Thank you for sharing that experience. Its something that has always concerned me about the limits on the optics, and now I feel a little more wiser, Good to know! Oh, and the flicker in your LED/Video I suspect is that UK mains is at 50Hz, and your video scan rate is probably at 60Hz (Andriod & IOS default), and this leads to rastered images - I have the same problem - need to use a 50Hz or 25Hz scan rate and also make sure you author the video at those rates too.
Thanks for sharing your experience with this scope. I was looking at the scope as a possible for imaging, but reading descriptions and specs on suppliers’ websites I had already begun to suspect it might have the problems you describe. So good to have your confirmation. I shall now look at other scopes. Cheers. Andrew.
I have a QHY268M and Tak FSQ85 - But i've never seen the star shapes you've described! Down to the tiniest bright stars no sign of astigmatism whatsoever. For what it's worth!
Useful video to some for sure👍 I have the Esprit 120ED which I think will be my forever scope! I love it, it’s excellent! I also have the 50ED guide scope, which I find great, I think you’ll come to love your Esprit 100, good luck with first light, I’ll be interested to see what you think when compared to the Takahashi. Clear skies!
@@SimonsAstro congrats 👏 well I have been doing for about the same and this video has really done well and doubled my subs and had over 4K views in just over a week So onwards and upwards 👍
When I had the Takahashi BabyQ (used for visual astronomy) everything was pinpoint sharpness and zero CA. The photos I took were superb. I used a Canon 1Dx full frame camera. My Takahashi 120 was producing oval shaped stars using the same camera set up. I was surprised at the discrepancy between these two brand new scopes.
Thanks for the comment, I think they are many bad Taks in circulation and it’s totally pot Luck to what you get, which is not good for a top brand at a super high premium price, there should be one bad one in every few hundred sold, and not 25% or more bad ones in all sold. CS 👍🏻
@@Astro_Shed You do get this with prima donna brands. A friend of mine had a Rolex which started running backwards. Another bought a new Aston Martin and the driver door fell off the second time he opened it. Manufacturer arrogance perhaps.
I know the Esprit's are a good performer even Es Reid mentioned to me they're a lovely scope when we me after taking my RASA to him to get sorted so I look forward to seeing what you think of it when you get a chance to use it. I like the idea of the flat panel to I might do something similar in my observatory. Clear skies!!
Thanks for the comment, well it nearly put me off when I thought I had bought my dream scope, and turned out to be a nightmare…I nearly threw the towel in while trying to sort it out…
You must remember the FSQ is over 20 years old. They have a lot of superb Opticians over there I've met many of them. They're just slow to take awhile to catch up but they do make superb instruments
Thanks for the comment, I do understand that, but they need to accept that there is an issue, and stop over promising and under delivering, how many other scopes out there need 2 flatteners to work, and even the work poorly, none….☹
I'm running a WO GT-81 IV with a RisingCam IMX571 and I have to say, my image quality is exquisite. I can't actually imagine better image quality than I'm getting, and I can't see how it's possible for me to justify spending more on a scope for a tiny, marginal improvement. I'm guessing the equivalent Takahashi would be the FSQ-85? That's more than twice the price for (I guarantee) way less than twice the image quality. I certainly can't see how it's possible to justify the cost of a Takahashi, just because they have a good reputation amongst people who spend more than they need to. 😁
Well, i did the same, i bought a scope from TS Optics [their new series CF, 90mm], paired it with RisingCam IMX571 and dedicated, it was that much good that i ordered second 90mm and IMX571, i don't think i can beat that with Takahashi, so instead of one high end scope i bought two and added a second camera, to me this is a better wiser decision than getting a name reputation.
Enjoyed your video, thank you for the insight. If you are still interested in a new scope, i might suggest an Askar 130. Lukomatico and Nebula Photos did excellent reviews of this scope. Might be, what you are looking for. Clear skies !
Thanks, yes I had the chance to review that scope, but the timing was not good so had to refuse Also was busy trying to sort the Tak out, but we all now know how that ended ☹️
I have the esprit 80 and have had good results with it. When I decided to get a little bigger scope I went with a stellarvue svx 102. The svx is a great scope and Stellarvue is one of the only companies that list the scopes strehl ratio. So you know how well your optics are aligned and their quality. But with everything you can do with processing How good of optics do you really need. I really enjoy using both scopes and after processing I can’t tell which is which, but visual observing is where the svx shines.
Thanks for the comment Yes I would love a Stellarvue scope I really would but they are so rare here in the UK I am enjoying the Esprit it’s far better than the Tak I had
Interesting. I have been seeing similar star shapes with my William Optics Zenithstar 61. I've reached out to William Optics but they never replied back. Comments from other astrophotographers suggested pinched optics but I'm not convinced. I'm using a ZWO ASI2600MC which is similar to your camera in terms of sensor and pixel size. I wonder if that explains my star aberrations as well?
Hi, It’s not pitched optics, it’s deffo astigmatism if the star shapes are the same as mine in the video, the proper name Sagical and tangical aberration, I might have spelt those wrong…you can have one or the other or if you have very good collimation, then both, which cause the cross like stars shapes… I hope you get it sorted…👍🏻
Interesting, thanks. I wonder if pixel binning might be used to mitigate the issue? Or digital correction by taking a reference picture of geometric shapes and generating a digital flattener?
I use mine with a 6200MC and it's sensational. I feel like you had a particularly bad scope.. I've used mine with the SBIG ST11000M back in the day, then APS-C CMOS cameras with tiny pixels, then the 35mm 6200MC pro... No dramas with any of them.
That's a brilliant heads-up. Having an extra flattner to the scope. Im wondering how long it will be before suppliers will be holding the flattener back as an 'extra to be purchase'. Like they have with other scope bundles.
Thanks, Well, it started off as an extra, when they first were on the market, as that is how I got mine, then they put the price of the scope up by £300, and added the flattener into the package…go figure
@@Astro_Shed As mentioned, the Esprit is (was?) sold with a flattener in the US. In Europe it is sold without a flattener for less...go figure. Both have there pro's and cons. If I use the Esprit for visual, I don't need a flattener (aka I don't want to pay for a flattener). If you don't sell with a flattener, you have the choice regarding the SW branded one or maybe the Starizona 0.77 flattener/reducer...
@@MGralike I’m sorry, but i was talking about the Tak and the flattener in the video, and not the Esprit, you are confused, and maybe need to watch the whole video….🤔
@@Astro_Shed I saw the whole video, I just wanted to point out that there is a apples to oranges comparison going on in this post (although I understand the emotion about "a lot of money (tak)" and not "up to expectancy") with or without flattener. Therefore my point, the SW Esprit 100 without the flattener is also just not good enough for astrophotography. So why would be an old design like the FSQ85 from a era with different kind of sensors, be on par still without an flattener. The excuse that Takahashi is too expensive is not relative. Anyone knows that (aka don't talk about it, I got two, it hurts)..
@@MGralike yes, but my whole point is that the Tak is still pretty useless WITH the two flatteners that it has, one built into the scope as it’s a Petzval quadruplet design, and the new one they bought out to combat the issue, so even with 2 flatteners, yes 2, it’s still very poor….how many other scopes do you know of that need 2 flatteners and is still not up to par….none….
I had to egt shot of an Esprit 120 as it had pinched optics below -5 I bought a cheaper FK61 triplet APO which was almost half the price of the Esprit and I didn't loose anything imaging wise in terms of colour correction. Beware these expensive boutique scopes, some of the cheaper Chinese made designs are now really good.
Yes, I have heard that pinched optics can be an issue, with the Esprit’s, but I don’t get many nights at -5 or below, so will worry about that if it happens…an extra dew strap I guess…. Yes, I don’t think I would buy another Tak, even the FSQ106 which is supposed to be superb, as there is a 2 year wait list, and it does not even come with a test or optics report…😮
@@Astro_Shed Taks are great but are so overpriced these days and the chinese made scopes are now really good if you get one with a test report I got mine from Altair Astro, really pleased with it. There is a bit of snobbery with regards to glass type in this community. I am speaking from experience. I seen no detectable difference when imaging with an Esprit vrs a cheaper Chinese made FK61 or FPL51 made scope. The quality of camera is IMHO much more important.
@@desbarry8414 yes, it was ironic really as I had the Tak and thought it was a forever scope, decided to get a better more modern camera , the QHY268c and then that showed all the flaws on the optics of the tak, so I either went back to the old CCD camera or sell the tak and get a scope that worked with modern small pixel cameras….so went with the new scope….
Very interesting topic, since I'm struggling with star shapes in the corners, too. I'm wondering, if the reason for this (small pixel size) can also be true for Newtonians (Skywatcher Quattro 6")? And do you think, that 2x2 binning can be a remedy to make things better?
Hi, thanks for the comment, not sure about this issue with a Newtonian, could it be that you need a coma corrector for it..? As for binning, yes it does help, but in my case it did not help enough for me to be happy with the scope…it made a difference but just not enough…☹
Thanks for the comments, I was considering the Pegasus motorised focuser as they do the adapters to fit to the esprit 100, and that would give zero issues, but TBH the stock focuser is not bad, as long as you keep the draw tube protruding to a minimum, I only have the tube out 20mm and use spacers to take up the rest…👍🏻
Your are right, and its a pity. It is a design from yesteryear, but I love the stars and color correction FSQ with large 6 um+ pixels and especially those with microlensing such as the KAF 8300 where you see small stubby diffraction spikes. Annoying to have to take care of backfocus for a true petzval, yet decent quads from the east (triplet + flattener) give excellent results from good examples of the scopes. Esprit 100 is such a great scope though. Query: what was the APS-C large pixel CCD that you were using that behaved? I have seen very good stars on the full frame ASI2400 MC (~6um pixels) using the flattener on the FSQ 85, was well surprised with that.
Thanks for your comment… I was using the older Starlight Xpress SXVR M25c CCD camera with 8 micron pixels, and it was superb…and I totally think it’s wrong to spend this type of money on a scope with its built in flattener, to then have to add another flattener and then, as you say deal with back focus issues…it’s just wrong…IMHO
@@Astro_Shed fully agree. Modern options are just too close in performance, but what kills the interest for me was always the dark wedge stars on fsq from the virtual field stop optical vignetting of the back doublet. Two dark wedge diffraction in too many stars that are unsightly, and show more on the smaller pixels even on small chips. Flattener adds salt to a wound...but I love the physical design of the scope, and antidote to loud primary colours and racing car design of the modern alternatives. CS 😊
Check out my website for images of the build, link is on the home page, www.astroshed.co.uk, there is also a video on here of the obs, it’s quite small but perfect for my needs…not much else to show really..
Interesting to hear this, thank you for the video If I may ask you something, I am using a Quieter3 fanless mini pc on one of my setups and I am not really happy with it, I see that you use a sort of NUC computer there, does this work on 12 Volts also or do you have to use a separate power adapter for the 19 Volts that most of those NUC's need to be powered on ?
Hello and thanks Well funny you should ask this as I just swapped from the intel NUC to a Mele 3, as the Mele is much smaller and lighter and I got it secondhand for a very good price Yes most of the older NUC will run fine on anything from 12-19v I used 12v without issue 👍
@@Astro_Shed Well, mine sometimes freezes in the graphics, so the computer luckily keeps running but the view that I get sometimes freezes. And after a minute or so it comes back. So I guess the graphic card is not so good in these Quieter3 mini pc's
No, not at all, it’s just the FSQ85. It’s to do with the dated optical design and the low focal ratio of this scope, the 106 is fine AFAIK Thanks for the comment…
👍No , I am sure I won’t upgraded the two scopes C11 HD & Sky-Watcher esprit 120 ED ,Takahashi has the same problem with the new Willem 111 scope and also 62 in the category,I was actually shocked,how did you do that with the skywatcher!!???😔Takahashi rang is really bad 👎👎 sorry man🙏
@@Astro_Shed the flicker is caused by the power source. if it is being powered from the mains it will be 50hz and ideally you would match the fps to the power hz so if mains powered 50 fps.
Having dealt with Sony mirrorless cameras and the star eater problem, I found out the Japanese do not acknowledge a mistake, they throw in a flattener to take care of their perfection 😂
I had a brand new FSQ106EDXIII and never liked it. Always has issues with chromatic aberration and finally gave up on it. Sold it and got an Askar FRA400 and it has been outstanding.
Thanks for the comment, yes they are not all they are cracked up to be, and it’s very hit and miss whether you get a good one or not, and for a premium scope it’s not really acceptable. Clear skies 👍🏻
Thank you for your honesty! I have subsequently subscribed: FYI - there is one clown-paid-puppet for Skywatcher - I'm not going to use his name, but you or your viewers should be able to find this goof - he just reviews Skywatcher items and EVERYTHING is 110% perfect - he's all BS. My time is limited: I don't have time for BS: I want honesty and integrity from those sites that review things. I"m an old man: I'm not another Elon Musk - I have a budget and I need these reviews to help me when I purchase. Thank you for this video and review. :0))
Sorry my last reply was cut short, thanks for the kind words, bear in mint this was a review of my issues with the Takahashi FSQ85 and not the skywatcher I have replaced it with….👍🏻
Smart move! Tak 85 doesn’t give a lot over Espri 100. Tak 106 doesn’t either. However, your Tak is lemon. I have seen 2-3 such scopes. No problem with CMOS sensors. You should see no difference, and definitely no astigmatism. Moreover, I have Vixen doublet without flattener with 2.3um CMOS, still no problem.
Hi, you will always get issues with the 85 because the optics were not designed to work with small pixels My scope was not really any worse than other 85’s, even some older scopes work fine with modern sensors due to a better optical design
@@Astro_Shed I don’t. I like big scopes. Smallest one 4” duplet and no issue. But, many other, who have it, don’t. They are using 294mm with bin 1:1. If Tak know that there is an issue, they will stop production. Now, almost no one use CCD. I understand you read some issues on CN. On CN, people often complain. Even about Paramount mounts, Veloce scopes, etc.
Tak do know there is an issue, that why they bought out another extra flattener for the scope that already has one built in, would they have done that if there was no need to….of course they would not, and now it’s supplied with the scope, that have admitted there was an issue….I am not making this stuff up you know…
@@Astro_Shed Amazingly, you are right. Takahashi USA is here in Texas. They didn’t recommend 85 scope. But, they recommended TOA130mm, which has some incredible parameters - 1um star test!
Well I agree to disagree, if you watch the full video you will see what it did, and I am not the only one either, with modern small pixel cameras, and the old design optics of the TAKFSQ85 it was an issue, also having to use 2 flatteners on the scope is a joke, one built in and the extra one they now supply as standard with this model, and it’s still pretty awful…happy new year…👍🏻
I was limited financially, I just wanted a decent scope that worked out of the box, and this does really well, but I hope in the future to get a good “forever” scope…👍🏻
My Tak FSQ85, which I also bought used about 3 years ago and is probably 10 years old, does fine with a Risingcam IMX 571 camera That camera has--APS-C sized sensor and pixel size 3.76 microns and is a poor man's version of the ASI2600 MC Pro. I have never seen anything remotely like your stars shown around minute 3 of this video. Also, looking at several dozen FSQ85 images on Astrobin, I see nothing like your stars. Maybe there is something else wrong with your Tak--which is perhaps why you bought it so cheap. Granted, I haven't tried out a full frame camera with my FSQ85. Tak literature seems to say that their flattener is designed to make the FSQ85 work with full frame. Also, what is the basis for the claim that the problem here is related to small CMOS pixels as opposed to big CCD pixels? I have seen the claim made on Cloudy nights, but I have been unable to track down an explanation of why pixel size makes a difference or why it would produce the results you show us at minute 3 of your video. I do agree, if my stars looked like that, I'd ditch the Tak, too!
Hi, You are very lucky if you scope is that good, and with over 7000 views and more than 200 comments, you are the first person who has actually said that you disagree and your scope is good, I was expecting many more people to say this by now, so I guess the problem is as bad as I first thought…you have a good scope, so hold onto it. Tak themselves brought out the extra flattener and published themselves the reason why the pixel size is the issue, I can assure you that it is as I used an SX camera for a while with this scope and the stars were perfect corner to corner, without the new extra flattener. At the end of the day when you pay a high premium for a flat field Petzval quadruplet scope scope such as this, then you don’t expect to have to add another flattener straight away to the back of it, Tak supply the flatter er with the scope now in the box, would they really do this if they did not need to..? It’s the only scope on the market that needs 2 flatteners to work properly…go figure… Take an image with your scope with and without the extra flattener and blow to 3:1 and check the corner stars, if yours are perfectly round, then great, but I very much doubt they will be… Clear skies…👍🏻
@@marklindsey1995 well not so fantasies really as my video shows, they over promise and under deliver, and not worth the premium at all…☹ as fat as the FSQ85 goes anyway…
Man, that intro tune does _not_ match the tone of your videos. Completely different energy level. By the time the tune is done, I'm all pumped up to watch a 90's sitcom, not some guy in a shed calmly discussing astrophotography. 😂
@@Astro_Shed Ah, seems YT has been recommending me your old videos then. Yeah, new intro is way better. And it appears you've upgraded your recording gear as well? Looks much cleaner. Nice! 😃
Thanks But watch the full review and you will see my issues are with that flattener you mention and it does NOT make the stars perfect at all it’s pretty poor flattener and makes about 15% better
I think you have missed the whole point of the video, I did mention the new 1.01x flattener, that’s what the while video was about, you should watch it all maybe, before commenting..🤔the point was that the flattener you mention does not work as it should and does not make the strs perfect at all, I have used this flattener all the time since the purchase of it, and it does not work as it should and so even with 2 flatteners in this scope it still pretty rubbish, poor design scope and useless with modern small pixel cameras…
@@Astro_Shed- Thanks for the update. That is not my experience with that same equipment. Possibly the scope was misaligned in some way? But I understand and respect your experience, of course. Clear skies and best regards.
the Esprit 100 is awesome, round stars in every corner. Im super happy with it!
I had heard about some older Taks having astigmatism but this is the first time I have had it properly explained! TY.
Thanks
And your welcome 👍
Thanks for subscribing
Thank you for sharing that experience. Its something that has always concerned me about the limits on the optics, and now I feel a little more wiser, Good to know!
Oh, and the flicker in your LED/Video I suspect is that UK mains is at 50Hz, and your video scan rate is probably at 60Hz (Andriod & IOS default), and this leads to rastered images - I have the same problem - need to use a 50Hz or 25Hz scan rate and also make sure you author the video at those rates too.
Thanks very much, and thanks for the tip too, it was my mistake as I thought UK was 60 hz, and not 50…
Yeah, I just about jumped on a used fsq85, getting an Esprit 100 instead for way less money, they are on sale too 👍. Thanks for the explanation.
@@carlwellman3623 your welcome, thanks very much 👍
Fascinating!! Excellent video.
Thanks Richard….👍🏻
Thanks for sharing your experience with this scope. I was looking at the scope as a possible for imaging, but reading descriptions and specs on suppliers’ websites I had already begun to suspect it might have the problems you describe. So good to have your confirmation. I shall now look at other scopes. Cheers. Andrew.
Your very welcome, and glad I could be of help in your decision….👍🏻
I have a QHY268M and Tak FSQ85 - But i've never seen the star shapes you've described! Down to the tiniest bright stars no sign of astigmatism whatsoever. For what it's worth!
Thanks for the comment, yea others have said the same, not sure what was wrong with mine, as in a star test the collimation was good 🤷🏼♂🤷🏼♂
Useful video to some for sure👍 I have the Esprit 120ED which I think will be my forever scope! I love it, it’s excellent! I also have the 50ED guide scope, which I find great, I think you’ll come to love your Esprit 100, good luck with first light, I’ll be interested to see what you think when compared to the Takahashi.
Clear skies!
Thanks Simon, love you Chanel to, loved watching your observatory build videos 👍
@@Astro_Shed Many Thanks, I’ve subbed to your channel 👍
@@SimonsAstro much Appreciated thanks Simon I am new to all this YT stuff 😂
@@Astro_Shed I’ve been doing TH-cam just over a year and hit 1k subs last weekend😀
@@SimonsAstro congrats 👏 well I have been doing for about the same and this video has really done well and doubled my subs and had over 4K views in just over a week
So onwards and upwards 👍
Thank you for saving me from making a mistake. Well done!
Thanks for the comment, Glad I could help, these scopes can be very hit and miss..👍🏻
I love my Esprit 80 and 120, they are so easy to use and the quality of images are just amazing.
Thanks, yes I see so many people enjoying these highly regarded scopes….thanks for subscribing…👍🏻
Ah, the trials and tribulations of a pixel peeper. Fellow pixel peeper here :)
The Esprit is no slouch.. looking forward to your first light. CS!
Thank, yes although to be fair, it was still noticeable without too much pixel peeping…but yes, it can get in the way sometimes…👍🏻
When I had the Takahashi BabyQ (used for visual astronomy) everything was pinpoint sharpness and zero CA. The photos I took were superb. I used a Canon 1Dx full frame camera. My Takahashi 120 was producing oval shaped stars using the same camera set up. I was surprised at the discrepancy between these two brand new scopes.
Thanks for the comment, I think they are many bad Taks in circulation and it’s totally pot Luck to what you get, which is not good for a top brand at a super high premium price, there should be one bad one in every few hundred sold, and not 25% or more bad ones in all sold. CS 👍🏻
Oh, and also mine was fine for visual, it was just imaging that showed the severe astigmatism..
@@Astro_Shed You do get this with prima donna brands. A friend of mine had a Rolex which started running backwards. Another bought a new Aston Martin and the driver door fell off the second time he opened it. Manufacturer arrogance perhaps.
Cracking choice mate, the Esprit range are extremely well respected and with good reason! :-D Enjoy!!
Thanks Luke, yes I am very happy with it , and keep up the great work on your Chanel to, I do look forward to your videos…👍
I know the Esprit's are a good performer even Es Reid mentioned to me they're a lovely scope when we me after taking my RASA to him to get sorted so I look forward to seeing what you think of it when you get a chance to use it. I like the idea of the flat panel to I might do something similar in my observatory.
Clear skies!!
Glad you liked the flats panel idea, let me know how you get on if you do something similar…..CS…👍🏻
Like so many other comments, i was considering the tak, I think I will stick to what I know, William Optics.
Imaging has turned many amateurs away from Astronomy - this video is proof - life is too short!
Thanks for the comment, well it nearly put me off when I thought I had bought my dream scope, and turned out to be a nightmare…I nearly threw the towel in while trying to sort it out…
You must remember the FSQ is over 20 years old. They have a lot of superb Opticians over there I've met many of them. They're just slow to take awhile to catch up but they do make superb instruments
Thanks for the comment, I do understand that, but they need to accept that there is an issue, and stop over promising and under delivering, how many other scopes out there need 2 flatteners to work, and even the work poorly, none….☹
I'm running a WO GT-81 IV with a RisingCam IMX571 and I have to say, my image quality is exquisite. I can't actually imagine better image quality than I'm getting, and I can't see how it's possible for me to justify spending more on a scope for a tiny, marginal improvement.
I'm guessing the equivalent Takahashi would be the FSQ-85? That's more than twice the price for (I guarantee) way less than twice the image quality.
I certainly can't see how it's possible to justify the cost of a Takahashi, just because they have a good reputation amongst people who spend more than they need to. 😁
Well, i did the same, i bought a scope from TS Optics [their new series CF, 90mm], paired it with RisingCam IMX571 and dedicated, it was that much good that i ordered second 90mm and IMX571, i don't think i can beat that with Takahashi, so instead of one high end scope i bought two and added a second camera, to me this is a better wiser decision than getting a name reputation.
Enjoyed your video, thank you for the insight. If you are still interested in a new scope, i might suggest an Askar 130. Lukomatico and Nebula Photos did excellent reviews of this scope. Might be, what you are looking for. Clear skies !
Thanks, yes I had the chance to review that scope, but the timing was not good so had to refuse
Also was busy trying to sort the Tak out, but we all now know how that ended ☹️
I have the esprit 80 and have had good results with it. When I decided to get a little bigger scope I went with a stellarvue svx 102. The svx is a great scope and Stellarvue is one of the only companies that list the scopes strehl ratio. So you know how well your optics are aligned and their quality. But with everything you can do with processing How good of optics do you really need. I really enjoy using both scopes and after processing I can’t tell which is which, but visual observing is where the svx shines.
Thanks for the comment
Yes I would love a Stellarvue scope I really would but they are so rare here in the UK
I am enjoying the Esprit it’s far better than the Tak I had
@@Astro_Shed love your channel. Always good information.
@@dasimcoes thanks very much for that, really appreciate it 👍
I use the SW E120 with the ASI6200MM. Works great.
Interesting. I have been seeing similar star shapes with my William Optics Zenithstar 61. I've reached out to William Optics but they never replied back. Comments from other astrophotographers suggested pinched optics but I'm not convinced. I'm using a ZWO ASI2600MC which is similar to your camera in terms of sensor and pixel size. I wonder if that explains my star aberrations as well?
Hi,
It’s not pitched optics, it’s deffo astigmatism if the star shapes are the same as mine in the video, the proper name Sagical and tangical aberration, I might have spelt those wrong…you can have one or the other or if you have very good collimation, then both, which cause the cross like stars shapes…
I hope you get it sorted…👍🏻
Esprit 100 is an amazing scope . I have owned mine for about 5 years and it is an incredible telescope
Interesting, thanks. I wonder if pixel binning might be used to mitigate the issue? Or digital correction by taking a reference picture of geometric shapes and generating a digital flattener?
Thanks for the comment, I tried binning, and it helped, but only ever so slightly, it was barely noticeable TBH,, 👍🏻
I use mine with a 6200MC and it's sensational. I feel like you had a particularly bad scope.. I've used mine with the SBIG ST11000M back in the day, then APS-C CMOS cameras with tiny pixels, then the 35mm 6200MC pro... No dramas with any of them.
You are very lucky then, hang on to it…👍🏻
That's a brilliant heads-up. Having an extra flattner to the scope. Im wondering how long it will be before suppliers will be holding the flattener back as an 'extra to be purchase'. Like they have with other scope bundles.
Thanks, Well, it started off as an extra, when they first were on the market, as that is how I got mine, then they put the price of the scope up by £300, and added the flattener into the package…go figure
@@Astro_Shed As mentioned, the Esprit is (was?) sold with a flattener in the US. In Europe it is sold without a flattener for less...go figure. Both have there pro's and cons. If I use the Esprit for visual, I don't need a flattener (aka I don't want to pay for a flattener). If you don't sell with a flattener, you have the choice regarding the SW branded one or maybe the Starizona 0.77 flattener/reducer...
@@MGralike I’m sorry, but i was talking about the Tak and the flattener in the video, and not the Esprit, you are confused, and maybe need to watch the whole video….🤔
@@Astro_Shed I saw the whole video, I just wanted to point out that there is a apples to oranges comparison going on in this post (although I understand the emotion about "a lot of money (tak)" and not "up to expectancy") with or without flattener.
Therefore my point, the SW Esprit 100 without the flattener is also just not good enough for astrophotography. So why would be an old design like the FSQ85 from a era with different kind of sensors, be on par still without an flattener.
The excuse that Takahashi is too expensive is not relative. Anyone knows that (aka don't talk about it, I got two, it hurts)..
@@MGralike yes, but my whole point is that the Tak is still pretty useless WITH the two flatteners that it has, one built into the scope as it’s a Petzval quadruplet design, and the new one they bought out to combat the issue, so even with 2 flatteners, yes 2, it’s still very poor….how many other scopes do you know of that need 2 flatteners and is still not up to par….none….
I had to egt shot of an Esprit 120 as it had pinched optics below -5 I bought a cheaper FK61 triplet APO which was almost half the price of the Esprit and I didn't loose anything imaging wise in terms of colour correction. Beware these expensive boutique scopes, some of the cheaper Chinese made designs are now really good.
Yes, I have heard that pinched optics can be an issue, with the Esprit’s, but I don’t get many nights at -5 or below, so will worry about that if it happens…an extra dew strap I guess….
Yes, I don’t think I would buy another Tak, even the FSQ106 which is supposed to be superb, as there is a 2 year wait list, and it does not even come with a test or optics report…😮
@@Astro_Shed Taks are great but are so overpriced these days and the chinese made scopes are now really good if you get one with a test report I got mine from Altair Astro, really pleased with it. There is a bit of snobbery with regards to glass type in this community. I am speaking from experience. I seen no detectable difference when imaging with an Esprit vrs a cheaper Chinese made FK61 or FPL51 made scope. The quality of camera is IMHO much more important.
@@desbarry8414 yes, it was ironic really as I had the Tak and thought it was a forever scope, decided to get a better more modern camera , the QHY268c and then that showed all the flaws on the optics of the tak, so I either went back to the old CCD camera or sell the tak and get a scope that worked with modern small pixel cameras….so went with the new scope….
Wow
Thought those Takahashi were the ultimate 😮
Would mind telling where you sourced the clamps for your ecoguide 50 ?
Thanks for the comment.
Yes, so did I when I bought it…and how wrong I was.
I got them from a guy on enay selling them here in the U.K.
Very interesting topic, since I'm struggling with star shapes in the corners, too. I'm wondering, if the reason for this (small pixel size) can also be true for Newtonians (Skywatcher Quattro 6")? And do you think, that 2x2 binning can be a remedy to make things better?
Hi, thanks for the comment, not sure about this issue with a Newtonian, could it be that you need a coma corrector for it..? As for binning, yes it does help, but in my case it did not help enough for me to be happy with the scope…it made a difference but just not enough…☹
@@Astro_Shed I have the corrector which came with the scope. The idea with the binning came as I wrote the text ... 😉
Put a Feathertouch on your E100 to make a forever scope.
Thanks for the comments, I was considering the Pegasus motorised focuser as they do the adapters to fit to the esprit 100, and that would give zero issues, but TBH the stock focuser is not bad, as long as you keep the draw tube protruding to a minimum, I only have the tube out 20mm and use spacers to take up the rest…👍🏻
Your are right, and its a pity. It is a design from yesteryear, but I love the stars and color correction FSQ with large 6 um+ pixels and especially those with microlensing such as the KAF 8300 where you see small stubby diffraction spikes. Annoying to have to take care of backfocus for a true petzval, yet decent quads from the east (triplet + flattener) give excellent results from good examples of the scopes. Esprit 100 is such a great scope though. Query: what was the APS-C large pixel CCD that you were using that behaved? I have seen very good stars on the full frame ASI2400 MC (~6um pixels) using the flattener on the FSQ 85, was well surprised with that.
Thanks for your comment…
I was using the older Starlight Xpress SXVR M25c CCD camera with 8 micron pixels, and it was superb…and I totally think it’s wrong to spend this type of money on a scope with its built in flattener, to then have to add another flattener and then, as you say deal with back focus issues…it’s just wrong…IMHO
@@Astro_Shed fully agree. Modern options are just too close in performance, but what kills the interest for me was always the dark wedge stars on fsq from the virtual field stop optical vignetting of the back doublet. Two dark wedge diffraction in too many stars that are unsightly, and show more on the smaller pixels even on small chips. Flattener adds salt to a wound...but I love the physical design of the scope, and antidote to loud primary colours and racing car design of the modern alternatives. CS 😊
we want to see the obs and build
Check out my website for images of the build, link is on the home page, www.astroshed.co.uk, there is also a video on here of the obs, it’s quite small but perfect for my needs…not much else to show really..
Interesting to hear this, thank you for the video
If I may ask you something, I am using a Quieter3 fanless mini pc on one of my setups and I am not really happy with it, I see that you use a sort of NUC computer there, does this work on 12 Volts also or do you have to use a separate power adapter for the 19 Volts that most of those NUC's need to be powered on ?
Hello and thanks
Well funny you should ask this as I just swapped from the intel NUC to a Mele 3, as the Mele is much smaller and lighter and I got it secondhand for a very good price
Yes most of the older NUC will run fine on anything from 12-19v I used 12v without issue 👍
Why are you not happy with the Mele 3 as they are very popular for imaging rigs ?
@@Astro_Shed Well, mine sometimes freezes in the graphics, so the computer luckily keeps running but the view that I get sometimes freezes. And after a minute or so it comes back.
So I guess the graphic card is not so good in these Quieter3 mini pc's
Is this also a problem with the Takahashi FSQ106?
No, not at all, it’s just the FSQ85. It’s to do with the dated optical design and the low focal ratio of this scope, the 106 is fine AFAIK
Thanks for the comment…
👍No , I am sure I won’t upgraded the two scopes C11 HD & Sky-Watcher esprit 120 ED ,Takahashi has the same problem with the new Willem 111 scope and also 62 in the category,I was actually shocked,how did you do that with the skywatcher!!???😔Takahashi rang is really bad 👎👎 sorry man🙏
are this problem only on the 85? i thinking of geting 60cb
Hi, yes only the 85
The 60 is fine I have one of those and it’s all
Good 👍
Changing your video camera's frame rate and exposure length might get rid of the flickering in future videos.
Thanks for the tip, i use a GoPro, I recorded in 1080p and 60 fps, and uploaded at 30 fps, what frame rate should I record in to stop the flicker…?
@@Astro_Shed the flicker is caused by the power source. if it is being powered from the mains it will be 50hz and ideally you would match the fps to the power hz so if mains powered 50 fps.
@@lulzguy2501 there is a mains power brick down to 12v for the LED lights…👍🏻
Having dealt with Sony mirrorless cameras and the star eater problem, I found out the Japanese do not acknowledge a mistake, they throw in a flattener to take care of their perfection 😂
@@carlwellman3623 thanks for
The comment 👍
I had a brand new FSQ106EDXIII and never liked it. Always has issues with chromatic aberration and finally gave up on it. Sold it and got an Askar FRA400 and it has been outstanding.
Thanks for the comment, yes they are not all they are cracked up to be, and it’s very hit and miss whether you get a good one or not, and for a premium scope it’s not really acceptable.
Clear skies 👍🏻
Thank you for your honesty! I have subsequently subscribed: FYI - there is one clown-paid-puppet for Skywatcher - I'm not going to use his name, but you or your viewers should be able to find this goof - he just reviews Skywatcher items and EVERYTHING is 110% perfect - he's all BS. My time is limited: I don't have time for BS: I want honesty and integrity from those sites that review things. I"m an old man: I'm not another Elon Musk - I have a budget and I need these reviews to help me when I purchase. Thank you for this video and review. :0))
Thanks
Sorry my last reply was cut short, thanks for the kind words, bear in mint this was a review of my issues with the Takahashi FSQ85 and not the skywatcher I have replaced it with….👍🏻
um, maybe re watch the video he is talking about issues with the Tak not the skywatcher
Smart move! Tak 85 doesn’t give a lot over Espri 100. Tak 106 doesn’t either.
However, your Tak is lemon. I have seen 2-3 such scopes. No problem with CMOS sensors. You should see no difference, and definitely no astigmatism. Moreover, I have Vixen doublet without flattener with 2.3um CMOS, still no problem.
Hi, you will always get issues with the 85 because the optics were not designed to work with small pixels
My scope was not really any worse than other 85’s, even some older scopes work fine with modern sensors due to a better optical design
@@Astro_Shed I don’t. I like big scopes. Smallest one 4” duplet and no issue.
But, many other, who have it, don’t. They are using 294mm with bin 1:1.
If Tak know that there is an issue, they will stop production. Now, almost no one use CCD.
I understand you read some issues on CN. On CN, people often complain. Even about Paramount mounts, Veloce scopes, etc.
Tak do know there is an issue, that why they bought out another extra flattener for the scope that already has one built in, would they have done that if there was no need to….of course they would not, and now it’s supplied with the scope, that have admitted there was an issue….I am not making this stuff up you know…
@@Astro_Shed Ok.
@@Astro_Shed Amazingly, you are right. Takahashi USA is here in Texas. They didn’t recommend 85 scope. But, they recommended TOA130mm, which has some incredible parameters - 1um star test!
Swapping from a TAK to a SW is not the best idea.
Well I agree to disagree, if you watch the full video you will see what it did, and I am not the only one either, with modern small pixel cameras, and the old design optics of the TAKFSQ85 it was an issue, also having to use 2 flatteners on the scope is a joke, one built in and the extra one they now supply as standard with this model, and it’s still pretty awful…happy new year…👍🏻
@@Astro_Shed instead of the SW I would go for a Vixen VSD90SS. This would beamy dream optical system for photography. (I’m using a TeleVue NP101…)
I was limited financially, I just wanted a decent scope that worked out of the box, and this does really well, but I hope in the future to get a good “forever” scope…👍🏻
My Tak FSQ85, which I also bought used about 3 years ago and is probably 10 years old, does fine with a Risingcam IMX 571 camera That camera has--APS-C sized sensor and pixel size 3.76 microns and is a poor man's version of the ASI2600 MC Pro. I have never seen anything remotely like your stars shown around minute 3 of this video. Also, looking at several dozen FSQ85 images on Astrobin, I see nothing like your stars. Maybe there is something else wrong with your Tak--which is perhaps why you bought it so cheap. Granted, I haven't tried out a full frame camera with my FSQ85. Tak literature seems to say that their flattener is designed to make the FSQ85 work with full frame.
Also, what is the basis for the claim that the problem here is related to small CMOS pixels as opposed to big CCD pixels? I have seen the claim made on Cloudy nights, but I have been unable to track down an explanation of why pixel size makes a difference or why it would produce the results you show us at minute 3 of your video. I do agree, if my stars looked like that, I'd ditch the Tak, too!
Hi,
You are very lucky if you scope is that good, and with over 7000 views and more than 200 comments, you are the first person who has actually said that you disagree and your scope is good, I was expecting many more people to say this by now, so I guess the problem is as bad as I first thought…you have a good scope, so hold onto it.
Tak themselves brought out the extra flattener and published themselves the reason why the pixel size is the issue, I can assure you that it is as I used an SX camera for a while with this scope and the stars were perfect corner to corner, without the new extra flattener.
At the end of the day when you pay a high premium for a flat field Petzval quadruplet scope scope such as this, then you don’t expect to have to add another flattener straight away to the back of it, Tak supply the flatter er with the scope now in the box, would they really do this if they did not need to..?
It’s the only scope on the market that needs 2 flatteners to work properly…go figure…
Take an image with your scope with and without the extra flattener and blow to 3:1 and check the corner stars, if yours are perfectly round, then great, but I very much doubt they will be…
Clear skies…👍🏻
Johnson Carol Williams Elizabeth Martinez Michelle
Thanks 👍🏻
Sounds like Takahashi is overrated, somewhat? 🤔
Yes, they over promise and under deliver, at least with the FSQ85 👍
@@Astro_Shed and yet they command a premium price and have a cult following! 😱
A fantastic brand. The FSQ106 is legendary. The add ons are very pricey though. Finding a nice used one at a discount is a good deal.
@@marklindsey1995 well not so fantasies really as my video shows, they over promise and under deliver, and not worth the premium at all…☹ as fat as the FSQ85 goes anyway…
Man, that intro tune does _not_ match the tone of your videos. Completely different energy level. By the time the tune is done, I'm all pumped up to watch a 90's sitcom, not some guy in a shed calmly discussing astrophotography. 😂
@@EvenTheDogAgrees 😂😂 changed it now check latest video and let me know 👍
@@Astro_Shed Ah, seems YT has been recommending me your old videos then. Yeah, new intro is way better. And it appears you've upgraded your recording gear as well? Looks much cleaner. Nice! 😃
@@EvenTheDogAgrees yes am pretty new to this as you can see only really been 1 year making vids apart from the odd one
Thank for the comment 👍
@@EvenTheDogAgrees latest vid is GoPro 10 early ones were GoPro 3, but just bought a Sony ZV-1 but not used yet
@@EvenTheDogAgreescmon and subscribe and be my 900th sub 😂
Autsch! 😣
Thanks for watching…👍🏻
You should have informed your users that Takahashi provides a 1.01x field flattener to make stars perfect with your new camera…
Thanks
But watch the full review and you will see my issues are with that flattener you mention and it does NOT make the stars perfect at all it’s pretty poor flattener and makes about 15% better
I think you have missed the whole point of the video, I did mention the new 1.01x flattener, that’s what the while video was about, you should watch it all maybe, before commenting..🤔the point was that the flattener you mention does not work as it should and does not make the strs perfect at all, I have used this flattener all the time since the purchase of it, and it does not work as it should and so even with 2 flatteners in this scope it still pretty rubbish, poor design scope and useless with modern small pixel cameras…
@@Astro_Shed- Thanks for the update. That is not my experience with that same equipment. Possibly the scope was misaligned in some way? But I understand and respect your experience, of course. Clear skies and best regards.
Becouse the Taka is a bum bum.
Great scope, junk parts.
i think astrophotographers cook meth in their spare time....how else do they afford all this shit?
Thanks for the comment, 😂😂 yea maybe, I certainly won’t be buying another Tak anytime soon…👍🏻
Skywaycher focuser is absolutely junk.
@@shorty1474 thanks for your comment but I disagree , mine is very good but maybe not all the same 👍
Get a TSA-120 FT I have the ASI 2600 it’s perfect
Wouldn't be a solution for him, because you would be oversampling, but agree, brilliant scope ;-)