The Takahashi FCT 76 is the best 3" refractor on Earth that I know of. Completely color-free, with unreal performance for that aperture. Still, in many areas, it fell just slightly short of the Televue 85mm due to the 9mm difference in aperture. I compared it on globulars, double stars, and galaxies. The Televue 85mm is not as perfectly color-free as I may have reported previously. Although I never noticed it in-focus, on bright stars I was able to discern the slight "color" (green on one side, purple on the other) side of focus. This was made obvious by the lack of this in the Takahashi parfocal star test. However, although I haven't tried any of the Takahashi doublets recently, the amount of color in the Televue 85 seems to be less than in the more recently tested Takahashi 4" doublets. This could be aperture related. Please note the color is non-objectionable in any of these scopes. The only Takahashi doublet which it can be deemed objectionable (by me) is in the new FS60.

The FCT76 exhibited high contrast on all tested objects including the Moon, double stars, galaxies, clusters and globulars. The Televue 85 however was able to ever so slightly draw in more.. I could detect M51 and M101 more clearly. I could resolve M13 just a bit more, with more comfort into finding the "arms" of stars that flop out from the Globular's core. Additional brightness of background sky was noted on the Televue 85, but I think it was more aperture related than anything else. The 13th magnitude star near M57 which I was stunned to see in the FCT76 was ever so slightly easier in the Televue 85.. really marginal. The star test appeared better on the Televue 85 parfocally, but in-focus, less energy seemed to be entering the first diffraction ring around the airy disk in the FCT76. In seeing conditions of around 7 on a scale 0 to 10, the FCT76 therefore was just as good at doubles in terms of the "clean" look of the split. However, I could see that the airy disk was slightly larger when splitting the double double and Izar in the FCT76 due to the smaller aperture. However, there was something more enjoyable in the FCT on those particular objects, the blue member of Izar for instance seemed to be bluer. I did not compare these two telescopes on the planets, or on the moon side by side.

The comparison reminds me of comparing the Takahashi CN212 (8.3" Classical Cass. ) to the C9.25" (Celestron SCT) Those two scopes are also somewhat equally matched with stars slightly more visible in the C9.25", but super sharp contrasty optics in the 8.3" just about making up for it. I do plan to test those two scopes against each other on planets down the line.

The Televue 85 has more focus travel than the FCT, and a sliding dewshield. I needed the 2" sliding adapter from Texas Nautical to allow the FCT to reach focus in all eyepieces.. it works. The typical Takahashi tube ring for 3" scopes fits, but is heavy and takes some of the fun out of the lightness of this scope. The Televue 85mm is more suited for the Televue Telepod, Gibraltar and Panoramic mounts, although you can certainly get custom rings for the FCT to make it more friendly to those mounts. (Just as you can't really easily mount a TV 85 to Takahashi's Teegul mounts, w/o special hardware)

If you are into the Takahashi line in general and own other Takahashi scopes, the FCT may be your better choice.. if you are used to the Televue line and it's mounts, I'd go with that. The FCT76 is no longer sold new, but can be obtained for around 2000 including tube ring, more with any 2" adapters.
One last plus on the Takahashi side.. it DOES include a camera angle adjuster built - in, which is really nice.

Todd Gross 4/6/00