Quality Planetary eyepiece

iceman (Mike) · #1 04-05-2005, 01:39 PM

Hi guys.

Just planning my next "quality" eyepiece, which will be for planetary/lunar/doubles.. short focal length, good quality.

I've got the 14mm UWA Meade S4000, which I use for DSOs, and currently I just barlow it, or use my 9mm GSO plossl (on its own, or barlowed) for planetary viewing, depending on the seeing.

I'm after something higher mag than my 9mm, something around 6 or 7mm, which will give me 178x - 208x magnification in my 10" f/5 dob (focal length 1250mm). Of course i'd plan to barlow it on nights of exceptional seeing, for 300-400x mag.

I'm not planning on buying in the very short term, because my next planned purchase is the EQ tracking platform. So i'm just planning ahead and after opinions and ideas on what eyepiece you'd recommend.

On my short list so far is:

1. Pentax XW 6 or 7mm. I've looked through John Bambury's Pentax XW 7mm at the last mini star party, and Jupiter at 300x looked magnificent. It's a really nice eyepiece with a wide FOV (70deg) and a nice big lens for comfortable viewing (ample eye relief).

2. Tak LE (6 or 7.5). I've looked through Louie's Tak LE 7.5 at the last mini star party, and while the FOV wasn't as wide as the Pentax, it was a nice sharp eyepiece with good eyerelief.

3. Orthoscopic 6 or 7mm. Again I looked through John's 6mm and 7mm Ortho's, and the FOV is noticeably smaller but the image was sharp with good contrast. Smaller eyerelief but not too small, it wasn't uncomfortable.

4. Meade S4000 UWA 6.7mm. Haven't seen this eyepiece before, but have heard good reports about it, and would be a nice match for my 14mm. I'm expecting it to have good eyerelief and a wide fov, sharp to the edge.

I'm not sure on the exact prices of each of them, but I'm pretty sure the Pentax is the most expensive, the Meade and Tak are probably equal 2nd in price, and the Ortho is the cheapest, probably 1/3rd of the price of the Pentax.

Anyway, appreciate your thoughts and suggestions. I'll use the star party this weekend to view through as many of these again to help make up my mind too.

Striker (Tony) · #2 04-05-2005, 02:01 PM

Is it really worth the extra cost for Wide FOV for Planetry.....

I'm...not sure but I have heard the Meade series 5000 arn't too good in a F5 scope.....they only come in a 5.5 and 9mm...$145

How about a Radian.....

iceman (Mike) · #3 04-05-2005, 02:07 PM

I'm talking about the S4000, not the 5000.. they're the older model, which are (by all reports) better than the newer 5000 UWA's.

Without tracking, the extra FOV helps, whether it's for planetary or DSO work. Less nudging and more looking.

Why would a radian be better than any of the 4 listed above? (genuine question).

iceman (Mike) · #4 04-05-2005, 02:12 PM

Regarding FOV, if I get the tracking platform then a wide FOV won't be as important, as the tracking will keep the object centered.

So maybe the cheaper, high contrast, small FOV orthos would be best..

ving (David) · #5 04-05-2005, 02:21 PM

for the price, from all reports i've seen, you cant go past University Optics for orthos mike. I've not heard a single bad thing about them (except for maybe eyerelief).
I also read somewhere the celestron ultimas are exceptional for planetary work. I think it was louie that had a 5mm for sale?

sorry i cant help more.

like you said tho, you dont need a wide field of view when you have your tracking going

My TV plossl is very contrasty and offers good views but I dont know how it compares to the above. I cant imagine it would be as good.

gbeal · #6 04-05-2005, 02:57 PM

Ice,
OK I am a snob and am fortunate enough to have a set of Zeiss orthos, so this is my choice.
BUT.......... The U/O orthos are good, and very good, by all accounts. As far as a cost effective I believe they are hard to beat. The T/V plossls are also good, and double for general purpose use.
I have never really liked to wide filed (Nagler/Radian/Pentax's) but that is unsubstaniated on my account.
The try it a a star party idea is the best. Come across this weekend and try the Zeiss stuff.
Gary

mch62 (Mark) · #7 04-05-2005, 03:57 PM

Mike as a dedicated Orthoscopic man for a very long time I have had the fortune to procure recently a couple of Radians in the form of a 5 and 8mm .
Now I love my UO Orthos for the planets but find that the Radians are almost every where near as good.
I found them being described on the web as orthoscopics with built in barlows and would have to agree.
My main reason for straying from the ortho path is eye relief and my astigmatism in my dominant eye.I plan on using the new Televue Astigmatism corrector which fits long eye relief TV eyepieces.
I am planning on do a comparison when I get the observatory up and running between the designs.
Hope fully before the Comet collision.
But for the ultimate planetary eyepiece it is the 4 element Orthoscopic or 3 element Moncentric eyepiece , but then for a Newtonian pusher

the limited field at high power won't be any good for you.
Try a Radian if you can there are quite a few planetary observers using them these days but the price of one Radian will get you 2 orthos.
I don't plan on parting with my othos yet as there still very good for eyepiece projection.
Mark

Dave47tuc (David) · #8 04-05-2005, 05:44 PM

Well if it was me

I would buy a Pentax XW 7mm and 5mm. This would be my first choice.

Second choice Nagler 7 and 5 mm.

Try to look before you buy.

Good luck.

Starkler (Geoff) · #9 04-05-2005, 11:21 PM

The pentax are sharp as an ortho but wider field and with the most comfortable viewing.

Sounds like you have already tried the major contenders anyway.

atalas · #10 05-05-2005, 01:33 AM

Iceman, for the money you can't go past the Tak LE ! a 5mm and a 7.5 will serve you well. You will find them on Astromart now and again for around 130 US dollars. Postage from the US for these eyepieces is around $10.00 us .

Louie

iceman (Mike) · #11 05-05-2005, 07:54 AM

Thanks for all the comments guys.

I've seen some Meade S4000 UWA6.7mm for around US$200 (hard to find now, since the 5000 series are out). The pentax are around US$300, and the Orthos are around US$100.

Price will play a part, but so will tracking (whether/when I get it). FOV just won't be as important once I have tracking.

Some great thoughts for me to take onboard so thanks again.

dhumpie · #12 05-05-2005, 05:14 PM

I will have to agree with Mike on this one. I have compared side by side a 7mm UO Ortho (courtesy of David_westsky) and a TV 8mm Radian (courtesy of Andrew_astro_south) in Dave's 10" f/5 GS dob and I dare say that the Radian was just as sharp and contrasty as the UO Ortho. But I would lean towards the TV Radian as I wear glasses when observing (astig). Its just more comfortable to use. Have a look around Astromart as you can get a pretty good price on these.

Cheers,
Darren

robin · #13 05-05-2005, 09:10 PM

Well,as I've posted b4, I love my 9mm Nagler & my 6mm Radian.The nag is a gr8 all rounder.
The radian is my 'saturn' eye piece.....60o fov is gr8.Excellent eye relief, real sharp......but...if your eye isn't in the right spot, you may notice reflective 'little white moths' buzzing around, especially on jupiter.Once you've found the right spot......yeah baby!

ausastronomer (John Bambury) · #14 05-05-2005, 09:39 PM

I find the color reproduction in Radians to be warmer than my HD orthos and also warmer than my Pentax XW's giving a less neutral tone to my eye, actually they are warmer than most eyepieces not withstanding they are very sharp. The warm tone is something I don't particularly like but may not be an issue to many others. I know Mike doesn't wear glasses so eye-relief is not an issue to him, if it was then my 1st choice would be Pentax XW's followed by Radians.

CS- John B

trufflehunter (Wayne Robinson) · #15 05-05-2005, 10:06 PM

Mike, if the weather holds up

this Saturday night...
you can try out my 8mm Radian.
I really liked John's Pentax and UO's and Louie's LE's from our last visit to Kulnura too. I really don't know what I'd do if I had my time over again! In a perfect world I'd have the lot!

thomo · #16 05-05-2005, 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by robin
but...if your eye isn't in the right spot, you may notice reflective 'little white moths' buzzing around, especially on jupiter.

I've experienced the same in my 13mm Nagler. The first night I used it I thought there was something flying around inside my OTA.

ving (David) · #17 06-05-2005, 11:32 AM

weird... I had that once... It was a spider building a web.
are you any closer to making a decision mike? it seems to me that everyones opinions are right on this matter hey

Its a bit of "peanuts vs beernuts" if you ask me...

your lucky you are in a position to try quite a few out first to make your own opinion

ausastronomer (John Bambury) · #18 06-05-2005, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ving
It seems to me that everyones opinions are right on this matter hey

Its a bit of "peanuts vs beernuts" if you ask me...

Absolutely, all of the eyepieces mentioned are excellent. Its a matter of trying them out and finding out which of the good and bad points of each eyepiece are the most important to the individual.

Cs-John B

gaa_ian (Ian) · #19 27-05-2005, 10:44 PM

Just took delivery of a TV 8mm Radian
Very good high contrast views.
Yes the FOV is not so wide & means more pushing with the Dob, but should be good in the LX-90.
Found it particully good at resolving the Homunculous nebula in Eta Carina.
More detail due to the high contrast compared to my 7mm Seibert optics.
Almost no internal reflections on Jupiter & able to resolve surface details well.