Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [UncensoredTakGroup] Re: FS128 versus TOA130

Expand Messages
  • Steve Ryde
    Hi, If the improvement is that big then are you suggesting that the FS series has been superseded so not worth pursuing?:) Cheers, Steve ... From:
    Message 1 of 27 , Sep 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi,

      If the improvement is that big then are you suggesting that the FS series
      has been superseded so not worth pursuing?:)

      Cheers,

      Steve

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: <jdaukantas@...>
      To: <UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Monday, September 01, 2003 12:19 PM
      Subject: Re: [UncensoredTakGroup] Re: FS128 versus TOA130


      > Improvement can only be small, WRONG ! Joe D.
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > UncensoredTakGroup-unsubscribe@egroups.com
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
      >
      > __________ NOD32 1.497 (20030830) Information __________
      >
      > This message was checked by NOD32 Antivirus System.
      > http://www.nod32.com
      >
      >
    • William R Wood
      I have never seen a TOA130 but, as an FS128 user, I am here to defend my baby :o) Anybody with a TOA who wants to fight it out, bring it over! I, for one,
      Message 2 of 27 , Sep 1, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        I have never seen a TOA130 but, as an FS128 user, I am here to defend my
        baby :o)

        Anybody with a TOA who wants to fight it out, bring it over! I, for one,
        will be very surprised if the TOA can outperform the 128 visually on any
        in-focus object. Personally, I love the f/8.1 128 and would not consider
        trading for the f/7.7 TOA. The 128 is 5.5lbs lighter than the TOA and there
        is no worry about extension tubes to reach focus or counterweights for Dec
        balance - just plunk in a diagonal, an EP and have at it. Plus, the look of
        the 128 on my NJP is a picture of engineering symmetry and pure beauty.

        The alleged false color is not a factor to me. According to Tak they are
        able to bring the 3 colors to a common focus using a doublet design at f/8
        thanks to the special properties of fluorite glass:

        "Finally, in 1977, Takahashi Seisakusho Ltd. of Japan introduced the world's
        first astronomical telescope with a fluorite objective. By working closely
        with optical experts at Canon Inc., the technology for making fluorite
        lenses as large as 150mm (6") in diameter was developed. The remarkable
        performance of the fluorite element allowed the production of f/8 telescopes
        with only two elements in the objective. Coating technology had also
        improved during this period so that the glass elements could be fully
        multi-coated to prevent light loss and ghosting. The result was an
        air-spaced apochromatic doublet. Color correction was as good as or even
        exceeding most triplet systems and contrast was far superior.

        In the 1990's, Takahashi redesigned its FC series f/8 doublets and created
        the FS series. New advancements in hard over-coating allowed Takahashi to
        design an objective with the fluorite element in front of the low
        dispersion, flint-type optical element. Since fluorite is difficult to coat,
        the FC series employed a non-coated fluorite element behind the multi-coated
        optical glass element for protection of the fluorite against abrasion and
        staining.

        The new FS series employs fully hard over-coated fluorite and low dispersion
        elements in an air-spaced f/8 doublet design that provides the highest
        contrast, brightest, and sharpest images in an apochromatic refractor
        today."

        I do not see false color when observing in-focus images. But then I do not
        make a habit of looking at Sirius or festering about the color fringe on
        defocused star images. In good seeing at reasonable altitude, the moon is
        color free surrounded by jet black sky. I can split .9" doubles clean as a
        whistle, see the E/F stars in the Trapezium plain as day and see all the
        details shown in the best planetary images on the internet (for a 5" class
        telescope). Star and planetary colors are strong and rendered accurately.
        Star fields are pinpoints of light on a black background (at a dark site)
        and the brighter DSOs jump out at you. The high mag images I get of doubles
        are indescribably delicious - perfect Airy discs surrounded by a uniformly
        bright single diffraction ring.

        I am very picky and critical of the slightest shortcoming in my toys but I
        can't find anything wrong with the FS128 mechanically or optically - I
        believe it is perfect for the visual astronomer. The TOA is no doubt more
        appropriate for imaging with its superlative color correction and ample
        backfocus and may be as good as the 128 visually, but better? I do not see
        how the 128's images could be improved upon.

        Uncle Art has stated that the FS series will continue for the foreseeable
        future. I have a feeling that Tak is smart and believes that the imagers
        will buy the TOA's and the visual folks will keep buying the FS line. I sure
        hope that assumption is correct since I am saving up for an FS152 :o)

        Regards,

        Bill Wood
        Fountain Hills, AZ




        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: jdaukantas@... [mailto:jdaukantas@...]
        > Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 7:19 PM
        > To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: Re: [UncensoredTakGroup] Re: FS128 versus TOA130
        >
        >
        > Improvement can only be small, WRONG ! Joe D.
        >
      • jandm_93460
        Bill: I second your comments. I am the proud owner of an FS152. I ve heard all the talk by the supposedly knowledgable people concerning the color in Tak
        Message 3 of 27 , Sep 1, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          Bill:

          I second your comments. I am the proud owner of an FS152. I've
          heard all the talk by the supposedly knowledgable people concerning
          the "color" in Tak doublets. Had a couple of real "smart" folks try
          and find color through my scope and they went away "believers". They
          couldn't find any color in focus. It's interesting what some folks
          will say when they've never looked through a Tak scope. Too much
          reading and not enough looking.

          As an nnecdote, had the owner of an AP130 look through my FS. His
          parting comment was "where's the color everyone keeps talking about?".

          Marv
          >
          > Uncle Art has stated that the FS series will continue for the
          foreseeable
          > future. I have a feeling that Tak is smart and believes that the
          imagers
          > will buy the TOA's and the visual folks will keep buying the FS
          line. I sure
          > hope that assumption is correct since I am saving up for an
          FS152 :o)
          >
          > Regards,
          >
          > Bill Wood
          > Fountain Hills, AZ
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > > -----Original Message-----
          > > From: jdaukantas@a... [mailto:jdaukantas@a...]
          > > Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 7:19 PM
          > > To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
          > > Subject: Re: [UncensoredTakGroup] Re: FS128 versus TOA130
          > >
          > >
          > > Improvement can only be small, WRONG ! Joe D.
          > >
        • Gene Horr
          ... You are correct. Ignore the troll, and hopefully others won t feed it either. The primary advantage of the TOA design is for those doing CCD work. The FS
          Message 4 of 27 , Sep 1, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            wpg1956 wrote:

            > In the meantime, I would like
            > to know whether, FOR VISUAL WORK, the TOA series is really a
            > significant improvement over the FS series or just a very, very
            > subtle improvement. I suspect the latter. At this level of
            > performance, improvement can only be very, very slight, yes?

            You are correct. Ignore the troll, and hopefully others won't
            feed it either.

            The primary advantage of the TOA design is for those doing CCD
            work. The FS design from my experience requires the reducer
            to be corrected into the far IR (in the visual spectrum the
            correction was perfect) which the front-lit chips are quite
            sensitive. So if you were imaging without a reducer you might
            have needed an IR-blocking filter. The TOA eliminates this
            need.

            Backlit chips in the past used to be designed more for the
            large-instrument research crowd and weren't really suited for
            short FL refractors. So the correction into the UV wasn't
            a material issue. Aside - what is interesting is that for
            imaging the FS series actually had _better_ correction in the
            shorter wavelengths than competing triplet designs. But we
            are now starting to see backlit chip based comeras marketed
            to the amateur. These cameras "see" further into the IR than
            the human eye. Before the TOA all refractors required a UV-
            blocking filter to use these cameras. The TOA eliminates this
            need.

            By removing the filters you aren't just saving the cost of
            the filters. You are eliminating additional wavefront
            degredation and increasing the total system efficiency.

            To answer your original question, which assumed visual use,
            IMO the answer is that you'll see minimal if any difference.
            About the difference between a late-model AP and a FS. You'd
            have to spend a lot of time going back and forth between the
            two to see it, and it won't make a material difference.

            But if even plan on doing CCD work then you might want to
            give serious consideration to the TOA. That is what it is
            designed for.

            Gene Horr
            genehorr@...
          • martin_hopewell
            ... one, ... Hello Bill, I think you d be right. I had a chance to spend a night of visual observing with my FS128 and a brand new TOA 130 side by side a few
            Message 5 of 27 , Sep 1, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "William R Wood"
              <wmrwood@m...> wrote:

              > Anybody with a TOA who wants to fight it out, bring it over! I, for
              one,
              > will be very surprised if the TOA can outperform the 128 visually on any
              > in-focus object.



              Hello Bill,

              I think you'd be right. I had a chance to spend a night of visual
              observing with my FS128 and a brand new TOA 130 side by side a few
              weeks ago. Both scopes used identical binoviewers and Tak eps on Mars
              - with a few obvious dso's thrown in for good measure.

              Personally I could see little if any difference between the two but
              if, anything, the FS128 seemed to provide marginally more satisfying
              views. The TOA 130 was straight out of the box, though, so it's
              possible that the collimation needed tweaking or something. I wasn't
              greatly surprised by this result, as the thought had never even
              occurred to me that the TOA would be 'better' than the FS128. The chap
              who owned the TOA was a tad concerned though...

              The only other things that struck me were the obvious mechanical
              design differences - with some lovely touches on the TOA that I
              envied. It's a comparatively beefy instrument, though, and - unlike
              the '128 - there's no way you could get away with mounting it on
              anything less than an EM200.

              All the best,

              Martin Hopewell
            • Justin Morgan
              ... Add to that the fact that you can get a used FS-128 o.t.a. in good shape on Astromart.com for ~$3,250, and you re getting a good deal compared to a new
              Message 6 of 27 , Sep 1, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "martin_hopewell"
                <martin@p...> wrote:
                > ...I had a chance to spend a night of visual observing with
                > my FS128 and a brand new TOA 130 side by side...<snip>...
                > I could see little if any difference between the two but if,
                > anything, the FS128 seemed to provide marginally more
                > satisfying views <snip>.

                Add to that the fact that you can get a used FS-128 o.t.a. in
                good shape on Astromart.com for ~$3,250, and you're
                getting a good deal compared to a new TOA-130 o.t.a. at
                appx ~$5,250. (The TOA-130 is a new model so you can't
                really get a great deal on a used one yet.)

                That extra $2,000 that you save by buying a used FS-128
                can go a long way toward getting a good mount, premium
                eyepieces, accessories, or whatever else you need. That is
                the route I chose, and it made the difference between
                getting a great Takahashi EM-200 mount instead of a
                Losmandy G-11 mount (nothing against the G-11, it's a
                fine piece of work too, but all things being equal I'd
                rather have the EM-200 :-).

                Also, don't forget that the TOA-130 is also significantly
                heavier than the FS-128, so if you want to do astro-
                photography with a separate guide scope, then you'll
                probably want a pricey NJP mount instead of an EM-200,
                thus driving up the total price of the TOA package much
                further as compared to the FS-128 (which pushes the
                limits of the EM-200 for astrophotography).

                Just thought I'd mention all that in case it's a factor. Of
                course, if money is no object, then go for the TOA and
                NJP. You can't really go wrong with either scope. :-)

                Clear skies,

                Justin Morgan
                Seattle Astronomical Society
              • Charles Hover
                I guess if I owned the FS 128 instead of my TOA-130 my 128 views would be better than the 130! NOT Charles ... From: Justin Morgan
                Message 7 of 27 , Sep 2, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  I guess if I owned the FS 128 instead of my TOA-130 my 128 views would be
                  better than the 130! NOT

                  Charles



                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Justin Morgan [mailto:justin_t_morgan@...]
                  Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 1:51 AM
                  To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Re: FS128 versus TOA130



                  --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "martin_hopewell"
                  <martin@p...> wrote:
                  > ...I had a chance to spend a night of visual observing with
                  > my FS128 and a brand new TOA 130 side by side...<snip>...
                  > I could see little if any difference between the two but if,
                  > anything, the FS128 seemed to provide marginally more
                  > satisfying views <snip>.

                  Add to that the fact that you can get a used FS-128 o.t.a. in
                  good shape on Astromart.com for ~$3,250, and you're
                  getting a good deal compared to a new TOA-130 o.t.a. at
                  appx ~$5,250. (The TOA-130 is a new model so you can't
                  really get a great deal on a used one yet.)

                  That extra $2,000 that you save by buying a used FS-128
                  can go a long way toward getting a good mount, premium
                  eyepieces, accessories, or whatever else you need. That is
                  the route I chose, and it made the difference between
                  getting a great Takahashi EM-200 mount instead of a
                  Losmandy G-11 mount (nothing against the G-11, it's a
                  fine piece of work too, but all things being equal I'd
                  rather have the EM-200 :-).

                  Also, don't forget that the TOA-130 is also significantly
                  heavier than the FS-128, so if you want to do astro-
                  photography with a separate guide scope, then you'll
                  probably want a pricey NJP mount instead of an EM-200,
                  thus driving up the total price of the TOA package much
                  further as compared to the FS-128 (which pushes the
                  limits of the EM-200 for astrophotography).

                  Just thought I'd mention all that in case it's a factor. Of
                  course, if money is no object, then go for the TOA and
                  NJP. You can't really go wrong with either scope. :-)

                  Clear skies,

                  Justin Morgan
                  Seattle Astronomical Society







                  Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



                  <http://rd.yahoo.com/M=259395.3614674.4902533.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=17050828
                  05:HM/A=1524963/R=0/SIG=12o885gmo/*http:/hits.411web.com/cgi-bin/autoredir?c
                  amp=556&lineid=3614674∝=egroupweb&pos=HM>



                  <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=259395.3614674.4902533.1261774/D=egroupmai
                  l/S=:HM/A=1524963/rand=389380241>


                  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  UncensoredTakGroup-unsubscribe@egroups.com



                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
                  <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • William R Wood
                  I just noted a mistake in my post on Monday. I said that I can split .9 doubles with the FS128. Not so, I checked my log and my best clean split with the
                  Message 8 of 27 , Sep 2, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I just noted a mistake in my post on Monday. I said that I can split .9"
                    doubles with the FS128. Not so, I checked my log and my best clean split
                    with the 128 so far is 20 Dra at 1.1" but I can elongate Zeta Boo at .8".
                    Maybe I was thinking of the Mewlon which will split .9" doubles no problem.
                    Hope that lapse was not an early sign of Alzheimer's :o)

                    Regards,

                    Bill Wood
                    Fountain Hills, AZ
                  • Justin Morgan
                    ... I never said it was--I quoted someone else who said it, and added that if expense is an issue an astronomer can still get a great scope (used FS-128) and
                    Message 9 of 27 , Sep 2, 2003
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles Hover"
                      <hoverc@a...> wrote:
                      > I guess if I owned the FS 128 instead of my TOA-130 my 128
                      > views would be better than the 130! NOT

                      I never said it was--I quoted someone else who said it, and
                      added that if expense is an issue an astronomer can still get a
                      great scope (used FS-128) and spend less money. Just trying
                      to be helpful, since not everyone has $5,000+ just to spend
                      on scope alone. Despite that, apparently some forum members
                      don't mind rubbing their noses in it and making them feel bad.
                      Sigh.


                      > -----Original Message-----
                      > From: Justin Morgan [mailto:justin_t_morgan@h...]
                      > Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 1:51 AM
                      > To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
                      > Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Re: FS128 versus TOA130
                      >
                      > <snip>
                    • martin_hopewell
                      ... Not really, Bill - a) because I don t pretend to be any kind optics boffin (I m just another mug amateur astronomer who happened to have been lucky enough
                      Message 10 of 27 , Sep 2, 2003
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "wpg1956" <wpg1956@e...> wrote:
                        > --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "martin_hopewell"
                        > <martin@p...> wrote:
                        > Personally I could see little if any difference between the two but
                        > > if, anything, the FS128 seemed to provide marginally more satisfying
                        > > views.
                        > >
                        > > All the best,
                        > >
                        > > Martin Hopewell
                        >
                        >
                        > Martin,
                        >
                        > Can you describe how the FS128's views were "marginally more
                        > satisfying"?
                        >
                        > Bill G.
                        > bgreen2004[at]earthlink.net


                        Not really, Bill - a) because I don't pretend to be any kind optics
                        boffin (I'm just another mug amateur astronomer who happened to have
                        been lucky enough to be able to observe with both scopes side by side
                        - which was what your original question was asking), and b) because I
                        don't care enough about the issue to get in over my head or involved
                        in a game of 'my Tak's better than your Tak' with Charles or any other
                        TOA owners here.

                        I'll stick by what I said though. On the night, there was very little
                        difference if any between the visual performance of the two scopes,
                        and the TOA certainly did not produce better images than the FS128 on
                        the objects we observed. If I'd thought that it did, I'm gullible
                        enough that I would now have one on order...

                        That's was MY opinion - but the view of my friend with the TOA was
                        less ambivalent, and he was quite concerned about what he perceived to
                        be a slight edge in favour of the '128. As I said before, the TOA was
                        'straight of of the box', and it's quite possible that its collimation
                        needed a slight tweak - but at the end of the day both instruments are
                        5" refractors made by the same manufacturer, and I'm puzzled why
                        anyone should think there would be a major difference in the visual
                        performance of the two. To be really honest, the same goes in my mind
                        for AP, TMB or any other quality refractor of the same aperture. The
                        main differences surely are in the subtle design variations, and in
                        this case - as I believe Gene spelled out very well in his message -
                        the features of the TOA that are related to imaging.

                        All the best,

                        Martin Hopewell
                      • Charles Hover
                        Sorry Justin, I was not trying to rub your nose in anything, I was just making fun of the statement. It is like the great debate of which is better, the Apple
                        Message 11 of 27 , Sep 2, 2003
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Sorry Justin, I was not trying to rub your nose in anything, I was just
                          making fun of the statement. It is like the great debate of which is better,
                          the Apple or Windows. I apologize for not being clearer. To be honest if
                          I owned a 128 I probably would not upgrade, but when I bought my 130 I
                          wanted to buy the scope I thought I would keep for the next ten to twenty
                          years. I hate buying something only to regret not buying the little more
                          expensive one in the first place.

                          Charles



                          -----Original Message-----
                          From: Justin Morgan [mailto:justin_t_morgan@...]
                          Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 8:53 PM
                          To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
                          Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Re: FS128 versus TOA130



                          --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles Hover"
                          <hoverc@a...> wrote:
                          > I guess if I owned the FS 128 instead of my TOA-130 my 128
                          > views would be better than the 130! NOT

                          I never said it was--I quoted someone else who said it, and
                          added that if expense is an issue an astronomer can still get a
                          great scope (used FS-128) and spend less money. Just trying
                          to be helpful, since not everyone has $5,000+ just to spend
                          on scope alone. Despite that, apparently some forum members
                          don't mind rubbing their noses in it and making them feel bad.
                          Sigh.


                          > -----Original Message-----
                          > From: Justin Morgan [mailto:justin_t_morgan@h...]
                          > Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 1:51 AM
                          > To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
                          > Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Re: FS128 versus TOA130
                          >
                          > <snip>






                          Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



                          ADVERTISEMENT

                          <http://rd.yahoo.com/M=244522.3707890.4968055.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=17050828
                          05:HM/A=1595055/R=0/SIG=124j83ehr/*http:/ashnin.com/clk/muryutaitakenattogyo
                          ?YH=3707890&yhad=1595055> Click Here!



                          <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=244522.3707890.4968055.1261774/D=egroupmai
                          l/S=:HM/A=1595055/rand=248971564>


                          To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                          UncensoredTakGroup-unsubscribe@egroups.com



                          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
                          <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.



                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Jorge Daniel Morales
                          This reminded me of a few years back when I was in Yosemite at Glacier Point with my little Pronto, and this guy had a big 12 Meade LX200. We were both
                          Message 12 of 27 , Sep 2, 2003
                          • 0 Attachment
                            This reminded me of a few years back when I was in Yosemite at Glacier Point
                            with my little Pronto, and this guy had a big 12" Meade LX200.

                            We were both looking at Andromeda Galaxy, and in my 70mm telescope it was a
                            small blob of light, in his it was a BIG blob of light, I couldn't say that
                            it was more satisfying, and surely not worth carrying and setting up that
                            monster.

                            What was funny is that he came to take a peek trough the Pronto and he said
                            "Boy this little thing is surely sharp!", and at that moment the moon was
                            raising behind the mountains, and he said "I love to watch the moon rising"
                            and I'm trying to pull him out of my telescope so I CAN WATCH THE MOON RISE,
                            by the time I got him away it was too late. What a hog...

                            Jorge

                            "Boats are safe in the harbor, but that's not what boats are built for."

                            -----Original Message-----
                            From: martin_hopewell [mailto:martin@...]
                            Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 7:05 PM
                            To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
                            Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Re: FS128 versus TOA130


                            --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "wpg1956" <wpg1956@e...> wrote:
                            > --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "martin_hopewell"
                            > <martin@p...> wrote:
                            > Personally I could see little if any difference between the two but
                            > > if, anything, the FS128 seemed to provide marginally more satisfying
                            > > views.
                            > >
                            > > All the best,
                            > >
                            > > Martin Hopewell
                            >
                            >
                            > Martin,
                            >
                            > Can you describe how the FS128's views were "marginally more
                            > satisfying"?
                            >
                            > Bill G.
                            > bgreen2004[at]earthlink.net


                            Not really, Bill - a) because I don't pretend to be any kind optics
                            boffin (I'm just another mug amateur astronomer who happened to have
                            been lucky enough to be able to observe with both scopes side by side
                            - which was what your original question was asking), and b) because I
                            don't care enough about the issue to get in over my head or involved
                            in a game of 'my Tak's better than your Tak' with Charles or any other
                            TOA owners here.

                            I'll stick by what I said though. On the night, there was very little
                            difference if any between the visual performance of the two scopes,
                            and the TOA certainly did not produce better images than the FS128 on
                            the objects we observed. If I'd thought that it did, I'm gullible
                            enough that I would now have one on order...

                            That's was MY opinion - but the view of my friend with the TOA was
                            less ambivalent, and he was quite concerned about what he perceived to
                            be a slight edge in favour of the '128. As I said before, the TOA was
                            'straight of of the box', and it's quite possible that its collimation
                            needed a slight tweak - but at the end of the day both instruments are
                            5" refractors made by the same manufacturer, and I'm puzzled why
                            anyone should think there would be a major difference in the visual
                            performance of the two. To be really honest, the same goes in my mind
                            for AP, TMB or any other quality refractor of the same aperture. The
                            main differences surely are in the subtle design variations, and in
                            this case - as I believe Gene spelled out very well in his message -
                            the features of the TOA that are related to imaging.

                            All the best,

                            Martin Hopewell





                            To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                            UncensoredTakGroup-unsubscribe@egroups.com



                            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                          • Steve Ryde
                            Well put! Steve ... From: martin_hopewell To: Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 12:05 PM
                            Message 13 of 27 , Sep 3, 2003
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Well put!

                              Steve

                              ----- Original Message -----
                              From: "martin_hopewell" <martin@...>
                              To: <UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com>
                              Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 12:05 PM
                              Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Re: FS128 versus TOA130


                              > --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "wpg1956" <wpg1956@e...> wrote:
                              > > --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "martin_hopewell"
                              > > <martin@p...> wrote:
                              > > Personally I could see little if any difference between the two but
                              > > > if, anything, the FS128 seemed to provide marginally more satisfying
                              > > > views.
                              > > >
                              > > > All the best,
                              > > >
                              > > > Martin Hopewell
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > Martin,
                              > >
                              > > Can you describe how the FS128's views were "marginally more
                              > > satisfying"?
                              > >
                              > > Bill G.
                              > > bgreen2004[at]earthlink.net
                              >
                              >
                              > Not really, Bill - a) because I don't pretend to be any kind optics
                              > boffin (I'm just another mug amateur astronomer who happened to have
                              > been lucky enough to be able to observe with both scopes side by side
                              > - which was what your original question was asking), and b) because I
                              > don't care enough about the issue to get in over my head or involved
                              > in a game of 'my Tak's better than your Tak' with Charles or any other
                              > TOA owners here.
                              >
                              > I'll stick by what I said though. On the night, there was very little
                              > difference if any between the visual performance of the two scopes,
                              > and the TOA certainly did not produce better images than the FS128 on
                              > the objects we observed. If I'd thought that it did, I'm gullible
                              > enough that I would now have one on order...
                              >
                              > That's was MY opinion - but the view of my friend with the TOA was
                              > less ambivalent, and he was quite concerned about what he perceived to
                              > be a slight edge in favour of the '128. As I said before, the TOA was
                              > 'straight of of the box', and it's quite possible that its collimation
                              > needed a slight tweak - but at the end of the day both instruments are
                              > 5" refractors made by the same manufacturer, and I'm puzzled why
                              > anyone should think there would be a major difference in the visual
                              > performance of the two. To be really honest, the same goes in my mind
                              > for AP, TMB or any other quality refractor of the same aperture. The
                              > main differences surely are in the subtle design variations, and in
                              > this case - as I believe Gene spelled out very well in his message -
                              > the features of the TOA that are related to imaging.
                              >
                              > All the best,
                              >
                              > Martin Hopewell
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                              > UncensoredTakGroup-unsubscribe@egroups.com
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > __________ NOD32 1.498 (20030901) Information __________
                              >
                              > This message was checked by NOD32 Antivirus System.
                              > http://www.nod32.com
                              >
                              >
                            • Ralph
                              Maybe Im rocking the boat here on the new stuff but we did side by sides all night on a TOA130 and an FS-128, both using astrophysics maxibrights and naglers,
                              Message 14 of 27 , Sep 3, 2003
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Maybe Im rocking the boat here on the new stuff but we did side by
                                sides all night on a TOA130 and an FS-128, both using astrophysics
                                maxibrights and naglers, and of the three of us that did this
                                comparision, we saw absolutely no difference in either scope. We kept
                                thinking we did, but we had the eyepieces only a few feet apart for
                                seeing differences, and both were giving absolutely perfect images of
                                mars on sat night.
                                We had to bring our expert astrophysics Ph.D to make the final
                                difference and he couldnt see any differences at all.
                                Bases solely on this, If you have a FS-128, its rediculous to upgrade
                                to a 130, but if your buying a new scope...some like paying extra for
                                the new stuff.
                                I have an FS-102, and after last sat, Im on the search for a used
                                FS-128 from someone who has to upgrade. If your ready to upgrade, give
                                me a hollar, but its gotta be perfect.
                                Just for comments...Mars is a tough cookie to view..maybe on jupiter
                                or saturn there would be differences, but again, views were identical
                                for all of us.

                                ...Ralph



                                --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, skyloverz@a... wrote:
                                >
                                > Will your question regarding "better" lacks specificity.
                                > Setting aside "better" as a personal judgement of the "viewer" the
                                major
                                > difference will be the colour fringing around bright objects. And by
                                definition..
                                > being the FS-128 is a doublet objective.........it is a bloomin
                                > achromat.....although astronomy marketing technique by the big
                                companies has altered the
                                > perception and lingo.....just a few short years ago....when one
                                mentioned
                                > apochromat the typical refrence was to a refractor with 3 element
                                objectives.
                                > Just as the "original" reference to achromat was a doublet......yes
                                a 2
                                > element objective in a refractor. With the advent of more modern and
                                better glass,
                                > computerised machining and polishing..certainly Tak FS- series
                                > doublets perform admirably, but will require added filtration to
                                make them
                                > aboslutely colour free. That is the nature of the doublet
                                lens....regardless of
                                > manufacture or glass type ( at this time ) Whereas the
                                tripletobjective
                                > lens,if designed properly will render the stars colourfree
                                >
                                > I am by no means denigrating the doublet nor the FS serise
                                > Takahashi....perhaps some reading on your part of
                                > Tom Becks' essays on optics might help, Wallace and Provin
                                > wrote excellent information on optics in their Astrophotog
                                > book......Ven Rooji also wrote a dissertation on optics that makes
                                for
                                > interesting reading
                                >
                                > otherwise.......someone out here in astroland has probably performed
                                side by
                                > side tests of TOA vs FS-128.....tho the
                                > "big deal" testing has been against A/P scopes for some
                                reason.......mebbe
                                > because they have been producing outstanding refractor lenses for
                                many years
                                > now, and really
                                > were the "pioneers" of the apochromat lens configuration for us
                                amateaur
                                > astr-nutz
                                >
                                > and again " FOR THE MONEY ".i'd spend the extra 800 on a TOA
                                >
                                > my 22 cents worth
                                >
                                > Broose k
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • William R Wood
                                I don t think you are rocking the boat, you are simply confirming what others have said about the virtually identical optical performance of the two scopes.
                                Message 15 of 27 , Sep 4, 2003
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  I don't think you are rocking the boat, you are simply confirming what
                                  others have said about the virtually identical optical performance of the
                                  two scopes. As noted in my prior tongue-in-cheek "defense" of the FS128,
                                  the vintage doublet hardware is outstanding stuff and surely holds its own
                                  against the new triplet :o) But as Gene Horr pointed out there are concrete
                                  reasons to upgrade to or choose the TOA if you are an imager. And even if
                                  you are a visual observer, some folks will prefer the TOA simply because its
                                  newer, they like the looks better, they appreciate the outstanding degree of
                                  color correction afforded by a triplet design, the sliding dewshield, and/or
                                  the more compact format, etc. I think Martin Hopewell said that there were
                                  some mechanical differences that he really liked about the TOA. In short
                                  these things are a matter of personal needs and preference and luckily all
                                  the choices are outstanding.

                                  Sorry, but you can't talk me out of my 128 :o)

                                  Regards,

                                  Bill Wood
                                  Fountain Hills, AZ


                                  > -----Original Message-----
                                  > From: Ralph [mailto:aa6ww@...]
                                  > Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 11:31 PM
                                  > To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
                                  > Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Re: FS128 versus TOA130
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > Maybe Im rocking the boat here on the new stuff but we did side by
                                  > sides all night on a TOA130 and an FS-128, both using astrophysics
                                  > maxibrights and naglers, and of the three of us that did this
                                  > comparision, we saw absolutely no difference in either scope. We kept
                                  > thinking we did, but we had the eyepieces only a few feet apart for
                                  > seeing differences, and both were giving absolutely perfect images of
                                  > mars on sat night.
                                  > We had to bring our expert astrophysics Ph.D to make the final
                                  > difference and he couldnt see any differences at all.
                                  > Bases solely on this, If you have a FS-128, its rediculous to upgrade
                                  > to a 130, but if your buying a new scope...some like paying extra for
                                  > the new stuff.
                                  > I have an FS-102, and after last sat, Im on the search for a used
                                  > FS-128 from someone who has to upgrade. If your ready to upgrade, give
                                  > me a hollar, but its gotta be perfect.
                                  > Just for comments...Mars is a tough cookie to view..maybe on jupiter
                                  > or saturn there would be differences, but again, views were identical
                                  > for all of us.
                                  >
                                  > ..Ralph
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, skyloverz@a... wrote:
                                  > >
                                  > > Will your question regarding "better" lacks specificity.
                                  > > Setting aside "better" as a personal judgement of the "viewer" the
                                  > major
                                  > > difference will be the colour fringing around bright objects. And by
                                  > definition..
                                  > > being the FS-128 is a doublet objective.........it is a bloomin
                                  > > achromat.....although astronomy marketing technique by the big
                                  > companies has altered the
                                  > > perception and lingo.....just a few short years ago....when one
                                  > mentioned
                                  > > apochromat the typical refrence was to a refractor with 3 element
                                  > objectives.
                                  > > Just as the "original" reference to achromat was a doublet......yes
                                  > a 2
                                  > > element objective in a refractor. With the advent of more modern and
                                  > better glass,
                                  > > computerised machining and polishing..certainly Tak FS- series
                                  > > doublets perform admirably, but will require added filtration to
                                  > make them
                                  > > aboslutely colour free. That is the nature of the doublet
                                  > lens....regardless of
                                  > > manufacture or glass type ( at this time ) Whereas the
                                  > tripletobjective
                                  > > lens,if designed properly will render the stars colourfree
                                  > >
                                  > > I am by no means denigrating the doublet nor the FS serise
                                  > > Takahashi....perhaps some reading on your part of
                                  > > Tom Becks' essays on optics might help, Wallace and Provin
                                  > > wrote excellent information on optics in their Astrophotog
                                  > > book......Ven Rooji also wrote a dissertation on optics that makes
                                  > for
                                  > > interesting reading
                                  > >
                                  > > otherwise.......someone out here in astroland has probably performed
                                  > side by
                                  > > side tests of TOA vs FS-128.....tho the
                                  > > "big deal" testing has been against A/P scopes for some
                                  > reason.......mebbe
                                  > > because they have been producing outstanding refractor lenses for
                                  > many years
                                  > > now, and really
                                  > > were the "pioneers" of the apochromat lens configuration for us
                                  > amateaur
                                  > > astr-nutz
                                  > >
                                  > > and again " FOR THE MONEY ".i'd spend the extra 800 on a TOA
                                  > >
                                  > > my 22 cents worth
                                  > >
                                  > > Broose k
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                  > UncensoredTakGroup-unsubscribe@egroups.com
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                  >
                                  >
                                • bailyhill2001
                                  Hello This makes me wonder if the outcome would be different if LE eyepieces would have been used? I love naglers, but for planetary, I would use LE s. Gary
                                  Message 16 of 27 , Sep 4, 2003
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Hello

                                    This makes me wonder if the outcome would be different if LE
                                    eyepieces would have been used?

                                    I love naglers, but for planetary, I would use LE's.

                                    Gary


                                    --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ralph" <aa6ww@y...> wrote:
                                    > Maybe Im rocking the boat here on the new stuff but we did side by
                                    > sides all night on a TOA130 and an FS-128, both using astrophysics
                                    > maxibrights and naglers, and of the three of us that did this
                                    > comparision, we saw absolutely no difference in either scope. We
                                    kept
                                    > thinking we did, but we had the eyepieces only a few feet apart for
                                    > seeing differences, and both were giving absolutely perfect images
                                    of
                                    > mars on sat night.
                                    > We had to bring our expert astrophysics Ph.D to make the final
                                    > difference and he couldnt see any differences at all.
                                    > Bases solely on this, If you have a FS-128, its rediculous to
                                    upgrade
                                    > to a 130, but if your buying a new scope...some like paying extra
                                    for
                                    > the new stuff.
                                    > I have an FS-102, and after last sat, Im on the search for a used
                                    > FS-128 from someone who has to upgrade. If your ready to upgrade,
                                    give
                                    > me a hollar, but its gotta be perfect.
                                    > Just for comments...Mars is a tough cookie to view..maybe on
                                    jupiter
                                    > or saturn there would be differences, but again, views were
                                    identical
                                    > for all of us.
                                    >
                                    > ...Ralph
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, skyloverz@a... wrote:
                                    > >
                                    > > Will your question regarding "better" lacks specificity.
                                    > > Setting aside "better" as a personal judgement of the "viewer"
                                    the
                                    > major
                                    > > difference will be the colour fringing around bright objects. And
                                    by
                                    > definition..
                                    > > being the FS-128 is a doublet objective.........it is a bloomin
                                    > > achromat.....although astronomy marketing technique by the big
                                    > companies has altered the
                                    > > perception and lingo.....just a few short years ago....when one
                                    > mentioned
                                    > > apochromat the typical refrence was to a refractor with 3 element
                                    > objectives.
                                    > > Just as the "original" reference to achromat was a
                                    doublet......yes
                                    > a 2
                                    > > element objective in a refractor. With the advent of more modern
                                    and
                                    > better glass,
                                    > > computerised machining and polishing..certainly Tak FS- series
                                    > > doublets perform admirably, but will require added filtration to
                                    > make them
                                    > > aboslutely colour free. That is the nature of the doublet
                                    > lens....regardless of
                                    > > manufacture or glass type ( at this time ) Whereas the
                                    > tripletobjective
                                    > > lens,if designed properly will render the stars colourfree
                                    > >
                                    > > I am by no means denigrating the doublet nor the FS serise
                                    > > Takahashi....perhaps some reading on your part of
                                    > > Tom Becks' essays on optics might help, Wallace and Provin
                                    > > wrote excellent information on optics in their Astrophotog
                                    > > book......Ven Rooji also wrote a dissertation on optics that
                                    makes
                                    > for
                                    > > interesting reading
                                    > >
                                    > > otherwise.......someone out here in astroland has probably
                                    performed
                                    > side by
                                    > > side tests of TOA vs FS-128.....tho the
                                    > > "big deal" testing has been against A/P scopes for some
                                    > reason.......mebbe
                                    > > because they have been producing outstanding refractor lenses for
                                    > many years
                                    > > now, and really
                                    > > were the "pioneers" of the apochromat lens configuration for us
                                    > amateaur
                                    > > astr-nutz
                                    > >
                                    > > and again " FOR THE MONEY ".i'd spend the extra 800 on a TOA
                                    > >
                                    > > my 22 cents worth
                                    > >
                                    > > Broose k
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  • ready1810
                                    Does the TOA130 use flourite lenses or some other kind of exotic glass? The advertisments never mention flourite, I noticed that. ... what ... of the ...
                                    Message 17 of 27 , Sep 4, 2003
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Does the TOA130 use flourite lenses or some other kind of exotic
                                      glass?

                                      The advertisments never mention flourite, I noticed that.



                                      --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "William R Wood"
                                      <wmrwood@m...> wrote:
                                      > I don't think you are rocking the boat, you are simply confirming
                                      what
                                      > others have said about the virtually identical optical performance
                                      of the
                                      > two scopes. As noted in my prior tongue-in-cheek "defense" of the
                                      FS128,
                                      > the vintage doublet hardware is outstanding stuff and surely holds
                                      its own
                                      > against the new triplet :o) But as Gene Horr pointed out there are
                                      concrete
                                      > reasons to upgrade to or choose the TOA if you are an imager. And
                                      even if
                                      > you are a visual observer, some folks will prefer the TOA simply
                                      because its
                                      > newer, they like the looks better, they appreciate the outstanding
                                      degree of
                                      > color correction afforded by a triplet design, the sliding
                                      dewshield, and/or
                                      > the more compact format, etc. I think Martin Hopewell said that
                                      there were
                                      > some mechanical differences that he really liked about the TOA. In
                                      short
                                      > these things are a matter of personal needs and preference and
                                      luckily all
                                      > the choices are outstanding.
                                      >
                                      > Sorry, but you can't talk me out of my 128 :o)
                                      >
                                      > Regards,
                                      >
                                      > Bill Wood
                                      > Fountain Hills, AZ
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > > -----Original Message-----
                                      > > From: Ralph [mailto:aa6ww@y...]
                                      > > Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 11:31 PM
                                      > > To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
                                      > > Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Re: FS128 versus TOA130
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > Maybe Im rocking the boat here on the new stuff but we did side by
                                      > > sides all night on a TOA130 and an FS-128, both using astrophysics
                                      > > maxibrights and naglers, and of the three of us that did this
                                      > > comparision, we saw absolutely no difference in either scope. We
                                      kept
                                      > > thinking we did, but we had the eyepieces only a few feet apart
                                      for
                                      > > seeing differences, and both were giving absolutely perfect
                                      images of
                                      > > mars on sat night.
                                      > > We had to bring our expert astrophysics Ph.D to make the final
                                      > > difference and he couldnt see any differences at all.
                                      > > Bases solely on this, If you have a FS-128, its rediculous to
                                      upgrade
                                      > > to a 130, but if your buying a new scope...some like paying extra
                                      for
                                      > > the new stuff.
                                      > > I have an FS-102, and after last sat, Im on the search for a used
                                      > > FS-128 from someone who has to upgrade. If your ready to upgrade,
                                      give
                                      > > me a hollar, but its gotta be perfect.
                                      > > Just for comments...Mars is a tough cookie to view..maybe on
                                      jupiter
                                      > > or saturn there would be differences, but again, views were
                                      identical
                                      > > for all of us.
                                      > >
                                      > > ..Ralph
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, skyloverz@a... wrote:
                                      > > >
                                      > > > Will your question regarding "better" lacks specificity.
                                      > > > Setting aside "better" as a personal judgement of the "viewer"
                                      the
                                      > > major
                                      > > > difference will be the colour fringing around bright objects.
                                      And by
                                      > > definition..
                                      > > > being the FS-128 is a doublet objective.........it is a bloomin
                                      > > > achromat.....although astronomy marketing technique by the big
                                      > > companies has altered the
                                      > > > perception and lingo.....just a few short years ago....when one
                                      > > mentioned
                                      > > > apochromat the typical refrence was to a refractor with 3
                                      element
                                      > > objectives.
                                      > > > Just as the "original" reference to achromat was a
                                      doublet......yes
                                      > > a 2
                                      > > > element objective in a refractor. With the advent of more
                                      modern and
                                      > > better glass,
                                      > > > computerised machining and polishing..certainly Tak FS- series
                                      > > > doublets perform admirably, but will require added filtration to
                                      > > make them
                                      > > > aboslutely colour free. That is the nature of the doublet
                                      > > lens....regardless of
                                      > > > manufacture or glass type ( at this time ) Whereas the
                                      > > tripletobjective
                                      > > > lens,if designed properly will render the stars colourfree
                                      > > >
                                      > > > I am by no means denigrating the doublet nor the FS serise
                                      > > > Takahashi....perhaps some reading on your part of
                                      > > > Tom Becks' essays on optics might help, Wallace and Provin
                                      > > > wrote excellent information on optics in their Astrophotog
                                      > > > book......Ven Rooji also wrote a dissertation on optics that
                                      makes
                                      > > for
                                      > > > interesting reading
                                      > > >
                                      > > > otherwise.......someone out here in astroland has probably
                                      performed
                                      > > side by
                                      > > > side tests of TOA vs FS-128.....tho the
                                      > > > "big deal" testing has been against A/P scopes for some
                                      > > reason.......mebbe
                                      > > > because they have been producing outstanding refractor lenses
                                      for
                                      > > many years
                                      > > > now, and really
                                      > > > were the "pioneers" of the apochromat lens configuration for us
                                      > > amateaur
                                      > > > astr-nutz
                                      > > >
                                      > > > and again " FOR THE MONEY ".i'd spend the extra 800 on a TOA
                                      > > >
                                      > > > my 22 cents worth
                                      > > >
                                      > > > Broose k
                                      > > >
                                      > > >
                                      > > >
                                      > > >
                                      > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                      > > UncensoredTakGroup-unsubscribe@egroups.com
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                    • Gene Horr
                                      ... Not flourite. What exactly they use is being kept under wraps. I have no idea myself. A Temmon review would probably spill the beans, though . Gene
                                      Message 18 of 27 , Sep 4, 2003
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        ready1810 wrote:

                                        > Does the TOA130 use flourite lenses or some other kind of exotic
                                        > glass?
                                        >
                                        > The advertisments never mention flourite, I noticed that.

                                        Not flourite. What exactly they use is being kept under wraps.
                                        I have no idea myself. A Temmon review would probably spill
                                        the beans, though <g>.

                                        Gene Horr
                                        genehorr@...
                                      • ready1810
                                        Temmon did a review: http://www.temmon.net/serial-report/the-impression2.html but I think they maybe didn t put the page on the internet.
                                        Message 19 of 27 , Sep 4, 2003
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Temmon did a review:

                                          http://www.temmon.net/serial-report/the-impression2.html

                                          but I think they maybe didn't put the page on the internet.

                                          --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, Gene Horr <genehorr@t...>
                                          wrote:
                                          > ready1810 wrote:
                                          >
                                          > > Does the TOA130 use flourite lenses or some other kind of exotic
                                          > > glass?
                                          > >
                                          > > The advertisments never mention flourite, I noticed that.
                                          >
                                          > Not flourite. What exactly they use is being kept under wraps.
                                          > I have no idea myself. A Temmon review would probably spill
                                          > the beans, though <g>.
                                          >
                                          > Gene Horr
                                          > genehorr@t...
                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.