TSA-102s vs FSQ-106

Hi
Has anyone field-compared the new TSA-102S vs the FSQ-106 in terms of image contrast and high power sharpness for VISUAL use ?
I am only interested in the VISUAL aspect of these fine scopes.
Thank you
Jay

Jay,

I agree with Wei-Hao on this. I have the TSA102 and a good friend has the FSQ-106. I also have a TOA-130 and have owned several other Tak scopes. The FSQ106 is the superior imaging scope with its wide, flat field, faster F-ratio and larger focuser. It will also give you wonderful wide field views of star clusters, large nebulae and star fields.

However, the TSA102 is much less expensive, requires no extender-Q and gives high contrast views. IMO, it is the superior scope for high power viewing, especially for planetary use. It also gives a large focusing range and all my eyepieces come to focus without changing adapters. As far as contrast is concerned, I doubt that anyone could discern much difference in an FSQ and a TSA (or for that matter a TOA) at the eyepiece. Each scope has excellent contrast which is almost entirely a product of excellent figuring which each Tak scope possesses.

To me, it is a simple matter. If you are interested primarily in imaging with some visual use, go with the FSQ. It is IMO the best 4" imaging platform ever made. If you are interested in primarily visual with some imaging, go with the TSA102. It is lighter, requires no extender-Q for high power, eyepiece friendly, color free and is easily adaptable for imaging when desired.

I presently own a TSA102 and once owned a FSQ106N. The FSQ106N requires the ext-Q to achieve the higher powers required for meaningful planetary observations. That means more glass in the light path, which isn't really what you wanna do. The FSQ106N is already operating with 8 air to glass surfaces. Putting more in the way cannot possibly fare well for the image...if even marginally.

The TSA102, at f8 and perfectly color corrected, would in my opinion be better planetary scope. If I remember correctly, even Al Nagler has admitted the TV102 (doublet) would provide better contrast than the 4 element TV101 (or was that NP101?).

Just my 2 cents.

-Evan

The $1,000 premium for the FSQ is all related to photographic qualities (flat field, extra glass to correct color on a faster scope, etc).

Both are great scopes and it is unlikely that you would ever notice any advantage between them.

$1,000 would buy some great eyepieces and accessories for planetary viewing.

My $0.02 priced for value.

Regards,

Ron

Great input guys. As I wrote in my initial thread, I want a visual scope. I imaged for 10 years and recently sold both my AP's. Now I just wanna relax with a sharp, contrasty, lightweight and portable scope. The TSA-102s makes sense to me.
Thanks to all of ya!
Jay