New 2" 12mm & 15mm 80deg EPs anyone?

Miaplacidus (Brian) · #1 18-11-2005, 01:29 PM

Hi guys & gals,

I see Andrews Communications are now selling a 12 mm and a 15 mm version of their 2" 80° 30mm f.l. eyepiece, which received such a positive rap in one of the Aussie astro mags a few months ago. (I think the 30 mm still represents excellent value for money, especially if you're a lazy dobber who doesn't want to nudge the scope very much, or if you're having trouble locating lonely DSOs. Although there's a few around here, I know, who just HATE this poor man's nagler.)

Anyway, has anyone tried out these newer versions? (Cost: 15mm $149; 12mm $219.)

Cheers,

Brian.

davidpretorius · #2 18-11-2005, 02:51 PM

I love the 30mm and it punches above its weight I believe

Somewhere I read / heard that the 15mm weren't as good. Can't remember where or who????

I loved the wide view thru a nagler 13mm type 6 at camp, but i also would be interested in what someone may think if they have bought one???

Starkler (Geoff) · #3 18-11-2005, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miaplacidus

Although there's a few around here, I know, who just HATE this poor man's nagler.)

I had a very quick look through one at the star camp. My impressions of the 30mm was that the edge abberations seemed to be on a par with the gso superview, but the UWA has a much wider field. Overall much nicer than the superview.

P.S. theres no such thing as a poor mans nagler

You can choose any two of the following attributes, but you wont get all three.
1: reasonable price
2: sharp to the edge
3: wide field

janoskiss (Steve H) · #4 18-11-2005, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Starkler

You can choose any two of the following attributes, but you wont get all three.
1: reasonable price
2: sharp to the edge
3: wide field

So would you say the price of a Nagler, Panoptic or Pentax XW is unreasonable?

Argonavis (William) · #5 18-11-2005, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by janoskiss

So would you say the price of a Nagler, Panoptic or Pentax XW is unreasonable?

There is a law of optics that states, and I simplify, that to eliminate the last 15% of aberrations, you will pay 400% more. Is this reasonable? No. Fair? No. Especially to those of us who want it all on a budget.

janoskiss (Steve H) · #6 18-11-2005, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Argonavis

There is a law of optics that states, and I simplify, that to eliminate the last 15% of aberrations, you will pay 400% more. Is this reasonable? No. Fair? No. Especially to those of us who want it all on a budget.

I think it's the same with everything regarding the cost; you pay a lot more to get from very good to best, which is usually just a little better. Sometimes it's worth it sometimes not. Getting 10% more CPU power for an extra $1000: NO. Paying a lot more taxes for sake of top quality education and healthcare for a small proportion of the population on low incomes: YES. Paying 3x more per eyepiece for less (although still not absent) aberrations: I still haven't decided.

BTW, I just ordered some UO HD orthos because I'm curious and not entirely happy with any of my EPs on the planets.. On Mars I'm not too impressed with the Naglare (my priciest EP).

Miaplacidus (Brian) · #7 19-11-2005, 12:23 AM

Gosh, you're a philosophical bunch! Laws of diminishing returns, Rawlsian economic systems. Where on earth did all the astronomers go?

Got a phone message today (but I was out). Apparently the 15 mm eyepiece might be incorrectly priced on Andrews website. I'll post again when I've clarified the issue.

In the meantime, continue debating the aetherial and ineffable. I enjoy it.

Cheers

Brian.

astropolak (Joe) · #8 25-11-2005, 09:47 AM

Had a look at those and decided not to risk purchasing them. The 15mm has no edge blackening on the optical elements, poor quality lens coating and generally cheap appearance, the 12mm (no one could tell me what the focal length was) is a 30mm UWA 2" eyepiece with a Barlow screwed on.
Would be interested to hear views of someone who actually tested them in a telescope...

davidpretorius · #9 25-11-2005, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by astropolak

Had a look at those and decided not to risk purchasing them. The 15mm has no edge blackening on the optical elements, poor quality lens coating and generally cheap appearance, the 12mm (no one could tell me what the focal length was) is a 30mm UWA 2" eyepiece with a Barlow screwed on.
Would be interested to hear views of someone who actually tested them in a telescope...

Welcome to the forum,

thanks for the heads up!