If you could have only 2 eyepieces...

[Miaplacidus]

Increasingly I'm coming to the view that there is too much frapping around changing one eyepiece for another, this for that, etc. Time for minimalism, I reckon. So, if you were allowed to keep only two eyepieces, which would they be?

And why?

(Please specify scope/s.)

Cheers,

Nairb.

[wavelandscott]

With my current set of scopes (outlined in my signature) and eyepieces I'd say if I could only keep two eyepieces I'd pick the 24 Panoptic and the 10 mm Pentax XW. With the 13 mm Televue T6 Nagler a close third.

I prefer to stay with 1.25 inch format, I'm lazy and don't like to go back and forth...

That gets me my widest FOV in a 1.25 inch eyepiece with the 24 Pan at a good "finding" magnification and framing. The 10 mm Pentax is an outstanding eyepiece and would be a good higher useable magnification that most nights (nearly all) I could use. The fall back if allowed 3 choices of course would be the 13 mm Nagler. I use those 3 almost every night I ahve the scope(s) out.

I like the idea of having a few "high quality" eyepieces...

I've not used either the 8 mm or the 13 mm Ethos in my own scopes but they are very impressive eyepieces to behold...

[JethroB76]

I reckon I could get by with just one; the 13mm Ethos..

but I don't, so maybe the Ethos plus the Denk 21 or 20T5 would see me through, particularly if you included a 2x barlow..

[Ian Robinson]

A good 1.25" LV 8-24mm zoom and a good 2" plossyl (30-50mm for those extra wide views).

That will planets and moderately high powers (148x -50x) and 24x (50mm fl) ... 10" f4.66.

A nice APO 2x barlow , got an old RKE 2x barlow stashed somewhere failing that.

REALLY DEPENDS ON WHAT KIND OF VIEWING YOU LIKE.

[Miaplacidus]

Fair cop, I guess, tho in reality I doubt there are many of us who aren't pretty much all-rounders, when all's said and done. What I look at is partly dependent on the weather, moon phase, cloud cover, and what planets are up. "Everything from double stars to nebulars."

Short tubes, dobs, SCTs even? I don't mind, I'll have them all, but at least some will be GoNowhere, undriven, if that makes a difference.

The zoom. Mmmmm... (is that cheating?) I have one, but can't say I'm enamoured of the disappearing field of view and defocussing refocussing. Again, more time spent jigging the thing rather than just looking through it.



I would have put money on you saying that, Scott. Yes, the 10 mm Pentax is one sweet EP and was already on my list. I figure that if you only have two EPs, then it doesn't matter if one of them is a 2 incher, since interchanging them should be just as easy, apart perhaps from rebalancing issues (not the 31 mm Nagler, maybe. If the choice had been only one eyepiece, however, I wonder how many would plumb for the 13 mm Ethos...)

Thanks for your comments, guys. Keep em coming...

[Kal]

One would be my 24 Panoptic, it is my favourite eyepiece particularly in my C11. Based only on eyepieces I own and have used, I'd say the second would me my 9mm nagler. These are the two eyepieces I generally use the most.

[Starkler]

Two eyepieces are not enough unless you are allowed a barlow.

Max field - 31mm nagler or 24mm panoptic (for 1.25" format)
Medium/high power dso viewing - 10mm Pentax XW

What makes sense is to choose the best of whats available for the exit pupil size that suits your scope.

Lowest power - 5 to 6mm exit pupil.
Medium power - 2 to 3 mm exit pupil for general dso viewing.
high power - 0.5 to 1mm for small scopes, limited by seeing conditions.

[erick]

I think they'd have to be two of someone else's - mine aren't good enough :D

But somewhere around 27-30mm and 10mm plus a 2x barlow. Or maybe an 8-24 zoom instead of the 10mm? Decisions, decisions!

[PhilW]

[Scope is a 14" F/4.6]

I am going to break the rules & list three, which are the ones I use all the time:

1) Nagler 26mm T5 (5.6mm exit pupil)
2) Ethos 13mm (2.8mm exit pupil)
3) Pentax XW 7 (1.5mm exit pupil)

..with an honourable mention to the XW 10, which as several have noted is a cracker eyepiece. And the Pan 24 makes a fine & more compact substitute for the 26 T5. You could also substitute an XW 5 for the 7 if you wanted more power.

Limitations I see with the 31mm Nagler are the overly large exit pupil in fast scopes (6.74mm in my scope), plus of course the weight. Which is not to deny it was a groundbreaking eyepiece; just don't drop it on your foot.

[Miaplacidus]

Yes, much better to break the ground!:)

Thanks for your thoughts. Yes, I'll have to go back and consider exit pupil, as several people have said.

I already have the 10mm Pentax and a couple of Naglers, LVW 5 & 8, cheap plossls galore... Too many EPs. Plus WO binoviewers. Perhaps I should wait until Al comes out with the 17mm Ethos...

Cheers,
Nraib

[wavelandscott]

Am I really that predictable!?!...maybe, I am...

Like many I am interested in the 13 mm Ethos...if I was starting an eyepiece collection now, I would probably have one as well...but, it is hard to justify the outlay at present.

I reckon that 3 is the go as outlined by Starkler...

[Craig.a.c]

At the moment I would have to say my 2" 32mm wide field and 1.25" 15mm with my 3x barlow.

[astropolak]

Sope: A F10 SCT 10" 2.5m Focal Length

Favourite 2 eyepieces at the moment are a pair of 20mm KK Widescans in my binoviewer....

On the more serious note a 14mm Pentax XW (13mm Ethos would be nicer but...) and a 26mm Nagler.

Joe

[ausastronomer]

If allowed 2 only, it would be the 31mm Nagler and the 10mm Pentax XW.

I agree with the others that you really need 3 and also aspire to the theory that 3 good ones is a way better option than 10 mediocre ones.

If allowed 3 it would be the 31mm Nagler, 14mm Pentax XW and the 10mm Pentax XW, to suit MY needs. The reason I chose the 14mm Pentax XW over the ETHOS is solely on the basis that the ETHOS does not have enough eye relief for me to use with glasses on. For people who don't wear glasses I would substitute the 13mm ETHOS for the 14mm Pentax XW.

For people with smaller and or different design based telescopes, the above may change drastically.

Cheers,
John B

[kinetic]

Hi John, all,

Sorry to sidetrack from the topic but you seem to have a good knowledge of eyepieces all round....
On the subject of wearing glasses, what exactly, in layman's terms, would
having to wear glasses mean to using eyepieces in general?

I have just entered my forties and recently found that what I thought was
exceptional 20/20 vision is now on a slow, gradual, typical deterioration
of a 40 plus person.
This is obviously frustrating at times and especially so when observing.
I find I have to sway between about 1.5 diopter cheapie $2 shop glasses
to read the monitor and see stars as pinpoints, to taking them off to
look through the eyepiece.
I have recently had my eyes tested and was told I have the raw deal out of
the two typical diagnoses.
I need glasses now for reading, and I also need a slightly different diopter
for distance vision.
(The second diagnosis is: need glasses for reading and NO glasses needed
for distance....that deficiency kicks in later in life, typical late 40s).

When you mention eye relief are you talking about how good an eyepiece
would be for using glasses?
I thought eye relief meant, you can wobble around quite a bit near the
eye-cup and not get horrendous vignetting and distortion?

regards,
Steve B.

[RB]

LOL not that I'm into visual all that much but I suppose if I had to pick two then the Nagler 31mm and the 2x Powermate.
If three then a 4x Powermate as well. :P :lol:

[ausastronomer]

Hi Steve,

If you care to start a new thread in the eyepieces section I will be happy to respond there. This is quite a complex topic which warrants a detailed reply and I don't think it entirely appropriate to divert this thread.

Cheers,
John B

[Miaplacidus]

So... we need three eyepieces. Love it. Now I'll be able to tell everyone in my family just how unreasonable they are. Still, I suspect it will undermine my criticism of their much vaunted need for ipods, xboxes, iphones, etc.

Actually, my problem is I have a glut of eyepieces. (20 mm plossls seem to breed.) I guess I was wanting to get back to the zen of astronomy: a simple telescope, an eyepiece in the holder, another in the hand.

No room for the barlow in such a pared down existence.

Om.

[madtuna]

My 31mm Nagler and my 13mm Ethos.

though I'd break the rules and hide my 8mm Ethos and my 4x Powermate in a hollowed out bible and just pretend I only had the 31 and 13

[Miaplacidus]

Great. Now I have to find a place for a bible...

[Jen]

So far i have only ever used 2 eyepieces the 10mm and the 25mm :rolleyes:
:scared3:

[Kevnool]

Meade 4000 14mm and a 30 mmUW and the third 7mm ortho Better to have 3 High / Medium / Low power .....cheers kev.

[Fox]

Ha! this is an easy one. For my TV Genesis f/5, it would be the Pentax XW 7mm and the TV Ethos 13mm. If my circumstances allowed, I think I would trade my 13mm LVW and 27mm Pano for the Ethos. Fox!

[skies2clear]

If I only had 2 eyepieces.......................... .....

I would have to sell about 30 !!!!!!!! :)


Clear skies

BTW, it would be 3 eyepices, Pentax XW's 7, 10 and 30

[StarLane]

It would have to be my 30XW and 10XW???????..... or, 17LVW and 10XW?????...... or, 24Pan and 10XW, duno, this is too difficult to decide on just two, three would be a whole lot easier, ideally, 30XW and 17LVW and 10XW, but then I leave out the 24Pan, I give up..............

[Miaplacidus]

Well, I find it gratifying that at least some people find the dilemma as vexing as I do. Are we all eyepiece addicts? (Maybe the next question should be: "If you could have only one telescope...")

[Jen]

:lol::lol:

[Quark]

Hi All,
Although I have a fair range of eyepieces most of my observing is done with only two.

My absolute all time favorite is my Meade 4000 series 14 mm UWA, I do about 80% of my observing with this eyepiece.

For low power wide field stunning panoramas I use my 31 mm Nagler.

I think the size and type of telescope will play a major role in these selections.

Since the majority of my observing is deep sky, then I could survive quite happily with theses two eyepieces.

Regards
Trevor

[Stephen65]

Depends on the telescope's FL but would probably be one of these pairs:

7XW + 13 Ethos

10XW + 30XW

[PeteMo]

LOL as I'm actually going through a minimalistic purge of my current eyepiece collection to use just 2 excelent quality eyepeices.

My current average eyepeice usage per viewing night is Radian 6mm 15%, T6 Nagler 13mm 70% and Kasia Konig 15%. As the T6 13mm Nagler is my main eyepiece, I just need one more eyepiece to compliment it. I loved MikeyB's 24mm Panoptic, also like the 27mm Panoptic. I can reaslistically afford a Nagler T4 22mm as it covers a similar True Field of View as the 27mm Panoptic.

Agree with others that your choice will depend upon setup.

My realistic lineup would be: Nagler T6 13mm, Nagler T4 22mm

However I would be equally happy with a 24mm Panoptic or 27mm Panoptic.

ULTIMATE setup assuming money no object:
1 Eyepiece: Ethos 13mm

2 Eyepieces: Ethos 13mm, Naglar T4 22mm

3 Eyepieces: Ethos 8mm, Ethos 13mm, Nagler T4 22mm

[Ric]

Probably a pair of Meade UW eyepieces would do me fine. I have the 26 & 18mm, I'm happy with these two but maybe a 9mm for galaxies would be nice as well.

cheers

[Alchemy]

only have 1 decent eyepiece, a 24mm panoptic ...... it frames the same as my camera so i use it occasionally for framing.

[§AB]

If I could only have 2...... probably my 17 and 8mm LVWs

[allan gould]

If only 2 eyepieces it would have to be 8mm and 22mm LVWs

[Inmykombi]

Both of 'em would have to be 24 mm Panoptics ( on my wish list ).
I would need two for the bino-viewers.:whistle:

Geoffro.