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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #21  
Old 31-03-2005, 10:25 AM
ving's Avatar
ving (David)
~Dust bunny breeder~

ving is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: The town of campbells
Posts: 12,359
no probs. can you send me some good seeing?

used this EP on eta car lastnight before the clouds rolled in. some of the best ciews i have ever seen of this obj!
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 19-11-2005, 08:42 AM
davidpretorius's Avatar
davidpretorius
lots of eyes on you!

davidpretorius is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Launceston Tasmania
Posts: 7,381
how is your plossl going Ving, have you had a good night seeing to test it???

I am looking obviously at a tv plossl or radian????
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 19-11-2005, 02:23 PM
ving's Avatar
ving (David)
~Dust bunny breeder~

ving is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: The town of campbells
Posts: 12,359
to be honest davo, i use the celestron ultima 7.5 and 15mm GSO SV most and rarely use the 10.5 TV.
It is a good EP tho.
Quote:
how is your plossl going Ving
oh and it says hi


good to see that quote in your sig back, so heart warming
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 19-11-2005, 02:34 PM
davidpretorius's Avatar
davidpretorius
lots of eyes on you!

davidpretorius is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Launceston Tasmania
Posts: 7,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by ving
rarely use the 10.5 TV.
It is a good EP tho.
why?

is it that it is a 10mm, or do you need great seeing.

would you use a 7mm TV plossl more over the ultima????
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 19-11-2005, 02:45 PM
ving's Avatar
ving (David)
~Dust bunny breeder~

ving is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: The town of campbells
Posts: 12,359
its just the size davo. 7.5mm and 15mm... I dont really go in between much. I do sometimes tho, so dont get me wrong there... it does get used.

as for TV vs ultima, I dont have a 7mm TV to compare the ultima to. I understand they are of simalar quality tho and it comes down to preference. I have seen someone on here post that the TV felt too "warm" in comparison, I have no idea what this means.

if the seeing isnt up to the 7.5 i'll opt for the TV 10.5 tho... or just not look at planets... you know its funny but last night i used the TV 10.5, ultima 7.5 and series 500 6.5 and the 6.5 gave almost as good views as the ultima! just as sharp but not quiet the contrast... weird
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 19-11-2005, 04:52 PM
33South's Avatar
33South (Chris)
Registered User

33South is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Wentworth Falls NSW
Posts: 1,112
Glad to see this thread re-surface, missed it earlier was before I joined.
I've got one of these (1".25) havent used it for years, gonna try it in the ED80 tonight (eternal optimist).

As I recall it had a nice flat field with good edge definition but I found it hard to use because eyepositioning was very critical (maybe my eyes).
Might bring it to Lostock for the car boot sale, as you see Im in love with my 8.8UWA.
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (IMGP0612s.jpg)
42.2 KB15 views
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 20-11-2005, 12:56 AM
astroron's Avatar
astroron (Ron)
Supernova Searcher

astroron is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cambroon Queensland Australia
Posts: 9,326
I took the 16" out tonight for about three hours, seeing about 7-10 transparency 6-10 due to some haze about 15deg above the western horizon, I tried out my recently purchased 5mm Celestron X-Cel, I found that with bright objects like Venus and Mars there was annoying internal reflections, the views of Mars were not as sharp as as in my 7mm Celestron Orthoscopic, but the eyerelief is much greater in the 5mm X-Cel, I also found that at certain angles I was getting some glow from bright Mars behind and to the right of me when I was looking to the south, I had to cup my hand to the side of my face to cut this out when I was looking at faint galaxies.
This eyepiece is brilliant for galaxies, at 365 X mag it was a pleasure to view faint galaxies for S/N, much more easy on the eye than the 7mm Ortho, and there was lots of detail in quite a few galaxies, Ngc 1365 was a treat with both spiral arms and most of the stars in the galaxy that are on the Thompson Supernova Search Charts where seen.
I will be only using this eyepiece for looking at faint stuff in the future, and use the Ortho for looking for detail on Planets.
I bought the X-Cel from Darren (dhumpie) and I think it was overall a good investment.astroro

Last edited by astroron; 20-11-2005 at 01:24 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 22-11-2005, 01:15 PM
dhumpie
Planetary neb & glob nut

dhumpie is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 879
Glad you liked the ep Ron. I find that with the cheaper ep's, the glare and flare seem to be the main problems (despite Celestron claiming that the barrel and the retainer rings are blackened for superior contrast!!!). I had the same problem with my 6mm Expanse clone. But for deep sky they are really had to beat. I have had the best views of 47 Tuc, Omega Centauri, M22, M4, Pavo glob, Ara glob and even the "propellar arms" of M13 through my C6. Also the tarantula showed why its called the tarantula through this ep. I would have kept it if I had used it more often. My C6 can only do so much......

Darren
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 10:02 AM.

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