849 replies to this topic

[PatientObserver]

Kyoei's shipping costs are surprisingly reasonable. And delivery times from Osaka to Kansas are typically 3 days. It's shocking.

Without a doubt. Kyoei is awesome. However, shipping for the μ-180C will increase the total price to between $1500 and $1600 (depending on the current value of the yen and the price of shipping).

[Fiske]

Without a doubt. Kyoei is awesome. However, shipping for the μ-180C will increase the total price to between $1500 and $1600 (depending on the current value of the yen and the price of shipping).

I would be surprised if the total were over $1500. At any rate, it is not what I consider to be a support telescope. 

 

Honestly, Takahashi telescopes aren't a serious consideration for me. I have no doubt about their excellence. I'm just somehow not inspired to own one. Not saying it's rational. 

 

Edited by Fiske, 29 November 2023 - 07:26 AM.

[MT4]

My Askar FMA180 (40mm F/4.5 flatfield) supports my SkyRover 120mm BT.   With a Morpheus 12.5mm eyepiece, the Askar gives 5.4 degrees at 14.4x.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[PatientObserver]

I would be surprised if the total were over $1500. At any rate, it is not what I consider to be a support telescope.

Honestly, Takahashi telescopes aren't a serious consideration for me. I have no doubt about their excellence. I'm just somehow not inspired to own one. Not saying it's rational.

I was surprised too.

Not that I have a suggestion for a support telescope. I do not have enough experience splitting doubles to know what would be a good choice for you.

My choices for telescopes are the Takahashi FOA-60Q and μ-180C, and the Agema SD-120. Figure I am covered with 60, 120, and 180 mm of aperture, and can always use my Maven binoculars and the FOA-60Q while I wait for the larger scopes to cool down.

Our choices are not always rational. Despite the difference in aperture, I used the FOA-60Q far more often than the AT102EDL. The only issue I had with the AT102EDL was the finder and that was more to do with my inexperience aligning finder scopes than any real issue with the scope. See, here I am using past tense and I still own the scope.

For me, it was the Takahashi green/blue that I struggled to accept (much like my dislike of the color of the Meade Masterclass Pro). I originally planned on building an FC-76DCU from components and using a FeatherTouch focuser, so I could avoid the color. The color no longer bothers me. Instead, I have to stop myself from buying additional Takahashi scopes.

Have you ever looked through a Takahashi?

Edited by PatientObserver, 29 November 2023 - 07:58 AM.

[Fiske]

I was surprised too.

Not that I have a suggestion for a support telescope. I do not have enough experience splitting doubles to know what would be a good choice for you.

My choices for telescopes are the Takahashi FOA-60Q and μ-180C, and the Agema SD-120. Figure I am covered with 60, 120, and 180 mm of aperture, and can always use my Maven binoculars and the FOA-60Q while I wait for the larger scopes to cool down.

Our choices are not always rational. Despite the difference in aperture, I used the FOA-60Q far more often than the AT102EDL. The only issue I had with the AT102EDL was the finder and that was more to do with my inexperience aligning finder scopes than any real issue with the scope. See, here I am using past tense and I still own the scope.

For me, it was the Takahashi green/blue that I struggled to accept (much like my dislike of the color of the Meade Masterclass Pro). I originally planned on building an FC-76DCU from components and using a FeatherTouch focuser, so I could avoid the color. The color no longer bothers me. Instead, I have to stop myself from buying additional Takahashi scopes.

Have you ever looked through a Takahashi?

I have not looked through a Takahashi, PO. 

 

My issue is not that I don't believe they are outstanding optically and mechanically. I'm sure they are. For high end optics, they are an obvious and reliable choice. If you're going to spend that kind of money, it makes sense to go with Takahashi. What I am realizing is that for a support telescope, my interest is in better quality instruments at moderate prices.

 

And I get the color thing.  I have strong color preferences too. 

Edited by Fiske, 29 November 2023 - 08:13 AM.

[PatientObserver]

I have not looked through a Takahashi, PO.

My issue is not that I don't believe they are outstanding optically and mechanically. I'm sure they are. For high end optics, they are an obvious and reliable choice. If you're going to spend that kind of money, it makes sense to go with Takahashi. What I am realizing is that for a support telescope, my interest is in better quality instruments at moderate prices.

And I get the color thing. I have strong color preferences too.

If you are looking for quality for the price, it is hard to beat the EDL line from Astro-Tech. My only issue with mine is that it is not a Takahashi.

[Bill Barlow]

Fiske already has an excellent 4” refractor in the TV-101.  I don’t think he can do much better at that aperture.  I have the Tak FC 76 DCU and an A-P 92 Stowaway so I don’t need any more refractors.  Larger apertures above 5” I prefer SCT’s.  
 

Bill

[Fiske]

Fiske already has an excellent 4” refractor in the TV-101.  I don’t think he can do much better at that aperture.  I have the Tak FC 76 DCU and an A-P 92 Stowaway so I don’t need any more refractors.  Larger apertures above 5” I prefer SCT’s.  
 

Bill

Thanks, Bill.  And agreed about the 100mm aperture.

 

It's possible I might try an option in the 120-127mm range. 

 

Edited by Fiske, 29 November 2023 - 01:46 PM.

[Scott99]

My favorite ‘support’ telescope:

Is that the Genesis Terra?  Never got to look through one. So you prefer it to the Vixen 4-inch?   It reminds me of the TV102 I had for years before I converted to Tak

[Bill Barlow]

Thanks, Bill.  And agreed about the 100mm aperture.

 

It's possible I might try an option in the 120-127mm range. 

 

That would be a boost in performance over the TV 101.  Those apertures might rival your C6.

 

Bill

[Fiske]

Here is the TV-101 on the Manfrotto 161MK2B tripod with the recently arrived Stellarvue M002C alt-az head.

 

 

The tripod with head is easily carried. It's rock solid with the telescope onboard, but the combined mount and scope is not something I would hand carry.  The motions are buttery smooth. We will see how that holds up at high magnification -- I'm guessing skies here won't support enough magnification for the lack of slow motion controls to matter. 

 

I will say that I much(!) prefer top mount to side mount designs. I would never leave the TV-101 configured on this mount for storage, where I routinely leave it on the iOptron/Tri-pier/Bino-bracket setup (top mount). I've wondered whether an iOptron HAZ31 head would be added to my collection, but the fact that it can be configured for top mounting versus side mounting will likely push that decision over the top. 

 

Here is the Celestron 6SE.

 

 

This set up is so light and easily managed, every other telescope configuration I have is a nuisance by comparison. 

 

The sky was a mess last night, but some stars and the moon were visible, so I did a quick sanity check to ensure that it focuses properly and to align the red dot finder (which had to be adjusted to its extreme down limit -- not a great thing). The red dot finder is what I would characterize as minimally functional. I foresee an upgrade on that front.

 

I did not do a star alignment, just used the hand paddle to slew, and was easily able to center bright stars like Capella and Theta Aurigae. It would have been fun to take a quick peek at M 37 or M 36, but clouds got in the way.

 

I had innocently imagined using an Explore Scientific 68* 24mm eyepiece for a low magnification "finder" eyepiece, but that is a nonstarter because the diagonal set screws are near the top of the holder and interfere with seating eyepieces that have wide bases. So fat-bottomed eyepieces do not make the 6SE rockin' world go round.  One of the set screws can be seen in this image.

 

 

 

Fortunately from years back I have multiple smaller 1.25 inch eyepieces, including a Meade 40mm Super Plossl, Televue 25/20/15mm plossls, 13/7/5 Nagler Type 6 eyepieces, and an excellent Celestron barlow. And a more recently acquired Takahashi TPL 18mm 1.25" eyepiece. So I won't have a problem managing a range of magnifications with the 6SE. 

 

Despite the minor annoyances with the diagonal set screws and the red dot finder, there is something extremely satisfying about a 6-inch SCT. It's just so light and easily managed compared with larger SCTs. Really an eye opener. We'll see how it stands up in comparison with a 120mm APO, if something like an EON 120 should somehow arrive at my doorstep...

 

Edited by Fiske, 30 November 2023 - 09:46 AM.

[norvegicus]

I'd replace the diagonal with something better.  You could easily adapt an existing 2" diagonal if you have one.  You won't utilize the full field of course but then you could use any eyepiece and the mirror/prism will likely be nicer than the one included with the C6.

 

You have to pay attention to the available space below the OTA of course so you don't hit the mount when viewing high targets.

 

Personally I'd use a low profile SCT to T2 adapter and a Baader BBHS T2 1.25" diagonal with a Click Lock visual back.

Edited by norvegicus, 30 November 2023 - 11:32 AM.

[Fiske]

I'd replace the diagonal with something better.  You could easily adapt an existing 2" diagonal if you have one.  You won't utilize the full field of course but then you could use any eyepiece and the mirror/prism will likely be nicer than the one included with the C6.

  

[Rich V.]

  

+1 on a higher quality SCT visual back and your existing 2" diagonal.  The Celestron VB/ diagonal are cheap "freebies" as you can see; particularly the thin two piece VB.  There are quality SCT VB options from Baader, AP and TV as well as the inexpensive Blue Fireball options. 

 

https://agenaastro.c...sual-backs.html

[Fiske]

+1 on a higher quality SCT visual back and your existing 2" diagonal.  The Celestron VB/ diagonal are cheap "freebies" as you can see; particularly the thin two piece VB.  There are quality SCT VB options from Baader, AP and TV as well as the inexpensive Blue Fireball options. 

 

https://agenaastro.c...sual-backs.html

Agreed. I don't want to put too much weight on it, though. 

 

Thinking a Baader 1.25 inch diagonal with a clicklock eyepiece holder. Would there be a reason to use a different visual back? Instead of attaching the Baader diagonal with the existing visual back? The diagonal is held in place with set screws.

 

Of course, that would be about 25% of the 6SE purchase price. With goto mount. 

Edited by Fiske, 30 November 2023 - 11:50 AM.

[Rich V.]

I just found the Celestron VB to be a thin, cheesy affair.  No compression ring to hold the diagonal, just screws against the nosepiece.  Better ones at least use a brass compression ring.

 

If you want to keep the light 1-1/4" form factor, the Takahashi prism is a lot less than a Baader. No set screws, either.  

 

https://www.astronom...m-diagonal.html

 

 

[Fiske]

I just found the Celestron VB to be a thin, cheesy affair.  No compression ring to hold the diagonal, just screws against the nosepiece.  Better ones at least use a brass compression ring.

 

If you want to keep the light 1-1/4" form factor, the Takahashi prism is a lot less than a Baader. No set screws, either.  

 

https://www.astronom...m-diagonal.html

Nice! 

 

What would you choose for a visual back? Agreed about the Celestron VB.

[Bill Barlow]

The accessories that come with this scope package are pretty much junk.  The visual back and diagonal don’t have a brass compression ring so be careful you don’t scratch the end of your diagonal or your eyepiece barrels.  For a better quality 1.25” visual back I use the Blue Fireball that is sold by Agena Astro.  
 

Bill

Edited by Bill Barlow, 30 November 2023 - 12:19 PM.

[Rich V.]

The WO Rotolock looks nice to me; even the Blue Fireball would be a step up for sure.

 

https://agenaastro.c...ce-adapter.html

 

https://agenaastro.c...-back-e-15.html

[norvegicus]

Nice! 

 

What would you choose for a visual back? Agreed about the Celestron VB.

I would choose a low profile SCT to T2 adapter ring like this one, and thread a Baader T2 Click Lock diagonal right onto it, with a locking ring.  This saves you the length of the visual back and is more secure.

 

http://scopestuff.com/ss_talp.htm

 

https://agenaastro.c...g-2408190a.html

 

https://agenaastro.c...der t2 diagonal

 

https://agenaastro.c...hread-t208.html

Edited by norvegicus, 30 November 2023 - 01:23 PM.

[Fiske]

The accessories that come with this scope package are pretty much junk.  The visual back and diagonal don’t have a brass compression ring so be careful you don’t scratch the end of your diagonal or your eyepiece barrels.  For a better quality 1.25” visual back I use the Blue Fireball that is sold by Agena Astro.  
 

Bill

Thanks Bill! 

[ABQJeff]

Here is the TV-101 on the Manfrotto 161MK2B tripod with the recently arrived Stellarvue M002C alt-az head.

 

 

The tripod with head is easily carried. It's rock solid with the telescope onboard, but the combined mount and scope is not something I would hand carry.  The motions are buttery smooth. We will see how that holds up at high magnification -- I'm guessing skies here won't support enough magnification for the lack of slow motion controls to matter. 

 

I will say that I much(!) prefer top mount to side mount designs. I would never leave the TV-101 configured on this mount for storage, where I routinely leave it on the iOptron/Tri-pier/Bino-bracket setup (top mount). I've wondered whether an iOptron HAZ31 head would be added to my collection, but the fact that it can be configured for top mounting versus side mounting will likely push that decision over the top. 

 

Here is the Celestron 6SE.

 

 

This set up is so light and easily managed, every other telescope configuration I have is a nuisance by comparison. 

 

The sky was a mess last night, but some stars and the moon were visible, so I did a quick sanity check to ensure that it focuses properly and to align the red dot finder (which had to be adjusted to its extreme down limit -- not a great thing). The red dot finder is what I would characterize as minimally functional. I foresee an upgrade on that front.

 

I did not do a star alignment, just used the hand paddle to slew, and was easily able to center bright stars like Capella and Theta Aurigae. It would have been fun to take a quick peek at M 37 or M 36, but clouds got in the way.

 

I had innocently imagined using an Explore Scientific 68* 24mm eyepiece for a low magnification "finder" eyepiece, but that is a nonstarter because the diagonal set screws are near the top of the holder and interfere with seating eyepieces that have wide bases. So fat-bottomed eyepieces do not make the 6SE rockin' world go round.  One of the set screws can be seen in this image.

 

 

 

Fortunately from years back I have multiple smaller 1.25 inch eyepieces, including a Meade 40mm Super Plossl, Televue 25/20/15mm plossls, 13/7/5 Nagler Type 6 eyepieces, and an excellent Celestron barlow. And a more recently acquired Takahashi TPL 18mm 1.25" eyepiece. So I won't have a problem managing a range of magnifications with the 6SE. 

 

Despite the minor annoyances with the diagonal set screws and the red dot finder, there is something extremely satisfying about a 6-inch SCT. It's just so light and easily managed compared with larger SCTs. Really an eye opener. We'll see how it stands up in comparison with a 120mm APO, if something like an EON 120 should somehow arrive at my doorstep...

 

Beautiful new SCT…don’t forget to give it an insulating jacket!  Especially for rapid viewing!

[areyoukiddingme]

For the C6, I can also recommend the blue fireball visual back. I'd also suggest a .63 reducer. 

 

I stick with 1.25" in mine, and find that with the reducer my 24/68 ES is a satisfying lowest power. I also use the Tak prism diagonal. 

 

This keeps everything light weight, and I don't try to kid myself that a C6 is a wide field scope. 

 

They are fun little scopes and pack a surprising punch for such a compact and light scope. I found the optics on mine to be surprisingly sharp, and it does very well on the planets. I like using binoviewers on SCTs a whole lot more than on reflectors, just seems more comfortable and easy to deal with.

 

You should also put a bright star on the edge of the field and see what happens with light intrusion. Many people found that the baffle creates a strong diamond ring effect--bright spot with large circle of light. Many people (me included) fixed this with the "painted sand paper mod". . . . i.e., a ring of sand paper stuck up the baffle wazoo. Totally works to improve contrast and remove the reflections.

[dmorrow]

Another vote for Blue FIreball.  I used it when I had the C6.  It worked well, especially for the price compared to Baader.

[Fiske]

Another vote for Blue Fireball.  I used it when I had the C6.  It worked well, especially for the price compared to Baader.

If it's good enough for Bill Barlow, then...