Choosing Between Sharpstar 13028HNT vs Takahashi Epsilon 130D

Hi AstroBin community,

I’m weighing two fast astrographs for deep-sky imaging with a ZWO ASI2600MC Pro (APS-C), and would love your insights:

* Sharpstar 13028HNT-AL — 130mm f/2.8 hyperbolic astrograph, wide field, aggressive speed

* Takahashi Epsilon 130D — 130mm f/3.3, acclaimed optics and premium build

I'm particularly interested in:

-Edge performance across the APS-C field

-Star shape consistency across wide-field emission targets

-Mechanical build and collimation durability over time, especially under transport or temperature changes

-Community experiences with initial collimation, including tools and tolerance to minor misalignments

-Imaging success with either scope (especially paired with ASI2600 or similar sensors)

-any examples, annotated images, or hands-on comparisons!

Thanks in advance for helping me decide

CS ,

Fernando

Hi Fernando,
I did own a Tak 180 for some time. The epsilon series takes great images. I have a few on my site here. As I am sure many have or will tell you, they are not easy to collimate. I am not sure about the latest versions, but traditionally they came with special collimation tools including an eyepiece with cross hairs. The collimation is weird because the secondary is offset a fair amount, but the tools did work. I had very good results with a 16200 ccd sensor which I think is a little larger than the 2600 but that sensor had 6 micron pixels. Makes a big difference. You are making a good choice going with an APS-C. I tried to use a full frame CMOS on mine and I had a major problems getting the collimation even close! The problem is the tiny pixels. Even though the collimation tools were telling me I was good, it was way off. It was just too sensitive to even slight miscollimation. Binning the sensor does help.
At least the older Taks did require fairly frequent recollimating, much more than say fast newtonians.

If you haven't thought of focusers yet, Optec has a Tak 130 package for their low profile Leo focuser. They work awesome! But they are kind of pricey https://optecinc.us/products/19740?variant=42150728532117

I don't have any Sharpstar experience but I am sure others will chime in.

HTH
Best,
Dave

tak all the way, no question about it. I have the tak epsilon 130d, a friend has the sharpstar 13028hnt. I had never had any issues with mine except the focuser (I had to glue the small screws holding the focus tube so it won't wobble). my friend with the sharpstar though, had collimation issues, focuser slipping issues, temperature issues (not cooling down fast enough), inner reflexions issues.

collimation wise, I've never had to do it on my tak, my friend has to do it regurarly on his sharpstar. they're both offset but the tak would be easy to collimate on daylight, pointed at a window, with the included tools.

my last two images, Cocoon and M13 are with the tak. I've used it with 2600 in the past, pinpoint stars corner to corner. not sure if the sharpstar can correct an aps-c field, never tried it.

build quality, there's no doubt about it. tak is very sturdy (shipped from Italy to Romania, collimation remained perfect). transported around, the same.

sharpstar, bought in Canada and personally flown to Romania by my friend, didn't hold its collimation. its quality definitely below takahashi's.

Dave & Telescope:
Dave & Telescope

Thanks for chiming in, Dave, I really appreciate you sharing your experience with the Epsilon 180 and its collimation quirks.

That offset secondary and hypersensitivity to tiny pixel sizes sounds brutal with full-frame CMOS…
reassuring to hear APS-C was a smoother ride. I’ll be using the ASI2600MC, so glad it’s a better match!

Interesting note on binning, it makes total sense that it would help tame the sensitivity and give some breathing room on star shape.

The Leo focuser package for the 130D looks promising too, love the low profile, even if the price point stings a bit.

I’m still curious how the Sharpstar handles mechanical tolerance and field flatness, especially across APS-C. Hopefully someone with hands-on experience can weigh in soon.

Thanks again for the insights,

Fernando

Flavius Andrei

Thanks for jumping in, Flavius
I really appreciate your head-to-head perspective between the Tak and Sharpstar.

That’s exactly the kind of candid feedback I was hoping for. The fact that your Tak held perfect collimation through international shipping is seriously impressive.
The glued screw fix on the focuser is good to know, I’ll definitely check that when mine arrives.

Your friend’s Sharpstar sounds like it was battling on multiple fronts: collimation drift, thermal settling, reflections… yikes. I’ve read mixed reviews on build consistency, but your direct comparison really brings it into focus.

Great to hear the Tak pairs cleanly with the ASI2600 and delivers corner-to-corner stars. That’s a big box ticked for me.

Still curious how the Sharpstar handles APS-C in optimal conditions, but with your feedback and Dave’s experience, the Tak’s definitely pulling ahead.

Thanks again for taking the time
super helpful insights.

Fernando

I have tested Sharpstar 15028HNT and Epsilon 130. Epsilon 130 is better built than the Sharpstar HNT.
I didn’t like the focuser on either scopes. With Epsilon you have couple of aftermarket focuser choices available.

OCAL collimator was essential for me to get somewhat acceptable results. I couldn’t be successful with the Tak Collimation tools.

Deepan Vishal:
Deepan Vishal

Thanks Deepan
I really appreciate you weighing in with a direct comparison.

Your experience with both scopes is super valuable, especially hearing you weren't satisfied with either stock focuser.
I’ve seen similar notes across user threads, so I’ll definitely factor aftermarket options into the budget.

Interesting that the OCAL collimator gave better results than the native Tak tools, I was under the impression the Tak kit was fairly robust, but clearly mileage varies depending on tolerances and technique. Did you find OCAL helped nail the secondary offset more precisely, or was it just better at visualizing tilt across the field?

Thanks again for jumping in
really helpful perspective.

Fernando

I’ve got a 15028HNT-AL. I have it paired with an ASI6200MC. I have no doubt that the tak is a better scope but I’m extremely happy with the Sharpstar.

Backfocus has been fiddly. At the advertised 55mm there was pronounced coma and distortion in the star shapes. I’ve picked up an Askar backfocus adjuster and almost have a totally flat field with 55.6mm (I think it needs another .05-.1 mm).

Collimation hasn’t been bad. I got an OCAL collimator with the scope and it takes 15-20 minutes in the field to get really really close.

I’ve found the collimation to be fairly stable. My preferred dark sky site is a 180 mile drive. I collimated one night at a star party and hit the dark sky site the next night. After more than 200 miles of diving, the scope only needed a small touch up the next day

F. Londe:
Deepan Vishal:
Deepan Vishal

Thanks Deepan
I really appreciate you weighing in with a direct comparison.

Your experience with both scopes is super valuable, especially hearing you weren't satisfied with either stock focuser.
I’ve seen similar notes across user threads, so I’ll definitely factor aftermarket options into the budget.

Interesting that the OCAL collimator gave better results than the native Tak tools, I was under the impression the Tak kit was fairly robust, but clearly mileage varies depending on tolerances and technique. Did you find OCAL helped nail the secondary offset more precisely, or was it just better at visualizing tilt across the field?

Thanks again for jumping in
really helpful perspective.

Fernando

OCAL just did the same as Tak tools/Cheshire. Only difference is, I could do it bit more precisely with the circles and lines on my monitor.
Tak secondary has a dot, which is very helpful in alignment of secondary mirror (in all the axis) while collimating with OCAL.
Sharpstar wont have those dots, but OCAL will certainly help to identify the secondary offset.

My collimation skill is definitely not up to the levels of what a F2.8 or F3.3 system requires. And OCAL did help me to get acceptable stars.

Hope it helps!

masslessparticle

Thanks so much for chiming in, I really appreciate hearing from someone with hands-on time on the 15028HNT-AL!

Your ASI6200 pairing sounds like a great match for that focal length, and it’s encouraging to hear you’re getting near-flat performance.
That extra 0.6mm (or more) on backfocus makes all the difference, amazing how sensitive these systems are.

Good to know the OCAL workflow gets you dialed in reasonably fast and stays stable even with long drives in between.
That’s reassuring, especially compared to some of the horror stories I’ve read about collimation slipping in transit.

If you’re ever up for sharing a star field corner crop or a full frame with edge stars in view, I’d be curious to see what that near-flat field looks like with your ASI6200.
Definitely adds confidence to the Sharpstar’s real-world capability.

Thanks again for the detailed feedback
super helpful as I finalize this decision!

Fernando

Deepan Vishal:
Deepan Vishal

Deepan, thank you for the thoughtful follow-up!

That’s helpful context about OCAL, sounds like it wasn’t radically different in capability, but the on-screen overlays made a real difference in dialing things in more precisely.
Makes sense that the Tak’s secondary dot improved axis alignment too… it's always surprising how much a simple feature like that can streamline the process.

I'm with you on how demanding these ultra-fast systems are, f/2.8 and f/3.3 are pretty unforgiving.
Glad OCAL helped you get to acceptable stars even with those tight tolerances.

Appreciate you being candid about your collimation experience—it definitely helps set realistic expectations as I plan out my workflow.

Thanks again,

Fernando

Tak 100%. I live in Australia and bought mine and had it shipped from Austria! Collimation was perfect on arrival and has held since.

Collimation is not difficult either if you read the instructions. There is an extremely good amount of info on that process right here on AB - including a video of the procedure using an Ocal (which I can recommend).

The focuser on mine was not good and had some play - I replaced with the Optec Leo which is an incredibly expensive upgrade, but its been rock-solid since.

There is a very long thread on replacing the Epsilon focuser also here on AB if you do some searching.

Good luck!

D.

Here's a couple of takes from the Aberration Inspector tool in PixInsight. These are stacked images with color calibration and an unlinked stretch

The first is from first-light on the scope at 55mm backfocus. Notice the terrible coma. This also resulted in half flares around bright stars. There was also some trailing... it was really terrible

Here's my most recent image with 55.6mm of backfocus. The corner stars are way better. There's drastically less coma and there asymetrical flare is all but gone. You can still see some elongation toward the corners -- that's what's making me think it needs just a bit more backfocus!

Edit: I included the wrong image for the first-light example. It's corrected, now

masslessparticle

Thanks again, that’s incredibly helpful detail, and those Aberration Inspector comparisons really bring it to life!

The difference between 55.0 and 55.6 mm is striking. Amazing how just 0.6 mm can transform coma, flare, and symmetry across the corners.
I totally see why you’re chasing that final 0.05–0.1 mm now, it’s wild how sensitive these fast optics can be.

Your notes on stacking and unlinked stretch are appreciated too, it gives a clean look at the field behavior without overprocessing.

If you ever get a chance to test the final tweak on backfocus, I’d love to hear if that last bit locks in the stars.
Either way, your setup with the ASI6200 is proving that the Sharpstar can deliver a remarkably flat field when tuned right.

Really appreciate the share
it’s giving me a lot more confidence heading into the build!

Fernando

Dunk:
Dunk, thanks so much for sharing your experience, I really helpful to hear your Tak was collimated perfectly on arrival and has held steady since. That's pretty incredible, especially considering that shipping journey from Austria to Australia!

Noted on the stock focuser, it seems to be a common weak spot, but the Leo upgrade clearly takes it to a different level.
Pricey, yes, but I appreciate knowing it’s rock-solid once installed.

Thanks again for the insights.

Fernando

F. Londe:
masslessparticle

Thanks again, that’s incredibly helpful detail, and those Aberration Inspector comparisons really bring it to life!

The difference between 55.0 and 55.6 mm is striking. Amazing how just 0.6 mm can transform coma, flare, and symmetry across the corners.
I totally see why you’re chasing that final 0.05–0.1 mm now, it’s wild how sensitive these fast optics can be.

Your notes on stacking and unlinked stretch are appreciated too, it gives a clean look at the field behavior without overprocessing.

If you ever get a chance to test the final tweak on backfocus, I’d love to hear if that last bit locks in the stars.
Either way, your setup with the ASI6200 is proving that the Sharpstar can deliver a remarkably flat field when tuned right.

Really appreciate the share
it’s giving me a lot more confidence heading into the build!

Fernando

Sure thing! I've edited the post because I shared the wrong image the first time 🤦. There's still an interesting difference!

Just remember that the Sharpstar 13028HNT-AL is fresh off the press so you might have to wait for it to get into circulation to get a good idea on how it fares. I am going to assume most people will be basing their experience off the previous version.

Just remember that the Sharpstar 13028HNT-AL is fresh off the press so you might have to wait for it to get into circulation to get a good idea how how it fares. I am going to assume most people will be basing their experience off the previous version.

SemiPro Thanks for the reminder, great point about the 13028HNT-AL being fresh off the line.
I hadn’t considered how much of the feedback might still be based on the previous version.
That definitely adds some nuance to the comparison, especially with mechanical tweaks or optical refinements that may not be widely documented yet.

Really appreciate

Fernando

I have the 150 Sharpstar, so I can't directly answer your question, but I assume the 130HNT is similar. Collimation and bf is definitely a skill that needs honing if you are using it. I don't shoot full frame specifically because of the terror of dealing with tilt and such with fast optics. I have a 150mm Carbonstar and the 150HNT holds collimation much better than it. I use Ocal or a laser if it's a 4/3 or smaller sensor to collimate.

Get a good 6" f/4, add a Nexus 0.75 reducer/corrector and you have 2 scopes in one and blazing fast too.

I have the 150 Sharpstar, so I can't directly answer your question, but I assume the 130HNT is similar. Collimation and bf is definitely a skill that needs honing if you are using it. I don't shoot full frame specifically because of the terror of dealing with tilt and such with fast optics. I have a 150mm Carbonstar and the 150HNT holds collimation much better than it. I use Ocal or a laser if it's a 4/3 or smaller sensor to collimate.

ScottF, thanks for weighing in, I really appreciate your insight. It's helpful to hear you've had solid collimation stability with the 150HNT compared to the Carbonstar.
That definitely adds confidence in the Sharpstar's mechanical consistency, at least within that product line.

Totally agree that collimation and backfocus tuning are skills you have to grow into with fast optics, I’m finding that out firsthand with this decision process!
Good to know that OCAL or a laser worked well for you on smaller sensors, though I imagine even with APS-C, the tolerances are still razor-thin.

Thanks again for sharing your experience. It’s always reassuring to hear how others have adapted their workflow to tame these fast scopes.
Appreciate the heads-up!

Fernando

andrea tasselli:
te
Quote this post in your reply. If you select text, only the selection will be quoted.

Andrea, thanks for the creative suggestion. A well-collimated 6" f/4 paired with the Nexus reducer/corrector does sound like a versatile setup, having essentially two scopes in one is tempting, especially when chasing fast acquisition speeds.

I’ll definitely take a closer look at that configuration.
The modularity and potential cost-efficiency are compelling, though I’m still leaning toward a native fast astrograph for simplicity and field uniformity, especially across APS-C with minimal tweaking.

Appreciate the outside-the-box thinking, it’s always valuable to widen the lens (pun intended!) during gear decisions.

Thanks again

Fernando

Deepan Vishal:
OCAL collimator was essential for me to get somewhat acceptable results.

Agree on the OCAL. The Tak tools got me "close enough" but the OCAL was easier and got me dead on.

Thanks, Bill,
OCAL made it much easier to dial things in precisely. Appreciate the confirmation!

Fernando

Dave & Telescope:
Hi Fernando,
I did own a Tak 180 for some time. The epsilon series takes great images. I have a few on my site here. As I am sure many have or will tell you, they are not easy to collimate. I am not sure about the latest versions, but traditionally they came with special collimation tools including an eyepiece with cross hairs. The collimation is weird because the secondary is offset a fair amount, but the tools did work. I had very good results with a 16200 ccd sensor which I think is a little larger than the 2600 but that sensor had 6 micron pixels. Makes a big difference. You are making a good choice going with an APS-C. I tried to use a full frame CMOS on mine and I had a major problems getting the collimation even close! The problem is the tiny pixels. Even though the collimation tools were telling me I was good, it was way off. It was just too sensitive to even slight miscollimation. Binning the sensor does help.
At least the older Taks did require fairly frequent recollimating, much more than say fast newtonians.

If you haven't thought of focusers yet, Optec has a Tak 130 package for their low profile Leo focuser. They work awesome! But they are kind of pricey https://optecinc.us/products/19740?variant=42150728532117

I don't have any Sharpstar experience but I am sure others will chime in.

HTH
Best,
Dave

You absolutely do not need any special took to collimate an epsilon. Maybe takahashi has convinced people of this but it is just a newtonian by design. Nothing special about it. Mine has been in texas since september last year and looks the same as they day they installed it and it was not even collimated after it shipped from Canada to Texas. Doesnt need it either.

Choosing Between Sharpstar 13028HNT vs Takahashi Epsilon 130D – Advice Wanted