I have the 17.5mm Morpheus and consider it a beautiful eyepiece for my Scopes.
It sure is. The 9 and 12.5 would suit certain objects and depends on the focal length of your scope. 9mm at 819mm focal length is good for a close up look.
17.5 is a pleasant slightly wide view.
I saw all 6 stars of the Trapezium in M42 the other night with the 9mm. Never seen them all before. AP130 GT optics are superb. Good seeing as well helped.
It sure is. The 9 and 12.5 would suit certain objects and depends on the focal length of your scope. 9mm at 819mm focal length is good for a close up look.
17.5 is a pleasant slightly wide view.
I saw all 6 stars of the Trapezium in M42 the other night with the 9mm. Never seen them all before. AP130 GT optics are superb. Good seeing as well helped.
Greg.
Good seeing rules what you see in that scope.
The E and F stars are not even a test for a 90mm in superb seeing, but can be hard in 300mm when the seeing is bad.
Seeing is king and the rest merely pawns.
Good seeing rules what you see in that scope.
The E and F stars are not even a test for a 90mm in superb seeing, but can be hard in 300mm when the seeing is bad.
Seeing is king and the rest merely pawns.
Agree. I can see E and F with my 105mm in my location, which can have quite good seeing at times.
Agree. I can see E and F with my 105mm in my location, which can have quite good seeing at times.
Yeah but no but, as we know the CFF 105 F6 is about as sharp as any scope can be.
I just hadn't seen the E and F Trap stars before even using a Tak FS152. Admittedly that scope was mostly used in a suburban environment.
One time a friend who lived only about 15 minutes away were observing the same night. He was using a TEC140 and me the FS152. He said he could see the E star and I couldn't. I put that down to sharpness of optics.
Yeah but no but, as we know the CFF 105 F6 is about as sharp as any scope can be.
I just hadn't seen the E and F Trap stars before even using a Tak FS152. Admittedly that scope was mostly used in a suburban environment.
One time a friend who lived only about 15 minutes away were observing the same night. He was using a TEC140 and me the FS152. He said he could see the E star and I couldn't. I put that down to sharpness of optics.
Greg.
Put it down to seeing as all scopes mentioned should have optics capable of seeing both E & F. I can see both E and F components in my TV-101 and E component in my TV-60 (still looking for F in it and I believe I have been close), provided seeing is good AND magnification is high enough to give good contrast and clear separation of the component stars. About 180x and over is good. I use 6-3mm and 4-2mm Tele Vue Nagler zooms. Larger aperture telescopes can get affected by seeing more so wait for the right moment during the right atmospherics conditions.
Put it down to seeing as all scopes mentioned should have optics capable of seeing both E & F. I can see both E and F components in my TV-101 and E component in my TV-60 (still looking for F in it and I believe I have been close), provided seeing is good AND magnification is high enough to give good contrast and clear separation of the component stars. About 180x and over is good. I use 6-3mm and 4-2mm Tele Vue Nagler zooms. Larger aperture telescopes can get affected by seeing more so wait for the right moment during the right atmospherics conditions.
Yes, seeing reigns supreme (and a Tak ). Attached a diagram of the Trapezium from Sky & Telescope 2017. The caption reads :
The Theta-1 (θ1) Orionis multiple star is better known as the Trapezium. Its four bright stars are easily visible in a 3-inch telescope. A 6-inch will show two additional stars, E and F, both 11th magnitude. G and H require a large amateur instrument.
Jerry Lodriguss with additions by the author
Yes, seeing reigns supreme (and a Tak ). Attached a diagram of the Trapezium from Sky & Telescope 2017. The caption reads :
The Theta-1 (θ1) Orionis multiple star is better known as the Trapezium. Its four bright stars are easily visible in a 3-inch telescope. A 6-inch will show two additional stars, E and F, both 11th magnitude. G and H require a large amateur instrument.
Jerry Lodriguss with additions by the author
E & F are easy in a 6" and will show in less aperture given good seeing. We're not talking Sirius Pup here as the separation and magnitude of the components makes them clear targets given good seeing.
So as to be on topic; I haven't had the pleasure of viewing through a Morpheus. I do like the Tele Vue 16mm Type 5 Nagler too for its compact size which I can use on my TV-60 as well as the 17mm Type 4 Nagler which has a nice large eye lens.
Yes, seeing reigns supreme (and a Tak ). Attached a diagram of the Trapezium from Sky & Telescope 2017. The caption reads :
The Theta-1 (θ1) Orionis multiple star is better known as the Trapezium. Its four bright stars are easily visible in a 3-inch telescope. A 6-inch will show two additional stars, E and F, both 11th magnitude. G and H require a large amateur instrument.
Jerry Lodriguss with additions by the author
I've seen G, H1, and I in a 12.5" on a night of absolutely superb seeing, at 304x, but I didn't see H1 and H2 as separate stars.
E & F are easy in a 6" and will show in less aperture given good seeing. We're not talking Sirius Pup here as the separation and magnitude of the components makes them clear targets given good seeing.
So as to be on topic; I haven't had the pleasure of viewing through a Morpheus. I do like the Tele Vue 16mm Type 5 Nagler too for its compact size which I can use on my TV-60 as well as the 17mm Type 4 Nagler which has a nice large eye lens.
The 16mm Nagler T6 is a very nice eyepiece and is very compact as you say.
I do prefer the view in the 17.5 Morpheus though as its a more relaxed and comfortable view which makes a large difference in being able to enjoy the view. The Nagler though is a close 2nd.
I just received a 17.5mm Morpheus and a 16mm Nagler T5. I'll be pitting these 2 together next clear night probably at a dark site.
The Morpheus comes very nicely packaged with a belt pouch and a screw up eyepiece and seems really well made. The Nagler is surprisingly small, compact and light.
Has anyone had experience with these Morpheus eyepieces? If its a good eyepiece I'll most likely get a shorter focal length one around 9mm.
I'll be using it on a CFF105 F6 and an AP130GT F6.3.
I like Nagler eyepieces and have a 3.5mm, 9mm and 16mm Nagler.
The best views I have ever had was through a Tak FS152 and a Nagler 22mm T4. Next best was a TEC180FL and a 13mmTV Ethos. But generally I don't want huge and heavy eyepieces. The 100 degree FOV is not that appealling to me. 76-82 is plenty.
The Masuyama 10mm is a beautiful eyepiece and gives some of the best views in 3/4 of it field with the last 1/4 a bit aberrated but it still left about 60 degrees looking very natural, sharp and good colour - natural. They make a 20mm, 26mm and larger. 20mm on those scopes is quite widefield.
I have a few other brand eyepeices from years ago, a 12mm University Optics, Edmunds RKE 15, Meade UWA 14mm (don't laugh, its an awesome eyepiece but huge).
Suggestions?
Greg.
I have the 12.5mm Morpheus with my 10 inch Dob. Only had a few sessions but I have nothing bad to say about it. I've only used it under suburban skies, but still impressed with the view it provides. When I'm looking at Nebulas and star clusters I can't imagine how a Televue for hundred of $$ more could possibly improve the view. I'm no expert, and I'm comparing this to the original plossls that came with the scope so feel free to ignore my thoughts.
I have the 12.5mm Morpheus with my 10 inch Dob. Only had a few sessions but I have nothing bad to say about it. I've only used it under suburban skies, but still impressed with the view it provides. When I'm looking at Nebulas and star clusters I can't imagine how a Televue for hundred of $$ more could possibly improve the view. I'm no expert, and I'm comparing this to the original plossls that came with the scope so feel free to ignore my thoughts.
The 17.5mm Morpheus verus the Nagler 16mm Type 6 in an AP130GT at a dark site. The 17.5 was mesmerising in its beautiful and easy to view presentation. The 16mm Nagler was also very good but not as easy to view through as the Morpheus. I would prefer the Morpheus over the Nagler but the Nagler is definitely a nice eyepiece.
I have the 12.5 Morpheus as well and its very similar. The Morpheus eyepieces are right up there.
They certainly are .... I'll be chasing a Morpheus 14mm when I can ...!!
I think I would get the 12.5 or 17.5 over the 14.
Don posted earlier the 14 is the weaker of the series. I went with the 12.5 also because it gave a bit more space between the 17.5 I have and the 9 which I also have.
I think I would get the 12.5 or 17.5 over the 14.
Don posted earlier the 14 is the weaker of the series. I went with the 12.5 also because it gave a bit more space between the 17.5 I have and the 9 which I also have.
Greg.
That's a good point ...then it's the 12.5 soon. ( I already have the 17.5 )
I think I would get the 12.5 or 17.5 over the 14.
Don posted earlier the 14 is the weaker of the series. I went with the 12.5 also because it gave a bit more space between the 17.5 I have and the 9 which I also have.
Greg.
People SAY the 14mm is the weakest in the series, and it might measure that way, but in my 12.5" coma-corrected scope, it is sharp almost from edge to edge, with only the space at the field stop a bit lesser. If that's the weakest in the series, then the entire series is magnificent, as I said earlier.
). Attached a diagram of the Trapezium from Sky & Telescope 2017. The caption reads :
