Go Back   IceInSpace > Equipment > Eyepieces, Barlows and Filters

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 07-02-2021, 10:59 AM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
Several new eyepieces first impressions

I have been on a drive to accumulate some nice eyepieces for my AP130GT as I got rekindled in doing some visual in between some imaging.

I have 4 main sets.

5 Televue 3.5mm Nagler T6, 9mm Nagler T1, 16mm Nagler T5, 15mm and 32mm TV Plossl.

Baader Morpheus 9, 12.5 and 17.5mm.

APM 12.5 Hi FW 84 degree high eye relief, 20mm XWA 100 degree and 30mm Ultra Flat Field.

and a few other:

10mm Masuyama 85 degree.
Pentax XW 7mm.
Edmunds Optics RKE 8, 15 and the famous 28mm.
University Optics 4 and 12mm
18mm Fujiyama Ortho
SvBony 8-24mm Zoom.
TMB Planetary ii 3.2, 5, 7.5 and 9mm.

Last night was clear and no moon until about 1am.

AP130GT, Semi rural skies, reasonably dark but not like my dark site, average seeing, not bad, not good.

APM 12.5mm Hi FW versus Baader Morpheus 12.5mm:

The APM has a fair bit of hype about it, its expensive and solid. Supposed to be an attempt to copy the famous Docter/Noblex 12.5mm.

Very sharp, very bright - good light transmission, nice wide field, outer edge stars showed some distortion, very minor edge of field brightening (only noticed it because reviewers pointed it out otherwise I wouldn't have noticed it). Easy to view through, good eye relief. Nice colour.

Baader Morpheus 12.5mm:

The Morpheus eyepieces are my favourite of all of these eyepieces. They just seemed to get everything going nicely. Views were very similar to the APM. The APM is a bit brighter and its noticeable but not a huge difference.
The Baaders is more comfortable to view. This is important because you can view for a long time without getting blackouts etc like you can with some Naglers and Radians.
Stars show no distortions out to the edges. The APM is 84 degrees and the Baader is 76 degrees but in use its hard to notice any difference in the field of view.

Both Baader and APM show tiny pinpoints of dim stars, good colour, great detail and contrast. Almost the same view except for the outer edge and the brightnesses being the 2 main difference. The Baader seems to have the more comfortable view and better eye relief. It also is quite resistance to blackouts, more so than the APM although the APM is good in this area as well.

If I had to pick one (I plan on keeping both) it would be the Baader Morpheus but there isn't a lot in it.

Outer edge stars cleaned up on the APM when I added a 2X barlow or a Tak 1.6X Q extender. They became perfect.

For my viewing though, I like having the widefield as it gives a feeling of space but I don't go searching the outer edges for detail so the central area with some room for perspective is what I like personally.

Pentax XW 7mm:

This eyepiece and the 10mm often appear on people's 10 best eyepieces of all time.

It has no aberrations that I could see, but the view does require accurate eye placement much more so than the very tolerant Baader and the APM.

But that probably is something I would have to get used to. This eyepiece may be best for planets and closer views. Very beautifully built. Like the APM that way.

APM 30mm UFF:

A lovely wide view and nice colour, good sharpness, no obvious optical defects. In the 30mm range this eyepiece is probably one of the very best out there.

APM 20mm XWA 100 degree.

I have had a Televue 13mm Ethos in the past and it was wonderful on my TEC180 Fluorite at a dark site. Back then (8 years or more ago) it was $800 - ouch now they are $1200+ Yowsa.

This APM 20 XWA I got off Andrew here a few weeks ago. My first chance to try it. Wow, LOVE it. 100 degrees is so immersive and 20mm suits this scope very well. Outer stars were a tad weak but central 80% probably was very good and centre area was lovely and sharp.

Easy to view through, good eye relief. Views deteriorated when I added Tak extender. Perhaps a 2 inch barlow may work better with it.

My wife loved the view it gave. Now I am wanting another of these. Sensational. Ethos 21mm is currently $1,399.That's just silly. You can get a decent astro camera for that or a nice small refractor.
From what I have read the Ethos has better correction out to the edges compared to this and I can see that is likely the case as the only weak spot was some outer edge star distortion.

I am looking at adapting the field flattener for the AP130 to a visual back so that may correct all these eyepieces better.

A keeper and now one of my favourite eyepieces along with Morpheus 17.5mm.

18mm Fujiyama Ortho:
Nice and sharp and detailed. 18mm is a bit long for planetary, probably fine for lunar but a bit narrow view for DSO. Perhaps barlowing it to get the 6 Trapezium stars of M42 would be a good use. The RKE's are very similar.
I did not spend a lot of time with it so it probably is better than the first impression. Clear, bright, sharp, no optical defects but a narrow field of view.

RKE's University Optics. The 8, 15 RKE are clear and bright. The 28mm is quite an immersive eyepiece and a gem. It often comes up as one of the all time favourite eyepieces of many.

10mm Masuyama, Love this eyepiece. Stars out to the edge not well corrected but that central 70% is divine. Clear, contrasty, good colour, shows very faint detail. Its a tiny little eyepiece but has an 85 degree field.
Eye relief is tight so not ideal for those who wear glasses.
The 16mm or 20mm Masuyama is looking interesting to me.

SvBony Zoom: Seems sharp, not parfocal at all so when you zoom it needs to be refocused. Good sharpness and detail. Good for the price ($125).

Nagler 3.5 - a planetary eyepiece, needs good seeing but a good eyepiece.

Nagler 9mm T1 Very sharp, good detail and contrast. Good correction out to the edges. Lousy rubber eyecup. I've ordered a 3rd party eyecup to fix that. Still a keeper.

Nagler 16mm T5; A very small eyepiece for a 16mm 82 degree view. Very sharp, bright, a lovely eyepiece. Close to the 17.5mm Morpheus but I prefer the Morpheus for the better eye relief and tolerant viewing angle otherwise the views are very similar.

TV 15 and 32m Plossl. the 32 is good for framing and finding an object. Outer stars are not tight though. Overall a pleasant wide view eyepiece.

TMB Planetary 11. I only have received the 7.5mm. It surprised me with a decent field of view and bright sharp images. Gave one of the best views of the moon recently. For $45 each or so they are the hidden bargain although another poster warned of the terrible QC so best to buy from Ebay with a return policy.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-02-2021, 01:33 PM
mura_gadi's Avatar
mura_gadi (Steve)
SpeakingB4Thinking

mura_gadi is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Canberra
Posts: 829
Hello,

Another nice fat write-up of eyepieces with lots of comparisons, and in a scope close to my FL. What more could you want!


Thanks for these
Steve
Ps. My little savings jar had a slight hiccup accepting the last donation, which was a very nice thing to happen. Though a little shake and it was happy again...

Pps. if the Baader Morpheus 9mm/17.5mm and APM UFF 30mm are getting close to a "for sale" option, let me know. I'm sure I can find a can opener soon enough for any of them!

Last edited by mura_gadi; 07-02-2021 at 02:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-02-2021, 07:20 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
Hehe,

I am glad you liked it.

Greg.


Quote:
Originally Posted by mura_gadi View Post
Hello,

Another nice fat write-up of eyepieces with lots of comparisons, and in a scope close to my FL. What more could you want!


Thanks for these
Steve
Ps. My little savings jar had a slight hiccup accepting the last donation, which was a very nice thing to happen. Though a little shake and it was happy again...

Pps. if the Baader Morpheus 9mm/17.5mm and APM UFF 30mm are getting close to a "for sale" option, let me know. I'm sure I can find a can opener soon enough for any of them!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-02-2021, 09:14 PM
AG Hybrid's Avatar
AG Hybrid (Adrian)
A Friendly Nyctophiliac

AG Hybrid is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toongabbie, NSW
Posts: 1,581
I have to say Greg. Your sudden interest in visual/observational astronomy and all the threads you've made has brought back some life into the eyepiece forums.


In regards to your post, I think you should look into how much deeper you can see with certain eyepieces at similar focal lengths, and have a better understanding about eyepiece design can affect how well you can see objects. Not just in field correction but also light scatter.


My case in point is this. The target I chose with a mag 10 star cluster. Normally cake from dark sky but from the middle of Sydney - oddly difficult even in my 12".
I tested a 9mm ES 100 against a Delos 8mm and Pentax XW 10mm.
I found in both cases the Delos 8 and Pentax XW10 could see deeper then the 9mm 100. When I say deep I mean stars that needed averted vision in the 9mm 100 could be seen with direct vision in the 8 and 10.



I attributed this to the ES 9 have 12-13 pieces of glass in it and the Delos and Pentax XW only having 6-7, maybe also better coatings and a finer polish on top of that. All these little things start to add up.



You have a few eyepieces around 7-9mm. I'd be interested to see what results you find if any you can discern.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-02-2021, 04:42 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
Thanks Adrian.

I will do that. I have gotten quite a few eyepieces all of a sudden and hardly any clear nights to explore them so yes time on a particular eyepiece was limited.

I may set up my CDK for visual next time I get a clear night with it. Also the AP RHA (that means reinstalling the focuser).

I also want to try all these eyepieces out with my CFF105 F6 which is super sharp.

So much to do, so little clear sky to do it!

I must say though I did find the 100 degree eyepiece view a "wow experience". Looking to get the 9mm APM SWA next.

Greg.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AG Hybrid View Post
I have to say Greg. Your sudden interest in visual/observational astronomy and all the threads you've made has brought back some life into the eyepiece forums.


In regards to your post, I think you should look into how much deeper you can see with certain eyepieces at similar focal lengths, and have a better understanding about eyepiece design can affect how well you can see objects. Not just in field correction but also light scatter.


My case in point is this. The target I chose with a mag 10 star cluster. Normally cake from dark sky but from the middle of Sydney - oddly difficult even in my 12".
I tested a 9mm ES 100 against a Delos 8mm and Pentax XW 10mm.
I found in both cases the Delos 8 and Pentax XW10 could see deeper then the 9mm 100. When I say deep I mean stars that needed averted vision in the 9mm 100 could be seen with direct vision in the 8 and 10.



I attributed this to the ES 9 have 12-13 pieces of glass in it and the Delos and Pentax XW only having 6-7, maybe also better coatings and a finer polish on top of that. All these little things start to add up.



You have a few eyepieces around 7-9mm. I'd be interested to see what results you find if any you can discern.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-02-2021, 08:45 AM
Don Pensack's Avatar
Don Pensack
Registered User

Don Pensack is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 501
Quote:
Originally Posted by AG Hybrid View Post
I have to say Greg. Your sudden interest in visual/observational astronomy and all the threads you've made has brought back some life into the eyepiece forums.


In regards to your post, I think you should look into how much deeper you can see with certain eyepieces at similar focal lengths, and have a better understanding about eyepiece design can affect how well you can see objects. Not just in field correction but also light scatter.


My case in point is this. The target I chose with a mag 10 star cluster. Normally cake from dark sky but from the middle of Sydney - oddly difficult even in my 12".
I tested a 9mm ES 100 against a Delos 8mm and Pentax XW 10mm.
I found in both cases the Delos 8 and Pentax XW10 could see deeper than the 9mm 100. When I say deep I mean stars that needed averted vision in the 9mm 100 could be seen with direct vision in the 8 and 10.



I attributed this to the ES 9 have 12-13 pieces of glass in it and the Delos and Pentax XW only having 6-7, maybe also better coatings and a finer polish on top of that. All these little things start to add up.



You have a few eyepieces around 7-9mm. I'd be interested to see what results you find if any you can discern.
ES 9x100=9 elements in 6 groups
ES 9x120=12 elements in 6 groups
Pentax XW = 6 to 8 elements depending on focal length (40mm 6 elements in 4 groups, 3.5mm 8 elements in 5 groups, 7mm 8 elements in 6 groups)
Delos = 8 elements in middle focal lengths, unknown at the ends
Ethos = 8 to 10 elements depending on focal length
All these eyepieces have about the same number of air-to-glass surfaces, so what's the difference?
Coatings. Pentax and TeleVue use very sophisticated coatings and also multi-coat the cemented surfaces.
Polish. Higher polish results in less light scatter
Design parameters. Different eyepieces have different spot sizes and this results in superior focus to fainter stars.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-02-2021, 10:07 AM
AG Hybrid's Avatar
AG Hybrid (Adrian)
A Friendly Nyctophiliac

AG Hybrid is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toongabbie, NSW
Posts: 1,581
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Pensack View Post
ES 9x100=9 elements in 6 groups
ES 9x120=12 elements in 6 groups
Pentax XW = 6 to 8 elements depending on focal length (40mm 6 elements in 4 groups, 3.5mm 8 elements in 5 groups, 7mm 8 elements in 6 groups)
Delos = 8 elements in middle focal lengths, unknown at the ends
Ethos = 8 to 10 elements depending on focal length
All these eyepieces have about the same number of air-to-glass surfaces, so what's the difference?
Coatings. Pentax and TeleVue use very sophisticated coatings and also multi-coat the cemented surfaces.
Polish. Higher polish results in less light scatter
Design parameters. Different eyepieces have different spot sizes and this results in superior focus to fainter stars.
There we go. I knew I was on the right track.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 09:42 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Testar
Advertisement