

DavidNealMinnick

    Viking 1

  • ****-
  • Posts: 543
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2006

Posted 22 February 2021 - 10:22 PM

You know the funny thing is the great astronomers that bought the cheaper but well built, great performing whatevers have never complained of failure, of not working, of disappointment, they are just plain happy with the substantial $’s they saved all still in their bulging pockets ! With the spend a lot more guys, for the same performance, all I ever see is various ways of grasping at straws to justify buying these name stamped on the side parts that in most cases don’t do any better other than maybe color coordination ! Thats all for 3-4x the price ?? Maybe I’m just plain wrong but ......... ?

 

No, you're just condescending.


  • ad701xx, Glass Man and t-ara-fan like this

#27 LDW47

LDW47

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,633
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 22 February 2021 - 10:30 PM

No, you're just condescending.

Ya sure ! Thats the new buzz word of today what ever that means, implies, when at a loss for words, lol ! I have learned to read between the lines over the last 60 of my 73 yrs. thats all !


Edited by LDW47, 22 February 2021 - 10:35 PM.


#28 RichA

RichA

    Gemini

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 3,268
  • Joined: 03 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Toronto, Canada

Posted 22 February 2021 - 10:38 PM

About 20 years ago I bought a new FS102 and about died when I wanted the Takahashi FS-102/FS-128 f/6 reducer.  I was like that is higher than a giraffe's butt. 

I wanted to use the scope for AP and visual.  Also bought the TAK 2IN. visual back.  I bought some non TAK rings and have enjoyed the scope ever since.

I didn't buy the Takahashi camera angle adjuster because I could rotate the scope in the rings when needed.

I got out of doing AP around 2006.  Maybe some day I will give it another go.  

 

If you want cheap buy cheap.  If you want quality spend the money and not complain. 

That is how I look at it.  

If you owned a Tak, the reverse is true, you bought non-Tak rings and probably saved some money.   Were the rings you bought markedly inferior?



#29 RichA

RichA

    Gemini

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 3,268
  • Joined: 03 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Toronto, Canada

Posted 22 February 2021 - 10:41 PM

Do you have an actual example of the same exact ring, the same diameter etc with one being sold for $200, one being sold for $350 because it is somehow designated Takahashi?

 

Jon

Friend bought the Tak rings out of expediency.  I'll see it tomorrow.  Have lots of "non-Tak" versions from the same company to directly compare.   I'll be sure and let you know how they differ for their 2.1x price difference.


Edited by RichA, 22 February 2021 - 10:42 PM.


#30 LDW47

LDW47

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,633
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 22 February 2021 - 10:54 PM

As my old gramma always said ‘ why do you need a Cadillac to do a Chevys job ‘ ?



#31 BRCoz

BRCoz

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,110
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2005
  • Loc: Moreno Valley, CA

Posted 23 February 2021 - 04:10 PM

You know the funny thing is the great astronomers that bought the cheaper but well built, great performing whatevers have never complained of failure, of not working, of disappointment, they are just plain happy with the substantial $’s they saved all still in their bulging pockets ! With the spend a lot more guys, for the same performance, all I ever see is various ways of grasping at straws to justify buying these name stamped on the side parts that in most cases don’t do any better other than maybe color coordination ! Thats all for 3-4x the price ?? Maybe I’m just plain wrong but ......... ?

Funny.  

 

I did have a 60mm Tasco with 500 power as my only scope for 7 years.  Then I decided I wanted better optics.  The haves and have not.  Which are you?



#32 BRCoz

BRCoz

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,110
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2005
  • Loc: Moreno Valley, CA

Posted 23 February 2021 - 04:14 PM

If you owned a Tak, the reverse is true, you bought non-Tak rings and probably saved some money.   Were the rings you bought markedly inferior?

The rings were very nice.  I don't remember who made them it has been so long. 



#33 BRCoz

BRCoz

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,110
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2005
  • Loc: Moreno Valley, CA

Posted 23 February 2021 - 04:27 PM

No, you're just condescending.

There is one in every crowd.  


  • ad701xx likes this

#34 LDW47

LDW47

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,633
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 23 February 2021 - 06:14 PM

Funny.  

 

I did have a 60mm Tasco with 500 power as my only scope for 7 years.  Then I decided I wanted better optics.  The haves and have not.  Which are you?

I have 10 scopes 9 refractors and 1 SW 6” dob, the refractors range from a late 1959 Tasco model 308 60mm, f15 to a 127mm, f6.6. They are all great performers but they surely aren’t nearly the high end makes and models, I consider myself in the same group of which I speak ! And I have at least 6 pairs of binos of various sizes.


Edited by LDW47, 24 February 2021 - 07:36 AM.


#35 BRCoz

BRCoz

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,110
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2005
  • Loc: Moreno Valley, CA

Posted 25 February 2021 - 11:33 PM

I had the $50 no coatings 1991 Tasco complete with eyepieces that had plastic lens.  After replacing the objective with one that had some coatings and getting a few eyepieces with glass it was much better.  Not as good as the older ones.   



#36 luxo II

luxo II

    Gemini

  • -----
  • Posts: 3,420
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2017
  • Loc: Sydney, Australia

Posted 26 February 2021 - 12:06 AM

Why are we discussing Trashco refractors in a Takahashi thread ?


  • bugbit likes this

#37 Ihtegla Sar

Ihtegla Sar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 869
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2019
  • Loc: Pacific Northwest

Posted 26 February 2021 - 09:33 AM

Imagine if you saw a set of generic telescope rings retailing for $200.00. They fit various scope tubes. Then, a dealer gets a pair of these rings from a maker, and the maker, who designated a generic ring for Takahashi turns around and charges the dealer $350 a pair for them. Automatically, the selling price DOUBLES yet it's the SAME RING set!! Why abuse a Tak owner just because they happen to own an expensive scope??

No one's forcing you to buy the Tak rings. I own two Taks and I pick and choose what Tak accessories to buy for my scopes. I will give you a couple of actual examples with actual product links. For my FC100DL, I chose the Tak clamshell currently priced at $214 and in stock.

https://telescopes.n...l-fc-100dc.html

I enjoy the form and function of the Tak clamshell, so the $44 I saved over off brand tube rings ($170 and currently out of stock)
was well worth it to me.

https://optcorp.com/...1a2d1f1b75d5e53

Now Tak makes some spendy finderscopes but they don't make a RACI, so I went with a Stellarvue 8x50 RACI in white to match my Tak, but I mounted it in a Tak bracket that I found at Woodland Hills for $88. Price has gone up probably due to COVID and it's out of stock but the same bracket is now $100.

https://optcorp.com/...b2df25e96bd99b0

Stellarvue sells a finder bracket for $69.00, so I spent $19 more for a matching Tak bracket.

https://www.stellarv...er-scope-rings/

I guess if you want to own a Tak you better be financially able to spend a little more on accessories or be ready to make some compromises. But that's pretty much the same for high end manufacturers of any product. Takahashi in particular is known for manufacturing high quality telescopes and accessories with exquisite quality control.

HOWEVER, what you are alleging is that Takahashi is slapping its name on generic rings and selling them at a big markup. You need proof for such a claim and several posters have asked for specific examples or links to the tube rings you are talking about, but you have provided none. Until you provide proof of your claim that Takahashi is putting it's name on rebranded generic tube rings, I'm going to assume you just made the whole thing up since you started the thread with the word "imagine." Where's the proof?

Edited by Ihtegla Sar, 26 February 2021 - 10:01 AM.

  • DavidNealMinnick and mtminnesota like this

#38 mtminnesota

mtminnesota

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 333
  • Joined: 20 Aug 2019
  • Loc: St. Paul

Posted 26 February 2021 - 10:42 AM

Imagine if you saw a set of generic telescope rings retailing for $200.00. They fit various scope tubes. Then, a dealer gets a pair of these rings from a maker, and the maker, who designated a generic ring for Takahashi turns around and charges the dealer $350 a pair for them. Automatically, the selling price DOUBLES yet it's the SAME RING set!! Why abuse a Tak owner just because they happen to own an expensive scope??


Oops, people are asking what you're talking about. Didn't see that coming, eh?
  • peleuba and Kunama like this

#39 Bowlerhat

Bowlerhat

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,213
  • Joined: 05 Jun 2019
  • Loc: Melbourne, Australia

Posted 26 February 2021 - 06:18 PM

No one's forcing you to buy the Tak rings. I own two Taks and I pick and choose what Tak accessories to buy for my scopes. I will give you a couple of actual examples with actual product links. For my FC100DL, I chose the Tak clamshell currently priced at $214 and in stock.

This. When I go to store to tokyo to try FS60Q they just have me the OTA without something else. Similar when I'm preordering here.

 

However, tak design hasn't changed and develop it's own aesthetics, which-I don't mind it but buying own rings, which is cheaper, is also making the parts different and mismatched. I reckon some folks would argue about that. At the same time it's pretty good to have design proved-that clamshell design been around since first TS taks and still applied today. I can use adapters from a TS scope to modern FS scopes. etc.



#40 Bowlerhat

Bowlerhat

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,213
  • Joined: 05 Jun 2019
  • Loc: Melbourne, Australia

Posted 26 February 2021 - 06:24 PM

You know the funny thing is the great astronomers that bought the cheaper but well built, great performing whatevers have never complained of failure, of not working, of disappointment, they are just plain happy with the substantial $’s they saved all still in their bulging pockets ! With the spend a lot more guys, for the same performance, all I ever see is various ways of grasping at straws to justify buying these name stamped on the side parts that in most cases don’t do any better other than maybe color coordination ! Thats all for 3-4x the price ?? Maybe I’m just plain wrong but ......... ?

The diminishing returns in scopes world is high, so yeah, not many would understand what does last 5% means. Most cheaper scopes can do 80% (or higher) of what can be done with more expensive scopes. But it's also a dichotomy of telescopes world in larger scale: do you make better quality scopes, yet not accessible because of the price, or do you make good, cheap quality scopes which accessible for everyone? I don't think there's really good answer to that as both are necessary, but so far we don't really have both.



#41 LDW47

LDW47

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,633
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 26 February 2021 - 07:35 PM

The diminishing returns in scopes world is high, so yeah, not many would understand what does last 5% means. Most cheaper scopes can do 80% (or higher) of what can be done with more expensive scopes. But it's also a dichotomy of telescopes world in larger scale: do you make better quality scopes, yet not accessible because of the price, or do you make good, cheap quality scopes which accessible for everyone? I don't think there's really good answer to that as both are necessary, but so far we don't really have both.

This happens in everything not just in astronomy, its the way of life ! Thats not really the issue, the question is why would any one want to pay that much more for something that might be 10% better , maybe, will your eye ever notice the difference in honest truth on those dark but average nites, would your eye, your mind even care ? I know the answer 95% of the time, its ‘ I just want one because they say it is better ‘ but in fact ......... ! Thats what I see because I have been there with marine electronics, with firearms, with whatever but not in this hobby, with the scopes I have I can see it all ! 



#42 Kunama

Kunama

    Aussie at large

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,921
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Canberra, Australia

Posted 26 February 2021 - 08:59 PM

I don't belittle those of among us who choose to set a lower budget for their hobbies than what I am prepared to pay, I share my scopes with anyone who wants to have a look through them, I also keenly look through others' scopes regardless of their price or quality at various gatherings. What does really annoy me is the manner in which some claim that others are only buying top tier scopes to show off their wealth or to "rub someone's nose in it" should others not go for top tier.

 

My current outreach scope is my TMB-LZOS 152mm Apo, I never tell people its price nor that it might be better than the $250 Skywatcher that sits alongside, I merely show them the view and answer their questions honestly and try to keep their interest focused on the view in the eyepiece rather than the cost of stuff...

 

Nobody is forced to buy Tak accessories, there are many aftermarket suppliers that make cheaper gear, so why is that so many here complain of the price of these parts?


  • Full Sun and Ihtegla Sar like this

#43 Kunama

Kunama

    Aussie at large

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,921
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Canberra, Australia

Posted 26 February 2021 - 09:26 PM

Friend bought the Tak rings out of expediency.  I'll see it tomorrow.  Have lots of "non-Tak" versions from the same company to directly compare.   I'll be sure and let you know how they differ for their 2.1x price difference.

You're not comparing the same rings, genuine Takahashi rings are easily identified. Sure one can buy cheaper rings from Parallax or AliExpress but some people really like having sandcast Takahashi rings made actually in the Takahashi factory by artisans who have been sandcasting things for decades.

 

I have bought quite a bit of Takahashi equipment over the years, the scopes and their components have always worked as designed, nothing has ever broken in normal use and all their attachments align as designed.... their clamshells and rings have fitted perfectly and held the scopes securely......

 

Traditional sandcasting is a skill very few have mastered to the level of the guys at the Tak foundry......


  • peleuba and Ihtegla Sar like this

#44 t-ara-fan

t-ara-fan

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,758
  • Joined: 20 Sep 2017
  • Loc: 50° 13' N

Posted 26 February 2021 - 09:50 PM

I had the $50 no coatings 1991 Tasco complete with eyepieces that had plastic lens.  After replacing the objective with one that had some coatings and getting a few eyepieces with glass it was much better.  Not as good as the older ones.   

I have my grandfathers axe. It still works really well. Over the years it needed a few new handles, and a new head.  But it is nice to have a family heirloom like that.

 


  • btschumy, noisejammer and LDW47 like this

#45 Bowlerhat

Bowlerhat

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,213
  • Joined: 05 Jun 2019
  • Loc: Melbourne, Australia

Posted 26 February 2021 - 10:34 PM

This happens in everything not just in astronomy, its the way of life ! Thats not really the issue, the question is why would any one want to pay that much more for something that might be 10% better , maybe, will your eye ever notice the difference in honest truth on those dark but average nites, would your eye, your mind even care ? I know the answer 95% of the time, its ‘ I just want one because they say it is better ‘ but in fact ......... ! Thats what I see because I have been there with marine electronics, with firearms, with whatever but not in this hobby, with the scopes I have I can see it all ! 

not everyone can see that, but I don't see any reason why we shouldn't be pursuing the limits.



#46 LDW47

LDW47

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,633
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 26 February 2021 - 11:21 PM

I have my grandfathers axe. It still works really well. Over the years it needed a few new handles, and a new head.  But it is nice to have a family heirloom like that.

Wonderful but if it has needed a few handles and a new head, what is left of your granddads axe ? Handle replacement is standard but the head ?



#47 LDW47

LDW47

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,633
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 26 February 2021 - 11:27 PM

You're not comparing the same rings, genuine Takahashi rings are easily identified. Sure one can buy cheaper rings from Parallax or AliExpress but some people really like having sandcast Takahashi rings made actually in the Takahashi factory by artisans who have been sandcasting things for decades.

 

I have bought quite a bit of Takahashi equipment over the years, the scopes and their components have always worked as designed, nothing has ever broken in normal use and all their attachments align as designed.... their clamshells and rings have fitted perfectly and held the scopes securely......

 

Traditional sandcasting is a skill very few have mastered to the level of the guys at the Tak foundry......

You may not be comparing the same rings but the others work perfectly for which they are made and how many times have you seen the others fail / break under ‘normal use’ ?



#48 LDW47

LDW47

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,633
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 26 February 2021 - 11:33 PM

I don't belittle those of among us who choose to set a lower budget for their hobbies than what I am prepared to pay, I share my scopes with anyone who wants to have a look through them, I also keenly look through others' scopes regardless of their price or quality at various gatherings. What does really annoy me is the manner in which some claim that others are only buying top tier scopes to show off their wealth or to "rub someone's nose in it" should others not go for top tier.

 

My current outreach scope is my TMB-LZOS 152mm Apo, I never tell people its price nor that it might be better than the $250 Skywatcher that sits alongside, I merely show them the view and answer their questions honestly and try to keep their interest focused on the view in the eyepiece rather than the cost of stuff...

 

Nobody is forced to buy Tak accessories, there are many aftermarket suppliers that make cheaper gear, so why is that so many here complain of the price of these parts?

You don’t belittle .......... but read some posts throughout a myriad of threads and you will find many do using words like junk and trash and ...... and they weren’t talking about department store scopes. They were talking about fellow astronomers, those that have chosen to not spend for the higher end gear, hard earned scopes that perform for them each and every dark nite.



#49 Ihtegla Sar

Ihtegla Sar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 869
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2019
  • Loc: Pacific Northwest

Posted 27 February 2021 - 12:25 AM

You may not be comparing the same rings but the others work perfectly for which they are made and how many times have you seen the others fail / break under ‘normal use’ ?

Kunama was responding to the topic of the thread.  The Original Post accused Takahashi of rebranding generic rings for a markup. 

 

To quote the Original Post:

 

 

it's the SAME RING set!!

 

As Kunama points out that's impossible because Takahashi sand casts its tube rings, which is something no generic manufacturer of tube rings does. 


  • Kunama and mtminnesota like this

#50 LDW47

LDW47

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,633
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 27 February 2021 - 12:29 AM

Kunama was responding to the topic of the thread.  The Original Post accused Takahashi of rebranding generic rings for a markup. 

 

To quote the Original Post:

 

 

As Kunama points out that's impossible because Takahashi sand casts its tube rings, which is something no generic manufacturer of tube rings does. 

A technicality, I / we are talking the same in performance, thats what counts not how they are made !




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