which one 7 or 9 mm for my 8" SCT - Page 2

janoskiss (Steve H) · #21 01-12-2005, 08:16 PM

The UO HD orthos are my only definite keeper EPs so far. They will serve me well on planets and as a benchmark for more expensive wide-view EPs with a lot more glass. (I just sold the 13mm T6 Nagler.)

astropolak (Joe) · #22 02-12-2005, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by janoskiss

I recently got a set of UO HD orthos. Great sharpness & contrast. Beats everything else I've tried on planets (incl nagler, panoptic, plossl ...). And the 9mm still has plenty of eye relief (w/o glasses of course). The 7mm is getting a bit tight but still quite usable. They do have a 45 degree FOV, but for planets this is a non-issue. They barlow really well too in the shorty-plus, better than any other EP I tried. (Only 4 elements per EP which will help with the glassophobia too.)

And they are a bargain at around $125 new. (Or you could buy a 13mm Nagler T6, and I know someone who will swap you a set of four HDs for it.

But it won't be me!)

Hmmm, there is just one more question to ask - where do you get UO eyepieces in Australia?
RGDS Joe

Robert_T · #23 02-12-2005, 10:54 AM

Joe - you can get UO orthos from Frontier Optics who delivers mail orders. I've bought several eyepieces and a scope from Daniel there and have been pleased with service and product.

http://www.frontieroptics.com/

cheers,

iceman (Mike) · #24 02-12-2005, 11:02 AM

Agree with Robert, Daniel is a member of the forum too (frontieroptics) and I've met him at our dark sky viewing nights at Kulnura. A nice guy to boot.

ausastronomer (John Bambury) · #25 02-12-2005, 11:39 AM

Joe,

Your missing something here.

I own a full set of UO HD orthos and Daniel from Frontier Optics is a friend of mine and the last thing I wish to do is do him out of a sale.

The UO HD orthos are about as good as it gets for planetary observing. Only 1 problem and I see it as a big 1. They only come in 12mm and 9mm, I think 9mm is too much and 12mm is not enough. As I said before I think you need a 10mm eyepiece not a 9mm eyepiece, may not sound much but invariably I think you would get to use a 10mm on at least 25% to 30% more occasions than you would find the 9mm holding up. This of course depends a lot on the area you live and your prevailing seeing conditions. If you live in an area normally blessed with still calm air then the 9mm should be fine, if you have similar conditions to most of us the 9mm may not be fine all the time and may end up going back in your eyepiece bag on a fair number of occasions. Still if you do buy the 9mm UO HD ortho and it is too much you can always sell it and get 60% to 70% of your money back.

Your call but I would be buying a 10mm something, a Pentax XW or a 10mm Radian if you want to hurt the credit card, if you want to go with high quality and a bit cheaper the 11mm TV Plossl is an excellent planetary eyepiece as are the 10mm Celestron Ultima/Orion Ultrascopic. Another option is to get a 10mm Antares Elite Plossl from Canada, these are a 5 element Masuyama design plossl the same as the Celestron Ultima/Orion Ultrascopic.

CS-John B

davidpretorius · #26 02-12-2005, 11:57 AM

a simply great thread.

i know we have had a few of the eyepiece discussions recently, but this is a cracker.

well done everyone!

janoskiss (Steve H) · #27 02-12-2005, 01:54 PM

Joe, if you do decide to give the HD orthos a go, you might like to try starting a "Wanted" thread on the Buy & Sell forum, because I know there are some HD orthos out there that are not getting much use.

asimov (John) · #28 02-12-2005, 02:08 PM

I used to have a UO ortho that I ended up giving to a mate. What's the difference between a 'standard' UO orthoscopic & a HD UO ortho?

janoskiss (Steve H) · #29 02-12-2005, 02:25 PM

Better coatings and no volcano tops. There is a pretty comprehensive CN review comparing HD and standard UO orthos.

Dave47tuc (David) · #30 02-12-2005, 04:02 PM

I use to have the full set of UO Volcano top Ortho's. And yes i sold them

There outstanding eyepieces. I much prefer the Volcano top ones. Much easier to look into.

From what I have read on CN the HD's have had some problems with the coatings. They have small ER also.

I much prefer people look into a Ortho before they buy. Some people just don't like them. They say yes sharp but they don't like that tunnel view they give.

By the way I have a 25, 18, 12.5 and 6 mm UO ortho's on the way for the little Mak to play with. From Daniel

I have a 10 & 7.5 Parks Plossl which a very sharp.

But with a LX 90 at FL 2030. A 11mm or 8 mm Televue Plossl would be very nice for a small outlay. 11 mm at 185x and 8 mm at 253x. I doubt you will use much more than that. IMO.

ausastronomer (John Bambury) · #31 02-12-2005, 05:02 PM

Joe,

If you wish to come up to Kulnurra Tomorrow night ( see this thread)

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...ead.php?t=5769

I am happy to let you try my 9mm UO HD ortho and my 10mm Pentax XW in your 8" SCT

CS-John B

Dave47tuc (David) · #32 02-12-2005, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ausastronomer

Joe,

If you wish to come up to Kulnurra Tomorrow night ( see this thread)

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...ead.php?t=5769

I am happy to let you try my 9mm UO HD ortho and my 10mm Pentax XW in your 8" SCT

CS-John B

Joe I hope you catch up with John. I'm sure John will set you on the right path

ausastronomer (John Bambury) · #33 03-12-2005, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave47tuc

I have a 10 & 7.5 Parks Plossl which a very sharp.

But with a LX 90 at FL 2030. A 11mm or 8 mm Televue Plossl would be very nice for a small outlay. 11 mm at 185x and 8 mm at 253x. I doubt you will use much more than that. IMO.

Hi Dave,

I have used the Parks Gold Series a bit. They are the same eyepiece as the Celestron Ultima/Orion Ultrascopic/Antares Elite Plossls which are all made in the same factory in Japan to almost identical specs and end up with a different "paint job" at the end of the day. They are a 5 element Masuyama Design, which is basically a 4 element plossl with a 5th element added as a field flattener. They are fully multicoated and offer exceptional optical and mechanical quality as you would expect with any premium Japanese made product. These are superb eyepieces and I rate them right at the top of the tree for lunar/planetary work. The 10mm would suit Joe's needs perfectly IMO. I prefer them marginally to the TV plossls which are slightly "warmer" in their tone to my eye. Of course the TV plossls are also an outstanding planetary eyepiece, as are the UO HD orthos.

CS-John B

Dave47tuc (David) · #34 03-12-2005, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ausastronomer

Hi Dave,

I have used the Parks Gold Series a bit. They are the same eyepiece as the Celestron Ultima/Orion Ultrascopic/Antares Elite Plossls which are all made in the same factory in Japan to almost identical specs and end up with a different "paint job" at the end of the day. They are a 5 element Masuyama Design, which is basically a 4 element plossl with a 5th element added as a field flattener. They are fully multicoated and offer exceptional optical and mechanical quality as you would expect with any premium Japanese made product. These are superb eyepieces and I rate them right at the top of the tree for lunar/planetary work. The 10mm would suit Joe's needs perfectly IMO. I prefer them marginally to the TV plossls which are slightly "warmer" in their tone to my eye. Of course the TV plossls are also an outstanding planetary eyepiece, as are the UO HD orthos.

CS-John B

Thanks for the information on the Gold Series Plossl's.

I'm sure you will set Joe on the right track.
Oh yeh I'm not selling the 10mm.

I wonder If Claude still sells Parks eyepieces