Takahashi APO Refractors: The GOOD, the BAD, and the UGLY!!! Are they good telescopes???

Thinking of buying a Takahashi APO telescope? This is the video for you! I cover a brief history of Takahashi and how it translates into what makes the scopes one of the best in the world in some respects but not so much in others...
Buy Takahashi gear on Agena Astro to Support AVT-Astro: bit.ly/3TM0eNH
Get AVT Astro Gear and Apparel: avt-astro.com/shop/
My Blog full of great Astro content/reviews: www.avt-astro.com

[@CONDUCTORE77]

Taks are flat out amazing scopes. I’ve owned 5 of them( refractors, 2 FS78’s, an FS 102, a TSA 102 and a TOA 130). My FS 102 is my favorite. I notice a tiny bit of color on the brightest of objects but it’s very subtle and in no way obtrusive and is pretty much non existent with higher end eyepieces. Great video and think you are correct about the focuser & paint….but I’m a Tak addict and that’s all I’ll ever own now😀

[@AVTAstro]

Yeah they are great scopes! Recently had an FS-102 myself👍

[@k.h.1587]

Sky 90 was notorious for having a bit of color

[@stephenpalmer7281]

Enjoyed this video. The second scope I owned, back in the late 90s was a Tak FS -102. Back when FC Meichsner telescopes in Boston was still around. This was what really got me hooked in the hobby of visual astronomy.

[@AVTAstro]

Very cool, glad you liked the video👍

[@stonemason4902]

Helpful, concise video, thanks.

[@AVTAstro]

Glad it was helpful! Thanks for watching.

[@markihde4381]

That's helpful information to know. I've got an FC100DZ coming that's being shipped this week. While I may eventually upgrade it with a Feathertouch focuser, nothing compares to the awfulness of the rack and pinion focuser I got with a Synta/Celestron 6" refractor.

[@AVTAstro]

Very cool, congrats on the Tak!!!

[@astroblast9352]

I'm a big fan of them. Your analysis matches my experiences. The focusers are not terrible, but agree not premium. I'm going to do the retrofit Feathertouch also. I want to keep the look of the sandcasting. My paint is fine so far, but I have Vixen scopes with similar paint and I know what you mean. But that scope has seen heavy use. While the accessories are expensive, I do like the quality of them. But for sure mostly over priced.

[@AVTAstro]

Thanks for you input as another owner of a Tak. And I hear you as far as keeping the sandcasting theme. The other thing that I don't like about changing the entire focuser is that they put the model/serial plate on the focuser so you loose that as well. some people probably would not care but for me it's kind of a big deal....

[@lornaz1975]

Maybe its more of a Japanese theme. Seems that Vixen has really basic focusers on their Japanese made scopes.

[@astroblast9352]

@@lornaz1975 yeah, they are a bit old school in those areas. But I think in the Japanese market it is accepted. For instance, the Takahashi TSA120 comes standard with a two speed in the US, but single in Japan. Both Vixen and Takahashi focusers are not horrible like some scopes have, but no where near Feathertouch. Of course the option is there to buy with a Feathertouch.

[@yqh8247]

great content

[@AVTAstro]

Thanks, I appreciate it!

[@weschilton]

Nice, this is pretty fair video, I own a TSA-120 and an FSQ-106 EDX-IV, and after a couple of years of frustrations... neither of them have their original focusers. I put a 3" Feathertouch on the TSA-120, and since the FSQ is a pure imaging scope I put a NiteCrawler. I also agree about the accessories... Tak makes some of the most expensive adapters and reducers on the market... and many of them are not very sharp. And oh man I totally agree about the paint! Its awful! MY TSA-120 is literally peeling at the threaded end where the Feathertouch is attached. However, the experience of using these scopes has really made it worth owning and I will never sell either of my Taks! My TSA-120 especially is the sharpest scope I have ever used, and blows away every TEC and AP scope I have ever looked though.

[@AVTAstro]

Very cool, thanks for sharing 👍

[@madjoe8622]

I remember seeing these scopes in astronomy magazine in the 90s. Those prices, yikes! It was like looking at the Ferrari of telescopes. They were like 2.5x of Astro-Physics refractors. Every time I hear or see the brand Takahashi, I think of absolute quality.

[@AVTAstro]

They are optically. The reality is that as an overall scope package Astro-Physics is a much better scope these days for the reasons mentioned in the video.

[@madjoe8622]

@@AVTAstro People were saying the same thing in the 90s. But the price range has decreased between them. Well, I remember to put my name on their waiting list (for an APO 155 or 160 maybe) in 1999... never got an email from them lol.

[@nelsonf5508]

Awesome video very informative, that’s an amazing collection bro. What do you think of William Optics apo refractors?

[@AVTAstro]

The are actually very nicely built scopes. I currently own the WO GT102 and triplet. Wonderful scope , and I forgot to mention in the video that WO actual does powder coat their scopes(not sure if its all of them but my current one is).

[@nelsonf5508]

@@AVTAstrothanks for the reply bro, your the best source on KZbin for visual observation tips/advice. It seems all the astronomy videos out there are focused heavily on astrophotography

[@AVTAstro]

Thanks, yeah I think astrophotography is cool and all but I'm primarily visual. And that's really why I have not made too many videos touching on AP as I feel it's well covered and really not where the vast amount of my experience is.

[@alanprice9938]

Hi Vlad, I notice you appear to have a Baader click lock diagonal on the middle talk, and maybe a televue everbright diagonal at the back? I wanted the white Baader diagonal as it’s a little cheaper, but it’s on a long delivery out to August, so I paid the higher amount for the 2” televue everbright diagonal. Have i made a mistake, or will it be worth the extra cost?

[@AVTAstro]

Hey Alan, you certainly have not made a mistake. I think that the TV Everbright is top notch. In all honesty if i had them side by side you would not be able to tell the difference looking through the scope. Both excellent units.

[@najibnajjar9526]

Hi Vlad, you made me now worried about the lens alignment issue!

[@AVTAstro]

I assume you have a FSQ? I woukd not worry about it. If it happens, it happens.

[@davisd5203]

Hey Vlad, I just put a down payment on a Stellarvue SVX 130T. I should receive the scope this spring/summer. The guys at Stellarvue recomended the feathertouch focuser option, which I am sure you would agree is a good choice. I have not confirmed if they do indeed powder coat their white OTA's (as I did not opt for the carbon) but I would expect so for the price of admission. What would you say, if you can comment form your experience, is the better instrument when optics from both Tak & Stellarvue are compared visually, or are they equal? I have not looked through either but I went with Stellarvue due to their attention to detail; which is unmatched IMO.

[@AVTAstro]

Hi, the SVX130 should be an amazing instrument. I really do not see why it would not be right up there with the best performance wise. I have had several SV scopes and they where all awesome!

[@gclaytony]

I don't have a Takahashi, but it seems to be a perfect match with a Tak and a Moonlite Nightrcrawler focuser/field rotator. I do have the Nightcrawler and it is as good as it gets - IMO.

[@AVTAstro]

Yeah that would be the ideal choice for astrophotography. 👍

[@StargazerFS128]

Nice video! I see you have my beloved TSA-102 sitting front and centre, I wouldn't give it up for much less than a house lol.

[@AVTAstro]

Lol, it's an awsome scope indeed!

[@GuybrushThriftweed]

I had/have the chance to buy one Is it really as good as they say?!

[@StargazerFS128]

@@GuybrushThriftweed The TSA-102 is a legend in the 4" refractor class, one of the finest ever made and no one will argue it.

[@petert2098]

Vlad, you hit the nail on the head. While I also agree Takahashi optics are superior, their focusers are not very good. And the accessories are way over-priced. Thanks for another interesting video.

[@AVTAstro]

Glad you liked it, thanks for the feedback!

[@gothicm3rcy426]

they probably make the best eye pieces on earth.... dont take my word... ask ed ting

[@astrodysseus]

I wonder, what do you think of the FC-76DCU ? I didn't see through it but I saw an image of the FOA60 and for a 60mm it's clearly incredible.

[@AVTAstro]

Well the FOA60 is the best 60mm ever made. I'd hope that it provides amazing images. Any Tak that I have used was superb. I have not used the specific models you mentioned though.

[@jimpoop]

Vlad, im looking into getting my lifetime scope for both imaging and visual, something in the 120-130mm range. Im considering a TSA 120 how do you think other brands like stellarvue, SW esprit scopes like that compare? Like if you were looking to get a lifetime scope, spending around 5-6k, what would you go for?

[@AVTAstro]

If you like Takahashi there is no reason not to go with the TSA-120. It's as good of Optics as money can buy. The only thing I'd consider a possible step up is AstroPhysics. But you can't buy one unless you find it used so it's not really an option...

[@mazinalmoumen]

I have Esprit 120 ED APO Sky Watcher with AZ-EQ 6 Sky Watcher mount. I am very happy with my telescope 🔭 and mount. I mainly use it for visual and I intend to get Sky Watcher Evostar 150 DX APO refractor in the future. Sky Watcher is an excellent brand and provides amazing technical support.

[@mresfahani4195]

Hi Vlad, thanks for the vid and good info. I've been suffering from chronic Tak-fever. The doctor ended up prescribing me a FC-100D exclusively for visual (DSO's, planets, white-light solar). I have a question for thee; what's the best kind of 2 inch diagonal for such a OTA, Amici prism or dielectric mirror? In your opinion what are the pros and cons and are there any makes that you recommend? Cheers and clear skies. M

[@AVTAstro]

Congrats on the TAK! great choice!!! Diagonal wise it's a bit hard to recommend a perfect one. Prism is better for the planets, but dielectric is better for DSO. Best of both worlds? buy a 2" dielectric for DOS and a 1.25" prism for the planets! Thats what I did.

[@mresfahani4195]

@@AVTAstro Cheers Vlad, thanks for the recommendations and clear skies.

[@hamadalketbi2253]

For both visual/Astrophotography and for rest of life ,What you recommend of them? Thanks in advance

[@AVTAstro]

Are you asking about a specific model?

[@hamadalketbi2253]

@@AVTAstro FOA, Thanks. I have C9.25 & Orion T80. I think it is time to get premium one. I was looking for AP 92 stowaway and BabyQ 85 or TSA 120. because no astronomy society in my country I seek for an expert advice.

[@k.h.1587]

One of the expensive Takahashi accessories sold is takahashi brand touch up paint.

[@AVTAstro]

I'm sure it is. I make my own though.

[@_stardust62]

Is it true the Japanese prefer to view with out a diagonal, claiming you get the cleanest view that way?...it seems all their adds display them with only an eyepiece. What do you think about view with out a diagonal? Thanks

[@AVTAstro]

Well with most modern diagonals the view will really not be affected. But it is true that the best view possible will be with no diagonal. Comfort wise,... well yeah I'm a diagonal fan. Lol

[@mrh9635]

Would an FC100 be overkill as a first refractor? I'm thinking about that or a Vixen SD81.

[@AVTAstro]

Overkill? No its just essentially a perfect 4" APO. I do not thing its overkill at all as long as you can afford it(and really $2k over a lifetime is quite affordable...).

[@mrh9635]

@@AVTAstro That's what I thought.

[@tensorhugh2588]

THANK YOU VLAD! Now I feel like I need a Tak, there go my tax returns :/

[@AVTAstro]

I do what I can to help the economy;) LOL

[@baronty5549]

Hey Vlad, what is your thoughts on the Celestron 120mm aperture, 1,000mm focal length achromatic refractor?

[@AVTAstro]

If you after a low power scope you will like it. I would much rather have a 102mm Ed doublet though as it's a scope you can use well for most anything(besides serious astrophotography if you want secondary color free images).

[@k.h.1587]

Same as Orion 120f8.3 I think. The skywatcher 120ed f7.5 is excellent if you can swing it, but of course totally different price League, but it is one of the most affordable semi large apos out there, and I couldn't seem to get any false color out of it, which was a surprise for an f7.5 doublet that large. (My old celestron 80ed, also f7.5, had purple stars on long exposures, but was color free visually, the 120ed I evaluated when they first came out didn't show false color in my nikom d50) After I had to regretfully return it to the store, I had a terminally ill customer come in who was on the stellarvue 115 wait list and didn't think he would live to see it, so I told him about the sw120ed that I had personally used for a few months and my amazement with the performance, and he decided to take it home happy to be able to use a scope rather than wait for one. When I still had it I used it at an outreach on my pier extended cg5 rather than my g11, and we kept going higher and higher all the way up the tmb planetary set to 2.5mm on the moon,and and could not get any false color out of it. The 120mmx1000mm achromat will have serious false color, but no where near as bad as the shorter tube versions or any 6" achromat. Personally I am a BIG fan of 100mmx1000mm celestron achromats, the false color is much lower and the deep space contrast is amazing, get that over the 120 achro any day

[@candocan1668]

I have a TSA-120 and agree the focuser is indeed the weakest part of the setup.

[@AVTAstro]

Yeah they are not up to par to the rest of the scope...

[@ignatprokhoropchyuck4652]

La perfecto prodotto

[@MountainFisher]

Are the Takahashi scope bodies made of steel or aluminum? One is fine with powder coat, but aluminum not so much.

[@AVTAstro]

I just checked the tube of my TSA-102 and its not magnetic so I assume is aluminum. Not sure where you got that you cant powder coat aluminum. I own an automotive accessory business and have been powder coating aluminum parts for nearly 10 years. Some of the parts that are on my personnel vehicles look 100% brand new even being exposed to rock chips, and the elements 100% of the time. Like I said in the video I owned a pro auto detail company in the past, and have powder coated at least 100,000 parts over the years. I kind of know what I'm talking about when it comes to this. LOL.

[@MountainFisher]

@@AVTAstro I'm an aerospace bio-engineer and my experience with powder coating 'thin' aluminum usually ends up a little warped from the bake-on process. That is why I worded it as "not so much". Not ever having owned a Takahashi I do not know how thin the tube wall is, but in my experience if it is less than 1.5mm thick it tends to warp when baked, even as a tube.

[@AVTAstro]

Could be a type of aluminum your using or a higher temperature powder coat. A lot of my parts are only about 1mm thick and I have not had a single piece that has been even close to warped.

[@MountainFisher]

@@AVTAstro I'm sure as an automotive part you wouldn't measure any .010" warpage, but a tube for a scope would be heat treated and temps as low as 300F would change the hardness. It isn't all just about warp, but heat treat is what I would guess their tubes are T4 or harder like T6. Automotive parts tend to be in the 4043 series, but a telescope would be either 5350 or 6060-T4 to T6 types. The 5300 series actually have titanium in them. I doubt they'd use the 7075 series.

[@MountainFisher]

@@AVTAstro I didn't mean to get into the weeds about it. lol😆

[@bartekwitkowski7860]

Faktycznie optyka wygląda dobrze 😄👌🙂👍🏻.

[@AVTAstro]

Sure do!

[@ignatprokhoropchyuck4652]

La perfecto tripletos, amigos

[@Z-add]

Is stellarvue in the same league as takahashi?

[@AVTAstro]

Thier newer SVX line certainly is. Also, if you can find some of the older ones with Russian optics.

[@kenfrank2730]

I had considered a Tak 150. But not only is the scope expensive, so are the additional components. For example, the mounting rings cost $850. Yikes!

[@AVTAstro]

Yeah the price of the accessories is certainly "astronomical" 😅🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@Astro_Shed]

Try imaging with a Tak FSQ85, with a camera with small pixels, and you may change your mind about those Taks, even with the new corrector they produced to combat the issue, still poor stars in the outer 25% of the image….not good at all for a premium scope with supposedly the best optics…..☹

[@AVTAstro]

Yeah the FSQ optical design is over a decade old. Not really made for modern cmos cameras.

[@Buzzygirl63]

I once owned a FS-102, wish I had never sold it.

[@AVTAstro]

Yup, cool scope for sure!

[@addos999]

tak make amazing stuff, no doubt; but they stubbornly insist on a high margin pricing model which have allowed the likes of synta to establish dominance in the market. tak are great, but they need to change their thinking to survive!

[@AVTAstro]

Yeah can't comment of what they make per unit as I have no idea.

[@skywatcherca]

Good: I owned a 7" Starfire Astro physics refractor, and it was garbage! I have an acquaintance who sells telescopes, and he's enamored with Takahashi scopes-but I'm sure that from time to time, TAK also produces garbage scopes. I guess that, on occasion, an OTA slips through quality control. In any case, thanks for this review.

[@AVTAstro]

Glad you liked it, thabks for the feedback!

[@AbcDino843]

When I was younger, I dreamed of an Astrophysics telescope, but their lottery system rubbed me the wrong way so much that I will never purchase one, on principle, not even used. Takahashi FTW.

[@Durables1]

Lotto? Can you elaborate? Anyways, Takahashi all day, any day! 😊

[@Astronurd]

I’ll have to stop watching your channel Vlad. I just can’t cope with this constant flow of Astro pornography. Another great video 👍

[@AVTAstro]

Lol, too funny🤣🤣🤣

[@johnadams9044]

Agree with the the focus issue. However, Tak offers Feather Touch upgrades on most of their high performance scopes. The cost is stiff but everything Starlight Instruments makes is premium quality and extra elevated prices. That is Astronomy today so just get used to it. It is an expensive hobby. Period.

[@AVTAstro]

I agree with the FT focuser but not that astronomy being expensive. Is a very affordable hobby even with a Tak in your life!

[@southbronxny5727]

I'd carbon fiber wrap the scope to protect it.

[@AVTAstro]

That's an idea. I have actually done a carbon wrap on a scope before and have a write up on it on my blog.

[@ignatprokhoropchyuck4652]

Carbon coat need to be indeeded

[@rafaberrios8142]

FSQ 106 has an almost 2 yr wait…..

[@AVTAstro]

Yeah with covid there are a lot of delays unfortunately.

[@palmereldrich]

Or just get a Sky-Watcher F/9 100ED and be done with it. Mine does 800X plus. Accessories are reasonably cheap and the focuser is better. Or waste your money on a Tak.

[@AVTAstro]

I'm sure its a nice scope. Any scope can do 800x it does not mean its an image that has an additional benefit over ~250x where a 4" telescope(no matter how amazing and perfect) runs out of light.

[@martinyokhanis90]

Respectfully disagree with the the accessories being expensive. They are only expensive outside Japan as the local distributors mark the crap out of them being greedy. Go buy them in Japan, not even considering the favourable currency exchange, and see how well priced they are.

[@AVTAstro]

Well if that's an option for someone that travels then sure that's great. I don't see that applying to more than a handful of people though.

[@EleanorPeterson]

Premium telescopes are definitely not my area of expertise, but I was wondering how you can chip the paint on one. Did you drop it? Is it a case of being sufficiently wealthy not to have to worry about accidental damage? When you see guys carelessly kerbing the wheels of their £2,500,000 hypercars or smashing a £7,000 carbon-fibre air-splitter on a speed bump, you know it's a deliberate 'status statement' to ordinary peeps that they're rich enough to laugh off the eye-watering repair bills. They've got plenty more cars in the garage to choose from. Whatever. Part of being wealthy enough to afford nice things seems to be the desire to show the world that you're not cowed by the fear of trashing them. Only poor people need to take care of their stuff. But... Chipping the paint on an expensive telescope? Nooooo! It's like dropping a newborn baby on its head. Over the years I've handled microscopes, telescopes, all kinds of cameras and lenses, binoculars, priceless 13th century porcelain figurines, rare violins, solid gold flutes, micrometers, laser theodolites, and I used to grind, polish and figure optics (Newtonian mirrors up to 18" and once a set of 6" objectives). Because I've never had much cash of my own, I handled everything with reverence and extreme care. Never dropped, scratched, chipped, or broke anything. I freely admit - I was too SCARED to. The idea of damaging the paint on a precision instrument makes me go all weak at the knees. Memo to self: remember not to use a £20,000 telescope like a cricket bat to hit rocks... 🤭

[@AVTAstro]

All of the Taks that I have owned where bought used and came with the chips. Having said that no one that have EVER meat in this hobby would intentionally do anything to ding a premium scope. It just happens from normal handling it. Think about it ur using the scope at night. It's not that hard to see an accidently ding happening....

[@nr7975]

It's pretty easy for it to happen when setting up your scope or adding new equipment onto your scope. I've had a few times where I thought I had my dovetail seated in the mount and I was a little off, almost grinding my scope against the mount. Especially in the dark it can be difficult to watch your surroundings and you may end up accidentally knicking your eyepiece or your flashlight. In the end it doesn't really matter since the optics are what you buy the scope for. Takahashi even sells the exact paint of their scopes to cover up damages.

[@jasonadamik2206]

It's 'Apo' - *Not* 'A.P.O.' Apo doesn't stand for anything. It's just short for apochromatic.

[@AVTAstro]

Yeah I'm just a special case😅😂 This has already been pointed out, but thanks for the reply. I have changed my ways.

[@deennice6035]

Why do you call them ay-pee-ohs? You say achro so why not just say apo? Are you not referring to “apochromat”?

[@AVTAstro]

Tell you what, next time I do a video on APO's I'll hire you to do a voice over for me🤣🤣🤣

[@AVTAstro]

But to actually answer your question idk why I say it that way. I think I have just been in the hobby for so long reading internet forums that I always though that it was kind of like an acronym. To me it sounds weird when people say it as one word. 🤔

[@gothicm3rcy426]

it matters?

[@jasonadamik2206]

Yes, it matters. It's dumb. It's not an acronym.

[@AmatureAstronomer]

They cost too much.

[@AVTAstro]

Well so does a Tesla, and plenty of people drive them. Lol