Tasco 40-114675


 Info  Votes  Messages  More Stats  Up One Level
Vote
Page 1 of 1

Tasco 40-114675
not a bad scope for the money

Overall Rating: 7
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.197.192)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=41000


Tasco 40-114675
Not a bad starter

Overall Rating: 7
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.57.55)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=41001


Tasco 40-114675
The scope seems to be made well tasco has gone to a good eq mount that is very stable. I shelved the eyepieces that came with it for some higher quality and the view is everything I expected. The mirrors are of sufficiant quality so with the new eyepiece it stand up against any 114mm by 900mm

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.201.194)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=41002


Tasco 40-114675
Great deal as a starter scope. Easy to use, provides good images. Keeps me interested.

Overall Rating: 8
Optics:7 Mount:7 Ease of Use:5 Value:8
Weight: 3 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.104.156)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=64989


Tasco 40-114675
My first telescope, I am very satisfied. Optics are fine. In fact far better than most would expect. Mount is a little unstable, but once you get used to it, it is fine. Easy to use and set up. A very good value for the money.

Overall Rating: 7
Optics:7 Mount:6 Ease of Use:7 Value:8
Weight: 10 (Trustworthy Vote)
Date:
By: nafa
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=63295


Tasco 40-114675

Tasco 4.5" f/8 Luminova Reflector, Model # 40-114675
Purchased from the Telescope Warehouse, Price $75.00, plus $25.00 shipping.

OK, you know that it's a Tasco because it promises "675 X" right there on the box and it has those clunky plastic end pieces, but there's a lot more to this scope than advertising hype and silly looking cosmetics. I was looking for decent options for a freind who wanted to upgrade to something better and larger than his old 2.4" refractor, and Bill Vorce at Telescope Warehouse suggested that I look at this Tasco 4.5" Newtonian reflector. "It has great optics," he said. "A Tasco?" I said, "well, maybe..."

OPTICS:

As it turns out, Bill was right, and this one does have great optics. After basic collimation with a Cheshire eyepiece, the images in the unit that I purchased are as good as any 4.5" f/8 that I have ever used -- far, far better than most of the shoddy, run of the mill 4.5" optic sets that have been coming out of China of late. While I have not bench tested the primary, at high magnification, star images are almost perfect, with clean, well defined Airy discs. At 130X, the two pairs of the "Double Double" in Lyra, for example, are each cleanly separated with black space inbetween. This is one of the very few "department store" telescopes out there that is really "diffraction limited."

The included 1.25" format eyepieces (a 20 mm Huygenian, 12 mm Ramsden, 6 mm Huygenian, and a single element, 3X Barlow) are, of course, only marginally useful, but they do provide a hint of what is possible. An humble 28 mm RKE turns this telescope into an extraordinary star finding machine [WHY, exactly, can't Tasco at least include a good 25 mm Kellner?!], and good Orthos (and a good Barlow) will give killer views of the moon and planets.

Mars, in particular, was the target of a recent side-by-side test of the Luminova and a very good quality 90 x 1000 mm refractor (using high quality Orthoscopic eyepieces and a Goodwin Barlow). Not surprisingly, both instruments gave very good images, showing lots of surface detail, with the reflector having better color correction (as would be expected) and the refractor slightly better contrast -- probably due to the obstruction of the Luminova's stalk-mounted diagonal mirror.

As an aside, the included 5 x 24 mm imitation finder is the usual worse-than-useless plastic toy that Tasco, et al., have been inflicting on their department store telescopes for years. A decent quality 6 x 30 finder will bolt right on, fortunately. Also, the clunky-looking black plastic end pieces -- put on for God knows what possible purpose -- will come right off of the nicely-finished gold tube. Do this immediately.

MOUNTING AND EASE OF USE:

As good as the Luminova's optics may be, the supplied equatorial mount is really a bit undersized for the OTA. Originally supplied with their short, "Galaxsee" series telescopes, the mounting really isn't up to the job of supporting the longer and heavier f/8 OTA. Although the telescope is easy enough to move around the sky, and the adjustable tube rings (that allow the eyepiece to be rotated to a comfortable viewing angle) and slow motion controls work well enough, there is just too much vibration with this setup for higher power work. By the time that the shaking dies down, the object has moved to the edge of the field, and you have to recenter again -- starting up yet another round of image blur. A clock drive, of course would cure much of this problem, but the "ideal" solution is to put the OTA on a larger mount.

OVERALL VALUE:

The undersized EQ mounting not withstanding, this version of the classic 4.5" reflector is an outstanding bargain for the price. If you are looking for a small telescope that will actually deliver on most of what is promised in the advertising, this is the one. Even if you spend another $100.00 on several better eyepieces and a decent 6 x 30 finder -- highly recommended! -- you will still be way ahead of the game. Sadly, most people will go on buying the brand "M" 4.5" plastic junkscopes at their neighborhood Sprawl-Marts, but don't be fooled. This one works!

Overall Rating: 8
Optics:9 Mount:4 Ease of Use:6 Value:10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.208.9)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=279989


Tasco 40-114675
Tasco-bashing seems rather popular in our hobby, but those who engage in it may not have looked through one, or maybe the ones they looked through were lemons. Mine is definitely not (at least not the OTA). It takes up to 300 power quite well, especially in good seeing. Even at only 150X, Jupiter's bands are clearly visible, Cassini's is a neat dark line, and Venus's clouds show detail with a blue filter.
Even at 100X, M-42 is a pleasing sight: the Trapezium resolved into four sharp points of light with blue-and-green nebulosity clearly visible (this in urban light pollution). Epsilon Lyrae splits into its four constituent stars at 225X, even better at 300. Clusters such as M-45, M-44, M-35, all show up nicely; with a blue filter, the sky looks darker, important with a low-power EP.
And the Moon? The rille running down the middle of Valles Alpes is supposed to be visible only with apertures of 6 inches or more. Last night, at 300x with a Celestron yellow filter, I saw it quite clearly, and I have to wear glasses thicker than primary mirrors most of the time. Also, fine details within crater rims are easy to see, and the shadows of lunar mountains are sharp. All this from a scope that is supposed to be "crap."
The mount, however, is not equal to the OTA. CG-4, EQ-1, who knows the specific number. What I do know is that it takes several seconds to damp out even minor vibrations, and even changing the focus can throw it off. I'd thought about getting a sturdier mount, but for what the mount alone costs, I can get a bigger scope with a better mount. I've thought a lot about the Skywatcher 130P with the EQ-3. Anyone out there who uses this scope, especially on the Moon and planets? Please no GO-TO. No computer database can take the place of the knowledge of the sky gained through years of studying star charts and looking for objects. No substitute for what I call "the astronomy equivalent of ground school."
Overall, the 114675 is a decent OTA on an inadequate mount. I'm amazed at what a scope too often derided as "crap" can show even under heavy light pollution. I can just imagine what it can show under dark sky!

Michael P. Graham
ibs4mpg@infosel.net.mx
Guadalajara, Mexico

Overall Rating: 8
Optics:8 Mount:6 Ease of Use:8 Value:9
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.156.137)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=403339


Tasco 40-114675
they used to make fantastic rifle scopes
(and I still use them) but their Telescopes are bare bones .. The mounts are CHEAP and lousy..

Overall Rating: 4
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.60.189)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=407087


Tasco 40-114675
Someone lent me one of these, I think Tasco put shaving mirrors in them. And the eyepieces came out of a Christmas cracker. Sorry I know I shouldn't knock Tasco for turning out JUNK.

Overall Rating: 2
Optics:1 Mount:1 Ease of Use:6 Value:1
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.187.193)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=594835


Tasco 40-114675
A breakthrough in technology, Tasco managed to build a telescope around someone's old shaving mirror. Still, the scope is far from useless - keep one at your bedside for home defence, instead of a baseball bat.

Overall Rating: 1
Optics:1 Mount:1 Ease of Use:1 Value:1
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.187.193)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=594836


Tasco 40-114675
Got this telescope as a retirement gift, when I retired from Verizon. The directions for assembly are totally inadequate. I have about a dozen left over pieces, with little idea of how or where they are supposed to fit onto the overall item. I've tried to use this item in the partially assembled state that it's in, and trying to view a full moon is like looking at a 100 watt light bulb from a foot away. I've spoken to Bushnell, by phone, bit they did not return my last phone call, so I gave up until I had a chance, just recently, to try it out, with the above mentioned results. I don't know who's responsible-- Tasco, Bushnell, or Tharpe Robbins. So now what?

Overall Rating: 0
Optics:0 Mount:0 Ease of Use:0 Value:0
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.59.197)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=599827


Tasco 40-114675
Tasco Luminova 40-114675
Directions suck--incomplete and unclear. No customer service.
Overall: The directions for assembly are terribly ambiguous--supposedly covering 5 different models at once. I can't tell which instructions apply to my model and which ones don't, much of the time. I have about a dozen small pieces left over--lenses, etc.--and it's unclear which one(s) get put on next, or where, or with what other pieces. I tried looking at the full moon, with what I had put together, and it's obviously incomplete--it looks like I'm looking at an incandescent light bulb from a foot away. I spoke to customer service once, but they stopped calling me back.

Overall Rating: 0
Optics:0 Mount:0 Ease of Use:0 Value:0
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.124.253)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=600291


Tasco 40-114675
I think the quality in this telescope is very variable from one piece to another. Mine, is excellent. With decent seeing the image is very sharp even at 300x
-Eyepieces are awful, but I didnĀ“t expect much for its price.
-Mount is not robust (eq1) but is ok.

Overall Rating: 9
Optics:10 Mount:6 Ease of Use:10 Value:10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.5.88)
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=605205

Page 1 of 1

[Click Here to Login]
Don't have a login? Register!