Yes , but that's another story , but I do have a very old .965 orthoscopic that is like looking down a straw but it gives views of the planets like no other eyepiece ( modern ? ) I own , the eyepieces really have no say in the OP's original question and I think its more about quality of coatings than most other things in scopes of the same design ( fraks , newts , Mak's and CAT's ) and aperture .
I have looked thru some awesome scopes that are not expensive and a few stinkers that are considered 'Top of the drawer' , but all in all the better the figure /polish/design and coatings makes a better view , eyepieces /focusers and diagonals and the what not are secondary to what the objective/mirror's will produce .
Good point tho
.
Brian.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Satchmo
In practise that's not quite true.
A typical old F15 refractor probably came with 1" fittings , and might have a 40mm eyepiece if you were lucky . The user - seeking the lowest power and brightest image will reach for the 1" 40mm eyepiece which will give a narrow true field with a lousy 35 degree apparent field and a rather dim 2.8mm exit pupil . The owner of the modern F6 apo rafractor may reach in for a 2" 40 mm eyepeice and get a much brighter nearly 7mm pupil and a tasty 70 degree apparent field .
I used to own a 4" F15 Polarex rafracter and I am certainly not going to waste any time defending its qualities  |