#1  
Old 07-07-2016, 09:06 AM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is online now
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 15,409
Best all round eyepiece

I sold off my Televue eyepieces a while ago to help fund something or other.
Now I wouldn't mind getting an eyepiece or two for the odd visual view.

I still have a Meade UWA 12mm large eyepiece which was about as good as it got at the time.

I used to like the 19mm Televue Panoptics. A 21mm Nagler gave a nice view through my FS152 as I recall.

I would be using a CDK17 at 2948mm focal length. So 19mm Panoptic?

Are Ethos eyepieces better? I am not really up with the latest available in eyepieces so some advice would be appreciated.

Pentax XW eyepieces used to review well. Are they the better choice over Televue?

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-07-2016, 09:34 AM
janoskiss's Avatar
janoskiss (Steve H)
Registered User

janoskiss is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sale, VIC
Posts: 6,032
For the "odd visual view" I'd go for light, small form factor EPs. It sounds like you have enough experience to choose something that suits you. You know your observing habits, preferences and the kind of object you like to observe better than anyone else.

If you are going with just one EP then the Ethos makes some sense: you can go for higher magnification for a given TFOV. They are excellent EPs, with optically superior in every way (not just FOV) to all the Naglers (except for eye relief of T4s). But you need to try one to see if you actually find all of that huge AFOV usable. Choice of focal length depends on what you want to look at. Still, for quick occasional peeks the weight and bulk of the Ethos would put me off.

Re XWs: short answer IMO (and I'm sure many others disagree) is yes they are better than TVs except maybe for the Ethos. But that should be qualified. It's been discussed many times on the forums. Search past threads.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-07-2016, 02:52 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is online now
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 15,409
I did have a 13mm Ethos when they first came out. Yes I think it was quite a nice eyepiece.

I should check them out.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-07-2016, 08:31 PM
Camelopardalis's Avatar
Camelopardalis (Dunk)
Drifting from the pole

Camelopardalis is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 4,637
Personally, I prefer the Ethos 17mm over the 13mm, it just gets used more in a longer focal length scope...it's probably my favourite when visually using my C11.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-07-2016, 08:40 PM
Atmos's Avatar
Atmos (Colin)
Ultimate Noob

Atmos is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 6,266
If you wanted an ultra wide but higher res I'd say the 21 Ethos. 141x mag with 100 FOV
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-07-2016, 02:46 PM
clive milne
Registered User

clive milne is offline
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Freo WA
Posts: 1,443
If you need to wear glasses then eye relief becomes important, in which case Nagler type 4's are a good option. The 17mm is my pick at f5... the 22mm would work well at f6.8.

Even if you don't need glasses, these are a great eyepiece and it is not surprising that they are still being produced after all these years.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-07-2016, 03:38 PM
alocky's Avatar
alocky (Andrew lockwood)
PI popular people's front

alocky is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: perth australia
Posts: 1,287
Completely endorse Clive's suggestion of the 17mm type 4 at f5, and I'd put the 12mm at a close second in my lineup for my 25".
Although I recall Clive's 17mm Nikon was superior in contrast and edge of field distortions.
Cheers,
Andrew.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-07-2016, 04:54 PM
clive milne
Registered User

clive milne is offline
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Freo WA
Posts: 1,443
Well yes... the Nikon HW's deserve a mention as does the Docter 12.5mm

Another favourite of mine (and this is a budget eyepiece) is the Celestron Ultima range.. based on the venerable Masuyama design... These approach the crystal clarity of a mono-centric. Even Stefan would give these a high distinction.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-07-2016, 07:01 PM
alpal's Avatar
alpal
Registered User

alpal is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,801
I have a whole set of Williams Optics SWAN eyepieces like this:
http://www.williamoptics.com/eyepiec...9_features.php

They really are great quality & have a 72 deg. F.O.V.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-07-2016, 09:33 AM
casstony
Registered User

casstony is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Warragul, Vic
Posts: 4,193
I owned XW's and Delos together: XW isn't better than Delos, perhaps equal on axis. The XW14 and 20 curvature doesn't work well with many scopes producing fuzzy outer fields.
Delite, Delos and Ethos are all safe choices - just pick according to your preference for FOV and eye relief.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 16-07-2016, 11:16 PM
janoskiss's Avatar
janoskiss (Steve H)
Registered User

janoskiss is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sale, VIC
Posts: 6,032
Quote:
Originally Posted by casstony View Post
The XW14 and 20 curvature doesn't work well with many scopes producing fuzzy outer fields.
That is indeed a common complaint about the XW14 & 20. I had the 14mm and used it with fast Dobs and indeed there is visible FC for me. But it's pure FC and can be refocussed for sharp-to-edge stars. Some people have eyes with better "auto-focus" and are more tolerant to it.

I found the XWs 10mm and under faultless. Also the 30mm 2", which is unfortunately no longer available. I find the edge performance of most Naglers not that great in Dobs f/4.5 to f/6. And it's not just FC but aberrations that cannot be got rid of by refocussing. A coma corrector will fix that but the XW10,7,5,30 don't need a coma corrector in the same scopes to produce nice round sharp stars to the edge of field.

I'm not a Nagler fan at all. (I've owned T4s and T6s and spent plenty of time with T5s at star parties.) But I am impressed with the Ethos. That is like the XW (except 100 vs 70 degree FOV!) ito of how it works very well in fast scopes (f/5) even without coma corrector: sharp to edge, unlike Naglers (for my eyes).

Eyepiece choices are very subjective. We all have a different imperfect lens inside our eyeballs that we have to live with. My best guess is that people who say that Naglers are tack sharp to the edge of field have better eyes than mine.

I've never tried a Delos.
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 07:56 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Meade Australia
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
SkyWatcher Australia
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Celestron Australia
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement