A couple of surprise eyepieces are the TMB Planetary 11's and Edmunds RKE 28mm.
The TMB 7mm costs about AUD $53 on ebay or AliExpress and its a wow eyepiece with a 58 degree field and very sharp, bright, low to no chromatic aberration. Its well made as well. Crazy good for the price.
The other is Edmunds Optics 28mm RKE. I got this from Edmunds direct and I
paid Singapore $90 + shipping.
If you read the thread all time favourite 10 eyepieces I was amazed to see how often the 28mm RKE was listed. I tried mine out last week and was surprised by how nice it was. 45 degree field of view but at 28mm its quite a wide view.
A couple of surprise eyepieces are the TMB Planetary 11's and Edmunds RKE 28mm.
The TMB 7mm costs about AUD $53 on ebay or AliExpress and its a wow eyepiece with a 58 degree field and very sharp, bright, low to no chromatic aberration. Its well made as well. Crazy good for the price.
The other is Edmunds Optics 28mm RKE. I got this from Edmunds direct and I
paid Singapore $90 + shipping.
If you read the thread all time favourite 10 eyepieces I was amazed to see how often the 28mm RKE was listed. I tried mine out last week and was surprised by how nice it was. 45 degree field of view but at 28mm its quite a wide view.
Greg.
Its the 28mm RKE with its seemingly half meter of eye relief that creates an effect that the image is floating above the eyepiece itself. Its a lot of fun but no body is making any serious observations with it.
A couple of surprise eyepieces are the TMB Planetary 11's and Edmunds RKE 28mm.
The TMB 7mm costs about AUD $53 on ebay or AliExpress and its a wow eyepiece with a 58 degree field and very sharp, bright, low to no chromatic aberration. Its well made as well. Crazy good for the price.
The other is Edmunds Optics 28mm RKE. I got this from Edmunds direct and I
paid Singapore $90 + shipping.
If you read the thread all time favourite 10 eyepieces I was amazed to see how often the 28mm RKE was listed. I tried mine out last week and was surprised by how nice it was. 45 degree field of view but at 28mm its quite a wide view.
Greg.
.
Greg Hi..
Got the 8mm TMB11 from Allie..put it up against my 9mm Nagler and said.."This cant be happening"!..Better Contrast and ALMOST as Clear..Jupiters Belts were Browner and the GRS a darker pink ..prob due to Only 5 Elements versus 7..but still NOT what I wanted to see as the 9mm Nagler is a great EP.
Hope it was due to the slight mag diff in 1800mm scope!
PS: Dont tell Anyone..Shhh!
Bigjoe
Last edited by bigjoe; 28-01-2021 at 10:55 PM.
Reason: Add
The view through the 28mm RKE is unlike any I have seen before and I bought mine simply to experience this view described by others as floating. You don’t get the feel as if you’re floating but instead the view itself appears to float in front of you. It isn’t so much the eye relief of the 28mm RKE although it has been calculated perfectly to match a combination of factors including design of the upper body holding the eye lens which consists of a thin wall beveled at such an angle to match the 45 deg apparent field.
It is as if the walls of the eyepiece simply disappear and the view is simply in front of you superimposed against the background peripheral view. The floating effect of this view is seen just as well the daylight as it is at night in a number of different ‘scope designs.
The 9mm Morpheus has the same effect as the 28mm RKE where the eyepiece dissapears ( best seen with the eyecup removed) akin to an infinity pool view. I Have the Edmund scientific 28mm Kellner (RKE predecessor) which has the same floating field characteristic.
Thanks for starting all these EP threads, I’ve been enjoying them immensely. Lots of great info coming out as well.
I had a couple of questions
1. There seems to be a lot of clones/knock off tmb’s on AliE and eBay, prices range from $30 to $70, is there any way of knowing or supplier that you’re getting the right one? Was after a pair of 9mm for binoviewing. In a small frac.
2. What would be your ultimate planetary/ double star ep?
There seems to be a lot of clones/knock off tmb’s on AliE and eBay, prices range from $30 to $70, is there any way of knowing or supplier that you’re getting the right one? Was after a pair of 9mm for binoviewing. In a small frac.
TMB Planetary Type II eyepieces are not really a clone or knock off of the original TMB eyepieces. And there is no "the right one" - they are made on the same factory. You can get a lemon from any supplier unfortunately as QC is the issue. I can recommend just check the seller's rating to make sure you are buying from a good one.
The one I have is the 7mm. I have 2 more I bought at the same time that have not yet arrived. This is my first dealing with Aliexpress. I am more confident in Ebay.
I see there is a 7.5, 8 and 9mm as well. Plus a hood that extends the magnification of each X3. I didn't see those on Aliexpress.
I think I ordered the 3, 5 and 7. On Aliexpress most of the vendors do not have the full range and and don't anything above around 5mm.
As far as ultimate planet/double star eyepiece I have limited experience.
What I have is:
Edmunds RKE 8mm 15mm and 28mm. These rate highly in planetary shootouts, in fact did the best out of some very high end eyepieces and they are cheap. There is an article on Cloudy Nights where RKE's beat out everything else including Zeiss Abbes. Mine seem good, very clear. Small field of view though.
Fujiyama 18mm Ortho. This is brand new so I haven't looked through it yet but comes with a strong recommendation from the supplier.
University Optics 12mm Ortho. This gives pleasing views. Again a bit on the narrow side like all these types eyepieces - something in the low 40 degree area.
University Optics 4.6mm - ouch, mainly see defects in my eyes! These eyepieces also show lousy eye relief so you have to get your eye right up to them and keep it very still. Pinhole view.
The TMB Planetary 11 is very comfortable, very bright, very sharp and very low chromatic aberration and a comfortable 58 degree view. Also very cheap eyepiece.
3.5mm Nagler T6. 82 degree field of view is hard to beat and very addictive. I use this one when the seeing is steady. Very nice but it does requrie steady seeing.
9mm Nagler T1 -lousy eyecup (I have ordered some nice looking wing eyecups off ebay). Great views. I used to have the 9mm T6 Nagler. Not sure the views were any better (many years apart) but the ergonomics were. I see detail through this eyepiece I may not in others. Best view of Jupiter was many years ago through a TakFS152 and 9mm Nagler at 2am and very steady seeing.
9mm Morpheus - lovely view, very easy to see the view, very little blackout (the weak spot of the Naglers) and more forgiving of eye position. Very sharp, clear and detailed view. There is a 6.5 and 4.5 Morpheus but I decided (at this stage) to simply use a barlow on the 9 or the 12.5 I have. But this is a stunning eyepiece.
Pentax 7mm XW its on the way to me and will be tested next clear night. the 7 and 10mm XW Pentax topped the list of 10 all time favourite eyepieces thread on Cloudy Nights. Many responded. So I want to see what all the fuss is about. 10mm and below seems to be the specialty of these eyepieces.
TMB Planetary monocentric. I got one or two of these when they first came out about 12 years ago. Sharp etc but I don't like these tiny pinhole views. The FOV is just too small and feels claustrophobic. No need these days as eyepieces have evolved.
13mm Ethos. This was the first in the Ethos line. A beautiful eyepiece but huge and heavy and expensive. Got an amazing view of M42 in my TEC180FL at my dark site one time. I am sure the short focal length versions would be good but now you are looking through a lot more layers of glass so ultimate performance may be lacking. Others should comment here as I am no expert on Ethos, Delos or Delites but they review really well. Delite and Delos around 6mm or so seem to get a lot of recommendations on Cloudy Nights. 6 and 8m Delos comes up a lot in threads.
10mm 85 degree Masuyama. I got the best views from this compared to 9mm Nagler. The Nagler is better corrected all the way out to the edge but the Masuyama central 60% is just sublime. Its subtle but its a more pleasing view. More natural, easy to see, clear, detailed, no flaring - lovely. Eye relief for me without glasses was fine. I am interested in adding either the 26 or 32mm Masuyama at some point. They only have 5 lenses compared to the modern more complex eyepieces which have 9 or more. Each layer of glass takes something away no matter how slight.
Available now for reasonable prices are Baader Classic Orthos ($139.95) - 52degree, Fujiyama Orthos ($149.95) 42 degree view (supposed to be better than the Baaders but 42 degrees isn't easy to live with), these TMB Planetary 11.
Other high end are Takahashi Abbe, TOE, Pentax XW but now prices are much higher. Pentax XW are around $500, Tak Abbe and TOE not 100% sure but I imagine $300-400.
Nagler 3-6mm zoom often is recommended. I had one for a while years ago and it was nice. I have a cheap SvBony 8-24mm zoom and its good (it goes out of focus when you zoom though). The Baader Hyperion 8-24mm Zoom though gets constant good feedback ($389.95 or so).
That's about all I know. You can google best planetary eyepieces and I am sure there would be many threads on Cloudy Nights eyepieces forum about this.
Greg.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemi
Hey Greg,
Thanks for starting all these EP threads, I’ve been enjoying them immensely. Lots of great info coming out as well.
I had a couple of questions
1. There seems to be a lot of clones/knock off tmb’s on AliE and eBay, prices range from $30 to $70, is there any way of knowing or supplier that you’re getting the right one? Was after a pair of 9mm for binoviewing. In a small frac.
2. What would be your ultimate planetary/ double star ep?
Cheers
Last edited by gregbradley; 29-01-2021 at 10:38 AM.
For a good planetary / double star eyepiece, it is hard to go past either BGO ( Baader Geniune Orthoscopic) or Fujiyama orthoscopics. Compact design, simple lens configuration, only 40 / 45 deg. AFOV but that helps to concentrate on the subject, with a dark contrasting view.
The TMB "clones" are quite good performers as well, with a larger FOV which may help find and frame the target at high magnifications, at quite a reasonable price considering.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemi
Hey Greg,
Thanks for starting all these EP threads, I’ve been enjoying them immensely. Lots of great info coming out as well.
I had a couple of questions
1. There seems to be a lot of clones/knock off tmb’s on AliE and eBay, prices range from $30 to $70, is there any way of knowing or supplier that you’re getting the right one? Was after a pair of 9mm for binoviewing. In a small frac.
2. What would be your ultimate planetary/ double star ep?
There are a number of comparisons between the Baader Genuine Orthos (BGO) and the Baader Classic Orthos (BCO).
The BGO's often rate a hair better but on the 18mm the BCO seems to rate better. BCO's have a 52 degree FOV. Depends on your preferences for the size of the FOV. I definitely like a wider view but I am not super experienced here so I may change my mind on that. I just got the 18mm Fujiyama so I can post my impressions about that here next clear night.
What focal length eyepiece and scope do you use?
Greg.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saturnine
For a good planetary / double star eyepiece, it is hard to go past either BGO ( Baader Geniune Orthoscopic) or Fujiyama orthoscopics. Compact design, simple lens configuration, only 40 / 45 deg. AFOV but that helps to concentrate on the subject, with a dark contrasting view.
The TMB "clones" are quite good performers as well, with a larger FOV which may help find and frame the target at high magnifications, at quite a reasonable price considering.
I don't know where people get the idea about "clone eyepieces"!
There have never been clones. Ever.
Clones implies that somehow these have been copied or the design stolen. There are only a handful of manufacturers of eyepieces in the world (nearly all of them in China), and there are only a limited number of eyepiece designs. Anyone can go to the right factory and ask for eyepiece X if the design is not under licence and the factory will ask "what casing design will you like and coating specs". That is it. This is why the Baader Hyperions appear re-branded under a number of different flavours. And NO, the Hyperions are NOT a rip-off of the Vixen LVW's. Totally different optical designs with the only similarities being focal lengths and a focal length colour coding system, but they are not rip off copies of anything.
As for the TMB's, they are made in the same factory as when Thomas Black was still alive. When Thomas died the factory dishonoured the contract they had and started making these eyepieces for themselves - and good luck to the TMB estate in making a claim against that factory...
The TMB Planetary Type II's were a revelation when they were released, being relatively inexpensive for the quality of optical performance and inexpensive to manufacture. Without the licencing restrictions on the factory, they could sell the exact same eyepieces at an even cheaper price. HOWEVER, quality control is now not the same When you do get a good sample they can be excellent performers. But the failure rate is astronomical!
I bought the entire line from one supplier in order to test them all out in Newts, refractors and Catadioptic scopes, all 10 individual focal lengths. I also had four other eyepieces of these, so I had duplicates which allowed me to verify QC, so 14 eyepieces in total. Of the 14, 4 were totally unusable! These would not even come to focus, just remained a blurry mush. Sadly too is both of the 3.2mm were crap - a real shame as this would have been a good focal length for one of my scopes.
Of the two 2.5mm samples I had, one was rubbish. The other flaming brilliant, going toe to toe with the mystical 2.5mm Pentax XO with both outstanding in Newts and refractors. I was able to pit both EPs against each other. The 5mm TMB is just as good as the 5mm XO in a refractor, but whoops the Pentax's pants in an f/4 Newt - the 5mm Pentax just cannot handle a fast Newt.
Like I said, when you get a good unit these TMB's are excellent. All perform really well in refractors for which these were designed for. In Newts the pick of the crop at the 2.5mm, 4mm, 5mm, 7mm & 8mm in really fast Newts, like f/4, so with slower Newts the other focal lengths are less challenged by coma and perform well.
Curiously, the 6mm was the weakest performer from the Thomas Black era and continues to be. It will still do an ok job, but the other focal lengths are better performers, and you don't want to buy something knowing that it is just ok for the same money.
The pic below shows all the TMB eyepieces I used in my testing. The ones with the white band are the duplicate pieces. The crap pieces were put in the rubbish. I kept 5 of them and sold the others. I often use them with my lunar and planetary sketching and observing.
Also pictured is a 9mm TMB beside a 9mm plossl. The eye relief across all TMB's is the same generous amount as is the same big eye lens size, unlike plossls who's eye relief shortens and eye lens reduces as the focal length gets shorter.
Alex.
PS, I do not sell these eyepieces as the QC is just not good enough. I would only recommend buying them from Ebay because if you do get a poor sample you can get a refund.
For inexpensive eyepieces, these are really outstanding. QC lets them down though.
PPS: There is a way to tell if the TMB is from the time of production when Thomas Black was alive - those particular EP's have the focal length engraved as "mm". With the current, post Thomas Black, fabrication, the focal length is engraved as "MM" and the box they come in does not carry TMB branding.
PPPS: These TMB's are also available rebranded too! There is nothing exclusive about this design either.
Last edited by mental4astro; 29-01-2021 at 11:24 AM.
Col, your signature also brings up another aspect of this "clone" eyepiece business.
You list a 35mm Orion Ultrascopic plus a 30mm and 25mm Parks Gold Series pair. These are the same as the "original" Masuyama line. Celestron I believe also released a similar line as did one or two other brands. Difference being they were manufactured AFTER the master optician Masuyama died and the licencing restrictions ended on the eyepiece designs.
There are some manufacturing differences, including QC, case design and coating specs. When pitted against original Masuyamas, these differences are noticeable, but the glass inside the casings are exactly the same - no "clones". There was a premium to pay for the original Masuyamas at the time as they were the best at the time. Still bloody good today too, when used in slower refractors as they were designed for, NOT Newtonians and not for f5 fracs.
I have a 35mm Masuyama - damn nice eyepiece too. But exclusively with my refractors. This 35mm EP is not well suited for Newts.
Here I was thinking about a 6mm TMB for my F6 dob to do star testing/collimation with and someone helps out with "a weakest in the line up" comment. (helpful yes...) TMB II's are currently going for under $40 AUD with free postage at aliexpress(The Outdoor Movement Store) - I'm hoping for Chinese New Year specials - But the APM 30mm UFF is not budging atm...
Any pro's or con's about using a eyepiece/barlow combo to collimate against star tests? (like adding extra plumbing from a cheap barlow is not the best idea?)
Well, I'm still on a high as I have found someone to try and get my 8" glass blanks cut with at less than half the price of other quotes. Just dropped of the slab of glass half an hour ago. Fingers are crossed they don't shatter under the water jet.
Thanks Greg: a lot of info and experience to ponder there. I might try the TMBs, that got me posting on this thread. And great value for pairing in Bino’s.
Thanks DeWynter, very helpful, i purchased a couple of TMBs from one of your links on AliE. Fingers crossed Alex that I get a good example.
Thanks Saturnine: so many designs! I haven’t tried any orthoscopics so far, never thought I had a use case that differentiated them significantly from my plossls, but I’m still a relative novice with a very small collection, and will surely try at some point. I’m a fan of Baader!
Thanks Alex: these TMBs certainly have an interesting back story. I don’t think that the term clones necessarily implies any skull duggery. There are lots of re badged, housed, rebranded Astro stuff. All legitimate, and all clones. The sky watcher Az eq6, Orion Atlas pro, Saxon AZEQ6 I would describe as the same mount or clone.
Steve, you will best served with a 5mm TMB for your dob! I have one and frequently use it in my f/4 Newts to observe with, not just star test.
You can use a barlow if you like. However, Barlows are not a "neutral" optical element, and can actually exacerbate aberrations if the eyepiece is not an optical match with the scope. Really, it is just easier to have one EP that you star test with, even if you don't use it any other time, than use a barlow/EP combo... But you may be lucky with the barlow/EP combo you have and it may work just fine
I think the term clone is used loosely and perhaps a more accurate term would be to mimic or imitate.
I recall seeing the early Tele Vue ads in the astronomy magazines of the mid to late 1980s offering a range of 50 deg Plossl, 65 deg Wife Field and 82 deg Nagler in various focal lengths only to be pipped by ads from Meade offering the same or slightly different focal lengths in 52 deg ‘Super’ Plossl, 67 deg Super Wide Angle and 84 deg Ultra Wide Angle.
I think this could have started the ‘clone’ industry in eyepieces but I agree clone is not a good description so perhaps the imitation industry is a better choice if words. Have a look at the report on the Company 7 site; scroll down to “Mine is better than yours...”.
Company 7 mention that fans were loyal to Al Nagler for being a true innovator as opposed to following a company for being a true imitator by the fact that Meade took the Tele Vue concepts and designs from the US Patent Office. It is mentioned that some of the Meade offerings were quite good but they were an attempt to copy another product and market it as being and improvement on what others had, (namely Tele Vue). At the end of the day they were an attempt to make a better copy. Call it clone or imitation but the former rolls off the tongue easier and this is where I believe the term clone started amongst the amateur astronomy community.
I have just placed an order for the 5mm TMB II, toes crossed(fingers already in use) it is a good one, though the "Outdoor movement store" does offer free returns at least.
I seem to remember reading that star tests should use an EP that is the same FL as the F ratio of the scope. That's why I was fixating on a 6mm a bit, at 240mag the 5mm may be seldom used though. Was $38.xx plus the 10% GST added on at the checkout.
Any truth(or weight) in the statement that the best marriage for ep's is, if you have a convex objective, you should go for concave EP' tops and visa-versa?
When you do get a good sample they can be excellent performers. But the failure rate is astronomical!
