Jump to content

Narrowband

Differences of Explore Scientific eyepieces?


warpi

Recommended Posts

Hello,

I am about to purchase the Skyliner 250PX and have found out that many people recommend the Explore Scientific for this telescope. But now when I have looked on the internet for these eyepieces, there exist a lot of variants.

The 70 degree variant seems to be an old version so this I have rules out. But then there exist three versions of the 68 degree. Which of these have been tested to perform well on 250PX?

post-42211-0-87093500-1425244412.png

Explore Scientific Maxvision 68° Okular 24mm (0215224)

http://www.explorescientific.co.uk/en/Eyepieces/Explore-Scientific-Maxvision-68-Okular-24mm.html

post-42211-0-60061300-1425244415.png

Explore Scientific Maxvision 82° Okular 24mm (0215324)

http://www.explorescientific.co.uk/en/Eyepieces/Explore-Scientific-Maxvision-82-Okular-24mm.html

post-42211-0-71185200-1425244418.png

Explore Scientific 68° Ar Eyepiece 24mm (1,25") (0218624)

http://www.explorescientific.co.uk/en/Eyepieces/Explore-Scientific-68-Ar-Eyepiece-24mm-1-25.html

Thanks in advance,

warpi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The top one is the MaxVision 68° Variant which is spectacularly good value for money. I have all of them up to 28mm.

The middle one is the wider field (82°) version of the above. I have no knowledge of these and haven't seen much written about them.

The bottom is the Explore Scientific 68° which get good writeups. They are considerably more expensive than the Maxvision. I have tried the 82° versions and they are well built quality offerings.

Hope that this is of some help.

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The top 2 Maxvision EPs are rebadged Meade 5000 SWA EPs that came about because of an incomplete order.

People suggest that the quality control may not have been as good as on the proper ES own brand (bottom) EPs, however, there have been very few complaints about there functioning and at the price, they're a bit of a steal.

I have the middle EP and think it's actually rather good. :)

I wouldn't have been able to afford an EP of this size and quality had it not fallen off the back of a lorry, so to speak. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

have personally used both top Ep`s,one as Maxvision 24 mm and other as Meade 5000 series UWA or 82 degree.Cant say anything wrong about the quality issues commented above.Both Ep`s had no cosmetic or any other flaws,bith where bought by myself brand new.

Tested on: Skywatcher 250PX,Skywatcher 350P,and both my refractors.Never tried the original ExSc 24mm 68 degree,but i do have ExSc 30mm 82 degree and again its very good EP.

Performance wise,the Maxvision 24mm is OK on fast-ish scope,but will show edge distortion (astigmatism) and slight field curvature,82degree version was more pleasing but in fast scopes obviously will show coma due to larger FOV.Twist up eye guard on both can be a pain as the grease used is quite sticky and can become relatively hard to twist the EP in cold temperatures.Other then that,both are good value for money,specially as these are re-branded ones and once gone (sold out) will not be back in stock.Get them whilst you can :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll echo the post above - I've had the ES82s from 8.8mm to 30mm and all of the Maxvision SWAs and found the MVs to be ridiculous value for money. I'd add that I found the MV SWAs to be slightly more colour neutral against the ES82s, which are ever so slightly warmer in tone, if you swap the two out and do a back-to-back. Still, the ES82s are a Nagler copy, so you'd expect that..... :tongue:

I've just picked up a Meade Series 5000 6.7mm UWA and that has the same slight warmth too so, on this admittedly small statistical sample, I find no reason to separate out the three lines from each other in optical terms. I've heard the rumblings that there may be QC differences, but as the only EP (out of the 12 I've owned across the lines) I've had to return was an ES82 18mm, I wouldn't put too much store in that theory.

The MV 24mm SWA was comfortably the most used long EP in my 305mm F4.9 Dob and if there was a tiny amount of astigmatism in the outer FOV, then it was submerged in coma. That and the 16mm (which was a little tight on eye relief) were comfortably my favourites and very, very sharp EPs. There are better, but at nothing like the price and certainly, the Televue Delos that replaced a number of them, weren't so much better that I experienced a wow moment that justified why I was significantly poorer!

Russell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe it was me that suggested there could be QC differences and of course I have no proof of this and I guess outside of the place on manufacture nore has anyone else. I merely suggest this based on many years working in the field of QA or QC setting world wide Company standards, it is something that all facotories I have experience in do when something is re-directed towards a lower pricing point, however I have never visited JOC though they are only a short walk from one of Chinese manufacturing sites.

I think it is fair to say the original production run for Meade would have been to the Meade specification and QA.

Alan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is fair to say the original production run for Meade would have been to the Meade specification and QA.

Alan.

Interesting point that. We assume that the "big names" would insist on higher levels of quality checking from their manufacturers but, playing devils advocate here a minute :evil: , it's possible that they just rely on their branding and loyalty to it to sell their products and do so at a higher cost and higher margin than the unbranded versions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It may well explain the problems they got into on the LX800 mount, sorry if I got the number wrong but normally cherrypicking go's on . Let's hope our favourites don't do such things.

alan

Not so sure the LX850 is such a good example (for a number of reasons) but I'd like to think cheery picking does go on. I'd entirely understand why the best examples from the top of the bell curve distribution fetch premium prices, otherwise we're being hoodwinked.

I used to deal with a guy from Philips and they would sell their best 100W light bulbs under their own brand and the rest that were further down the curve on either side were what Tesco, etc sold. Given that we're talking the difference between 50p and £2, it wouldn't be unreasonable to think something as relatively expensive as an EP might get the same sort of test.

In the Meade/MV example, there may be some truth in the defaulted order, but if you were the manufacturer, the design is yours, the tooling is yours and frankly, any EP you make is yours until the client pays for it. If that goes Pete Tong, then you may as well recoup your costs and knock the design out at whatever price you feel appropriate and adjust QC accordingly.

In a thread on 8" SCTs, I posted a link to an optical test of a couple of Celestron Edge HD OTAs. I'm far more concerned by the manifest differences in the corrector plates of those two examples, especially considering they are very much considered a premium product - hence my assertion that I'd hope cherry picking goes on.

Russell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Warpi

I would go for the cheaper MV68°s as a first upgrade. That way you can learn what is important to you. You can then upgrade to premium glass safe in the knowledge that you are buying right. Be warned you will have to spend a fair bit of cash to make the upgrade worthwhile.

My MV68°s have seen me through my first 15 months of stargazing in some style. I'm now in the process of upgrading to TV / ES 82°s and am having to spend about 4x the price of the MVs...

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Paul, you will like these I am sure, I had a full set of the Meade branded ones and if I am honest they were good enough for me and still are, it is only the fact that I money burning a hole in my pocket and I am a fussy git.

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting point that. We assume that the "big names" would insist on higher levels of quality checking from their manufacturers but, playing devils advocate here a minute :evil: , it's possible that they just rely on their branding and loyalty to it to sell their products and do so at a higher cost and higher margin than the unbranded versions.

Were you talking about Meade or ES?

I know I'd send it back if I'd bought a Meade EP at the original price and it wasn't up to scratch.

You'd assume/hope that the Meade branded stuff would have received more rigorous testing!

As for the MVs, there've been very few complaints about the build quality, one or two about ER on certain models, but that's down to design, not QC.

As Alan says, the level of QC performed on the MVs is pure speculation, but given the price tag, must raise some questions.

They were clearly already made up, but un-badged and JOC wanted them shifted.

I assume ES were happy to take them on, but unable to remake them as ES models (waterproof with N2 purging! :D), had to re-badge them as a budget EP and sell them on at the bargain price some of us have been enjoying! :)

This is all pure speculation however (except the bargain price)! :D

I know the glass in mine is first rate, I might have grumbled a bit at the build quality had I bought it for nearly double the price!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I came across this little oddity the other day http://www.amazon.co.uk/Premium-Grade-Optical-Glass-Telescope/dp/B00AZXQWBS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1425403749&sr=8-1&keywords=maxvision+eyepiece

I thought somebody might like to see an original maxvision

The Mk 1 Explore Scientific 82 degree eyepieces used to look just like that except with a black / grey colour scheme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought several 70° ES's last year when they were on closeout specials. Great pieces, wish I could buy more. I do have a bunch of their 68º's and never had a problem. I also have one 20mm 100° which I got at an Astro Expo at a greatly reduced price. It produces very good views also but I'm not sure I can afford any more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

post-15801-0-04075200-1425729061_thumb.jpost-15801-0-55198200-1425729096_thumb.jI have the MEADE 40mm Super wide angle.... And I LOVE THAT EYEPICE, I sold my 35 PAQNOPTIC because the view through the MEADE 40 SWA simply was much more appealing to me, and I bought a MEADE 14mm XWA 100 degree FOV, and It is AWESOME as well.  if you can afford them, I would highly recommend Wide field eyepieces , they give you MORE sky to look at and if You don't have tracking (most Dobs) You will spend less time nudging the telescope along...

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deepspacehunter,

I had both the 40mm SWA and the 30mm UWA and they really are in need of a good diet but in my books very good eyepieces. I have the 41mm Panoptic and the 31mm Nagler in place now and although thay are heavy they are not so fat.

I also see you have a very long time favourite of mine the 20mm Nagler, I had to sell mine because in the first year I only used the 21mm Ethos twice. :eek:

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.