radiofm74

After further deliberations (and finding very attractive offers on TV eyepieces with two Swiss dealers) it's now between

- UFF or ES 24 + Morpheus kit (14-9-4.5) or

- Pan 24 + Nagler T6 13, 9 (or 7), 5 (or 3.5) with the prospect of later completing the line. 

Both sets would be internally consistent (weight, eye relief) and work well with all my scopes I'm using or might use in the future. Based on what I read, they should be more or less equivalent in optical quality and FoV afforded. Comfort, hard to say…

- Pros of TV set: form factor (I am a traveller, light and small is my preference); I like the magnifications better, and as noted they're part of a line I can also expand (3.5, used 2.5… or Delites…); I cannot deny that their "classic" status appeals to me
- Pros of UFF/ES/Baader: the Morpheus might have an edge in comfort, usable FoV, and also maintenance (no eyelashes near the glass); the set costs less (I can have a great price on the TVs but I'll still have to sell something to stay in budget); I am used to and like very much Baader's little "eye-protecting wing". 
 
Tomorrow I'll go to a shop having both Naglers and Morphs in the house, and so I plan to see them side-by-side and if allowed to put my eye to them for a feel. 

Do you think that a daytime test could offer good indications as to their respective comfort and ease of use? I know that my pupils will be less dilated and thus react differently, but I'd still hope to get a rough idea… 

Speaking of Naglers… ;D

My dratted C8 weights in at 6.2 kgs complete with its finders and diagonal. So in one of my applications (C8 on tracking Advanced Polaris), I'm ever so slightly above payload and every gram counts. 

I might still take the UFF 24 + Morpheus route, or I might take the Pan + ES82° route. Night will bring counsel.

But since "light and quality" is the name of the game, and assuming I could negotiate a good discount for the whole package from a dealer I know, what would you think of an "all TV" set?

- Panoptic 24
- Nagler T5 16 or T6 13 (which would be your suggestion?)
- Nagler T6 9
- Nagler T6 5

I've seen that eye relief on these is 12mm. For an observer that does not use glasses would it be uncomfortable? It's the last option I'll explore, promised…

PS: concerning the shorter focal lengths. I usually use a reducer on my SCTs so I don't think that a 4.5-5mm EP would be redundant. And it would be positively precious with my 420, 625 and 920 focal length refractors all the while respecting a minimum 0.5 eye pupil. 

8 minutes ago, Don Pensack said:

The 30mm to 17.5mm (17.2mm) jump in magnification is a reasonable jump in a lot of scopes.

For example, in a 1200mm focal length scope, it's 40x to 70x, not a large jump.

With longer focal length scopes, the 24mm in between makes some sense.

In a 2795mm focal length, that is 93x, 116x, and 163x.  A 22mm eyepiece would be closer to the in=between magnification, however.

 

The apparent field of the 24mm UFF doesn't feel like the others, alas, but it is quite comfortable to use.  It has an effective eye relief of 17-18mm, fine for glasses.

(it is one of the only glasses-friendly, widest-field, 1.25" eyepieces)

Measured apparent fields:

30mm UFF--70°

24mm UFF--64°

17.2mm (17.5mm) Morpheus--72°

13.9mm (14mm) Morpheus--78°

I take your point. I might still want a 24mm for the nights when I'm out with my f/6.3 (reduced) C8 or C6 and the UFF is not available: the 24mm would effectively be my widest, lowest power eyepiece. 

I am intrigued however:

- What 22mm would you suggest? If I found a Vixen LVW 22mm I think I'd scoop it up in a heartbeat, but they're not on my market. And I haven't seen a 22 in the ES or UFF lineup.

- Between UFF and ES 68° 24mm, considering that I'd probably be comfortable with either in terms of eye relief, which one would you pick to complement the 14-9-4.5 Morphs? 

Thanks, and sorry for pestering you with my questions!

3 minutes ago, Don Pensack said:

It's not as good as the 30mm, but it is close to being the only 24mm widefield compatible with glasses in a 1.25" format (the other being the Baader Hyperion, but the latter is not well--corrected at f/5-f/6, while the 24mm UFF is.

 

Plus – forgive the shallowness of the comment – UFFs look a lot like Morphs! The 30 UFF, 24 UFF and 14-9-4.5 Morphs will make for a nice set I think!

5 hours ago, Highburymark said:

Having tried most of the major wider field lines over the years, with the exception of ES I must admit, I don’t think you can go wrong with XWs from 10mm to 3.5mm, Morpheus for the ‘teens’, and a Panoptic 24. Proven favourites with many experienced observers. 

That'd indeed be a dream eyepiece kit, but I've checked prices and unless I find a good discount it'd set me back about 1400€. 

My provisional determination is: I'll go home, weight again my own C8 with its accessories (finders and diagonal). If it is within ≈5.6kg (= the payload of my lightest mount minus the weight of a Morph) I'll go straight for the Morpheus "starter set" and add an ES 68° 24mm or UFF 24mm (more the ES given that it weights exactly as much as the Morphs guaranteeing best balance when I swap eyepieces). The test will be valid also for the R200SS, in case I'll keep it, which weights a smidge less than the C8 while being physically much larger. 

This has become Option A, and based on availabilities and pricing in shops around me, it's within budget with the added perk that a case is included with enough room to accommodate my UFF 30mm 2" for the times I want to play with the refractors. It's not lost on me that Morphs have a 1.25"/2" barrel, so for those times I'll be able to use my whole set without having major rebalancing problems (the UFF is ≈200g heavier) and without having to swap in and out the 1.25/2 adapter, which I'll simply keep screwed onto the 24mm.

I'll be a little sorry not to get the Pan 24 – I had gotten a little romantically involved with the idea – but indeed, as many have pointed out, the whole set will likely serve me better. That I love my little Baaders and have grown to respect that brand very much is an added green light… 

2 hours ago, John said:

I tried all the Vixen SSW's a few years back. They were good but had some flaws particularly with regards to eye positioning and outer field performance I thought. Your mileage may vary of course 🙂

Vixen SSW Ultra Wide Angle Eyepieces: Review - Member Equipment Reviews - Stargazers Lounge

 

What a wonderful review John, thank you!

Thank you all for the food for thought! Given the availabilities and verified prices and availabilities I see in shops around me, I see basically these options:

1) The "230 g" route

- Pan 24 + a set of ES82° (14-8.8-4.7). That is (given prices around me) the cheapest and lightest option. Leaving my refractors aside for a moment, for someone who has to load a C8 on an Advanced Polaris, or if I can get it to work a R200SS on an APZ, weight is a key consideration. And in my market this is by quite a margin the cheapest option, believe it or not. The one concern I've read is short e.r. I do not wear glasses and have been schooled at the hard school of 10mm and 6mm Classic Orthos and did quite ok with them, but I do not mind a bit extra e.r.!

2) Same but with Vixen

- There is a reseller around me that has 14-9-5 Vixen SSW. The price is a bit higher than the ES but weight is still very limited and I think I understand e.r. a tad better. Worth considering! It'd be much the same concept and I'd still be in the budget.

3) Morpheus!

Dan's endorsement of the Morpheus makes me think. The "whole box" is not in my budget, but I could stay within it with a "starter set" (14-9-5), sold at a very attractive price in a shop a short train ride from here, and a UFF 24mm or ES68 24mm. I cannot "ditch" a 24mm widefield because my UFF 30 has a 2" and I want to be able to have the whole range in 1.25" format, especially for my SCTs.

My only concern is about the additional weight against the other option, or I think I'd have settled the debate already. I need to crunch some numbers re: OTA weight and mount payload.

Thank you all already. 

PS: I also get the impression that I cannot go FAR wrong with any of these options ;D

No coma corrector during the test. Everything was screwed down tight and firm. Perhaps even too tight (clip screws on the back, I need to check as soon as I have the scope under my hands tonight). Thx!

14 minutes ago, Backyardscope said:

Is the object centred in your fov? if so - the collimation is out, also you might want to check the retaining clips on the mirror. The clips should be just resting on the mirror, then forced down or tight. You will find astigmatism will be apparent.

When dealing with F4 Reflectors, mechanics, optical parts must be all aligned best as possible.

Don't rely on cheap lasers to collimate fast scopes.

A 2" sight tube for the secondary and a Chesire eyepiece for the primary.

PS. If you get fed up with scope, ping me a PM about the scope, thanks.

 

Thank you so much! Yes, the artificial star is carefully centred in the FoV (I used AsiAir's grid and made sure it was dead center).

Your comment is extremely valuable. I'll try to recollimate and go easy on the retaining clips: I follow astro-baby's methodology and do collimate, in general, with a Cheshire and a collimation cap.

With my older f/5 newt it was much easier since there was little offset. Here, I even have trouble understanding why collimation is off – though I trust your judgment 100%! Given the offset, which I read should be normal, the rings seem pretty concentric. It would probably be good for me to have a reference image of how the star test in a well-collimated f/4 newtonian of this kind should look like… I'll look around!

Be that as it may, I'll try to better the current collimation, and if I throw in the towel you'll be the very first to know! 

23 minutes ago, Moonlit Night said:

I have a lot of time for ES 82 series eyepieces. I think they excellent eyepieces and very reasonably priced. I once owned a full set. You may notice all my gear is TeleVue, all of it. It’s a long and almost accidental story and nothing to do with anything remotely fan boy-ish. I would never buy anything new from TV, it’s just over priced and while they were absolutely the most innovative company back in the day there are other more re seasonable options out there these days. Have ES ripped off TV designs, probably. Have SW ripped off other designs, probably. Personally I think most of us would struggle to tell the difference between TV and ES in blind testing (yes I know that sounds ridiculous in a thread about optics). If I am honest I regret selling them and have often thought about selling the TV eyepieces I have and going back to ES.

Others will vehemently disagree, hey ho. 

Thanks for sharing your experience. I am very attracted to the ES. I would also consider (and I do consider) a 68^ 24mm as a suitable replacement for the Pan, but the form factor is in favor of the Pan and if I can find one at a decent price (there seems to be a shortage) I think I’ll go for that one. But yes, other 24mm may come into play! 

26 minutes ago, Franklin said:

Considering your love of Vixen, how about the SSW range? Online they have a bad press, though I don't know why, they are superb eyepieces. I sold my LVW collection and kept the SSW set which is complimented with a Pan 24 for low power.

I had missed those! I read a review that looks very promising! Plus it’s the right weight, parfocal…. Seems like a great option to consider. How do they compare in your experience to ES or others that may enter consideration? 

Hello dear eyepiece gurus! 
 
I've been in the hobby enough that I lust to upgrade my (much-used) Baader "Classic Plössl/Ortho" sets. I'll turn 50 soon and my beloved wife has allowed a ≈1000€ budget for a "lifetime eyepiece set". Here are the basic parameters:
 
1) there may or may not be a fast dob/newt in my future – I have a R200SS which might be on the way out (see separate thread on this: https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/419573-help-with-f4-newton-what-does-this-star-test-show/) – but my key scopes for now are  C6, C8, 3" and 4" Vixen refractors (f/7.7 and f/9) and a smaller mostly photographic 70/420 ED refractor.
2) I travel to dark spots with light mounts, so I need to keep everything light and balanced: a set of 1.25" EPs ideally all weighting the same (I do have a 30mm UFF and 40mm Swan should the need arise, but I find myself using 2" EPs very seldom and almost never on my dark spot trips)
3) I want to trade long focal length (read 32 Plössl) for AFOV in order to achieve widefield. I've crunched the numbers and I think I want a 68° AFOV 24mm, then wider AFOV ≈ 14 - 9- 4.5. Seems right for exit pupils and magnification achieved. I might add a Barlow or a super-short eyepiece too. 
4) I do not wear glasses, though I do not dislike comfortable eye relief (not wanting to jam my eye in the 5mm eye relief of my 6mm Ortho is part of why I do this…).
5) For just this once, I think I'll buy new eyepieces. 
6) (I am in any case keeping the Baaders and for purely planetary/lunar I am also working on a set of Vixen LVs… that will be my secret, smaller gift to myself ;D)
 
Option 1 would be to buy a 24mm Panoptic and complement it with Explore Scientific 82° 14mm, 8.8mm, and 4.67mm. 
 
All the EPs are very light and weight about the same (210-250g), the field would be generous, eye relief reasonable, and I'm reading excellent things about these. And I won't deny that I'd be excited to get some green lettering… 
 
The 24mm might also be taken by an ES 68° 24mm, or an UFF 24mm… but they're both heavier than the others, and no green lettering ;D
 
Option 2 would be to go a little heavier (≈400g) and get the ES 68° 24mm (or UFF 24mm) with the Baader Morpheus "starter set" (14-9-4.5), which also includes a nice case.
 
What do you think? Does the thinking seem right, and are the options chosen good?
 
Thx for any feedback, especially from users of these eyepiece!

That's all… again, thanks for sharing your thoughts if any!!

Here we get very close to focus, then through. Note how the image is "messy" at focus: not a nice little airy disk but a bit of a rayed blob… that's what I also saw when focusing on bright stars under the night sky. 

Hello all!

I've recently gotten me a scarred old Vixen R200SS. I brought it to a respected tech in Italy who ran over it and collimated it. He said A-OK. Under stars, however, it has performed horrendously, with even stars at the center of the field not being in good focus, despite 2+ hours of acclimation and using orthoscopic EPs (with and without a coma corrector). I've wasted close to 7 hours of good nights on it and always let the eyepiece frustrated. 

It's my first "fast Newtonian" (I had no issues operating a 6", f/5 before it), so I thought "operator error". However, a first round of comments on CN unanimously questioned whether the mirror was good and/or well collimated and suggested I do a star test. I've done so, and being relatively new to fast Newts I was wondering if more experienced members might help me determine if anything is wrong with the mirror or collimation, and if so what.

I am actually trying to determine whether I should keep the scope or move it on. And even if I move it on, in order to do a honest sale, I think I should first determine whether something is crucially amiss. 

Here's how I've done the test, at home (with a pile of tube extension so the dratted camera could reach focus on such a close object…). I've shot 12 exposures documenting the (artificial) star image from full outside focus to full inside focus going through (what I hope was an) at-focus image. These are very short exposures (20 milliseconds, and 10 milliseconds on the image at focus). I adjusted the histograms a little so the rings would show, and cropped  just so the image would be large enough for your appreciation, trying to respect roughly the proportion from full outside to full inside but cropping more the images close to focus. 
 
Hope it's all clear and I've made no major mistakes. I am a complete newbie as far as f/4 newtonians are concerned so will refrain from offering any thought as to what these images show. I am very much looking forward to reading what you may have to say!!
 
Thanks in advance for any comments!

The first is with focuser fully racked out of focus. The next ones move towards focus, then to fully racked in.

From here on I darkened them so rings would still be visible

I am glad to see the Advanced Polaris discussed here. Can't remember if I posted the pictures below already but I do have the AP (dual motors) and the APZ and they are absolutely crucial for my life as travelling astronomer. They may seem pricey at first, but in fact they're priceless. There is no other mount that combines portability and capability quite like the AP…

I use the AP for imaging with a SD81S, much more rarely – and especially for lunar/planetary – with a C6. I've used it for visual for the Sd81s, C6, C8 and R200SS. The 8 inchers are a little at the limit but the C8 in particular is fine on it. The APZ carries all the aforementioned scopes without batting an eye and it's even more portable, although sometimes I find myself missing the nice tracking of the AP. 

Along with my Vixen refractors and the GP-DX, the AP and APZ are the pieces of kit that I know I'll never let go. 

Last instalment of the ED102S story… Thanks to Justin, Tim, and a couple astro-friends in Italy, I've managed to put together the complete set-up as it might have come out of Vixen factory at the turn of the century: tube (in pristine condition optically), rings, plate, handle, original 1.25" visual back and 6x30 finder, all completed with a nice Baader T2 prism (acting also a fine-adjustment focuser) mounted on a now-complete and working GP-DX. For good measure, I have found and bought "new old stock" a spare Mt-1 motor with clutch (white, but it would go under the green cover, so… ). And for when I'll take the set-up DSO-hunting, I have a 7x50 finder and a nice 2" visual back and diagonal. 

Thought you might want to see it. Won't bother you with this scope any further … except if I find the half-pillar I'm seeking, that is ;D

The story of the ED102S goes on, thanks again in good part to SGL and its members… Today I came home to find this was in the mail

An original vinyl handle that our fellow member @Franklin generously donated for the full restoration of the venerable ED102, and a pair of rings that I sourced out of sheer luck in an Italian shop as "new old stock".

The screws that @Franklin had included helped me figuring out those I needed for the plate, and after a dash at the hardware shop I managed to put this together:

I then realised that putting the rings on would not be easy: Vixen did not at the time believe in split rings! I did not feel confident enough to do what I was supposed to do – either remove the focuser, or unscrew the objective cell – so I went for the ignorant man's solution: I took off the focuser knobs and huffing and puffing got the rings on the tube…

It was an anxious five minutes, but it's an understatement to say that I am pleased with the end result. To celebrate, we went out for a double stars romp…

Well, if I may contribute more corporate literature, here is a brochure depicting EXACTLY my scope, mount and motor controller. The filename reads "ED-S II" and the webpage displaying it dates it at 1999. Given that the graphics displayed in the 1997 and 2002 catalogues above are subtly different (no red "Vixen" logo near the focuser, no oversized "ED" sticker) I will assume that my big boy dates from around '99 and leave it at that ;D

1 hour ago, Franklin said:

Here you go, pages from the 1997 and 2002 Vixen catalogues, I think this 5 year period is when your scope was out (mine was from 2003 and very short lived as the ED103 took over not long after).

Also note that in 1997 the ED range consisted of the 102mm and 80mm only, yet by 2002 Vixen had added the faster ED102SS F6.5, ED114SS F5.3 and the very rare ED130SS F6.6.

It's also interesting to note that in 1985 when the Fluorite scopes were released on the SP mounts they came in 55mm, 70mm, 80mm, 90mm and 102mm sizes but by 1992 the little 55mm fluorite had been dropped and by 1997 just the FL80S F8 and the legendary FL102S F9 remained.

Vixen pulled the plug on them all by 2003 with the release of the ED103S which was the predecessor of the current SD103S.

 

Thanks Franklin, wonderful!

1 minute ago, Franklin said:

Snap! mine is a white/blue one from around 2002, it's performance is not far behind the FL102S.

 

That's a magnificent scope Franklin! I'm trying to reconstruct the timeline of the Ed102S… all I find is rather generic info such as "in the mid- to late-nineties…". The only solid info I have is:

- My specimen with the large "ED" sticker is the second version of the ED102S – and if I'm correct, the first version was f8.8 and this one is f9

- In the 2003 Vixen catalogue the ED102S is no longer offered, and the range of f7.7 ED81, ED103 and ED115 is presented.

- Your scope would suggest that around 2002 or earlier Vixen moved to the white trim.

Am I far wrong in thinking that my large-sticker, green hammerite tube should date from somewhere around 1997-2001?

Ah… Sunday time curiosities ;D

New old scope day! After I posted on here that I was on the lookout for a Vixen doublet of 4" or more, a member of the forum – the nicest chap of all, whose name I won't disclose until he gives me permission – contacted me and we agreed on the sale of this beautiful ED102S + GPDX combo:

We've yet to sort out together a couple of details to make the mount fully functional, but the OTA is wonderful in every respect. I am currently using it on my HEQ5 Pro, and since the drawtube accepts M60 threads, and I had the original visual back of my SD81S lying about, I've been able to put a 2" diagonal on, adding wide field capabilities to the scope. Indeed, my William Optics 40mm SWAN eyepiece – which showed too much aberrations  in my faster refractors – is perfect for this scope. Here's the setup as I am using it:

Fun little fact, it's precisely one of the two ED102s that Roger Vine used for his review of the model. You may recognise the faded "ED sticker" and the mismatched rings: http://www.scopeviews.co.uk/VixenED102S.htm 

Needless to say, that review was a big factor in getting me interested in this model in the first place! The tube and glass are in wonderful condition:

First light was two nights ago, after suffering the customary meteorological sanction for acquiring new gear. I had bad seeing and so-so transparency gradually improving to good under the Bortle 9 sky of Milano. This is where the scope will reside for 99% of the time: it is to be my dedicated lunar, planetary and double star urban scope. I tested it accordingly. But first off, the physical impression is that the scope is handsome and, well, huge for my standards. When the HEQ5 was slewing to target I felt like I was in a professional observatory  In my cramped little balcony, I think it's as big a scope as I can swing, and it will need a half pillar for added comfort. Mechanically everything is A-OK: the focuser is simple but fully satisfactory and I find that the f9 focal ratio makes finding optimal focus easier than I am accustomed to. 

Planetary observation was inconclusive due to seeing – but very promising, with Saturn showing a hint of planetary bands and a well-incised ring shadow, and Jupiter proudly displaying its larger belts and zones and in fleeting moments turning tiger-striped. Lunar was positively fun despite, again, very bad seeing: I could enjoy lots of detail in the tiny sliver of lunar surface that was not yet fully illuminated, including the area around Eddington and Krafft (Catena Krafft was well visible at very low power), and around Grimaldi and Riccioli. No false color to be seen even at close-to-full illumination. The real blast was hopping around for doubles: colourful ones showed me the fantastic transmission of the glass (Albireo, Almach, Delta Cephei); the Double Double was a beautifully clean split in spite of turbulence, as was lovely unequal double Sigma Cas. Achird, Polaris and the Engagement Ring, beautifully matched Mesarthim… it was just a joy wandering around. As a last treat, full Moon and city lights notwithstanding, I put on the big eyepiece and went for a peep at the Pleiades: the cluster was perfectly framed and very, very beautiful with pinpoint stars all across. Same for the Double Cluster, less bright but very detailed and with stunning colours in its red giants: bright DSOs will be fun even under metropolitan sky with this scope! The next night, yesterday, I had the opportunity to take it out again and enjoy a bit of the lunar eclipse – first time I saw one through a telescope and it was fitting that "Big Vic" should be the instrument used. With the Moon now at full, with a small part of it in Earth's shadow, I could really appreciate the albedo features – bright craters and rays, dark maria – and the lack of false colour.

I think that it will be a lifer scope. Over time, there are details I want to improve, gradually. In order of importance:

- First and foremost, of course, I need to get its matched mount up and running: the seller is busying himself with sending the missing parts, so that's just a matter of days

- I'll be actively looking out for a Vixen Green half pillar. 

- I need to get a 140mm dust cap for the dust shield, and the internal 46.5 mm cap is borrowed from a scope that I'm selling so I'll need to source one… they're hard to get by!

- The mismatched rings are OK, but if I find a set of green 115mm rings, I'll pounce

- It would be nice to have the original 7x50 finder, and in the meantime I'll replace the Baader red dot (nice, but gets a little in the way) with a Vixen XY red dot

If any of you has an idea where I could get these hard-to-get-by parts, I'm all ears! But the scope is already fully usable, and I intend to use it on every coming clear night ;D

Timely thread! I'll follow it as I was trying to wrap my head around this very problem yesterday and this morning. 

Being a little puzzled by the Vixen adapter I have at least for now bought this and am waiting for delivery: https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p202_TS-Optics-Adaptor-M60-to-T2---low-profile-adapter-for-photography.html

The concept is a lot clearer, and it also allows for mounting a 2" filter inside, which is a good thing (Vixen adopts a much more uncommon 52mm filter thread). No grubscrews though. 

Thanks a lot!