Takahashi FS-102

Ratings:Top:Astronomy:Equipment Reviews:Telescope Reviews:Takahashi FS-102

 Info  Votes  Messages  More Stats  Up One Level
Vote
First Prev Page 2 of 4 Next Last

Takahashi FS-102
I want to give a fair an objective reveiw. I have a 102 on top of a 12" LX200. This is a very large setup. I previously had a TV85 as well as a Pronto and an AP. Compared to the TV the TAK is huge. Without diagonal it is about 33" long. I have Losmandy 5" rings on the 12". To get the TAK to fit I had to unscrew the focus knobs and insert the scope and then replace them. The TAK is 114mm normal tube diameter. The 5" rings are 125mm so it doesn't leave much room. The TAK dew shield is HUGE. It is overly large and in my opinion a little overdone. It screws off for access to the objective or cleaning. The lens cover is like a manhole cover and pushes into the dewshield with felt lining. Personally I like the TV screw-on cover better. The TAK cover also has a 2" screw out center for various use. The objective is gorgeous. It is VERY dark from the optical coatings. The focuser is very smooth and with a tension screw like the TV. I personally think the TV focuser is just as good but others may disagree. The overall styling is very bland. The focus knobs are blah and plain as is the light lime green paint on rear and the weird blue around the dew shield! On top of this TAK uses stickers to announce the presence of this fantastic optical instrument!! You would thing they could have come up with something a little better. The TV's definately has the styling edge. The TAK is very conservative (like most Japanese cars - I own an Acura TL. Go figure). Now... where the TAK makes up everything is in the viewing. I have done several star test and it is by far the single best refractor I have looked through. The inky dark backgrounds provide superb constrast to star clusters and double stars at high to medium powers. Low power views are also very dark and with a 31mm TV Nag I get 3.1 degree fov which is awesome on larger clusters. Planets are awesome. I recently saw a shadow transit on Jupiter (on a less than favorable night) better in the TAK than the 12" at approx. the same power. Color correction is perfect. I could go on and on about the views. As I said above optically this is the best available in this price range. Although, the appearance is somewhat bland the optical performance more than makes up for it. If you ask me this is what a scope is really about in the end. Because of this I gave it a 10.

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 5 (Veritable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=37969

Takahashi FS-102
I purchased the Tak FS-102 with EM-10 mount from a previous owner. I had read excellent reports about this telescope. They are all true. Usually I need to make small improvement to a telescope (a little flat black paint or light baffles or replace the focuser) but nothing needs to be done to this telescope. It is perfect. Not just the optics but also the mechanics. It is a joy to use. You just have to wait for our not so perfect atmosphere to settle down and clear up.
I did make one very minor improvement. The heavy duty lens cap came off too easily so I added a single layer of 3/4" wide black electical tape over the felt strip. It now fits quite snugly.

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=37970

Takahashi FS-102
If there's a better 4" refractor, I haven't seen it! Beautifully made, with fabulous optics that snap into focus. My 10" SCT doesn't come close when it comes to lunar observing. Mine is mounted on the new EM-200 Temma PC mount,(I live in Japan) and it deserves the same accolades. You can't possibly ask for more than what this combination offers. Superb, high contrast images on top of one of the most robust and accurate mounts available to amateurs.

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=37971

Takahashi FS-102
Awesome Telescope!!!!!! The EM10 mount is a rock and the motor tracks perfectly. COmpared to an AP Traveler you lose just a bit of performance but you get two years of extra viewing time. (AP waiting list is very long). Resolution was awesome on the moon and there was no color detected.

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=37972

Takahashi FS-102
Outstanding build quality. Focuser velvety smooth, dust cap like a man hole cover. The images are crisp, clear and absolutely stunning. One of the best purchases I have ever made. You won't be disappointed. Just about as good as an AP, but best part is, you don't have to wait forever to get your hands on one.

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=37973

Takahashi FS-102
Serious pride of ownership. I bought mine used (less than 2 months old) and put a Tak 6x30 finder on it for a total of around $2,000., and I am thrilled with the images and the mechanical quality. Even low in the sky the giant planets were gorgeous. Moon is very sharp and color-free (to my amateur eye)even with a UO 7mm ortho and a TV 2.5x Powermate. I had a very nice Vixen 102 f/9 ED but the move to the Tak was a noticeable step up. The focuser is much smoother than Vixen's. I use it on a GP mount with Sky Sensor 2000 and Ken Dauzat hinged rings. Highly recommended.

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=37974

Takahashi FS-102
Greetings All

Had a chance to view through one of these babies at a recent star party. Scope owner and I agreed optics corrected to about 1/6th wave with a bit of extra-focal "mushiness" apparent. (This is better than diffraction limited.) Had no trouble splitting a converging Gamma Virginis (3.6/3.7 - 1.3") cleanly at moderate magnification. Nice round airy disks apparent. Altogether, excellent pinpointy stars against velvety black fields. The Tak was doing everything my MK-67 was doing - but right out of the box - no tube currents... Later caught the eastern and western veils. Fit the entire Eastern Veil into a single 25X view. Well displayed with and without an OIII filter. (Tougher Western Veil required the filter in both our scopes under ULTM 5.5 visibility skies.) One very significant thing: Experiments with various scopes show that refractors are slightly superior to Newts and significantly superior to MCTs and SCTs in telescopic limiting magnitude. This 102mm scope held the 13th magnitude star east of M57's western ansae at 140X with mild-moderate aversion on a night when my 150mm MCT could just hold it direct. Thus the 102mm holds 12.5 mag stars - only .5 mags down from the 150mm with about 2/3rds the aperture. (A similarly apertured MCT or SCT would have done well to hold a star of magnitude 11.8 under the same circumstances. Such a scope would do well to catch an occasional glimpse of the 13th mag star when moving the eye rapidly across the field.)

Bottom line: There are a variety of scope types, manufacturers, models and apertures available. I personally would not trade a six inch scope of comparable optical quality for a 4 inch. However, if you are thinking of getting a scope and have 2-3K to spend the FS102 would be a fine investment.

Now let me send a message to scope manufacturers:

1. BUILD A 140MM semi-APO refractor (some slight color permitted to keep down costs).

2. CONSISTENTLY turn out an optic set that gives 1/6th wave 96% strehl ratio performance.

3. KEEP the focal length down to 1000mm so it remains portable and 30X views can be had with a 35mm ep for wide field sweeps. (The Eastern Veil is INCREDIBLE when it fits in the FOV.)

4. Put an adjustable iris on the end of the scope so aperture can be scaled back to match sky conditions - especially for planetary and double star use.

5. Sell the OTA with a 1.25" MATCHED diagonal for 2K (OK add on shipping, handling, and a test report for another $200.00.)

What the buyer gets for the money:

1. The equivalent deepsky magnitudinal reach of an 8" SCT (Mag 13.5 under 5.5 ULTM skies).

2. Ability to split a pair of 6th magnitude doubles down to .80 arc-seconds.

3. Complete resolution across the core of The Great Hercules cluster on a 8/10 -5.5 ULTM seeing night at 400X.

4. Effortless festoon detail in both the NEB and SEB of Jupiter.

5. Views of the Encke Gap in Saturn Ring C.

6. Starlike cores, expansive core regions, and flaring extensions of most of the Messier Galaxies on 5.5ULTM seeing nights. Beautiful edge-ons that cut like diamonds against a jet-black sky.

7. Airy disks with concentric diffraction rings on superb stability nights for all stars dimmer than magnitude 3.0. Pinpointy views of all stars dimmer than magnitude 7.

8. On a decent seeing night you will never have trouble distinguishing a 10 arc-second bluish planetary nebula for a star again...

9. On a dark, still night Trapezium members E & F plus an awesome wealth of nebular folds and tenuous rifts well away from the Great Nebula's core region.

10. The texture of space as you move the eye across the field of view.

Look, the manufacturer who can accomplish this will have endeared themselves as an organization who really cares about the amateur astronomy. This will in turn result in a great deal of prestige and, oh yes, some small profits. You will be loved and adulated, feted and showered with accolades.

Now Get Cracking!

Clear and Steady Skies to All

jeff barbour

on the web at:
http://www.ihwy.com/~barbour/jeff/astro/index.html

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=37975

Takahashi FS-102
Is a televue as good as a takahashi or astro-physics?

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=37976

Takahashi FS-102
In response to the above question. I can't speak for the AP Traveller, having never had the opportunity to try one, but on a direct comparison with the Tak FS102, Televue's Genesis model is not in the race. Don't get me wrong; it's an excellent unit, it's just that the Takahashi exhibits zero color fringing and pin-sharp image definition at magnifications where the Televue image is definitely starting to break down. It would be nice to see TeleVue upgrade their top model to apochromat status. I have absolutely no doubt that it would then give the others a real run for their money,as it's pretty close now at low magnifications. Their eyepieces are fantastic!

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=37977

Takahashi FS-102
To the above comment above the above comment. The big four refractor companies are Astro-physics takahashi televue and TMB.AP has tooooooo long of a wait, televue is not as good as the other three(don't get me wrong, televue is great)
, Takahashis show slight color if you train your eye to see it. Overall TMBs zero color Super ED triplets are the best. They dont have a long wait until you get over 7inches.

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=37978 

To the above comment, and now my comment: 

>>They dont have a long wait until you get over 7inches.<<

Oh yea, know anyone who has taken delievery of a TMB 80?  Perhaps two years isn't a long wait to you.  My hat is off to your patience.

>>Takahashis show slight color if you train your eye to see it.<<

Am I missing something here?  Why would I want to train my eye to see color that is not obviously seen and therefore not a bother?  How about I not train my eye and never notice it.
Takahashi FS-102
Just received my FS102 this weekend. Only had two nights with it so far but here goes...
The first thing that hits you when you see it, is it's size...For a 4" scope it's huge! Everything is meticuluosly engineered to a very high standard. The only plastic parts are the two covers for the finderscope.
Optically it's the best scope I've ever owed. Peering at the Cygnus starfield with a 22mm Panoptic was simply outstanding. Each star from edge to edge being perfectly circular, with some of the brighter ones showing diffraction rings.
I also have a chinese Synta 4" and can confirm (This is my first APO) that it really does make a difference, both in terms of how hard you can push the optics and in colour correction.
On the Messier objects I found that the images were sharper and of a higher contrast. Also when looking at the ring nebula I could take up the magnification a lot higher than the Chinese scope before the image became unviewable.
I also own a 10" LX200 and in terms of wow factor the 4" has it. The 10" produces brighter objects but is let down by its FoV and image quality. (Yes it is collimated!)
If I could only keep one scope, it would be the Tak, no questions asked. BTW: Anyone want to swap a 10" LX200 for a Tak EM10 mount.... :-)

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=37979

Takahashi FS-102
Excellent instrument! It needs an appropriate mount, at least GP-DX or GM-8.
Great versatility from visual to deep-sky shots. For those loving high resolution
and image quality over brightness, this is a great choice. And after all, if it is
true that f/10-f/6 big SCT usually deliver 50-micron stars on film, the 2-3 times
smaller star size from the f/8 Tak fills the gap in focal length providing the
same actual resolution... (all in a smaller instrument, more portable and less prone
to thermal instabilities)

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=37980

Takahashi FS-102
I had the chance to have this next to a TV101 and I feel this scope has better optics. we had the scopes corrected for FL differences by using EPs that would yield the same power

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=37982

Takahashi FS-102
... if you want to know what stars should look like through a telescope.

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=37983

Takahashi FS-102
Televue 102 or FS 102? Also, will FS102 work on a gibralter mnt.?

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=37984

Takahashi FS-102
Simply the best

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=37985

Takahashi FS-102
Built like a rock. the objective is a dark blue, almost black. Extremely well baffled. I have read that some color is noticeable with this scope, But I tried to find some and never did, across the limb of the moon, i didn't notice any color at all. Maybe some optical genius can notice it, but I never did, even when looking for it. Diffraction rings identitical on both sides of the focus. I barlowed my way up to about 400X on jupiter one clear night, without any image breakdown at all. Impressive!!. I believe I could have pushed it higher, but I didn't have the appropriate barlows/eyepieces to do it with, so I can't say how high the magnification can be pushed. Just for fun one day, I pointed this scope out my window toward a microwave tower that is about 2 miles away. I was able to see the bolts on the structure that hold it together!!, even though this structure is barely visible to the naked eye on a clear day. The image clarity of this telescope is simply outstanding.

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=37986

Takahashi FS-102
I love all telescopes and still own a 4" Tak, and it is a great scope...but the truth about performance has to be told...If I had to keep ONE scope it would be my EL12.5. Why, aperture wins. I believe that Scopes should be compared on a cost comparison, not strictly on like aperture. It's unfair to compare a $300 4" Newt to a $2900 4" refractor, even though many of them come pretty close in image quality. All my reflectors have handily beaten any 5" or less APO on planetary and deep sky detail. The only 2 saving graces for the smaller refractors is that they have quick cool down and can be used for extreme widefield use in excess of 3 degrees field of view. I owned 2 APs (Traveler and a 130) as well as 7 Taks (2 FS78, 3 FS 102s, and 2 FS128s), None even matched the performance of any reflector over 7-8" I owned regardless of make or manufacture, be it an SCT, Newtonian, or a MakNewt, whether on planets or deepsky. The price/performance ratio doesn't even come close. Many fail to remember that the most important consideration is aperture. As an example, even the 3 8" SCTs which I used to compare to two 5" Taks (these scopes were owned for nearly a year and directly compared side by side with the same premium eyepieces) beat out all these refractors on planets and deep sky detail, even in average seeing. I have never once seen more contrast or detail in the smaller scope, except when the seeing was exceedingly poor. Which was only about 20- 25% of the time.
If you consider that you can get a C9.25 with excellent optics with a computerized GP-DX mount for about $3300, it's a major value compared to about $2900 for just a Traveler optical tube. And it does beat it handily on all objects, except for those over 1 degree in size. But even then the intraobject detail is much higher and apparent in the larger aperture. As for ease of setup, it is about the same for both except that the Traveler can also be used on a large photo tripod for quick use.
I am absolutely convinced that refractors are perceived to perform better than reflectors because of: 1) Smaller aperture gathers less background light, and have darker backgrounds as a result...this is mistaken for higher contrast, particularly by novices and gives an aesthetically more pleasing image. The image contrast is higher in a larger telescope. 2) High quality refractors cool faster, and give excellent images within a short amount of time...large reflectors need a lot of cool down time, and are often not fairly evaluated at star parties because they did not reach thermal equilibrium 3) Comparisons are usually with reflectors that are not properly collimated, or cleaned 4) Most reflector owners of the cheaper dob and SCT variety use less than premium eyepieces, where a Tak or AP owner wouldn't even consider using less than premium ones on such an expensive instrument. Premium eyepieces can even improve a dept. store scope!!! 5) Lastly, the comparisons are made to less than premium instruments. An EL11, costs about $2600 shipped, mount and all. Add a dob driver and computer and your at about $3600. Considerably less than the $6-7000 for a premium 4" refractor setup. And the 11 beats it handily on every object under 1.5* in size.

Overall Rating: 8
Optics:10 Ease of Use:8 Value:5
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=69704

Takahashi FS-102
Looking around here I see a fair bit of discussion and varied opinions about what matters. I'm not even going to try to mess with that, just convey my experience without any extra crap. I have 3 scopes, a FS 102, a celestron 9.25 SCT and a Orion refractor. With respect to the 102 the following things stick out in chronological order starting with purchase. First this thing is rather spendy for a 4" scope. I know, no shit right? Anyway next thing noticed is that the scope is very very well built compared to my other scopes and really conveys quality. The tube is rather big as well. The focuser is really smooth, much better than anything else I've used. The TAK accessories like the 2" adapter are way too expensive for what you get by the way. For that price they should at least have lock rings instead of screws. As far as looking goes I find the 102 cools down very fast. It seems to stablize in 30 to 40 minutes (call it a 30 degree drop). Because of this I use it way more than my 9.25. Side by side with the 9.25 is tough. First of all the SCT seems to need a couple hours to cool down and get stable. When things are stable it gets tough. On deep sky stuff like say M37 the 9.25 wins easy. Way more detail and a very clear center orange star in the SCT. As for contrast, the background, whatever you want to call it, on the 102 I can only say it is very dark where my orion is a bit grey. I also compared to a stellarview 1010 and it and my orion were too close to call. As well M37 102 is not too bad because the stars are very sharp to the edges of the field and it is obvious where focus is. On planets like Jupiter I find that the 102 actually seems to work better. Side by side I usually see more detail in the 102. I do know my SCT is collimated well by the way. I rarely ger steady air so this might change in another location. All in all I find that my scopes compliment each other with the SCT going much deeper and the 102 being optically great and complete fuss free. No finder needed, really nice focuser, and good views almost right away. I'm a lot less worried about the cost now by the way and have no second thoughts. By the way I bought 114mm Vixen rings for this thing. They and a $2 sheet of thin felt made a good match for about $80. Also not that the 102 seems to be at a curious price point. the more expensive 4" scopes don't offer much more if any and the cheaper smaller scopes seem like toys. Above the 102 the price gets out of control and about doubles per inch. cheers paul peterson

Overall Rating: 9
Optics:10 Ease of Use:10 Value:8
Weight: 3 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=85441

Takahashi FS-102
I love all telescopes and still own a 4" Tak, and it is a great scope...but the truth about performance has to be told...If I had to keep ONE scope it would be my EL12.5. Why, aperture wins. I believe that Scopes should be compared on a cost comparison, not strictly on like aperture. It's unfair to compare a $300 4" Newt to a $2900 4" refractor, even though many of them come pretty close in image quality. All my reflectors have handily beaten any 5" or less APO on planetary and deep sky detail. The only 2 saving graces for the smaller refractors is that they have quick cool down and can be used for extreme widefield use in excess of 3 degrees field of view. I owned 2 APs (Traveler and a 130) as well as 7 Taks (2 FS78, 3 FS 102s, and 2 FS128s), None even matched the performance of any reflector over 7-8" I owned regardless of make or manufacture, be it an SCT, Newtonian, or a MakNewt, whether on planets or deepsky. The price/performance ratio doesn't even come close. Many fail to remember that the most important consideration is aperture. As an example, even the 3 8" SCTs which I used to compare to two 5" Taks (these scopes were owned for nearly a year and directly compared side by side with the same premium eyepieces) beat out all these refractors on planets and deep sky detail, even in average seeing. I have never once seen more contrast or detail in the smaller scope, except when the seeing was exceedingly poor. Which was only about 20- 25% of the time.
If you consider that you can get a C9.25 with excellent optics with a computerized GP-DX mount for about $3300, it's a major value compared to about $2900 for just a Traveler optical tube. And it does beat it handily on all objects, except for those over 1 degree in size. But even then the intraobject detail is much higher and apparent in the larger aperture. As for ease of setup, it is about the same for both except that the Traveler can also be used on a large photo tripod for quick use.
I am absolutely convinced that refractors are perceived to perform better than reflectors because of: 1) Smaller aperture gathers less background light, and have darker backgrounds as a result...this is mistaken for higher contrast, particularly by novices and gives an aesthetically more pleasing image. The image contrast is higher in a larger telescope. 2) High quality refractors cool faster, and give excellent images within a short amount of time...large reflectors need a lot of cool down time, and are often not fairly evaluated at star parties because they did not reach thermal equilibrium 3) Comparisons are usually with reflectors that are not properly collimated, or cleaned 4) Most reflector owners of the cheaper dob and SCT variety use less than premium eyepieces, where a Tak or AP owner wouldn't even consider using less than premium ones on such an expensive instrument. Premium eyepieces can even improve a dept. store scope!!! 5) Lastly, the comparisons are made to less than premium instruments. An EL11, costs about $2600 shipped, mount and all. Add a dob driver and computer and your at about $3600. Considerably less than the $6-7000 for a premium 4" refractor setup. And the 11 beats it handily on every object under 1.5* in size.

Overall Rating: 5
Optics:10 Ease of Use:9 Value:4
Weight: 10 (Trustworthy Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=92098 

This is a carefully considered statement by an experienced user, containing valuable insights that may prevent many a novice from running into a dead end. I needed three years and many expensive wrong turns to realize the truth of what Bernie is saying: If you want a tool for excellent views of all objects with fields below 3 degrees, get a big Dob. If you want beautiful widefield, get a Docter Aspectem. The FS-102 is a gorgeous instrument in the way a Jaguar is a gorgeous car - an extravagant collector's piece, not an efficient tool.
What an idiot.  I am still not sure what you are comparing since you did not provide any "review" on the FS-102. If you prefer a big Dob that's great, but what "value" have you added to a review of this or any other scope. What function or feature on the FS-102 did you provide input on. You obviously dislike many of them based on your rating. You "claim" to have owned several of them. Why did you keep making the same mistake by buying refractors when at best they would only be a marginal performer by your criteria?

You might also get yourself caught up on prices and products. You seem to be a graduate of the Enron school of accounting.  I guess your numbers serve your purpose, but they are not accurate by any means.  Check the FS-102 GM8 combo price, the check the ELT price. (the EL-11 is not a current model) In fact based on your criteria why waste your money on a 12.5 Starmaster when you can get a  Meade 16 inch Dob for about 1/3 of the cost. Since the Meade has a larger aperture it will obviously outperform the inferior Starmaster using your $ per inch ratio. 

I came to this review site to get some user feedback on the FS-102.  The current sale price makes the 102 very tempting.  After reading the reviews and then reading your "commentary" I felt I had to reply.  Actually I love the views through my 20inch Obsession, but it is a pain to move, setup, and use.  My AP155 is fantastic also, but I have it setup on a perminant pier and have to drive out to the country to use it.  Now that I have seen the price on the FS-102 GM8 combo and since a pro-Dob user like yourself feels obviously threatened by this little scope, in the end you DID help me make up my mind.  Thanks.  DJ
Bernie's commentary about the Takahashi FS 102 is completely irrelevent. It dwells too much on the debate on the subject of refractors vs reflectors and too little on the real issue regarding the quality and utility of the scope being reviewed. Bernie's vote is therefore useless and unwelcome. I recommend it be ignored.

First Prev Page 2 of 4 Next Last

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

Checking Your Telescope
Starting out in Amateur Astronomy
 
How to use This Site
Why Register?
[Get rid of the ads!]
Voting Guide