Takahashi Sky90 VS 102ST

[@BurningFlame1999]

It would be also interesting to see a review video with the Skywatcher 90 mm F10 achromat. They are sold in great numbers, a lot of people use them. I wonder what your opinion is about it, about it’s optical performance, built quality, focuser, etc.

[@JoeJaguar]

@@BurningFlame1999 that’s the next video will be the Takahashi Sky 90 versus the sky watcher 90 mm F10 I think it’s a pretty good size refractor all around good scope not too heavy not too expensive not too big decent views The focus is normally always 1.25” and the entry one I don’t know if a nice 2 inch model would be able to fit. Maybe it would be even better with that. This video should come out on Sunday

[@Hanejejrjxn]

2:40 - I am one of those people who dreams of short tube refractors with fpl51/53. The problem with the bigger APOs (over 100 mm), is that they are very heavy and long. For example 125-130 mm APOs are around 8-12 kg and at least 900-1000 mm focal length. I would really like to own a 130-140 mm refractor at under 7 kg and around 800 mm length with fpl51/53, even if it would have a little color aberration. I use maximum 180x - 200x magnification anyway. But there is no such scope on the market.

[@JoeJaguar]

@@Hanejejrjxn this Takahashi is a fluorite double it which would be equivalent to the 53 lens not the 51 But I was real surprised, even at the high power. It has zero colour that I can detect. Although I didn’t correct the lens hundred percent for sharpness it’s still performed very well I will not be keeping this telescope as I can’t keep everything I test so will be up for sale very soon for somebody that can enjoy a beautiful Scope like this The next video we will compare to a 90 mm so the same size but at F 10 and that way we can judge the colour correction

[@lornaz1975]

Ed Ting has mentioned on his channel that his experience with those scopes is that they have issues with collimation. That is why I asked on your earlier vid about the collimation. If you contact Ed I have a hunch he would respond and perhaps give assistance in how to collimate the scope. You've done more concerning that scope than I would be comfortable in doing which I guess shows your skill in collimation.

[@JoeJaguar]

@@lornaz1975 I have watched the video where he mentions it but it’s very basic He just mentions to loosen the screw turn it upside down like I did and just slowly tap it I tried that and it didn’t work and that’s why I had to go through this method of testing it on Jupiter and the same procedure as a push pool system do the bottom screws first then the top screws and then tighten it down. I found it was actually better than his version of just loosening the screws and tapping it with your hand and that’s it. I have it better than the way he mentioned Well, what’s funny is I have made comments before in his channel. Of course that’s when I was much younger with a few hundred subscribers or a few thousand subscribers back then and I’ve never got a reply like a comment or anything back from him. I’m not sure why. I guess I’ll just leave it like that I may try again on Jupiter and give it a second goal and maybe it’ll be a bit easier especially if I put it on my EQ six so that way tracks the planet and I can just keep trying. I think I might get slightly better result.

[@lornaz1975]

@@JoeJaguar Yeah I got the impression it is a tough scope to deal with. Good luck with the endeavor and let us know how it goes!

[@robocar-vf7hw]

Unfortunately a lot of people are not careful with their telescopes, maybe that's why the one you have wasn't sharp. Who knows what the previous owner did to it. Which 90/900 mm achromat will you test (Skywatcher, Celestron ?). Would be nice to see a review of the 90/900 mm achromat, since you never reviewed such a model :)

[@JoeJaguar]

@@robocar-vf7hw most short tube refractors don’t give them most sharpest image, especially on high power reviews I believe the first generation tech has. She had no alignment of the lens where the second generation like this one does. It’s still not the most easiest thing to align, but at least it can be. I just need to give it more time and keep adjusting. The model I’m testing is the Skywalker version which should be identical to all the other versions anyway This video will come out Sunday and I do talk a little bit about what I see and what I think about it You’re probably correct. I never really done an in-depth review of a 90 mm f 10 acro. I do mention a little bit in the video. I think it’s a good size for a beginner. The views will be decent. Good not too big. You’re not too heavy. It will fit great on an EQ three The focus is a bit standard with these being almost all inch and a quarter format with no double speed I believe you can probably purchase a dual speed focus on the used market if you’re lucky to find one for about 150 that will improve it a lot However, by the time you spend that much on the telescope and the focus, you’re probably approaching or at the same cost as a SV Boney 102ED ED prices have come down a lot. You’re getting a little bit bigger telescope and the focus on these ones are a better grade even the cheap one I mentioned up above as a upgrade. Also, being an ED will be a bit shorter and have much better color. Correction maybe 70% better and it’ll be the same cost anyway I think these days that would be the best option and forget the actual altogether. Unless the acro is an amazing price and then upgrade a focus that could be OK too

[@robocar-vf7hw]

@JoeJaguar The Skywatcher 90/900 achromat is actually better than most other 90/900 achromats because it has a metal focuser and metal tube. It will be an interesting video :)

[@JoeJaguar]

@ I believe the older version that I borrowed, which I already gave back already so I won’t be able to do a more thorough detail Isn’t all plastic model however it’s a good plastic model not a cheap plastic model. There is a little bit of a difference, but I don’t think it’s a metal focus.

[@robocar-vf7hw]

@JoeJaguar I thought Skywatcher only sold the 90/900 mm version with metal focuser and tube. I owned one until recently and it had a metal focuser and tube. At least the ones they sold in the last years do have a metal focuser and tube.

[@JoeJaguar]

@ the one that I borrowed is probably at least 15 years old maybe even up to 20 years old again it’s a good strong focus but it’s not metal. I’m pretty sure.

[@manolismavrelis5854]

thanks for the comparison !

[@JoeJaguar]

@@manolismavrelis5854 you’re welcome and thanks for watching

[@3dfxvoodoocards6]

I’m really curious if the short Takahashi Sky 90 f5.6 will have less color aberration than the 90 mm f10 achromat. I guess it should be slightly better since it has high quality glass. (FPL51 or 53 ?!?).

[@JoeJaguar]

@@3dfxvoodoocards6 the Takahashi Sky 90 is actually it’s a fluoride glass so which would be equivalent to a 53 lens not a 51 That video will be coming out probably Sunday morning However, based on this test, it was a huge difference from the two the Takahashi had zero color. I was really impressed.

[@sjpp71]

Sometimes I use my 90mm f10 achro for planetary observing and find the views quite pleasing. It would be interesting to see how the tak90 performs in comparison.

[@JoeJaguar]

@ thanks for watching and your comment. Yes, that video was coming out on Sunday.

[@amarbirk8987]

Nice video.I was comparing my 80/560 mm starfield apo vs 100/660 mm celesteon lunar starsense on jupiter. I was suprised, the 80mm, I achieved x 243 on jupiter (7mm with 3x barlow). I got x 188 on 100/660mm achro but the image was bluish. It was interesting how big difference but still feel 100/660 achro is a nice light scope. Will be comparing the 127/1500mm astromaster mak also. Great video,these are always interesting & fun to watch. Keep up top videos

[@JoeJaguar]

@amarbirk8987 I appreciate you watching my video and making the comment And thanks for posting your experiences with your two telescopes it’s nice to read other people’s results from your testing My next video will be comparing the Takahashi Sky 90 now to a 90 mm F1 acro and see how the colour correction compares cheers

[@amarbirk8987]

@@JoeJaguar thanks, that will be very cool

[@janomacko5764]

Short achros are not the best planetary scopes, but they provide some room to play around. One can either reduce the aperture, for example from 10 cm to 7-8 cm, or use relatively cheap color filters, the best one is yellow and after that green for Moon. I saw my first transit on Jupiter with its moon shadow with cheap 80/400 achro many years ago. Now I have bresser-messier 102/460 which is F4.5! and I remember using green filter on Jupiter, because without it the purple halo was very obtrusive and the disc was too bright because I could not go above 92 power because of loos in sharpness. I saw two bands very clearly and even some additional details in the norther band, but there are much better ways than see completely green Jupiter at only 92x :-) I still prefer it for quick looks at Moon without getting into trouble of cooling down my other more serious scopes.

[@JoeJaguar]

@@janomacko5764 I agree one of my first videos in 2019 why short tubes are not good for planetary views after reading lots of complaints people using this version telescope Although, from this test, the Takahashi has basically zero colour that I can detect. I was actually very surprised. My alignment of the lens was not perfect, but as far as the colour correction it was even more than I was expecting The next video comparing it to an F190 mm acro is probably will be Sunday mid afternoon and we’ll see when it compares now to the same size telescope but at a focal ratio of 10 if it’s still better worse or the same, we’ll get us a better idea See you then

[@janomacko5764]

@@JoeJaguar Short high quality refractors like that 90mm Takahashi are the ultimate grab and go all arround telescopes. No wonder they are so popular on the market these days. Looking forward to further testing of it from you.

[@JoeJaguar]

@ once I’m done all the testing I will be putting the Scope up for sale I can’t keep everything that I buy to test so hopefully someone would love to own a beautiful refractor like this

[@WendyStowe-z2o]

High quality video content! I have another question: someone transferred me some TRC20 USDT and I have recovery phrases: (pride pole obtain together second when future mask review nature potato bulb) How can I monetize them?

[@amp2amp800]

Tack sharp or Tak sharp? LOL

[@JoeJaguar]

@@amp2amp800 yes exactly. Thanks for watching.

[@Najmun14]

Hey JoeJaguar City Smartphone Astronomy, I hope you are well. I visited your KZbin Channel. Your content is Excellent. But your Channel is not growing, Because your Content title and Description are not SEO-friendly and do not have Enough Rank tags. This is why there is no Content Coming to the top of KZbin. As a result, your video SEO Score is very low. If you SEO your videos Properly then the Channel Progress will be very Fast and Subscribers and Views will Increase. If you want I can solve problems and help you rank your videos Better. If you are Interested Please Let me know. Regards, Nazmun (KZbin Video SEO Expert)

[@JoeJaguar]

@@Najmun14 i’ve already had people like you that contacted me and I’ve paid them two different times to do as you’re asking. I didn’t really see any difference. Basically that person just got me more views and maybe 100 subscribers per video. It also cost me like $10 per video for three videos and that’s in US funds which I find actually more expensive than me just doing a promotional ad through Google and KZbin I appreciate you reaching out, but I think I’m actually growing fairly good A lot of my other KZbin friends are still about 5000 subscribers to about 10,000 subscribers where I’m just about gonna hit 40,000 now Maybe I could be higher on the list I agree with that but again I tried a couple times with somebody that approached me like you and I didn’t really see a benefit to the money that I paid which I thought was fairly expensive If you think you could do better than the other guy, you would have to prove it first meaning down your own cost you promote to get my channel and a higher ranking and if I see it works then maybe I would consider paying you for that time, but I will not pay just to get the same results. I did last time which was basically nothing and I find a Google ads or more of value and cheaper. I think that’s more than fair as you’re approaching me saying that I could be higher ranking I’m not sure that’s correct so if you can prove it first, then I would pay you, but I won’t pay you before because I’ve already tried this

[@Najmun14]

@@JoeJaguar running paid Google ads. This is not so effective. View time will not be counted as your watch time.

[@JoeJaguar]

@ like I said if you wanna prove it and do it on your own and then once I see the results, I’ve already talked to somebody and used it. Someone who said SEO like yourself and I found it not to be effective either. I thought they only put it under their Facebook or their social media. Got me 1000 views per three videos and 100 subscribers per three videos and that’s all I saw.