Help re eyepieces, please

[DancingStar]

Hello I have a question about my current EPs, with regard to which focal length(s) to get in addition.
My scope is a Meade 2080 SCT F10 from 1987
My EPs are all Meade 4000 series:
1. Meade: Super Plossl 56mm
2. Meade Super Wide Angle 18mm
3. Meade Ultra Wide Angle 14mm
4. Meade Ultra Wide Angle 8.8mm
5. Meade Ultra Wide Angle 6.7mm

I bought the best EPs I could afford. They were all bought in the late 1980s, so they are the original ‘smoothside’ versions of the Meade 4000 series. I’ve read that they are copies of the Nagler design at the time – which should mean that they are still considered to be good quality.
But some stuff I’ve read implies that there is a different type of 4000 series; these are much cheaper than I paid for mine.
[eg https://www.safaribooksonline.com/library/view/astronomy-hacks/0596100604/ch04s07.html says that the Meade SWAs are 16, 20, 24, 28, 34, 40 [no 18mm] and the UWAs are 4.7, 6.7, 8.8, 14, 18, 24, 30. But I have one which says SWA 18mm, so are mine a different 4000 series?].
Can you give me an idea if my ones are considered to be the ‘classic’ good ones or not?
If not, I will consider replacing some with better ones.
I want to get good widefields at low and high magnifications, and I’d like to get good planet details.
I like the sound of the Ethos 21mm, 100 AFOV, but I live in the northern suburbs of Perth, Western Australia – there is some light pollution, and I am worried that a 100 degree field might just accentuate any skyglow and give a disappointing result. Would a Delos be a better bet?
Also, I’ve been reading how exit pupil is an important factor, not just an irrelevant-sounding statistic like I stupidly imagined a few days ago! I’m 58 so 7mm is probably a waste, but I can’t quite understand what size exit pupils I will need.
I don’t want to end up with beautiful, expensive Eps which give images which are not significantly different from those which I already have.
I do not have any access to trying the Ethos or Delos out before I buy, so I’m hoping someone can guide me.
Also, can a Meade 2080 8inch SCT give the full view in a 2 inch, 21mm EP?
Thanks in advance
Tony
:newbie:

[Wavytone]

Tony keep what you have and don't develop a case of Eyepiece Envy.

On an f/10 scope pretty much any good eyepiece will work fine, you aren't going to get anything significantly better by splurging on the latest super-ultra-maxi-wide from televue or Explore Scientific.



Forget it. Whether they're "classic" is irrelevant - they're not collectible and don't appreciate in value. Astro gear - eyepieces included - depreciates faster than cars.



No eyepiece does both.

Basically, the wider the field of view, the more glass elements internally and air-glass surfaces. This degrades transmission and contrast, contributes to light scatter, internal "ghosts", and on-axis performance is generally compromised to get good performance at extreme off-axis angles.

The best planetary views are generally had with relatively simple eyepieces with few elements - monocentrics, RKE, Plossl, orthoscopic etc. Buth these have a small field of view.


you are right about that, actually. The usual result i your night vision is degraded and you don't see faint things so well as you might hope.

In suburbia there is a lot to be said for eyepieces with a modest field of view with a big black region outside the field stop - this maximises your night vision.

Not noticeably better than what you have.

Your exit pupil might reach 5mm if you are lucky (I'm 57 and mine is 4mm).

No it cannot. The central hole in the backplate is considerably smaller than the inside barrel diameter of the big 2" eyepieces.

While you can try one it will vignette for sure.

FWIW I have a Skywatcher 7" 180mm f15 maksutov, this is the smallest cataleptic that comes with a 2" back, and it can fill the fields of the Vixen 42mm LVW and LV50mm - which are my preferred low power eyepieces.

On a Meade or Celstron f/10 SCT the smallest that can fill these eyepieces are the 10" (Meade) or the 9.25" (Celestron).

[Renato1]

I've got the 18mm SWA and it's not razor sharp to the very edge. I prefer the 19mm Edge-On Flat Field eyepiece put out under various brand names, which is sharper at the edges (the 19mm Orbinar one on Ebay is one of the cheaper ones at $68).

The 14mm SWA is still superb, though it is extremely heavy relative to later Meade ones. I currently really enjoy the Meade Series 5000 18mm UWA on my C8, which isn't as heavy as your 14mm.

I remember Meade replaced all their 5 element Meade Super Plossls with 4 element Super Plossls of the exact same focal lengths, making it hard to tell them apart. The former were very highly rated, mainly because they had a very big sweet spot compared to other plossls.

I find the 56mm Meade Plossl somewhat unsatisfying in my C8. I much prefer the view in my cheap 2" 40mm GSO wide angle eyepiece from Andrews. Similarly, I prefer the view in my $80 30mm UWA eyepiece that both Andrews and Bintel were selling a few years back (the image may not be perfect at the edges, but it costs heaps more to make it perfect). Obviously, you can pay a lot more to get better images than those from these two inexpensive eyepiecs.

The other thing missing from your collection is a 5mm eyepiece, which would be useable on some nights of the year in your telescope when the atmosphere permits. I have the old 4.7mm Meade UWA, and think it very good. But its very shallow eye relief drives some people batty, so I wouldn't recommend it. I'm more fond of my 5mm TMB with much longer eye relief.
Regards,
Renato

[DancingStar]

Thank you for your advice.
Cheers
Tony
:thanks:

[dannat]

Tony meade had a few variants of s4000 ep's in both plossl [50deg] swa [65-68] & uwa [80-82deg]

Wavy is right, you wont do much better, but the delos with newer coatings will make a small diff [exp obs will see it but some can't]

yours will be japan made ep's -they will still be good today, only place the newer coatings excel is faint DSO's -for lunar /planet there will be next to no diff

if you want to get something wider maybe the 20mm 100mm ES will fit the bill, bit cheaper than the ethos at close to the performance

you have the high mag end covered with your UWA's

[brian nordstrom]

:) Tony , hi and welcome .

Dannat and Wavy hit the nail on the head here in my opinion . the series 4000's ( smooth side ) are a very good eyepiece , basically a very good clone of the excellent TV Plossls .

I the past I have owned and tested at the same time a Meade 4000 56mm you have against a TV 55mm , Meade 18mm against TV's 20mm and the excellent Meade 8.8mm against the TV 10mm and in my eyes the differences being so small it does not matter , I believe that the Meade's at 1/2 the TV price really are a major bargain .
I found the Meade 8.8mm plossl to be the pick of the bunch ,TV or Meade an excellent high power eyepiece that would really shine in your 203mm f10 CAT on the moon and planets .

On the 21mm 2 inch it should be fine if you use a 2 inch visual back , on that the 23mm Celestron Lumina in the classifieds would be a good place to start , these are optimised for f10 so would perform very well in your scope , I say this because I have its bigger :eyepop: brother the awesome ( yes its HUGE ! ) 31mm Axiom and it performs perfectly to the edge of it's huge 82* field in my C9.25 , beautiful images , just lovely and a definite keeper .

Hope this helps .

Brian.

[ab1963]

Hi tony
As Brian was saying about the 23 mm celestron I bought one off someone that came with his scope brand new and he didnt want it for an awesome price and the views are incredible,I have a meade LX90 , f10 ,beutiful eyepiece and Brian's advice is spot on
Andrew

[Visionary]

Wayne, I have been lead to believe the current LX90 has a 2" visual back.