Anyone use a Vixen ED115S and can compare it to a quality 4" scope - say a Tak FS-102? I am just wondering what 15mm buys at this general size range? Do you need to go past 130mm or so to make a dramatic difference? I am thinking strictly visual and primarily for planetary and lunar observations.
Vixen ED115S or quality 4" refractor?
Started by Dragonophile, 07/06/2009 01:40AM
Posted 07/06/2009 01:40AM
Opening Post
Posted 07/06/2009 02:05PM
#1
Jackie,
I owned a Vixen 115EDS last year. I eventually sold it when I got a larger refractor. My take was that it was an excellent telescope.
Only issue I noted was a slight shift of the color correction so that the red fell out a bit on bright yellow or red objects. Very
subtle, but there. Violet correction was such that I could see no discernible color. Overall, it gave excellent planetary and lunar
performance. I think the extra aperture would give an advantage over a Tak FS-102. Enough to be noticed. My point of comparison is
a TMB100/800 I own with an excellent test report from LZOS. The TMB has better color correction, but the extra 15mm gives the Vixen
a small advantage on planets. Going up to 130mm would make for a difference that would be clearly noted. A good used Tak FS128
might be a good choice. They come up for sale from time to time. There you would have a clear improvement over the 4", enough to
be worth the upgrade. Even though the 115EDS would show a noticed improvement over the 4", I think the extra inch would be enough
to make it worthwhile, with the 15mm possibly making you wish you had gone further.
The one advantage to the Vixen I liked was weight. It only weighs 9.7 lbs, making it useable on a relatively lightweight alt-az
mount. It made for a nice grab and go setup with my Unistar Deluxe mount. Now if portability and weight are issues, that could
make the 115EDS more desirable. I also understand that they now have a dual-speed focuser option on these scopes they did not have
previously.
Tom
I owned a Vixen 115EDS last year. I eventually sold it when I got a larger refractor. My take was that it was an excellent telescope.
Only issue I noted was a slight shift of the color correction so that the red fell out a bit on bright yellow or red objects. Very
subtle, but there. Violet correction was such that I could see no discernible color. Overall, it gave excellent planetary and lunar
performance. I think the extra aperture would give an advantage over a Tak FS-102. Enough to be noticed. My point of comparison is
a TMB100/800 I own with an excellent test report from LZOS. The TMB has better color correction, but the extra 15mm gives the Vixen
a small advantage on planets. Going up to 130mm would make for a difference that would be clearly noted. A good used Tak FS128
might be a good choice. They come up for sale from time to time. There you would have a clear improvement over the 4", enough to
be worth the upgrade. Even though the 115EDS would show a noticed improvement over the 4", I think the extra inch would be enough
to make it worthwhile, with the 15mm possibly making you wish you had gone further.
The one advantage to the Vixen I liked was weight. It only weighs 9.7 lbs, making it useable on a relatively lightweight alt-az
mount. It made for a nice grab and go setup with my Unistar Deluxe mount. Now if portability and weight are issues, that could
make the 115EDS more desirable. I also understand that they now have a dual-speed focuser option on these scopes they did not have
previously.
Tom
Posted 07/08/2009 10:29PM
#2
Vixen ED glass is great but the TAk flourite elements are amazing.Anyone that looked through my FS78 always said wow. Me included.
My Vixen ED103S focuser sagged and the the focuser on my Taks did not.
Because of these two facts, I would guess that the only time the Vixen 115 would be superior to a FS102 would be at very high magnification.
My Vixen ED103S focuser sagged and the the focuser on my Taks did not.
Because of these two facts, I would guess that the only time the Vixen 115 would be superior to a FS102 would be at very high magnification.
Funding Member
