F15Rules

6 hours ago, Telescope40 said:

Hello. Same here. I have a couple of Maxvisions and a couple of ES EP,s.  The ES one,s I love and wondered if  swapping the Maxvisions for ES would be the way to go 

 

regards. John 

Hi John

I think optically there is little, if any, difference. However, speaking for myself I much prefer the design, looks and ergonomics of the ES range.

I also like the argon purging as it keeps dust and debris out. 

The Maxvisions are optically very good though :-)

Dave

John

I also meant to say, regarding the ES 68s, I read somewhere that some users prefer the 68 versions to the 82 degree ones?

I have only used one 82deg ES, the 6.7mm, which I liked a lot and now regret selling: of course the 68deg range only starts at 16mm so a comparison is only really possible at longer focal lengths. The comments I saw suggested the 68s are a tad sharper on axis but I can't verify that from personal experience..the 6.7mm I had from new seemed very sharp to me, the only reason I sold it was I thought the eye relief a bit short..no such probs with the 68s, but the 82s at longer focal lengths may be fine too? Maybe someone else here has a view on this?

Dave

18 hours ago, John said:

What a nice selection Dave

There's a lot of glass in that Morpheus eye lens !

I'm glad you like the 24mm ES 68 - I've just ordered one. Amazingly it will be just the 2nd ES eyepiece that I've ever owned.

 

 

Thanks John:-).

I really like the Morpheus, so much better than the Hyperions IMHO. I really think optically they are a match for the Pentax range. Build is good, not quite to Pentax levels, but durable. The only features I'm less keen on are the too flimsy eyecup ( although you do get two, I prefer the winged version), and the allegedly luminous screen print writing that I find a bit tacky. But superb value for money overall and as you say, huge eyelenses, which I love!:-).

As for the ES24 68, just a lovely ep, better build than Morpheus and cracking views!

Dave

1 hour ago, Alan White said:

Dave (F15rules) and Ben (Ben the Sane) you are both saying this about the ES and Ben said the same before I bought the TV.
I should perhaps have listened. 
 

Hi Alan,

I've owned several TV 32mm plossls and really liked them. But I didn't pay anything like £143 for them (I paid about £100 last time I bought one new, they go used for around £70-£80 max). I also didn't have a problem with the eye relief myself, although I did find the 50 deg field quite narrow, having now moved to eps with a minimum 60 deg up to 76 deg.

If you can return the unit to the Widescreen Centre (without hurting your wife's feelings of course), I genuinely would recommend the ES 24 68. But if you can't, don't beat yourself up - the TV 32 is a fine eyepiece, so worth investing in the extender as it will last you literally a lifetime.

Just enjoy your new toy!

Dave

13 hours ago, Cjg said:

Alan, I found the same with the TV 40mm Possl. Eye relief is just too much to get comfortable. I passed it on. If you can exchange it, I can recommend the 24mm Panoptic, I know it's about another £100 or so, but that's a magnificent eyepiece and the most  used with my refractor. 

Good luck,

Chris

I agree with Chris. £143 for a plossl, whatever the brand name, is ridiculous in my view. Go for an Explore Scientific 24mm 68 degree, available from several UK retailers for around £100. Argon purged (dust proof), waterproof, TV level build and much bigger field of view. Very nearly as good as the Panoptic 24mm but c£150 cheaper..No contest!

Dave

Here's my modest collection, just completed (for now!) with the two Celestron Xcel LX's which arrived today. From left to right:

Pentax XL 5.2mm, Pentax XL 10.5mm, (both 65 deg) Celestron Xcel LX 7mm (60 deg), Baader Morpheus 14mm (76 deg), Celestron Xcel LX 18mm (60 deg), ES 24mm , ES 34mm (both 68 deg). I like them all very much, my favourite three would be the Pentax 10.5, Morpheus 14 and the ES 24.

Just store them in a standard ali case with pluck foam, which needs renewing. Where I have the original boxes I keep them in an old Polarex Unitron wooden case...all I have from left from a super rare Polarex 4" F15 folded refractor which I stupidly sold years ago. 

Dave

43 minutes ago, YKSE said:

My wild guess is that you'll be more impressed with 7mm Xcel-LX than 18mm

That's interesting...have you read reports to that effect, or used them yourself?

Dave

I have the earlier Pentax XL versions in 5.2mm and 10.5mm, both are superb. I did have XWs in 14mm and 20mm but got major kidney beaning/blackouts in the 14mm and severe curvature in the 20mm. I replaced the 14mm with  Morpheus which has a 76deg fov (now one of my favourite eps), and didn't replace the 20mm as my ES24mm is so good with much less FC. That said, and being budget limited at present I've just ordered 7mm and 18mm Xcel LX's to fill the gaps (see my signature for full ep line up).

When funds do permit I would love to get an XW 7mm and maybe a Delos or Delete in 17 or 18mm range. I know all the XWs at 10mm or less are superb.

Will be interesting to see how the 60 degree Xcel LX's stand up against my Pentax (65deg) and Morpheus (76 deg) units...I've read good things about their bang per buck performance:-).

Dave

17 minutes ago, Roy Challen said:

Wasn't me Dave! I had your Prinz 660 off you last year- had it Skylighted

Whoops, sorry Roy. That's what happens when you have bought and sold a few oldie scopes!

I've been very good this year though, only one small F5 frac purchased...

Dave

On 11/09/2016 at 18:28, Dave1 said:

Topic (Towa 339) 80mm f15 telescope. 

Hi Dave

Lovely scope, and do you know, I think I owned that one once! The brass 1.25" adapter looks very familiar, mine certainly had one just like it. Can't recall who I sold it to, I wondered if it might have been Roy???

Thanks for posting.

Dave

Lovely looking scope Chris! Have a go at Delta Cygni, it should split nicely at x150 or so:-).

A "proper" looking  scope!!:-)

Dave

2 hours ago, Knighty2112 said:

Received the WO 2x binoviewer nosepiece from Agena Astro from the US earlier than expected. Screwing in the 2x nosepiece I can achieve focus OK with my new Baader prism diagonal. Still awaiting a good clear night to test them further, but also got another 32mm Celestron Omni EP to make a pair with one I have already, so can use these too in the binoviewers, so hoping to get some nice wide'ish views with them.  

Your 32mm plossls will likely vignette a little (show a darker edge to the field of view) but should still give a nice view..(the longest focal length EP you can use in a 1.25" barrel with the widest true field of view is around c25mm.

As your binoviewers have a maximum clear aperture (diameter of barrel on the binoviewer eyepiece side) , any eyepiece with a wider than 20mm field stop will vignette ( ie you lose some of the light). I think that's right:-)

Dave

On 05/08/2016 at 11:31, Star Struck said:

A lot of getting Binoviewers to work is suck it and see as you will discover.

One thing not mentioned so far is Inter Pupillary Distance i.e. the distance between the centre of your eyepupils. I have found this to be critical for Binoviewers, a lot more so than for normal binoculars. I could not get the images to merge unless I got this spot on. It is easy to measure yourself, but if you wear glasses then your optician should know what it is exactly as they use it when making sure your glasses fit correctly.

This is the prism I use, it represents very good value for money if you cannot get your existing mirror diagonal to come to focus: http://www.365astronomy.com/Baader-Prism-Diagonal-T-2-90-degree-32mm-Set.html?gclid=COzow5qJqs4CFXYW0wodF4gKqg

Tony

Tony is right, this is cheapest way to buy the Baader set. Its a superb setup and because it uses a prism, not a mirror, it has a significantly shorter light path and so takes up less of your precious in-focus:-)

Dave

On 12/07/2016 at 19:13, John said:

Lovely frac(s) kirkster 

Those flextube dobs still remind me of R2D2 when they are in the "down" configuration

I've not posted a pic of my LZOS 130 F/9.2 in this thread yet so yer tiz with the ED120 for scale:

 

 

Maybe it's line of sight effect John, but doesn't the ED120 seem to be wilting a little? Bowing in the presence of greatness, perhaps? :-)

13 hours ago, DRT said:

At the risk of stirring up the wrath of a thousand Talites, I must confess that I find these scopes rather ugly   (sorry, Chris)

I have never looked through one and I am sure that is where they win you over, but they do seem to look like something you would see piled high and selling cheap by the checkout at Aldi.

I'm out of here...

 

It's called "eclectic industrial chic" actually Derek (sniff sniff) :-)

Dave

Well, my new (to me) holiday grab n go scope arrived:-).

It's a Phenix/Starsky 90mm F5.5 doublet with a sliding dewshield.I've mated it it with a nice Saito Japan 7x50 finder.

Only 1 quick peek so far but surprised by the low level of CA at x50 to x100 (Pentax XL 5.2mm).

Should be great in Norfolk when visiting family and rock solid on the Porta II..

Dave

No worries Chris, I know you have your hands full lately with the "flock" and the house move. I hope all is well :-).

Dave

Thanks John .

I'd have to agree...somewhat understated, but I like that. The build and finish is actually very good when you see it close up, with a nice lightweight tube that is easy to handle.

Not as solid as a Tak, but a cut above many of the mainstream brands. The oversize tube is nice and I really like the dual speed R&P focusser, no slippage whatsoever.

Dave

11 minutes ago, CraigT82 said:

I've never seen tha Vixen HAL tripod in the flesh... Does it come with the wooden inserts at the bottom of the legs or is that something you've done?  It's genius if it is!

Thanks Craig :-).

Actually, I can't claim the credit for the wooden leg extensions: I bought an AZ4 mount some time back, and the seller had made these to fit the AZ4 tripod, which is a clone of the Vixen one. I didn't like the AZ4 much, so I moved it on, but I kept the leg extensions "just in case".. in fact, about a month ago, I very nearly took them to the tip with a load of declutter I was getting rid of!

When I bought the Porta very recently, I remembered these and thought I'd try to see if they fit - perfect fit! So I'm well pleased I kept them :-).

I'm just about to acquire a short focus 90mm F5.5 for true holidaying grab n go viewing, so will post up some pics once I have it (tomorrow, I hope!).

Dave

I've posted pictures of my Vixen ED103s doublet here before I think, but here she is on my new Porta II mount for quick grab and go sessions.

Very smooth and the manual slo mos are great, no backlash.

I've fitted 3 hardwood leg extensions which can increase height (not needed with this scope) and/or aid improved stability as the ali legs don't have to be extended so far.

The weather has been so lousy where I live this year, but this set up at least allows me to pick up the rig from the garage and move it 4 metres onto my drive with no effort whatsoever, no alignment with Polaris etc, just point and shoot!

Is pretty steady, damps down with a big ES eyepiece in 2-3 seconds maximum :-)

Dave

Fabulous first light report John, which I've only just seen as I'm on holiday in north Norfolk til tomorrow ( and no clear sky to look at at night time!).

I really do think a 5" or so apo at F9 , and of that quality, must be pretty near the perfect dream scope for frac lovers.

I'm so pleased for you!:-)

Dave

On 25/05/2016 at 19:13, John said:

Thanks Mark - hope you have a nice boat trip

I expect I'll keep the Vixen. It does widefield better than any of my scopes and it's just a lovely and rare scope.

 

Thank goodness for that! I think you and the Vixen should be joined at the hip! Be great to hear how they compare, even though they are very different:-)

Dave

These are clones of the Zeiss Jena 8x30s, which is why they are so sharp. I believe the manufacturer is ZOMZ, who also make Tento and Sotem brands, all with very good glass. As Nigel mentioned above, the quality was superb until the fall of the Berlin Wall in  1989, so the most sought after models are pre 1990 (although that's not to say you can't find good post 1990 examples).

These 8x30s can be picked up for a song. I have a pair in mint condition which I bought on Gumtree UK for £13! And they are to my eyes every bit as good as the Jena CZ which would cost around £100 plus on ebay etc.

Yours look to have been well used/loved, but the lenses still seem to be very clear and sharp.

Enjoy!

Dave

On 5/3/2016 at 20:43, bish said:

You've been banging the drum so hard on these that I have been  tempted. I like the fact that they aren't too cumbersome and look comfortable (as well as having TV quality).  The only thing that pushed me more towards the Delos/XW is that my Meade HD 60s are the same fov and are nice to use, so I would want to try a wider fov to justify the extra cost. No doubt the Delites are better (than the HD60) in all other respects though. 

My attention has now been taken with an obsy (shed) at the top of the garden and possible scope upgrade, which means I don't have to lie awake at night weighing up the pros and cons of eps (limited supply of money!). Choosing a scope is far easier and quicker than deciding on which eps to go for!

I've owned several HD60s and I did like them. They are very well built and solid feeling. They are effectively a "supercharged" plossl, ie with an artificially wider field of 60 degrees instead of the normal 50 degrees found in a plossl: the views on axis match most eps, but I did find the edges very soft when I compared them to other 60 degree eps, most notably the Pentax XF 8.5 and 12mm. I take your point about only wanting to upgrade if you get more field of view, but actually, if you can get the same field of view with sharper images  for the full 60 degree field, I submit that too is a worthwhile upgrade - you could have virtually 60 degrees of sharpness instead of 50 degrees of sharpness and 10 degrees of seagulls..

You can currently get a good price (around £90 each) for the Pentax XF's and I would heartily recommend them :-)

Dave

On 24/03/2016 at 19:36, spaceboy said:

I remember you having the EVO120 Jules but as with anything that comes out of mass production there is always a chance a lemon made it through QC. TAL are not immune from QC issues either but their bomb proof build quality mean your more likely to get a good one than a bad one. You have to think sky-watcher is every where so the chances of a poor example are higher. I think I have been fortunate in that both my EVO 120 (idiot for selling it) and 150 perform far beyond my expectations. I think that having a collimateable cell is a bonus as you can be sure the optics are always perfectly aligned so if the performance is lacking you know you got a poor example. You also have to consider that f/10 over f/8.33 is going to give the TAL a slight edge regards sharpness but the EVO will always have the advantage of 20mm more light grasp adding to greater if subtle depth.

I'm not knocking the TAL in anyway and there has been many a time I have almost purchased one myself hence why I am aware of 100RS vs EVO120 topics. I'm sure the TAL is hard to beat when pitched up against similar apertures and focal lengths.

I have a mint Evo 120 which I store for my son in law. Most of the time it lives in a wooden box, but I have used it a few times and have twice put it head to head with one of my Tal 100RS scopes (I don't own a Tal any more).

In nearly every respect I preferred the views through the Tal..the Moon and Jupiter to my eyes were sharper and with less CA than the Evo. I don't think F8.3/does the Evo any favours..if it was an F10 (or better yet, F12) the Evo would be a very attractive proposition, to me at least. 

The one area that I felt the Evo beat the Tal was DSO..on M42/and the Double Cluster it showed more detail, a wider field and far more faint stars- altogether a lovely view, and showing that the extra 20mm of aperture really does count on fainter objects.

Dave