Interesting observations on price.

[alan potts]

Many of us believe that the Explore Sc ranges and the older Meade Uwa and Swa are the same and I guess the only way of knowing overwise is to work at JOC.

Some interesting pricing I have noticed.

When Meade were running at full tilt the SWA Range was priced at a point below the UWA range, seems right to me. Now the Meade UWA range which is not the same as before is somewhat cheaper and I believe made by other than JOC. Pricing is I am sure to compete with ExSc.

Now take a look at the ExSc ranges: the SWA are priced above the UWA, prices taken from Teleskop Services in Germany. The 4.7mm UWA  (119eu) which I have just reviewed is a full 10 euros less than the 16mm SWA (129 eu) in the other range, in Meades days the price between these two was much lager, maybe closer to 100 euros. Working from memory which I know is not that clever, I feel strongly that my 4.7mm UWA Meade was better than the one I have just reviewed. Also I am reviewing the older none waterproof Meade 8.8mm UWA at the moment and that is going rather well against a Nagler, I have also read some not so wonderful reports on the new Meade 8.8mm, for me clearly not the same but said without proof.

The punch line comes at the 30mm UWA being 40 euros less than the 40mm SWA, when Meade made these there was a significant difference the other way.

Is the ExSc SWA at a price that would suggest old stock.

My point, have they, JOC, changed something in the lens mix, type of glass or whatever that allows them to now market  UWA for 119 Euros where as in Meades days the same was 179 pounds and I believe the like ExSc was something similar the other thing is very few of this range seem to be available which could hint at re-development in process.

Any thoughts?

Alan

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I have heard the more recent version of the Meade UWA 14mm getting some bad press, whereas my old one was right up there in Nagler territory, even in Olly's F/4.1 20" scope. There was an ever soslight difference with the 17T4, but it was no slouch. Recent versions get a much worse press. Something seems to have changed, or there is a problem with QC

[Dude_with_the_tube]

I can assume Allan means the Meade 5000 series UWA/SWA vs ExSc.

Having owned both,optically there was very little to none difference.Obviously each brand had its own ups and downs.Meade where good performers,not perefect or excelent but good.Personally I think ExSc where a notch better then Meade 5000.Would i rate both Meade or ExSc as high as Naglers? No.Nagler will still be better.

However,if we are talking about the older 4000 series Meade,picture does change by a considerable margin.Again we are comparing UWA range to match ExSx and Nagler.Unfortunately Meade 4000 UWA where only released in limited focal length,but both Smoothies or rubber eye guarded ones had the same optics and performed beautifully.Very sharp to the edge,nice flat field ,generous eye relief and these I would rate as high as Naglers.

Michael is correct,newer 5000 series do not get very good feedback,not all the focal length,but only some.

[alan potts]

Dude, with the tube,

I was getting at the Series 5000 range as you assumed, I have never seen any of the 4000 series other than the newer Plossl and I don't think they are very good at all in fast scopes. I guess though they have just carried the name foward and you are talking of a range that go back a few years and if I read the situation correct are sort after.

There is little chance of me finding things like that here though I have seen the 14mm version a few times on the USA market S/H.

I am wondering if what was then, a few years back and now are the same. I believe something has changed because the price has for sure.

Alan

[John]

I guess brands might be tempted to reduce the quality of their products slightly to hit another price point ?

I mean both in terms of the raw materials used and the levels of quality control applied during manufacture. The latter especially can be really expensive I'd have thought.

[alan potts]

It just seems odd to me that the range by ExSc have stayed the same, UWA 30mm, 24mm, 18mm, 14mm, 11mm, 8.8mm, 6.7mm and 4.7mm and the price has fallen dramatically since Meade stopped the same line apart from the 11mm and the 18mm was not a 2 inch eyepiece in the S5000 range, but I guess the optices could have still been the same just in a bigger shirt.

The other SWA range  was 16mm, 20mm, 24mm, 28mm, 34mm, and 40mm that was the same in every way size wise anyway.

I would love to know if they are the same we have all been guessing, the rotters.

Alan.

[DaniAstro]

Alan,

You can be sure that now that JOC offers directly the eyepieces to the end customer because ExSc USA and ExSc Europe are now their own subsidaries they can keep good margin and the additional old MEADE margin to be avoided. But it is very likely the design must be different because they are also water/fog proofed. Now they even got more aggresive with prices from May this year.

[alan potts]

Thanks for that Dani but do you know who is making, or who made the re-designed Meade UWA range as it did undergo  re-engineering, the shape is much the same but wording changed and I think optical quality too.

Alan

[Ruud]

It's difficult to know for certain, but this is what I read on Astronomieforum.nl

The Maxvisions are the old Meade SWA and UWA series 5000 eyepieces. Only the Meade logo has been replaced by the Maxvision one.

JOC made them for Meade, before the two fell out. Meade was not happy with JOC setting up a new competitor in the form of Explore Scientific.  Meade cancelled  a big order of SWAs and UWAs and JOC got stuck with the eyepieces.

First Meade started dumping their SWAs. Now JOC is dumping its supply of them, through places like Explore Scientific and quite a few others. The "Explore Scientific Maxvisions" are not by Explore Scientific at all. They are a Meade design.

Meade continues with the UWAs, but they are now made by Kunming United Optics, and no longer by JOC. This may explain why there is a drop in quality. This is probably only temporary. After all, Kunming is capable of making some excellent optics like the WO UWAN / SW Nirvana eyepieces, and Kunming's BA8 binoculars are quite famous (Fujinon, Helios and others sell them).

----

ES's own 68° eyepieces are indeed expensive compared to their 82° ones.  Maybe this has to do with how prices of different types of glass have changed.

----

I'm really not certain of all of this.

[John]

I believe that a manufacturer such as Kunming, JOC etc will make a product to the specifications agreed with the ordering company and this includes the levels of quality control applied during manufacture. The quantity ordered, quality of materials used, coatings applied, finish and testing will affect the unit price so I guess a brand could specify lower quality production either to allow them to use a lower retail price or to allow a higher profit margin, the latter is a bit unscrupulous though.

[RikM]

I have a 68 series ES and it seems a bit sharper, better corrected and has better light throughput than the equivalent 82 series eyepiece.

[Ruud]

I believe that a manufacturer such as Kunming, JOC etc will make a product to the specifications agreed with the ordering company and this includes the levels of quality control applied during manufacture. The quantity ordered, quality of materials used, coatings applied, finish and testing will affect the unit price so I guess a brand could specify lower quality production either to allow them to use a lower retail price or to allow a higher profit margin, the latter is a bit unscrupulous though.

I thought that maybe the design of the UWAs was maybe changed a bit to accommodate for the kinds of optical glass that Kunming has available, but that the UWA design just doesn't translate well to those new glasses. Something like that.

It could also be that because these eyepieces are new to Kunming, that their production line still needs a bit of tweaking here and there. Or maybe Meade was in a hurry and Kunming had too little time to get it right.

I hope the next run will be up to par again. 

[alan potts]

Ruud,

You could be right with all you say. I think though if I had bought a dodgy eyepiece from what was a market leader a few years back I would be far from happy if the maker, Kunming was not up to speed.

The Maxvisions I thought came about because  Meade could not pay for the order, Meade being chessed off is a new twist, interesting.

I did buy a 5.5mm when they first came out, I had a few others from the range as well then, that was very good and I wrote a review on it and a Tele-Vue Delos 6mm I think. I have however seen reports of poor 8.8mm and 14mm new ones, as for the 20mm I have yet to see more than a picture. 

Thanks for all the info.

Alan