TAK Epsilon collimation

Hello everyone,

For permanent setup, how often do you need to collimate the Epsilon series telescopes (E-160 or E-180)? And how suitable it will be for unattended remote operations that require less maintenance; what I like about Epsilon is the larger and faster apertures they have.

Hi,

For permanently installed setup, I don’t see any reasons to redo the collimation of your epsilons once properly collimated. Like the polar alignment, once it’s done, no need to play with it again…

As for your second question, I will have soon my epsilon 160ed fully operated remotely! I don’t see any arguments against it. What you need is reliability while controlling your gear remotely. Make sure to have the proper equipment though.

Some people on this forum are a bit reluctant to have such a scope controlled remotely (don’t know why). To me, it boils down like having a refractor controlled remotely. Yes, a refractor is maybe more convenient (no collimation, for instance). But at the end of the day, you can control remotely whatever scope you want provided you have the right equipment.

Good luck in your project !

CS,
Aygen

Thank you for your answers; currently, I don't own Epsilon, but I plan to have a remote system soon. I'm thinking between FSQ-106 and TOA-130, but recently I started to consider Epsilon too; I'm not familiar with any reflector telescope, and I'm concerned that Epsilon will require a lot of recollimation, but with your answer, you made it clear to me that it's a more stable system.

All valid points. Until recently, I was operating remotely a TOA 130 which worked seamlessly.

You will enjoy it whatever the scope you chose 😂 - all excellent scopes.

Best,
Aygen

Yes, you are right, you can't get wrong with any of them, and good luck with your Epsilon

Best,
Abdullah

It's very rigid. I carry the scope outside every time I set up and never lose collimation. Obviously you do need to be careful not to accidentally press on the primary mirror.

The only hard part is doing an initial collimation because the Takahashi manual is so hard to understand. I believe there might be a simplified tutorial somewhere on here.

It's very rigid. I carry the scope outside every time I set up and never lose collimation. Obviously you do need to be careful not to accidentally press on the primary mirror.

The only hard part is doing an initial collimation because the Takahashi manual is so hard to understand. I believe there might be a simplified tutorial somewhere on here.

*** Thank you for your input, glad to hear that it's rigid with a solid structure that can hold the collimation ***

I collimated my e160ed and put it in my backyard observatory. Never needed to touch it in about a year. Even handling it for maintenance and cleaning it holds collimation. Very solid setup.

Chris White- Overcast Observatory:
I collimated my e160ed and put it in my backyard observatory. Never needed to touch it in about a year. Even handling it for maintenance and cleaning it holds collimation. Very solid setup.

*** Thank you for sharing your experience, this is what I expected from a premium design telescope, it must have a good mechanical quality ***

Abduallah Asiri:
Chris White- Overcast Observatory:
I collimated my e160ed and put it in my backyard observatory. Never needed to touch it in about a year. Even handling it for maintenance and cleaning it holds collimation. Very solid setup.

*** Thank you for sharing your experience, this is what I expected from a premium design telescope, it must have a good mechanical quality ***

The scope is very good. The focuser is not. Typical Tak... amazing optics but a mediocre focuser. Most of us are replacing the focuser with an Optec LEO. It's not cheap, but quality is excellent and it has a 0.08 micron step size, so critical focus is easy to achieve.

For a remote operation, definitely exchange the focuser. Mine develops play after a few weeks. The scope itself holds collimation extremely well, it even survived bringing it inside and disassembling the image train for filter cleaning, no need to collimate for a year. It’s even better than my CFF RC in that regard. With a better focuser, I wouldn‘t hesitate to use it remotely.

As a personal comment I do feel, though, that the FL of the TOA-130 is a bit more versatile - but I‘m quite far north, so many large Milky Way nebula aren‘t well accessible from here.

Fully with all what has been said with regards to the focuser: it's a MUST from my perspective to get the LEO should you want to remotely control your epsilon and on top get reliability and repeatability.

Chris White- Overcast Observatory:
The scope is very good. The focuser is not. Typical Tak... amazing optics but a mediocre focuser. Most of us are replacing the focuser with an Optec LEO. It's not cheap, but quality is excellent and it has a 0.08 micron step size, so critical focus is easy to achieve.

Yes, I agree with you, TAK produces the best optics but not the focusers, this is what I did when I received my FSQ85. I replaced the stock focuser with Moonlite Nightcrawler. Does the collimation change if I rotate the camera? Do the original tube rings and dovetail good, or must they be replaced?

Thank you

i should probably ask this in the thread i first saw this comment made but it seems relevant at this point..

What did the LEO owners make of tak americas claim in regards to the difficulty of focsuer alignment as as it would pertain to changing/swapping/replacing out the factory focuser unit..

Thanks

i should probably ask this in the thread i first saw this comment made but it seems relevant at this point..

What did the LEO owners make of tak americas claim in regards to the difficulty of focsuer alignment as as it would pertain to changing/swapping/replacing out the factory focuser unit..

Thanks

Easy peasy. Collimation of a newtonian includes aligning the optical axis with the drawtube. I don't know why tak would discourage a focuser swap. The secondary rotates and moves laterally just like any other newt. The tak collimation tools are excellent.

Torben van Hees:
For a remote operation, definitely exchange the focuser. Mine develops play after a few weeks. The scope itself holds collimation extremely well, it even survived bringing it inside and disassembling the image train for filter cleaning, no need to collimate for a year. It’s even better than my CFF RC in that regard. With a better focuser, I wouldn‘t hesitate to use it remotely.

As a personal comment I do feel, though, that the FL of the TOA-130 is a bit more versatile - but I‘m quite far north, so many large Milky Way nebula aren‘t well accessible from here.

When I started to think about a remote system TOA-130 was my first choice; with a full frame, I can get enough FOV at 700m focal length, which offers a little more resolution compared to 530m (FSQ106 or E-160ed), but recently I started to consider E-160ed as a possible choice.

I have operated the TOA 130 remotely with a full frame for a year ! Very good scope. However, go ahead with the e-160ed should you a) want a faster scope b) bigger FOV.

What other upgrade should I consider alongside the focuser if I go with E-160ed? Also, I noticed that both Leo and Moonlite Crayford focusers designed for Epsilon don't have rotators integrated with the focuser, which I think will be necessary for framing objects remotely

Abduallah Asiri:
What other upgrade should I consider alongside the focuser if I go with E-160ed? Also, I noticed that both Leo and Moonlite Crayford focusers designed for Epsilon don't have rotators integrated with the focuser, which I think will be necessary for framing objects remotely

You don't need to upgrade anything else from my perspective. Also, with regards to the rotator - I see where you are coming from since I went through the same thinking - I don't think that you really need one. Why, because of the huge FOV. In addition to that, and given the F/ratio of the epsilon, you could do mosaic quite fast. That's my two cents about it.

I have operated the TOA 130 remotely with a full frame for a year ! Very good scope. However, go ahead with the e-160ed should you a) want a faster scope b) bigger FOV.

E-160 looks impressive, but I'm still leaning toward TOA-130, both will be an excellent choice

I just installed a Falcon Rotator on mine. I have no idea if it will be precise enough to maintain tilt, so I have a lot of testing to do on it but it will be great if it works. Especially for mosaicing northern targets, and just enabling my laziness with imaging in general.

Abduallah Asiri:
What other upgrade should I consider alongside the focuser if I go with E-160ed? Also, I noticed that both Leo and Moonlite Crayford focusers designed for Epsilon don't have rotators integrated with the focuser, which I think will be necessary for framing objects remotely

I believe it will be very challenging to get a rotator to work well at f/3.3 without introducing tilt. You’ll have to have an exceptionally flat image train for that. Also, there is quite little space to mount a rotator. But do check with Optec - I believe I read somewhere they got the Gemini to work in the E-160.

The rest of the telescope is built excellently. I saved a bit of money by going for third-party rings and dovetails instead of the Tak ones.

Chris White- Overcast Observatory:
I just installed a Falcon Rotator on mine. I have no idea if it will be precise enough to maintain tilt, so I have a lot of testing to do on it but it will be great if it works. Especially for mosaicing northern targets, and just enabling my laziness with imaging in general.

Cool, let us know once you can share anything.

Chris White- Overcast Observatory:
I just installed a Falcon Rotator on mine. I have no idea if it will be precise enough to maintain tilt, so I have a lot of testing to do on it but it will be great if it works. Especially for mosaicing northern targets, and just enabling my laziness with imaging in general.

Yes, very interested, too - I actually have a Pegasus here that I can’t attach to my RC because of the geometry of the image train with the OAG.

Abduallah Asiri:
What other upgrade should I consider alongside the focuser if I go with E-160ed? Also, I noticed that both Leo and Moonlite Crayford focusers designed for Epsilon don't have rotators integrated with the focuser, which I think will be necessary for framing objects remotely

You don't need to upgrade anything else from my perspective. Also, with regards to the rotator - I see where you are coming from since I went through the same thinking - I don't think that you really need one. Why, because of the huge FOV. In addition to that, and given the F/ratio of the epsilon, you could do mosaic quite fast. That's my two cents about it.

That's a good point. With E-160, I still have a big FOV; I checked different targets in telescopius, and I can see most targets can fit nicely

Related discussions