Charic

lol!.......I found an old pair of Commodore 12x50s today in the local PDSA outlet, they were quite dirty, inside too, looked like fungus in there! also covered in web and two dead spiders between the bridge and focus adjuster, original square case, But the smell....... very musty, said they were years old, and the straps looked like they would fail if hung around the neck. Maybe this week on my shopping trip I'll find something better, so still looking. My Strathspeys have a unique smell too, rubber armoured, smell's like a tyre bay when you uncase them.

Cheers, I'm glad I watched via the link you supplied, as over on Sky tv, Kay Burley was presenting, I just have to turn her off!

All Ive heard is that Sky News will be broadcasting the event, so thats where I'll be at 1800Hrs or maybe catch the highlights later. I just hope for those folk who have taken more effort, their efforts were worthwhile.

The results are in! ---------------------- Me! " Is it possible to confirm their design pattern they are based upon, like Erfle, Kellner, or do they posses their own design name? The question arises many times in astronomy forums, and no-one seems to have the answer, only suggestions" ----------------------- This is their reply ------------------------ "Here is the spec of our Stargudier eyepieces" [sic] field of view eye relie elements LENS COATING 3.2mm 60 degree 15.8mm 3 5 FMC 5mm 60 degree 15.8mm 3 5 FMC 8mm 60 degree 16.5mm 3 5 FMC 12mm 60 degree 20mm 4 6 FMC 15mm 60 degree 20mm 4 6 FMC 20mm 60 degree 18mm 4 5 FMC 25mm 60 degree 20mm 3 5 FMC It's helpful but does not give the answer I expected, I'll just refer to them as Stauguiders from now on!, why Not?

I'll be passing some book shops this Week, might take a look, though I do like the hardback variant!

Getting away from any light pollution helps enormously. When a way from home, my scope see's 'everything' that the scope and my eyes are capable of seeing under real-world conditions, and having the right seeing conditions. From home I struggled at first, but I'm finding the longer I look, the more I can see, even managing to pick out galaxies around Ursa Major, but its taken some time to get to this level of observation. As for scope image orientation, that comes together with time and practice, the more you practice, the better is becomes. Keep at it, your not doing anything wrong, its a learning curve.

.......funny old thing, I just tried with Stellarium and I see it, not sure ill see it from my garden though! (real-world)

Cheers John, glad their of use to you.

Sounds like you really have stopped studying the merits of each and every eyepiece, and enjoying the results you see through them, enjoy it while you can. I'm still waiting for darker nights ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz,,,,,,,,,,!

....and of the two, 40 and 32mm. the 32mm is the better choice ( their words too ).

A little cheaper than they sold for ( to cover postage and insurance - theres a lot of Glass in these EP's! ) I sold three of them recently, delivered at 160/165/200. In my book, the cheaper you can get them,the better, but I, in all honesty expected a massive jump in performance! A £300+ EP vs. £49 EP you'd expect something special in return, I know I did, but had to try them alone to find out for my self. Not only that, it was my want to have a faster scope, and possibly the need for better corrected lenses, but the EP's came first, in-fact, I missed one EP going for 150 in the same town, on Gumtree! It would have cost less without the postage ? Their good lenses, and they can sell and sell again, based on their merit, but I'm more than happy with the EP's that remain in my collection after comparison test's. Remember, TV prices are up again, the second hand market will follow suit, just how much are you prepared to spend? If I bought again and wanted wider views, the Ethos. If I could stomach the lesser view at 72°, back to the Delos (its based/built on the Ethos pedigree, just a smaller fov) If you needed slightly less, the DeLite! The only way to find out whats best is to try an eyepiece for your self, under real-world conditions, then make your decision to purchase more of the same, or try something else. On axis, I'm sure my Starguiders will be fine on a 12" scope, and I'm hoping to test this theory in a few days time, using my 12mm and one other EP

I know this is an old thread, but thats what happens when you look around! John, I have 1.9° working on a field stop of 40mm ( I measured the narrowest aperture on the field side ) but to be honest, unlike Tele Vue's take on giving everything away, I have not yet found the official measurement for the SWP32mm field stop. If the field stop is a tad less than 40mm then 1.8° would suffice (you know me, its the detail that counts!) I'm not disputing our result, just wanting to know / trying to locate the spec for the field stop?

I have emailed Barsta, hopefully they can further provide some explanation!

I posed the same question sometime back and suggested (mainly to myself ) that the BST's and all the same make, different brand variants, should come under the overall design name of Paradigm, believing they were the first, and the rest followed? There is a chart here http://www.quadibloc.com/science/opt04.htm showing the major deigns involved, but the Starguider does not match, last time I looked, so a family name like Paradigm would be apt.

Not sure its just about having a larger exit pupil, more to do with having the right exit pupil? The real advantage with a longer focal length eyepiece is the lower magnification, and wider field of view. This view, the 'true field' is controlled solely by the telescopes focal length and the field stop of the eyepiece in use. The field stop is important, if you can determine what size it is? I have seen two references where the field stop sizes are recorded for our information, Tele Vue being one company. Now at something like 27mm your at the physical limit for a 1.1/4" eyepiece, so no matter how long the focal length of the eyepiece, any eyepiece with a field stop this size, in 1 1/4 fitting will provide the widest true field. To go bigger, you could jump to 2" eyepieces with larger field stops. From comments already supplied, you'll see that the shorter length eyepieces can for some folk show an improvement. In fact two different focal length eyepieces, with the same common field stop should produce better contrast using the shorter focal length, given the same field of view! Why? Magnification! Magnification has the effect of darkening the sky, making for a better contrast between the two, target & Sky. So far, I have mentioned Field Stop's, Magnification and focal lengths for telescope and eyepiece, but as yet, no exit pupils! Its possible to have too large an exit pupil, so trying to understanding some of the reasons and theory beforehand is quite important, but there's huge amounts of info on the web! Some folk may already own telescopes that are specially designed for wide field views, with their much shorter focal length scopes, and using for example an eyepiece of say 50mm could end up with exit pupils in excess of 10+ mm which exceeds the reference of 7mm to shame! Having an exit pupil that is larger than your dilated eye will give a nice bright provided by the system, but your 5mm eye (for example ) can only use some of that exit, not the full amount, so effectively reducing the 'aperture' and reducing the performance of what your trying to achieve in the first place! One way to choose the perfect fit exit pupil, without understanding all the theory is to select the focal ratio of the telescope in use and multiply that by the size of your dilated eye ( it can be measured with a rule, or ask an optician ) Its a good guideline, but can be exceeds by a few mm either side of the mark. My perfect fit would be 29.7mm? I chose and use a 32mm 70° to good effect. If I use something longer, especially on a reflector, then there are limits at which I'll starting seeing the secondary obscuring the image and my floaters!