View Single Post
  #45  
Old 18-08-2015, 09:17 AM
WilliamPaolini
Registered User

WilliamPaolini is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by N1 View Post
Bill, while I quite like your review and would consider it valuable to anyone considering these EPs, I respectfully disagree with your chair/stool analogy. I can't see how ER and AFOV could possibly be of the same importance as optical performance.
Hi Mirko,

I see it in action all the time with my observing as well as with others. With all the eyepieces I have used and own, which has been hundreds, bar none the absolute best for the best (contrast, crispness, details) lunar performance has been the TMB Supermonocentric. Not much comes close at all as the views are stunningly detailed. However, 9 times out of 10 I will not use my Supermonocentrics for lunar observing even though it without a doubt for me puts up the most optically precise and detailed view in my preferred telescopes. Why? Because for lunar observing I am willing to forgo a best optical performance in trade for a little more ER and a lot more AFOV.

Actually, I can also say based on my experiences that nothing beats the Supermono or the Zeiss Abbes on pulling in the most stars the most authoritatively in a Glob Core. Yet again, I prefer to trade that for more AFOV.

Now on a planet I will trade AFOV and ER for the best view I can muster.

So my weighting of ER, AFOV, and Optical Precision very much varies based on the target or task at hand, and sometime on the scope as well. I think it is probably this way for a great many observers.

-Bill
Reply With Quote