Novosibirsk Tal 100R


 Info  Votes  Messages  More Stats  Up One Level
Switch to Subject View
Post Message



Page 1 of 1


Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.72.101
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.53.212)
In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.72.101) (Original Vote)
Date: 06/06/2002 01:23:38 am PDT
>Our experience was dreadful. The rings were pot metal and one broken, the tube was of some cheap steel and way too heavy, paint job terrible, the end cap with R&P had fallen off due to poor threads and when we tried to rethread it we could not so simpyl let the thing pop on as it would wobbling, the diagonal was rotating on its tube and useless, I guess therewas a mirror inside thatdiag but it had so muchdiust and crap on it you could barely see light off it,
>thefinder etc were all made of some cheap pot metal, and Isont even bother with the mount because no aspect of it was even remotely acceptable. I did try the slow motions and they turned like my grandmother's knees - you culd hear metal crunching on ??. The legs were very cheap - crap really. We finally got the ota on a G11 mount to try it out and because of
>the wobbling end cap with R&P and wobbling diag all I saw was a very distorted star image. Thatw as a new experience for me!
>I pulled thediag out onyl to discover these damned things screw on so could not even get an ep in the tube. I pakced this piece of junk back in the box and
>shipped it back the next day. Thank GOD we got ourt money back. Im sure some other "satisfied" customer has it, and thank God its not us!
>Its the worst telescope experience Ive had with a "new" scope ever.
>I wouldnt wish this piece of junk on my worst enemy. Sorry, but those are/were the facts.
>Obviously something was wrong since the rest of you rave about the Tal-100.
>I guess we got the only lemon made. Rating = 0 and thats a gift!

Where did you buy thid scope from. The Dealer should be ashamed at selling you obviously damaged goods.


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.72.101
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.53.212)
In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.53.212) (Original Message)
Date: 06/13/2002 12:07:17 am PDT
>>Our experience was dreadful. The rings were pot metal and one broken, the tube was of some cheap steel and way too heavy, paint job terrible, the end cap with R&P had fallen off due to poor threads and when we tried to rethread it we could not so simpyl let the thing pop on as it would wobbling, the diagonal was rotating on its tube and useless, I guess therewas a mirror inside thatdiag but it had so muchdiust and crap on it you could barely see light off it,
>>thefinder etc were all made of some cheap pot metal, and Isont even bother with the mount because no aspect of it was even remotely acceptable. I did try the slow motions and they turned like my grandmother's knees - you culd hear metal crunching on ??. The legs were very cheap - crap really. We finally got the ota on a G11 mount to try it out and because of
>>the wobbling end cap with R&P and wobbling diag all I saw was a very distorted star image. Thatw as a new experience for me!
>>I pulled thediag out onyl to discover these damned things screw on so could not even get an ep in the tube. I pakced this piece of junk back in the box and
>>shipped it back the next day. Thank GOD we got ourt money back. Im sure some other "satisfied" customer has it, and thank God its not us!
>>Its the worst telescope experience Ive had with a "new" scope ever.
>>I wouldnt wish this piece of junk on my worst enemy. Sorry, but those are/were the facts.
>>Obviously something was wrong since the rest of you rave about the Tal-100.
>>I guess we got the only lemon made. Rating = 0 and thats a gift!
>
>Where did you buy thid scope from. The Dealer should be ashamed at selling you obviously damaged goods.

I just can't understand your actions here. If the telescope was as damaged as you say, and the endcap fell off because the screws were useless then why even bother looking through it? And if it was in such a state why go to all the trouble of putting it on an expensive mount? Also if you have a 2,500 mount kicking around why are you buying a 250 telescope?


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Subject: TAL 100R
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.123.196)
Date: 07/21/2002 07:53:48 am PDT
I have had my scope Since December 2001. It came with a Tripod mount. The case it comes in is huge, but extremely useful in when storing the scope. This is not my first scope, it is my Fourth.


The style is simple, The tube is white enamel paint, all metal, not too heavy. The focuser is the week point. TAL's come with 1.5" E.P. (25mm,10mm) and they work great. Some of my other E.P. (University ortho's & Konigs, Meade 3000 series) do not reach focus,without a Barlow, and sometimes even with one. Not enough allowed forward focus movement.
The Diagonal was dirty on the inside, and had to be cleaned. It does not have the fit and finish of other main stream diagonals, but gave pleasing views. If you remove the diagonal. The scope can pick up a extra level of detail. Festoons and mutiple banding on Jupiter. Saturn also showed banding. All planetary views were sharp and contrasty. This from a Suburban neighborhood loaded with street lights.

You can detect some violet in the moon, but I was looking for it. Though some false color is present, it's neglegable and can go unnoticed, and is transparent to the viewing experiance . Other Achro I have looked through show much more false color. Not sure how this done at only F10. The mount can be balanced easily and once you get started can have hours of quality viewing.

The wooden tripod is furniture grade and very asthetic & fuctional. It is too short though, so viewing near Zeinth can be a pain. The motozied head is large and ugly, but easy to work and adjust. There is no Polar scope, so Polar alignment for long exposure photography is difficult.

It is my favorite scope. I gave my ETX to my friend so he could hassel with it. Like all TAL's, once setup, the instrument becomes transparent to your viewing of the night sky. No quirky focus nobs, and movements.

The scope is heavy by mass produced beginner scope standards, but it's awsome to use. Espically for $650!

The views are awsome. I can bearly detect violet in the moon.
It is transparent to the viewing experiance and goes unnoticed. Other Achro I have looked through show much more false color. Not sure how this done at only F10. The mount can be balanced easily and once you get started can have hours of quality viewing.


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.72.101
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.70.7)
In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.53.212) (Original Message)
Date: 09/20/2002 03:08:06 am PDT
>>>Our experience was dreadful. The rings were pot metal and one broken, the tube was of some cheap steel and way too heavy, paint job terrible, the end cap with R&P had fallen off due to poor threads and when we tried to rethread it we could not so simpyl let the thing pop on as it would wobbling, the diagonal was rotating on its tube and useless, I guess therewas a mirror inside thatdiag but it had so muchdiust and crap on it you could barely see light off it,
>>>thefinder etc were all made of some cheap pot metal, and Isont even bother with the mount because no aspect of it was even remotely acceptable. I did try the slow motions and they turned like my grandmother's knees - you culd hear metal crunching on ??. The legs were very cheap - crap really. We finally got the ota on a G11 mount to try it out and because of
>>>the wobbling end cap with R&P and wobbling diag all I saw was a very distorted star image. Thatw as a new experience for me!
>>>I pulled thediag out onyl to discover these damned things screw on so could not even get an ep in the tube. I pakced this piece of junk back in the box and
>>>shipped it back the next day. Thank GOD we got ourt money back. Im sure some other "satisfied" customer has it, and thank God its not us!
>>>Its the worst telescope experience Ive had with a "new" scope ever.
>>>I wouldnt wish this piece of junk on my worst enemy. Sorry, but those are/were the facts.
>>>Obviously something was wrong since the rest of you rave about the Tal-100.
>>>I guess we got the only lemon made. Rating = 0 and thats a gift!
>>
I'm very surprised at your findings.
I agree that some components could be better made, but that would add to the cost. The Tal-100R I have was not bought new and had delivered at least a year of work in the field for its previous owner. In view of this, I have to say that the components such as the finder, focuser and mounting rings etc while not as 'pretty' as those from major companies like Meade, Tele Vue and Synta etc, are nonetheless perfectly adquate for the task.
All of the tube rings I've ever seen (with the exception of some expensive hand made ones) have been light metal castings. The TAL is no different. My only grouse with the rings is the lack of any sort of locating points to stop the fixings from moving .

The OTA although robust is not overly heavy, something I was surprised at. You obviously think otherwise.
The mount (after more than a years service for its previous owner) is silky smooth. Ditto the focuser. Everything is well fitted and functional if a little bit utilitarian. I have no problem with that because it works well and has excellent optics.

I have used better star diagonals but the one supplied is no worse than I'd expect for price range this telescope is in.
One thing I particularly like about the diagonal is the compression fixing which holds eyepieces securely while not marking or damaging them in any way.

The solid birch legs my scope came with are of excellent quality and infinitely better than the hollow aluminium ones supplied with many scopes costing far more than the TAL.
The mount is well made and operates smoothly while the solid wood legs damp vibrations far faster than any aluminium legs I've used. In fact, I also use the mount and legs with my Stellarvue AT1010 short tube *because* it is so good.

The eyepieces supplied 10&25mm Plossl type are of better quality than any I've seen supplied with almost any other scope of similar cost.

My year plus old TAL-100R has one small scratch on the tube assembly, put there by myself accidentally. Nothing has ever broken or become sloppy in use and I can honestly say that I rate this telescope as excellent value for money.

I feel that the telescope you bought was very second-hand and previously owned by someone with no respect for delicate optical equipment. I presume that you would have seen what you were buying so it surprises me greatly that you bought an item in such obvious shoddy condition.
I can assure you that every factory supplied TAL I've seen has been in excellent condition. What you describe is certainly not representative of what I've come to expect from the Novisibirsk Instrument Making plant.

Allan Copland.
acopland@reidkerr.ac.uk


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Subject: TAL scope
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.168.183)
Date: 02/15/2003 03:28:58 pm PDT
A friend gave it to me? And I gave it to another friend. Its ugly! Everything is ugly about it. The lens is only slightly better than a Syntra. Oh yes! My friend gave it to his girlfriend...now his former girlfriend...I guess she'll keep it as a parting souvenir...


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Subject: Moved Message
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.14.67)
Date: 08/18/2003 10:17:24 am PDT
Does anyone explain how is done the colimation of the mirror diagonal?
where can be found a tube extension to use the scope without the mirror since the focus travel is short?


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Subject: Tal 100R
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.192.4)
Date: 02/19/2005 01:35:26 pm PDT
I don't know what that man is moaning about ref:the Tal! I own one and find that the object lens is absolutely fabulous when you consider thet it is an achcromat and only cost me £190 (uk) $100!!! For a start it is built like Russian T34 tank and the wooden stand is way above your average cheap telescope offering in stability and ruggedness. I once had the Tal up to over 800x on the moon and I could still make out the craters!! It was only limited by the 100mm aperture. I am sure that if this was 150mm it would outperform anything .\i made a wire mesh cap for observing the planets and fitted with filters you can see a lot of planetary detail. It splits binaries beautifully but of course its deep space abilities are limites by the aperture. On the Moon this telescope comes into its own and will take anything you can ask of it. The set of Tal plossels that I bought are very good and certainly dont disgrace that wonderful object lens. all in all i have really enjoyed using this telescope and would really love to own a Tal 150mm refractor if only such a thing existed!! A pity because at these prices it would be world beater! cheers Dave,England


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Page 1 of 1

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