Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_comet_46p_winners.thumb.jpg.b3d48fd93cbd17bff31f578b27cc6f0d.jpg

pete_81

Members
  • Content Count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About pete_81

  • Rank
    Nebula

Profile Information

  • Location
    Barnsley
  1. Thanks @Ricochet! In the lens box now. Thinking this kits out well with the ES68*,24mm and the next on the target will probably be the 82*6.7, which will give me TFoVs of 1.3*, 1.1*, 0.65*, 0.45*, all with the exit pupil > 1mm, then a killer with 350x, 0.2*TFoV which should have 80% of the FoV filled with M82, exit pupil drops to 0.7, but may still be OK (read somewhere to try and keep it >1 for DSOs). Time to gaze and rest, then save some! Thanks for the advice to all...
  2. Thanks @John & @rwilkey. Yep, all views on the ES say great, nothing really bad except for the potential size/weight increase to the scope (John posted great summary image of this on which I think sums up the issues with "good" focal extenders/barlows! Am I right in my assumptions that the ES_68*_24mm would essentially become a ES_68*_12mm with ER staying at the 18.4mm, affecting ONLY the focal length of the scope (not EP) => does the focal-extender change the SCOPE focal length rather than the EYEPIECE (field stop stays same dimension when solving equation for TFoV=FieldStopOfLens x 57.3 / FocalLengthOfScope. The focal length change consequently doubles magnification, so exit pupil halves; same thing as using an EP with half the focal length and same ER... Surely a TV-PM/ES-FE should be a part of everyone's EP kit IMHO
  3. Post on: shows same thing - am I missing something to go for a ES focal-extender as a birthday pressie?!
  4. Thanks Gerry - any thoughts on the extenders (even the x3 is cheaper than a single EP and from ES, whats the drawback?!)
  5. Hi folks, coming back to this again I've taken the plunge and got a 24mm ES 68* and just WOW. Love the increase in FoV angle from the Plossls, (profile pic is camera on phone looking down the EP, hand held). My next target is the mid-range and think I'm in love with the ES EPs. Made a fancy spreadsheet that shows the calculations of magnification, exit pupil, and TFoV (from both the quoted AFoV and the likely more accurate field stop). With this spreadsheet, I've also added columns to show how much of the EP is filled with different objects - eg the moon takes up ~40% of the 68*ES24, or ~15% taken up by M82 and can compare this to any other EP I'm thinking about. I was about to take the jump for birthday with a 6.7 82*, then looked and thought about barlowing - there's lots of discussion on this again, but the ES x2 FocalLengthExtender may be just what I'm after - this would allow me to have a 68* 12mm (using the 68-24) with half decent ER, with the possibility of later getting the 82*14mm and effectively having FOVs that would allow the moon to fill 40%, 58%, 80% and 115% of the eyepiece viewing (taken from the 24mm, 14mm, 24+x2 and 14+x2 lens choices (magnifications of 50x, 85x, 100x, 170x respectively) - the TFoVs being 1.3*,0.9*, 0.65* and 0.45* again respectively looking at that possible EP setup. I guess ignoring the 14mm for now (it may be better to get the 8.8mm), I'm wondering if the x2 is the best choice now so that I'd have a 24 & 12. Is the x2 a good choice that would be financially beneficial as EP collection grows... What are everyones thoughts on the ES x2? Better than Barlow? The ER won't change, which is fine, probably better. (The TV Powermate is well out of any range, so please don't suggest it!) Do most of you avoid focal-length extenders? Thanks again
  6. Hi guys, Yes, I'm honestly not sure what to get but as the discussion has progressed and I've written out some ideas, it's become obvious that my initial (and preferred choice just on paper) was in favour of the Hyperions, but this is completely the wrong choice at fast focal lengths. I'd never even considered the ES range in any of the FoVs, and they're now the top contenders (ER is possibly the largest issue with them, expecially wearing specs too ), alongside the SLV, remembering I'm budgeting for ~£100 per optic. So whilst the discussion hasn't concluded with "this is THE one", it's been very useful to get some ideas and rule out the pretty hyperions and point out to me that FoV isn't necessarily the most important feature to aim for (at least not at this time with the limit to budget). Next step being armed with some good quality EP info is to try them in the scope under dark (and light polluted!) skies. Some local astro clubs also sourced, thanks!
  7. Thanks @John & @Paul73 ? This has cleared up the real issue, which I think I can summarise as: Expensive lenses will generally have a wider AFoV Expensive lenses will work better with faster scopes, where the optics have been designed to keep distortion from the faster scopes (off-centre of EP) to a minimum (across the bulk of the view through the eyepiece Expensive lenses likely to be longer eye-relief Expensive will have better coatings and higher contrast The SLV are similar FoV to Plossl, but for the cost, I think I'd try the 62* as I've never had this luxury, or am I being too narrow minded here?! Am I right in saying that the main gain from the wider FOV is just the viewing angle that the scope/eyepiece picks out, so a wider FOV is in some way equivalent to a longer focal length, thus more of sky in eyepiece (not quite the same, but could one say that a 15mm 50* Plossl has a similar view to a 10mm 75*, so going for a longer focal length, smaller FOV to get wider TFoV is a worthwhile pursuit, or is this just wrong?! Ignoring the potential lunacy of the above statement, coming back to original post, what about the Hyperions as a stepping stone? Nobody has commented on these, or is that just because they're poor with the fast scope? (https://www.harrisontelescopes.co.uk/acatalog/baader-hyperion-13mm-eyepiece-1.25.html suggests good at f/4, for same AFOV and 2/3 cost of the ES68* - plus the adapters give lots of focal length options in cheaper package, or are these a gimmick rather than anything useful?). If the Hyperion is a possibility, the hyperion13 with the adapter rings and 24mm ES68*, giving FOV>65* and decent eye-relief may be an option for a good focal length range (8-24, but prime lenses here being better than the Hyperion zoom option?) How does eye relief vary with the Hyperions and the extension rings? Or are the Hyperions not as good, so back to the 5.5/9ES62*, 14mmES82* (for the eye-relief) and the 24ES68* (or even change the 14mm to the SLV15mm) @jetstream, you mention ES sale events - is this a thing from ES directly (via FLO etc) or second hand through SGL? Thanks again to all who have responded...
  8. Interested in following up to this - I've an OO Europa 250 f/4.8 also, but the original GEM mount and alu tripod doesn't feel at all sufficient enough for it, OK for observing but not a chance for any astrophotography - did you have the same tripod initially and then upgrade to the NEQ6? If you have had the GEM, is it the legs or the eq-mount that is the (biggest) issue - upgrading to the NEQ6, have you kept the same 10" bracket for telescope or whole new assembly? Did you get a Dob style mount in the end (post here is from Jan)? Not looked at upgrading the tripod yet, but think it is needed at some point for more serious observing... Pete
  9. Hi John & Jetstream, following on from this then, the 62deg Explore Scientific sounds like a fab upgrade for my use at any level, and I'd guess much nicer than the Plossls. The SLV was a possible option to start with but with the smaller AFoV, maybe they're closer to the plossls? Are the SLV decent with the fast scope? And the Baader zoom was my strong contender but again is it good with the f/4.8? There's a few reviews from March where John agrees about the zoom being ok for bright objects, but not for nebulae due to lack of contrast? Would the zoom be a good option and later get the 5.5ES62 and 32ES62 or would folks recommend leaving the zoom and doing single focal lengths, like the 5.5 and 14 and 32? This range is approx doubles of each other (there are posts suggesting do scaling of 1.4) but that's for later! On that, are barlows good enough or preference for single focal lengths? Last for now, reading jetstream's post, is it better to go for higher quality EPs at the short or long focal length?
  10. Hmmm, some interesting things coming back here, thanks all Regarding the focal length I should go for for starters, any suggestions on this? I'd thought filling the 10/25 gap with something around 15-20, so looked into the 14mm ES 62, but the eye relief seems possibly a bit short on it. Going to the shorter lengths, I'd look to the 9mm - this would be good for M51, M57, but possibly too short for M31 & M42. A power-per-inch of ~13 and exit pupil of ~1.9mm seems well within the capabilities of the scope, so could use a barlow quite nicely. But is this too close to the 10mm series 500, or is this now getting rid of the 25&10 and upgrading rather than adding to collection? Or is a high power 5.5mm ES62 going to wow and then save for something in the middle range (15-20)? The eye relief seems to be concern of middle ground ES62, or is that the difference in cost - compromise between good eye relief with the EPs that are good with fast scopes? As Gerry mentions, trying longer focal lengths seems to be better for the scope, so is the ES62 32mm the ideal starting point, and increase from there? Other than ER, the ES62 look to be great choices, thanks to Philip & Robin. That throws the next question on how good are the 68deg (and even up to the 82deg 4.7mm) which would be top of my single-EP budget for the time being... As I have mentioned before, I do wear glasses but typically not whilst observing, so is the short ER going to throw up an issue at this point... So, the ER on both the 62 and 68 deg med lens (14/16mm) are short at <12mm, so for something in this range of focal length, should one go to ES 82deg f=14mm; ER>15mm which bumps price significantly, but what is an 82deg EP like compared to the 62 (and my present Plossl choice?!) For high mag: 5.5mm, 62deg, 13ER => £77 4.7/6.7/8.8mm 68deg, 13-15ER=>£120 Low mag: 32mm 62deg, >20mm ER=>£120 (2" EP) Are the 68deg worth almost double the cost? And the 82deg?!
  11. Hi all, First post here but been member for a few years just browsing. Looking for some help and advice on eyepieces. I've had an Orion Optics (UK) Europa 250 (f=1200, f/4.8) reflector for many years and keep going through phases of getting it out and being impressed by what I see through it for all types of clusters, DSOs and planetary. I've upgraded it a few times to have a 2" Crayford (with 1.25" adapter) from the supplied Rack & Pinion focuser, added centre marker to primary, cooling fan to back of primary, amongst other mods to both scope and tripod (which isn't really stable enough for such a large scope, but that's not for now). Looking at upgrading the supplied eyepieces, which are initially a Series500 Plossl and 25mm Plossl, alongside a x2 Barlow. I've found several websites that detail the Series 500 (eg https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/547181-series-500-plossls and other links within this page), suggesting that they're not bad eyepieces, although from reading around, they (like most) probably struggle at off-axis with the fast scope. The 25mm, I've no idea about. Supplied with the scope, I doubt it's anything as fancy as a TeleVue Plossl, but the green writing and OO-UK now selling these may suggest it could well be a TV. Can anyone suggest yay or nay to this looking at the attached photos (there's no other markings on the barrels so no AFoV or manufacturer details)? Also, no other markings on the barlow, so wondering on manufacturer if anyone knows, or should it just be left to gather dust rather than possibly ruin observations?! So, onto the main topic - new EP(s)! Looking around, (eg older posts at https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/189230-wide-field-eyepiece-thats-suitable-for-f47-newtonian or https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/280181-what-eyepieces-for-f4-scope/) it's obvious that I need to spend significantly to get something that really lets the scope perform. But that's not where I'm at just now, rather looking as upgrade/addition at this point (not looking to buy the TV Delos/Ethios until the kids have left the nest?!). With the long focal length of the scope, I'm thinking about longer focal length (30-40mm) EP that will give a slightly larger TFOV (mag of 30-40x), which tends be better suited to DSOs. Also having less mag would keep objects closer to centre of view, so suffer less from aberations or is that wasting the EP? Perhaps a larger AFOV may be better with a shorter focal length (eg 60deg AFoV on a 20mm still gives TFOV of ~1deg in sky, so M42/M57 easily observable here). So, choices... I've seen the Baader Hyperions (and the Zoom MK IV), but think I've seen John Huntley's review against the Vixen LVW on https://www.firstlightoptics.com/blog/vixen-lvw-vs-baader-hyperion-review.html. Although as an upgrade point, are these still contenders or do a cheaper alternative before looking to the better Vixen/TV/Pentax/etc. Are Plossl's still good EPs?! Or is the Plossl just a good EP in general across the centre, then suffers around edges esp in faster scopes, hence need to go for different designs? The Meade 4000 (on listings like https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/meade-series-4000-super-plossl-eyepieces.html) say they're good for f/4, but is this just sales jargan?! If they're still good, what are the feelings towards the following EPs: Meade 4000 SP Celestron Omni Vixen NPL TeleVue Plossl Obviously the TeleVue Plossl is similar budget wise to the Hyperion, Meade 5000 and Vixen SLV, so if the limit on the Plossl is off-axis and tigher FoVs, is the Hyperion/SLV a better choice? Remembering that I'm looking to take steps in upgrading and not just splash to the best of the best (and I'm city based so do see my fill of stray light, but the scope +25Plossl easily picks out Mag 8 stars from the back garden), can I have some recommendations on both lens choice and focal length (whether to go for a longer 32/40mm or fill in gap with 15-20mm range, eg Hyperion 17) on what to get next. Also if anyone knows if the 25Plossl is TV or not would be good as I then don't need to think about upgrading this one for some time. As a last note, I do wear specs, with astigmatism correction although don't always wear when observing, only to look at the RA/Dec on the scope and which EP I've put in! Eye relief not the most important thing, but would be nice to have some! Budget wise, I had thought of stretching to ~£100 per eyepiece, or equivalent of the Hyperion Zoom at ~£200 for several focal lengths. Looking forward to hear suggestions/responses; thanks all in advance?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.