Go Back   IceInSpace > Equipment > Eyepieces, Barlows and Filters
Register FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 13-12-2008, 06:44 PM
zumka (Daniel)
Registered User

zumka is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: East Bentleigh, Victoria
Posts: 177
SW600 eye pieces and filters

Can you please recommend what filter and eye pieces should I get for my SW600. I want to be able to see planets clearly as well as good deep space view. Friend suggested to buy a set.

Preferably don't want to spend lots of money but the goal is quality.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 13-12-2008, 07:10 PM
dannat's Avatar
dannat (Daniel)
daniel

dannat is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Macedon shire, Australia
Posts: 3,427
I wouldn't buy a whole set, but one or two quality pieces.

Look at some others before buying i think - what kind of price range were you looking at
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 13-12-2008, 08:54 PM
JethroB76's Avatar
JethroB76 (Jeff)
Registered User

JethroB76 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Tassie
Posts: 1,104
If, by a set, you mean a meade or celestron kit (or similar) in a case, I'd think you'd be better off buying a couple singular eyepieces instead.

You do however need to give your budget
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 13-12-2008, 10:24 PM
zumka (Daniel)
Registered User

zumka is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: East Bentleigh, Victoria
Posts: 177
I was recommended to buy a set, it does not mean I will buy a set. That's why I'm trying to get everyones opinion.

I want to have a reasonable quality eyepieces maybe barlow if price allows. Preferably don't want to spend more then $100 per piece.
Forgot to mentioned this is my first scope, I have SW600 with EQ6PRO, my plans are to start with observing then move to astrophotography.
As I mentioned in my previous post I need a good piece for planets and another one for DSO.
Also I'm thinking about light pollution filter and possibly some other filters.

Hope this is enough info.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 13-12-2008, 11:14 PM
bmitchell82's Avatar
bmitchell82 (Brendan)
Newtonian power! Love it!

bmitchell82 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Mandurah
Posts: 2,597
well you will need some different kinds of filters to do cirtain jobs. and it all depends on your locations. I have found this is in my experience that filters for visual are very limited in their uses. I have a compleat set that i have access to and i think i used them twice now.

If your in the city, then go the light pollution filters though they are kinda exy it will make a bucketload of difference. maby even a nebula filter.

As for your eye pieces, the skywatcher ones are fine for now. The only things that i would do is get A, 9 or 12 mm illuminated rectical for your astrophotography, a 2x Barlow, and maybe a 32 or 40mm eye piece.

Remember that a barlow for visual observing is a powerful thing as it turns 3 eye pieces into 6. eg if your current set is something like 15, 25, 40mm add the barlow in and you will have 15, 25, 40, 7.5, 12.5 and 20. I wouldn't go too much past that if your main aim is going to be astrophoto. save your pennys for that as that is a expensive arm of astronomy! and a camera you will never beat as you will see so much more of the sky.

Thats my 2 bobs worth
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 13-12-2008, 11:15 PM
matt's Avatar
matt
6000 post club member

matt is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Launceston, Australia
Posts: 6,570
Having owned the SW600 and EQ6 combo, I'll jump in here

First of all, $100 per eyepiece doesn't give you much room to move. Like most things, you tend to get what you pay for.

My best planetary views with that scope were with a 5mm Vixen LVW eyepiece.

Best deep space view was with a 20mm eyepiece.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 13-12-2008, 11:21 PM
bmitchell82's Avatar
bmitchell82 (Brendan)
Newtonian power! Love it!

bmitchell82 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Mandurah
Posts: 2,597
well the horses mouth just spoke . the other thing to remember with faint fuzzies and the like is that when you go down in size form say 20mm to 6mm you are getting all the light coming into the 20 mm hence things are brighter, and in the 6mm the light is streched over alot more hence duller images this is why Matt uses the higher power on planetarys because they are naturally brighter. and the low power on the fuzzies, But within saying that the eye pieces that he mentioned are a lot more expensive than your 100 rods
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 14-12-2008, 09:38 AM
BerrieK's Avatar
BerrieK
Registered User

BerrieK is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Orange
Posts: 650
I have the SW600 but on an EQ5 (a few sandbags on the accessory tray help dampen down any wobbles) with a dual axis motor drive.

I have recently upgraded to Baader Hyperions which seem to perform well even at f5, to my very beginner eyes. They are really crisp on planets, and I find that the reported 68deg FOV give me reasonable views on DSOs. I confess that I did purchase the whole range of Hyperions (from Andrews) and do not use them all. I also have a 2x barlow. The 3.5mm is just at the edge of useful mag for the SW600, but fine on a night of good seeing and viewing.

I agree that a Barlow and 2 or 3 EPs are really all that you NEED, but it always fun to have other mags to play with, particularly with varying viewing conditions.

What I did when I was deciding which pieces to buy I made myself a little table (on microsoft word) incorporating the mags and possible mags with the Barlow, calculated the highest useful mag for the scope, and made unuseful mags red as they were not wanted...then looked at which barlow / eyepiece combos overlapped closely to show superfluous combos. I then did a bit of reading to find suggested mags for planetary viewing and took these numbers into consideration also....but in the end I like toys and bought the lot anyway. As I said I dont use them all.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 14-12-2008, 10:27 AM
matt's Avatar
matt
6000 post club member

matt is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Launceston, Australia
Posts: 6,570
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmitchell82 View Post
this is why Matt uses the higher power on planetarys because they are naturally brighter. and the low power on the fuzzies,
Mate...

I recommended the 5mm for planets.

If you go back to zumka's original post, he asked which ep for 'planets'....not planetarys.

I wouldn't use a 5mm to look at DSOs.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 14-12-2008, 11:02 AM
zumka (Daniel)
Registered User

zumka is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: East Bentleigh, Victoria
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt View Post
Best deep space view was with a 20mm eyepiece.
Hi matt I assume you are talking about same Vixen LVW brand.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 14-12-2008, 11:11 AM
matt's Avatar
matt
6000 post club member

matt is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Launceston, Australia
Posts: 6,570
No. Not necessarily.

Vixen only has an LV at that focal length. You'd need a 22mm LVW if you wanted to stay in the LVW series.

I was refering to recommended focal length for DSO viewing with that scope.

If you wanted to stay with the LVWs...either the 17mm or 22mm would be very nice.

But there are other brands to look at. It's all depending on $$$.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 14-12-2008, 11:35 AM
zumka (Daniel)
Registered User

zumka is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: East Bentleigh, Victoria
Posts: 177
what about Meade 4000 QX
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 14-12-2008, 11:55 AM
matt's Avatar
matt
6000 post club member

matt is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Launceston, Australia
Posts: 6,570
Don't know about Meade eyepieces, sorry.

Have never used them. Although I do seem to recall a bit of negative comment about that particular range. I could be wrong, though.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 14-12-2008, 12:35 PM
bmitchell82's Avatar
bmitchell82 (Brendan)
Newtonian power! Love it!

bmitchell82 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Mandurah
Posts: 2,597
Sorry i did mean planets. hence if you read the whole post it will make sense anyhow.

I have acess and use Meade Series 5000 ep's and i cannot fault them. They always give beautiful views.

The only thing i say about planetarys is that 5mm ep's always have short eye relief, unless your willing to part with $300+ and hence a Barlow with a 20 or 15mm is quite nice, as you get the aparent FOV and eye releif that you get with those kinds of eye pieces.

The problem is also that getting conditions that are good enough for using these high mag eye pieces is not very often and hence unless you are 100% commited to planetary without ever looking past there, buying such an expensive ep for just a hand full of nights I cannot see the value of. But also saying that if i had the money and didn't care, why not buy the best that i could buy

I just hate seing people buy heaps of eye pieces for no reason when what they have is quite sufficient untill they get further into the game. even then i would only be replacing my current Skywatcher eps and barlow with higher quality as they still give me a wide range of mags!
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 14-12-2008, 06:19 PM
zumka (Daniel)
Registered User

zumka is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: East Bentleigh, Victoria
Posts: 177
What do u think about Burgess Planetary series are they good quality ?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 14-12-2008, 06:50 PM
wavelandscott's Avatar
wavelandscott (Scott)
Plays well with others!

wavelandscott is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Ridgefield CT USA
Posts: 3,535
If you are asking if they are as good as the highend Televue, Pentax etc. etc. eyepieces, no they are not...but, I do think that they represent good value for money.

I have TV, Pentax and also the BO/TMB (sourced from our own Frontier Optics) and would rate them as good eyepieces...but not great.

To my eye they are a step up from the typical standard entry eyepieces. They combine reasonable eye relief (much more than high power plossls) and a decent FOV...the views are nice...some versions do show some flaring on bright objects (varies from production trun as the baffles have changed in some)

Some people hail them as the second coming and nearly perfect (this is internet hype)...I wouldn't say that they are perfect but I would place them performance wise in the 89-95% of the high end stuff and a small fraction of the cost. Hence my comment of good value for money.

The build quality is good but they are not in the same league as the Pentax and Televue in my opinion...
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 15-12-2008, 10:46 AM
zumka (Daniel)
Registered User

zumka is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: East Bentleigh, Victoria
Posts: 177
Out of 3 which one is better:

TV Plossl
WO Swan
Orion Stratus
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 15-12-2008, 01:43 PM
wavelandscott's Avatar
wavelandscott (Scott)
Plays well with others!

wavelandscott is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Ridgefield CT USA
Posts: 3,535
TV plossl is hard to beat.

The eye relief of the plossls at higher magnification may be problematic...that is where the TMB/BO Planetary Eyepieces come into their own (in my opinion).
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 15-12-2008, 01:53 PM
zumka (Daniel)
Registered User

zumka is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: East Bentleigh, Victoria
Posts: 177
I decided to get TMB for my planatery. What is the best size for my scope 4 5 or 6. MyScope is F5 1000mm Focal Length, HIghest Practical Power 470X
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 02:29 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement