Helix - Page 2

Thiink · #21 18-05-2005, 10:47 PM

I was eyeing off the 1rpd that Gary had for sale in the 'sale forum', but it looks like it may be gone. When it comes time to get a wide field 30mm I might look into one anyway.

And it looks like I might need to reconsider the glasses thing, there just isn't that many cheaper long eye-relief eyepieces around. I went out and did some observing tonight (with bad seeing and the moon up!) and the view wasn't too bad with the glasses off, was just annoying putting them back on to do everything (change eyepieces, align with the finder).

What are the UO's like for faster scopes compared to the Antares Elites on the helix page John (ps. thanks for the post!), they are similarly priced. Are these similar to the UO's everyone else has?

ps. sorry for the hijack frogman!

ausastronomer (John Bambury) · #22 18-05-2005, 11:22 PM

Anthony,

If you can observe without your glasses on then the Antares Elite Plossls will be your best option. They have a 52 deg AFOV compared to 65 deg AFOV for the GSO superviews but in terms of sharpness, contrast and light transmission they are clearly superior to the GSO superviews IMO, particularly in an F5 scope. The GSO superviews do ok considering their price but in slower scopes like Rod's F10 SCT. I think you should wait until the next observing gathering and try Rods GSO superviews and also try my 12mm and 9mm UO HD orthos which perform similarly to the Antares Elite Plossls "IN YOUR SCOPE" and see which you prefer between the 2. You can also try Louies 5mm Celestron Ultima which is the same as the Antares Elite Plossl.

CS-John B

ausastronomer (John Bambury) · #23 18-05-2005, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Thiink
What are the UO's like for faster scopes compared to the Antares Elites on the helix page John (ps. thanks for the post!), they are similarly priced. Are these similar to the UO's everyone else has?
ps. sorry for the hijack frogman!

Simon,

The othos do very well in fast scopes. They provide exceptional image quality, the downside to them is the short eye-relief which makes them difficult to use with glasses on and their narrow FOV. The image quality in the UO orthos is as good as any premium eyepiece like a Pentax or Nagler. If you wanted to buy the orthos you can also buy them in Australia

www.frontieroptics.com

CS-John B

ausastronomer (John Bambury) · #24 18-05-2005, 11:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by iceman
I really didn't like the Orion/Andrews ED eyepieces.. at least, the one I tried. I'll try and finish the review I was doing on it and post it up soon.

Mike,

I owned the 5mm version of this eyepiece for quite a while (over a year) and was pretty impressed with it for the price, I have seen a lot more expensive eyepieces than this that didn't perform near as well. Unfortunately this situation probably reflects the typical QC of Synta where there is a lot of variation in quality with identical product lines. I am pretty confident in saying "you got a bad one" but of course that doesn't do the next person that "gets a bad one" any good either.

Cs-John B

atalas · #25 19-05-2005, 12:16 AM

Yeah I bought an Andrew ED eyepiece the 5.2mm I think It was ,in one word to describe It crap!

Louie

iceman (Mike) · #26 19-05-2005, 07:56 AM

I had the 14mm for a few weeks, and I just didn't find it comfortable to use. There was severe kidney beaning and blackouts and I just couldn't consistently get my eye in the right spot.

There was also a lot of internal reflections on bright stars, like little moths flying around. The edge sharpness was only marginally better (had to really look for it) than the 15mm GSO plossl I compared it too, and FOV was comparable also.

In the end, I couldn't find any reason why it would be a better purhcase than my 15mm GSO plossl, and the plossl is probably half the price.

Maybe the 14mm isn't the best focal length for them, maybe they're better in the shorter focal lengths, but I certainly wouldn't recommend them without trying them first, or at least have the option to take it back if you don't like it.

ausastronomer (John Bambury) · #27 19-05-2005, 02:53 PM

Mike / Louie and everyone else I have given a BUM STEER,

My apologies.

I have just realised the eyepiece I am thinking about is not the same eyepiece as the one you guys are bagging. I should have gelled when I said the one I had was black and the Orion Epics were silver, also the one I had was 5mm not 5.2mm focal length. So I am not talking about Andrews ED eyepieces I am talking about Andrews LER eyepieces duhhhhh !!!

Here is a link to the eyepiece I am talking about on sale in the UK. It is sold under the Skywatcher label which is the Synta Brand Name.

http://www.obm.co.uk/products/db/578.htm

AFOV is narrow at 45 deg but they do provide 20mm of eye-relief in all focal lengths, they work well at F5 and image quality is very good considering the price, <$80 from Andrews, if he still sells them. They are not in the class of good orthos, plossls or premium eyepieces but they are pretty good considering the price if you need Long Eye Relief on a budget.

CS-John B

atalas · #28 19-05-2005, 04:02 PM

No bum steer here Jonh, the 5.2mm ED are crap! and I didn't think the Andrews LE were that bad for half the money of the ED's .
The ED at 139.00 and LE's at 69.00 probably cheaper than that now.
How do the cheaper Andrews plossles compare to those John B at half the money again ?

Louie

Starkler (Geoff) · #29 19-05-2005, 10:59 PM

Let me be the first to bag the Andrews generic plossl

A clue as to their quality. They come as freebies with the GS dob and have absolutely no trade in value .

atalas · #30 20-05-2005, 11:26 AM

Yeah Geoff , but compared o the Andrews LE what rates higher !

Louie

Starkler (Geoff) · #31 20-05-2005, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ausastronomer
Louie,

Any assesment of an eyepiece is subjective and based solely on the observing preference of the individual.
CS- John B

I agree , especially when it comes to those eyepieces you rate as 9/10 or higher. The individual ratings will vary according to who you ask. Many rate the pentax xl's ahead of the tv radians.

ausastronomer (John Bambury) · #32 20-05-2005, 01:16 PM

Geoff,

Sorry figured it better to move that to a new thread.

CS-John B

Starkler (Geoff) · #33 20-05-2005, 01:18 PM

OMG John you scared the hell out of me thinking that I had deleted your post ! Must have moved it while I was quoting you.

Phew !

iceman (Mike) · #34 20-05-2005, 01:19 PM

2 times in 2 days Geoff, now that'd be scary