Skywatcher Myriad 100 / 110 Degree Apparent Field Eyepieces

[John]

Introduction

In late Spring of 2014 a new design of 100 degree eyepiece appeared on the market. With a focal length of 9mm, initially William Optics showed it on their website branded as the XWA 101 degree model but within a month the design appeared under Skywatcher branding as a new range called the Myriad. At that time there were promises of more focal lengths in the range and these duly appeared late in 2014 in the form of 20mm, 5mm and 3.5mm eyepieces. The 5mm and 3.5mm actually delivered a 110 degree apparent field apparently competing with the Tele Vue Ethos SX 4.7mm and 3.7mm which also have that massive field of view. These additional focal lengths have now appeared in the William Optics XWA range and also under the TS branding of Telescope Services in Germany. As far as I can tell these are all the same eyepieces.

In January this year (2015) First Light Optics very kindly sent me examples of the 20mm, 5mm and 3.5mm Skywatcher Myriads to try out and report back to the forum on. I decided to include the 9mm in the group review as well giving me another chance to appraise that model. Since then the weather gods have been relatively generous and I’ve managed to have 7 sessions with the eyepieces totalling some 25+ hours and I’ve used them in 3 of my scopes, the 12” F/5.3 dobsonian (no coma corrector), a 120mm ED F/7.5 refractor and a 102mm ED F/6.5 refractor. I selected some tough competition for the Myriads in the form of the 21mm and 8mm Tele Vue Ethos which are 100 degree apparent field eyepieces and the 5mm and 3.5mm Pentax XW’s which are 70 degree apparent field long eye relief eyepieces. The Ethos and the Pentax are, in my view, about as good as it gets in performance terms within their hyper-wide and wide angle niches.

On the pricing of the Myriads, the 9mm is currently listed from around £220 and this rises to £250 for the 20mm. Expensive for single eyepieces of course but not too expensive for 100 degree field eyepieces, and no great step up for the longest focal length as there is in the Ethos range. Basically the Ethos equivalents are twice the price plus a further £100 for the 21mm Ethos. The Pentax XW’s retail for around £255 apiece.

I posted some physical descriptions and a few photos of the 4 Myriad eyepieces when they first arrived here: http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/234138-more-myriads-join-the-9mm/

For this comparison the range of targets that I’ve observed are obviously influenced by the season and include nebulae such as M1, M42, M78, M97 and NGC2392, galaxies including M81, M82 and M108, open clusters such as M35 and NGC 2158, binary stars such as Sirius, Rigel, Sigma Orionis, Theta Orionis, Eta Orionis, Alnitak (Zeta Orionis), Gamma Leonis, Castor, Mizar and Alcor and Theta Aurigae (I like binary stars !) and solar system objects that included the Moon, Jupiter and Comet Lovejoy Q2. Observing conditions during the period have varied from moderate to quite good but nothing truly exceptional.

Due to the practicalities of seeing conditions, maximum useful magnification etc, the 9mm and 20mm Myriad eyepieces saw time in all three of the scopes I mention above but the 5mm and 3.5mm spent more time in the refractors.

General Observations on the Myriad Range

The packaging of the Myriads is of a high standard as you might and should expect of a £200+ eyepiece. Large boxes with contoured foam interiors to fit the eyepiece snugly. Skywatcher also supply a 1.25” dust cap as well as a 2” with the 9mm, 5mm and 3.5mm focal lengths, which is very useful if you frequently chose to use them in the smaller barrel mode option they have.

The overall build quality and finish of the Myriad eyepieces is excellent. From the high gloss finish, the engraved logo and markings, the cleverly machined 2” barrel adaptors, the deep greenish-purple coatings, the smooth twist up eye cup to the well blackened interior surfaces and sharply defined field stops, they exude an air of quality and competence. If you have seen or used a William Optics UWAN or SPL eyepiece or a Skywatcher Nirvana you will recognise the manufacture levels in the Myriads. It would not surprise me at all to learn that they are made in the same factory.

That said, the Myriads that I was sent were not perfect. The eye cup on the 5mm had a twist up action that was much looser than the other 3 focal lengths and had a very slight rattle to it contrasting with the smooth progressive feel of the others in the range. The 2” barrel adaptors used on the 9mm, 5mm and 3.5mm, despite looking very similar are actually machined to an exact length and interior taper to match the dimensions of the eyepiece. When removed from the eyepieces even in daylight it is very hard to tell which 2” barrel adaptor goes with which focal length eyepiece - an additional engraved indicator on the 2” barrel would help to get the right match first time, every time. The 2” barrel adaptors use a machined ribbed disk to thread onto the 1.25” filter threads of the 1.25” barrels fitted to the 9mm, 5mm and 3.5mm eyepiece. This is a neat approach but on one eyepiece the ribbed disk had a habit of unscrewing within the 2” barrel when what you thought you were doing was unscrewing the whole barrel. This is frustrating when it happens, more than anything else, and a dab of Loktite of similar to secure the disk within the 2” barrel would solve it.

One final whinge on the 2” barrels is that they use a wide and rather sharply incised safety undercut groove which has a habit of snagging on compression rings in draw tubes as you try and remove the eyepiece from the focuser or diagonal. The 1.25” barrels of the 9mm, 5mm and 3.5mm Myriads have a more gently tapered undercut so don’t snag as you remove them. When in 1.25” mode (ie: 2” barrel adaptor removed) the 9mm, 5mm and 3.5mm Myriads accepted 1.25” filters. Because the 2” barrel adaptors use the 1.25” focus thread to attach themselves to the eyepiece,  only 2” filters can be used with the 2” barrel adaptors in place.

When looking into the eyepieces the field stop edges are sharply defined but do show a thin blue rim of light around them similar to the “ring of fire” effect found on many types of ultra wide angle eyepiece. The eye cup design on all 4 of the Myriads is wide and flat and to access the maximum amount of the field of view you nestle the eyepieces up to your face with the flat rounded surfaces of the eye cup resting against your eyebrow, cheekbone and side of the nose. It is a slightly different sensation to eyepieces that use a more conventional soft rubber eye cup such as the Tele Vue Ethos or the Explore Scientific 100 degree series but with a little practice it seemed to come naturally enough and led to a rather intimate as well as immersive experience. I found that for all 4 of the Myriad eyepieces I needed to have the eye cup in it’s highest position. I did try twisting it halfway and all the way down but found that I experienced some blackouts with the eyepieces. I find the same when I use other eyepieces with twist up eye cups so the Myriads are consistent for me in this. In all 4 Myriad eyepieces the eye cup movement range is around 8mm.

I did wonder if the more extensive contact with the eyepiece needed to use the Myriads would create more scope vibrations in use compared with a softer rubber eye cup which might absorb slight body and head movement a bit. In practice I didn’t find this was an issue though.

With ultra wide and hyper wide (I tend to think of 100 degree apparent fields as hyper wide) field eyepieces there is always much debate about how much of the field of view the observer can perceive without having to tilt and move ones head around. My view is that this can vary from person to person as it is dependant on facial profile and technique as well as the positioning of the eye lens of the eyepiece, the eye relief of the eyepiece and the physical characteristics of the eye cup and eyepiece top. With the Myriad 20mm and 9mm eyepieces, I could see, or at least perceive the whole of the 100 degree apparent field with my eye positioned in the way I describe in the last paragraph. With the 5mm and 3.5mm Myriads I could not perceive the edges of their 110 degree apparent fields. If I turned my head to one side I could just see the field stop edges but it took some effort to do so. These are the first 110 degree eyepieces I’ve used and I was surprised how inaccessible the field stop seemed compared to 100 degree eyepieces.

If you have tried other 100 degree apparent field eyepieces and decided that they are not for you then I don’t think the Myriads will change your mind in all honesty. If you need to wear glasses when observing then the Myriads are also probably not for you either due to their limited eye relief ranging between 13mm and 15mm which is likely to mean that the amount of the field that you can see wearing glasses will be limited. 

A couple of last general points on the Myriads before I move on to observations of how they perform individually:

- They don’t seem to my eyes to possess a tint of any sort when viewing brighter objects. The view seems to be quite neutrally presented in colour terms.

- So far as I can see, the Myriads do actually deliver 100 and 110 degree apparent fields of view. My measure for this was a visual comparison side by side with the illuminated field of view of my Ethos eyepieces rather than drift timing or anything more sophisticated but they seemed correct to me.

The 20mm Myriad

The 20mm Skywatcher Myriad is a handsome and well proportioned 2” format eyepiece, at least to my eyes. Despite its published weight being heavier than the the 21mm Tele Vue Ethos (1.2kg v’s 1.05 kg), I felt the Myriad 20mm definitely felt a little lighter in the hand than my 21mm Ethos did each time I changed between the two eyepieces. Here are some bullet points from the observing notes I made when using the 20mm Myriad and comparing it with the 21mm Ethos:

- Overall there were very impressive views from the Myriad on all targets. In general I saw little or no differences in the views through the Myriad and the Ethos 21mm.

- The full field of view of the Myriad is visible to me with eye cup twisted in the “up” position. The 10mm wide Myriad eye cup is more of a “face rest” but works fine once you get the technique.

- If there are any lateral light sources around they can creep past the Myriad eye cup and onto the eye lens a little bit easier than with the soft rubber Ethos-type eye cup. Shading the eyepiece with your hand removes this issue.

- The Myriad 20mm view was very sharp right across the field in the 12” F/5.3 newtonian optics. Stars have a real “snap” to their focusing.

- I could not detect any edge of field brightening with either the Myriad or the Ethos. With this effect being much discussed on forums these days I did pay some attention to the contrast of faint objects as they approach the field stops of the eyepieces but I did not detect any drop in contrast and the background sky seemed to remain evenly illuminated.

- The Myriad 20mm is a nice eyepiece to handle. It is well balanced and does seem a little lighter than the Ethos 21 despite manufacturers claimed weights mentioned above. The Myriad felt similar in weight to the Nagler 31mm I feel. Heavy, but not quite Ethos 21mm heavy.

- When viewing M42, M81 and M82 under 100% moonlight and on other occasions with much less intrusion from the Moon, the Ethos 21 and Myriad 20 performance both in centre and edge of field of view was virtually identical to my eyes in all 3 of my scopes.

- Very carefully examining the contrast in objects such as M42 and M82 on darker nights I felt that the variations in the intensity of the nebulosity and star clouds were perhaps very slightly better shown in the 21mm Ethos however the 20mm Myriad seemed to have slightly deeper “reach” in picking out and holding the faintest stars in the field just that bit easier than the Ethos could. These differences were really slight at most though.

- A couple of hours comparing slight fainter deep sky objects such as M1, M97, M78 and M108 with the 12” dobsonian, with no filter and under average skies revealed strikingly similar performance again as I switched as rapidly as I could between the Myriad 20mm and the Ethos 21mm.

- The way you need to position your eye to view through the Myriad (as described earlier in this report) creates, for me anyway, a slightly more immersive experience. You seem closer to the star field you are observing somehow than you do with the Ethos 21mm. Maybe this is because your eye is actually a little physically closer to the top surface of the Myriad eye lens !

- The sharp focus position of the Ethos 21 is just a mm or so further out than the Myriad 20mm.

Overall the 20mm Skywatcher Myriad has proved an immensely enjoyable and satisfying eyepiece to use. It’s specification delivers enough magnification to reduce the background “skyglow” in my skies at home away to some extent, enough breadth of field to fit a lot in and a focal length that works with relatively fast focal length scopes to deliver an efficient exit pupil. Any differences between the Myriad 20mm and the Ethos 21mm are, to my eyes, very minimal indeed. It’s possible that a faster scope, larger aperture scope under darker skies might see the much more expensive Ethos pulling ahead in performance but in my scopes, with my eyes and my skies, the differences are barely perceptible. I strongly suspect, had I “blind tested” them, apart from the slightly larger true field, I’d have struggled to tell which was which from the views alone.

The 9mm Myriad

I’ve very briefly described observing with the 9mm Myriad eyepiece and how it compared to the William Optics XWA 101 degree 9mm last year: http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/218397-skywatcher-myriad-mwa-vs-william-optics-xwa-spot-the-difference/?hl=%2Bmyriad#entry2493955

This time around I compared the Myriad 9mm to the 8mm Tele Vue Ethos and on a different set of targets. My impression of the eyepiece remains very favourable. Here are some observing “bullet points” taken from my notes on using this eyepiece and apologies if some of these repeat or at least re-emphasise my earlier observations. I have tried to take into account the slightly higher magnification that the 8mm Ethos produces in these comparisons:

- The Myriad 9mm, in common with the Ethos 8mm, shows no astigmatism even in the fastest of my scopes, the F/5.3 12” dobsonian.

- The Myriad shows just a little more light scatter than the 8mm Ethos around bright objects. The detail within the object is not affected and the surrounding faint halo of light is still well controlled by any standards even on tough objects such as Sirius.

- There is a small amount of chromatic aberration (CA) introduced at far extremes of the Myriads field of view, for example around Jupiters disk.I would estimate that 90% of the Myriad 9mm field is free from CA. The Tele Vue Ethos 8mm does not seem to add CA at any point across it’s field.

- When viewing Jupiter, the same surface detail was shown, with the same ease, with the Myriad 9mm and the 8mm Ethos. A tiny “ghost” image occasionally flits across the FoV when Jupiter is in some parts of the field of view. This may have been a reflection from my eyeball though as it seemed very transitory.

- The Myriad provides a pretty flat and undistorted view right across the field of view. The disk of Jupiter showed slight extension just as it neared the edge of the field stop but features and contrast on the planetary disk remained well defined and no re-focusing was required.

- The view is very sharp and contrasty across the majority Myriads field of view all the time. Any degrading of the view in the last few % of the field is very slight and you have to look very critically at find details on objects to see differences as they approach the field stop of the eyepiece. This performance seemed consistent in all 3 scopes that I used the Myriad with. 

- The 9mm Myriad seems to have excellent light throughput. I felt that I was able to detect and hold the faintest field stars when viewing M42, for example, just a touch easier than I could with the Tele Vue Ethos 8mm despite the small amount of extra magnification that the 8mm delivered.

- The unequal double star Theta Aurigae was very nicely defined and split with the 9mm Myriad and my 12” dobsonian at 177x on more than one occasion.

- The contrast variations in the galaxy M82 were very well defined. The brighter “knot” around 2/3rds of the way along the galaxy and the dark rifts were well well shown on a number of occasions when I observed this object. The 8mm Ethos performed virtually identically on this target.

- Viewing M42, M81 and M82 under 100% moonlight the Ethos 8mm and Myriad 9mm performance both in centre and edge of field of view was virtually identical. With DGM NBP filter added and the result is still pretty much a tie on M42. The Trapezium resolution seems a little crisper at the field stop with the Ethos and little or no trace of added CA. The Myriad is very close on this though.

- As per the 20mm Myriad, I could not detect any edge of field brightening with either the 9mm Myriad or the 8mm Ethos.

- The sharp focus position of the 8mm Ethos is just a couple of mm further out than the Myriad 9mm which is itself not parfocal with 5mm and 3.5mm Myriads in 1.25” mode needing a few mm more inwards focuser travel than those shorter focal length eyepieces.

- The Myriad 9mm is a slightly larger and slightly heavier eyepiece than the 8mm Tele Vue Ethos. It works well in either 1.25” or 2” mode although it seems more secure to me to use it in 2” mode. The 9mm is through the smallest of the 4 Myriad eyepieces.

Overall my assessment is that the 9mm Myriad provides the majority of the performance and the experience of the much more expensive Tele Vue Ethos 8mm, at least in the scopes I’ve been able to compare the two in. If I had to quantify that I’d place a figure of around 95% on it, but please don’t ask me to show my calculations !. I hope this also illustrates the minor extent of the issues that I’ve seen with the Myriads performance.

The 5mm and 3.5mm Myriads

I’m going to cover both the 110 degree Myriad eyepieces in this section because they share so many characteristics. They are physically very similar in size and weight as well. A bit longer than the 9mm Myriad though and they give you two rubber grips around the body section so you can get a sure grip on them. I was able to use the 5mm a few times in my 12” F/5.3 dobsonian (318x) but the 3.5mm was mostly tested in my 102mm and 120mm ED refractors. For comparison purposes I used my excellent Pentax XW 5mm and 3.5mm eyepieces. The Pentax’s field of view is just 70 degrees but they do provide a very stiff challenge in all other respects. When trying to examine what was going on with the image right out at the edge of the field I had to turn my head and peer through the eye lens at a very oblique angle. To design an eyepiece where the optics still work pretty well even when such extreme viewing angles are adopted is no mean feat I reckon. Here are some of my observing notes with these 110 degree field eyepieces:

- These short focal length Myriads, as per their longer relations, did show some slight off axis CA but, again, only in the outer 10% or so of the field of view. It was minimal rather than glaring but it was there.

- Neither the 5mm or 3.5mm Myriad appeared to show astigmatism in any of the scopes they were used in. In the F/5.3 dobsonian a little coma from the scopes optics did show in the outer parts of the field but I can’t blame the eyepieces for that !

- With the 5mm Myriad, Jupiter stayed sharp and only showed distortion (elongation) of the planetary disk very close to the field stop. Jupiter is normally slightly oblate but it became slightly more so as it slipped towards the Myriad field stops.

- The field of the 5mm and 3.5mm Myriads seems remarkably flat - no re-focussing was needed as Jupiter drifted across right out to the edge of the field of view.

- The 5mm Myriad showed excellent detail on Jupiter with ED120 (180x). Jovian moons sharply defined disks with size variations discernible. The sharpness and contrast compared very favourably with those provided by the Pentax XW 5mm over the couple of nights I compared them.

- With both the Myriad 5mm and 3.5mm the light scatter around bright objects is a little bit more pronounced than with the Pentax XW equivalents. In general this does not seem to detract from the resolution or contrast delivered by the Myriads and the same planetary and lunar detail and the same quality of binary star splits can be seen as the Pentax’s could deliver.

- Both the 5mm and the 3.5mm Myriads showed an occasional small and dim “ghost” occasionally when viewing Jupiter. It was not really distracting and not present most of the time. The 5mm Myriad in particular seemed very close to the Pentax XW 5mm in overall image quality when viewing Jupiter. Closer than the two brands are at 3.5mm perhaps although even there the differences are very subtle and the very high magnifications that the very short focal length produces were testing the conditions, scopes and observer somewhat more.

- These short focal length Myriads emulate their longer peers by having sharp and pretty flat fields. On the moon, fine features stay sharp as they drift from the centre to the edge. No re-focusing is needed.

- As with the Pentax XW eyepieces, the Myriads showed no noticeable tint on the lunar landscape. A little off axis glare was noticed in the 5mm when viewing the terminator area. 4-8 Plato craterlets and some resolution of the central rille in the lunar Alpine Valley were seen with the 12” dob and the 5mm Myriad eyepiece. Very reminiscent of the performance of the Pentax XW 5mm at picking up fine details on these targets.

- The 5mm Myriad exhibited good enough control of light scatter to be able to resolve Sirus B when used with the 12” dobsonian. The Myriad 5mm did this very nearly as well as the 5mm Pentax XW does with “The Pup” star glimmering though the glow of Sirus A. The Myriad 3.5mm produced too much magnification for the conditions that prevailed to make the split though.

- Both the 3.5mm and 5mm Myriads showed crisp resolution of Eta Orionis - virtually identical performance to the Pentax XW of the same focal length when used with the ED120 refractor.

- The 5mm Myriad gave great views of the Eskimo Nebula (NGC 2392) at 318x with the 12” dobsonian. Two distinct “shells” of nebulosity and the central star were clear with some structure apparent within the inner shell. The 5mm Pentax XW produced virtually identical results although the “drift time” allowed by the much wider field of the Myriad allowed for more relaxed viewing with the undriven dobsonian.

- When the seeing conditions allowed I carefully compared the performance of the Myriad 3.5mm with the Pentax XW on Jupiter with my ED102 F/6.5 refractor. At 189x the views were similar but I felt that the subtle atmospheric Jovian details such as equatorial festoons, which can be hard to see with a 4” aperture, were slightly more distinct with the Pentax eyepiece. Perhaps with the smaller aperture scope the slightly better light scatter control of the Pentax was paying some dividends with these subtle features ?

- When observing the Moon with the 3.5mm Myriad some off axis glare was noticed when viewing the terminator area. I’ve already mentioned this when discussing the 5mm Myriad but it was a little more apparent with the 3.5mm. The illuminated surface stayed very sharp but the opposite side of the field, where the lunar surface was in shadow showed some reflected or scattered light. This could have been caused by light bouncing back off my eyeball but it was not seen so much with the Pentax XW 3.5mm. With the 3.5mm Myriad this was a little distracting at times I felt.

- The 5mm and 3.5mm Myriads are not quite par-focal when used with their 2” barrel adaptors. They are however very nearly par-focal in 1.25” mode with just a quarter turn of the focus knob needed to adjust between the two eyepieces.

- It was noticeable how the drift time of objects at 257x (ED120 refractor) seems very long compared to what I’m used to with the 70 degree Pentax XW. 110 apparent degrees gives plenty of time to examine objects in un-driven scopes like mine !.

Summary

The Myriads are really very accomplished hyper-wide field eyepieces. The issues and aberrations that I describe in the preceding sections far from major issues and the overwhelming experience you get using a Myriad eyepiece is that of a fine eyepiece that pretty much gets out of the way and lets you enjoy the observing experience.  

While I love ultra and hyper wide field eyepieces, the additional 10 degrees of the 5mm and 3.5mm Myriads is perhaps a little wasted I feel. It’s pretty well corrected as far as I can see but the optical gymnastics needed to see the edges of the field stop mean that it’s not something you do often. I’d not have complained if the manufacturer had contented themselves with 100 degrees for all the focal lengths in the range. I guess they had the 110 degree Tele Vue Ethos SX 4.7mm and 3.7mm’s in mind when they developed them though ?

Another strong range of hyper-wide eyepieces are the Explore Scientific 100’s. I owned the 20mm from that range before I moved to the 21mm Tele Vue Ethos. As I compared the Myriad 20mm to the big Ethos I did wonder how the 20mm Explore Scientific would have fared. Without actually being able to do the comparison I reckon the Myriad and the ES would be really very, very close, if not identical in optical terms. Maybe I’ll get a chance to do that comparison in due course - it would be fascinating !

Thinking about the Myriad range as a whole, I feel there are 2 focal lengths missing. I’d like to see a 12/13mm Myriad as it’s such a useful focal length in so many scopes. I’d also like to see something like a 6.5mm added to the range. In a 12” F/5 scope this would give a practical maximum magnification many nights. These two would round the Myriad range off very nicely and match other hyper-wide ranges such as the Explore Scientific 100’s very closely.

Quite a few years ago a range of 4 ultra wide 82 degree eyepieces came onto the market, initially branded as the William Optics UWAN’s and then under Skywatcher Nirvana and some other marques. These created a stir because they got very, very close to the “gold standard” of ultra-wide eyepieces, the Tele Vue Nagler. Despite early promises from William Optics, the range always lacked a couple of focal lengths which may have restricted its ultimate impact on the market, perhaps ?. With the Myriad eyepieces, quite possibly from the same manufacturing source, I feel we have a very similar situation and a range of hyper-wide eyepieces that push the niche leaders extremely hard on build and performance, besting them comprehensively on pricing but with a couple of gaps that could do with filling. Are you listening Skywatcher / Myriad manufacturer ?

So thats it from me on the Skywatcher Myriads. Apologies for the long and rather rambling report but, unusually, I did manage to get quite a few hours observing with them and had quite a lot of notes and points to share on what are an interesting range of eyepieces. There might be some slight variations or inconsistencies in my notes as conditions varied between the sessions but I’ve tried to set out what I observed as accurately as I can, warts and all !

And I can’t really finish without adding “Your Mileage May Vary” of course

Many thanks to Steve and James at First Light Optics for the loan of these impressive eyepieces to try out and report back on

[faulksy]

what a cracking report john. those sw look brilliant , and what a price compared to tv. i did look through dans 9mm and found it brilliant, so it doesnt serprize me that the rest of the range is ethos like either. well done john great read

[russ.will]

Thanks for that John. Always a good read.

Reading between the lines, it would appear that the differences between all of the brands offering HWAs (you coined it!) EPs are very small, to negligible under most circumstances. As such, does this leave the Ethos looking a touch expensive? The performance differential between Naglers and Panoptics versus similar competition is similarly slim, but the price differential in those cases seems less pronounced.

Russell

[jkwhinfrey]

Nice report John, thanks for taking the time to produce it and all that observing too. And thanks to FLO for making it possible.

I don't know, you say never to HWA, but then you just start wondering... How many Myriads are dropping in baskets? As already noted, the prices are very competitive.

I totally agree about the lack of 12/13mm focal length in both these and the Nirvanas. They leave you looking at ES and TV to fill the gaps.

I'm surprised about the weight of the 20mm. I remember seeing something that quoted around 900g which would fit with your comments.

James

[russ.will]

That lack of 12-14mm FL was a deal breaker for me. I was waiting on this report before pulling the trigger on the ES100s, but in a 2000mm FL scope, that absence was a complete no go.

You'd think the OEM of these and the WO equivalents, might have learned from the Nirvana/UWAN experience....

Russell

[Qualia]

Cracking report, John. Very well detailed and researched. Thank you for putting this together.

Within their focal lengths, it looks like the Myriad are probably the best value 101º eyepieces you can buy on the market and at their reasonable price will allow many to enjoy the hyper wide experience.

[swamp thing]

Thank you John. Ive been eagerly awaiting this review for while. It sounds as if the 20mm could well be coming to my eyepiece case very soon.

At least with the price they are means I can keep my Naglers. This was always my concern if opting for the Ethos. 

I've felt for while that although a 20mm HW would be superb on showpiece objects it would mean a loss of field for more general 'looking about' that the 31mm T5 does so well. 

I think that perhaps with the Myriad I can have both.  

[JG777]

Excellent report thanks for taking the time, new EPs are on my list for later in the year and this will definitely help in choosing.

[oldfruit]

Thanks for the very thorough review. I currently own the range of Nirvana eyepieces and am impressed with the quality and performance that they deliver. I have been looking at the Myriad range with interest, especially the 5mm as it would make a nice planetary eyepiece on nights of reasonable seeing and allow longer drifts through the field of view in my dob.

Your review has pretty much made my mind up that this would be a good purchase.

[laudropb]

Great report. Gives lots of food for thought.

[spaceboy]

Another superb report yet again from you John. Thank you for taking the time to compose it

I like my 28mm Nirvana a lot but it is a little let down by the whole face hugging eye cup. I agree that it becomes second nature to use after several sessions but I don't think ergonomically it would fit younger children or female faces as comfortably.

[Dude_with_the_tube]

good job John and nice reading,shame you dont have a scope what is faster then your 12" F5.3 dob as majority of dob owners are in F4-F4.5 area and this could make a whole lot of difference and i think you could possibly see Ethos pulling more ahead of Myriad in faster instruments(only an assumption).Ideally it would be great to have a review when a slow and a fast instrument are used like F7 or slower and F4.5 or faster.But never the less,it was truly interesting review.

[F15Rules]

That's a great read John, and hat's off to you for your sheer dedication and work as clearly put into your report.

I must confess I read it as "an interested bystander" - I'm not that big into mega wide fields (I have just one 84deg ep) and am not really likely to be buying them at my age - any funds I might come into I'd rather invest in more traditional high quality eyepieces of more modest field of view. But I can't deny that there is a market for these things and that some of them at least deliver excellent views if you are really into these size fields of view.

Just speaking personally, I think I'll stick with Orthos and good quality plossls for most of my needs, with the odd foray into Nagler-land in future I hope

Dave

[Damo636]

Fabulous report John on what clearly are a very good range of eyepieces, thanks very much for all your efforts!

I must admit I am very tempted to jump in and buy the 20mm. Having sold both my 21 & 13 Ethos (to fund another project!), these could be a alternate route back into hyper sides without breaking the bank (and divorce!). The fact that you could barely distinguish between the two is high praise indeed, I know how good that 21 Ethos is!