Alan White

On 12/5/2016 at 19:04, niallk said:

Thanks for posting a very good and helpful review .  I too have been looking at this option: looks very nice indeed.

I think that it is worth the money and I am renowned for being careful with my cash;
just ask my friends abut how careful I am with my cash near a bar!

It's a very nice seat.
I hesitated for some time before spending out as I felt at the time before purchase it's just a seat.....
however now I don't think that way at all, very pleased and wanted to share the review to encourage others to hesitate less.

Alan

6 minutes ago, 101nut said:

Nice first review!

If you're not tall, how do you get up onto the seat at its high position as there are no footpegs to step onto or support your feet when to get there. Or is it just lower than it sounds?

AndyG

Thank you,

I am 5' 10" in old money and the seat height at the top is fine for me.
Those a little shorter and you may be correct.
The cahir is not overly tall, measure the height stated 74cm (max seat height) against you legs and you will see if it's ok for you. 

As I said our mileages vary.

Video of chair also.

This is my first ever review here or anywhere else for that matter, hope it reads well for you all.....

I finally could no longer take the wobbly too short and too tall old MFI stool I have used for years,
it was bought when i was a lad so it's done a lot of years use (35), well done MFI.

So I bought the Geoptik Observation's Chair from Rother Valley Optics, cost in Nov 2015 £95 with a little concern,
I felt it was a lot of money I could spend on other astro items, I think you will see my concerns were not founded at all.

The chair duly arrived very quickly; however Mr. Delivery man decided to treat it with utmost care, NOT and it was a bit bashed on the dges and on the seat top, varnish scraped and looking a little worse for wear, I think the term distressed applies to furniture, fully functional but looks like I have had a number of months careless use from it.  
RVO were happy to replace it, but we agreed a modest discount as it was most usable and easier for us both.

The chair is made from 20mm Ply (I think Ash) and solid leg and hinge supports (I think Ash); very well made and solid and light at 4.5Kg

The seat is all wooden bar the nylon strap and clip, very well made and clearly will last a long time.
The seat are is modest and unpadded, unlike my rear end, which is neither of these; however it gives good support and needs no padding in my opinion,
those with less upholstered rear ends may disagree of course.

The seat overall folds flat and is the maximum size of 35cm at its widest and 92cm at its longest dimension.
The seat is about 60mm thick when folded, so stowes away easily.
The seat section moves up and down in very well cut slots and holds very solidly, the seat also has a clever trick as seen in the stowed picture below,
the seat has a cut out and steel washer fitted, these sit onto a wooden pin at the rear of the seat and a magnet fitted to the main body, holds the seat very solidly in place,
with the exception of delivery men and heavy treatment, hence the distressed arrival (the pictures really do not show the marks that well).

The minimum seat height is 22cm from floor height, works very well with my refractor at zenith and focusser out a long way.

The maximum seat height is 74cm from floor height, works very well with my refractor.

The chair was very solid in a nights observing use, the leg that looks a bit light is actualy solid Ash and is hinged from solid Ash blocks and a steel bolt.
The ash leg and hinge blocks are 32mm x 53mm and well engineered and finished.

The seat can be dropped lower for binocular use, however I have not done this presently and cannot comment, the strap somehow adjusts out and the main body ends up at a shallower angle.  The Geoptik vide shows this and it looks like it will be fine, when I try this I will add a report to this.

Overall a very well made chair, I feel it is good value for all the work that goes into its manufacture, clearly a very competent DIYer could make something similar, but it would cost a fair bit in materials and time to do this, why spend the time when you could be observing?   

I reccomend this to my fellow SGL users, clearly all our mileages vary and we all will like and dislike differing things,
from reviews and posts I have bought items upon recomendation from here and most have been spot on, sadly one was not, but that's life and the point I am trying to badly make.

ADDITION:

Just used it for the third session and it just gets better, being seated properly makes such a difference, thought I was sat ok with the old stool, how wrong I was, this chair is great, really great, I cannot reccomend it enough.

So trolling up the post has set others talking, great.

These SLV have such a nice image, the 50 degree fov works for me and the price is reasonable for the end result, again thank you John.

Fozzie I went for the 100ed ds pro and its great, you were quite right.

Now based on the good recomendations, what's the best lottery numbers then??

I know this is trolling up an old posting, but....
Having read Johns review I pulled the trigger on a 10mm SLV and wow what an eyepiece, wonderful.
As Victor Kyam in the 1970's said I was so impressed I bought...... another one a 6mm and double wow.

John your review envcouraged and I am so glad it did.
Wonderful eyepieces.
Quality of build, excellent.
Quality of view, outstanding.

This is based on Plossl TV etc. ownership to date and the view is much finer.

I have not been on this forum for long; joined this year.

The help received and resources of older posts has helped me a lot.
Friendly helpful advice, a general banter and a very warm welcome all make SGL a good place to be involved with.

As far as I am concerened, if it aint broke, dont fix it.

A few more stickies perhaps for repeating questions, but realise that is a big ask by the volume of similar threads that start up.

49 minutes ago, Charic said:

What if,  you  tell the Mrs, that there is an issue with the present telescope and you need  another?.....................I wonder how understanding she will remain? 

Charic, you are so bad!
Yes I think she would understand enough: but only after a lot of silence and dark looks.

Just a final update for all who have had an input in this thread:

I have returned the 32mm TV Plossl to the vendor, who has given me a credit note and I have bought a 32mm Celestron Plossl.
The Omni has a far deeper inset optics, so the eyerelief is accurate for the eyecup; ideal for a non glasses wearer when viewing (but probably not if you wear glasses).

I am in mixed minds about handing back the TV as I like my other TV Plossl; the price new is extreme in comparison to all other Plossl I have seen.
To then need to by an eye cup extension for another £37 incl delivery was just too far for me at present ( The Omni was not much more than this in itself!).

The good thing is the EP was a present from mt wife, who fully understands the quandry I have been in and was the driver to return it and make myself happy with the purchase. As my signature says 'Understanding Wife'.

Again thank you to all who have commented and provided advice, all very much appreciated.

24mm ES 68 in the future, who knows, possibly subject to pennies.
First I may be looking for a driven mount in addition to my AZ4, I am weakening the the lure of photographic side as well as visual.
An even bigger money pit than the EP one I have fallen into!

33 minutes ago, Timebandit said:

Stay away from the" Dark side "

But the force is strong.........

9 minutes ago, Timebandit said:

You are lucky we are not talking Ethos eyepiece money here ?

I could not afford to talk that level of money presently, note the word presently!!

So one extender as a starting point.
This is one expensive Plossl.

One question please.
Now that my thinking is chilled from a weekend of calmness 

For those who use the eye-cup extender, do you need one or two extenders?
From who of you giving advice, do not require glasses at the EP, I am lucky enough to not need them at the EP presently, but I am sure age will change that soon!!

Thats sound thought Fozzie, thank you.

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. 
 

Spike 95609 How do you deal with the eyerelief on your 32mm TV?

I see you have Vixen SLV at shorter FL, is the twist out eyepiece the solution to eyeplacement on these?

1 hour ago, Davesellars said:

Personally I'd question the need for a 32mm EP for your 150p (which is f/5?) to be honest unless your skies are really dark LP you're not going to have enough contrast for DSOs with a rather massive exit pupil - so unless you're using it with a narrow-band filter on large nebulae I would stick with your 25mm as the longest focal length EP in your arsenal.

You've got some nice quality EPs.  Which focal length do you use the most and what is your prime observing interest?  i.,e lunar/planetary or DSOs or both?

Dave

I think you may be right, perhaps I am wanting something I cannot have from my location and scope.
I have light polution but also very local overlighting fromtwo sets of insecurity lights and they are not open to any negotiation from the two neighbors concerned.

I love lunar observation and planets when I can see them, try DSO but to be honest I hoped the 32mm would help, your right about the lack of contrast.
EP most used is the 20mm and 9.5mm, barlow the 9.5 down with my TAL x2 barlow. The 25mm is used as a step from the finder scope to scope view.
I am on an alt az AZ4 mount so sky hop badly still.

Sounding a bit mad here but I came from a cheapy old 80mm reractor to the 150p reflector and although brighter I think the scope is also partly my challenge as well as in it collect too much light and pollution so is not such a contrasty view, does that make any sense?

Thanks for the thoughts.

47 minutes ago, Davesellars said:

Have to agree with the comments above.  While there's no doubting the optical quality of the TV Plossl - With the price of this EP now adding in the required eye guard extension makes this a seriously expensive Plossl!   What EPs do you have already?

Dave I have the following do collection to date. Some good some reasonable and some are so so.

32mm TV Plossl

25mm Meade 4000 Plossl. Reasonable to good.

20mm TV Plossl.   Love it to bits.

15mm Meade 4000 Plossl Japan Made. Good but not as good as 20mm TV.

9.5mm Meade 3000 Japan Made. Love it to bits.

6.7mm Meade 4000 Plossl. So so. 

I measure the EP set against the 20mm TV and 9.5 Meade as the benchmark.

I am a working bloke, normal financial pulls so the price band I am in is where I will stay for some time. The 32mm to me was a lot of money to be honest.

Thank you folks for your input.
I think the extension may be needed, but as you have said, makes it an expensive Plossl.

As Rudd has shown, it may be black out rather than Kindey Beaning as I stated (you live and learn), thank you for that information Rudd.

It was something that I was much looking forward to using, perhaps too much so and the bar was raised too high. 
The other TV 20mm I have is stunning so had set the bar height.
Time or extension will tell.

I bought a new 32mm TV Plossl from Simon at Widescreen Centre a week or so ago; last week of the London Store, I paid £143.
Anyway, finally a short first light tonight and I am dissapointed, had set my heart on it being great 

Such long eye relief it kidney beans on my 6" 150p Newtonian, I stuck in my 25mm Meade 4000 and although the clarity was better in the TV, I found it very easy to use.
Big shame as my Mrs bought it for my 50th birthday, so doubly sad.

Is this just too much for my scope, the EP or me.
Your thoughts and advice please.

Just checked back in and it got interesting while I was gone!

Thank you all for you varied input and opinions, thats what a forum is for is it not.

I have to say at present have all plossl all Meade but two are Japanese build and shine.

9. 5 mm series 3000 is a peach and offers views of a quality of the 20mm TV.

15 mm series 4000 is fine but is not as immersive as the 9mm or 20mm.

25mm series 4000 is good but you don't feel like you have fallen into the view.

Any little collection will be a slowly bought mixed bag as money allows as I have a daughter at uni and the bank of mum and dad is being worked hard!

Again thank you for such enthusiastic input guys, appreciated.

Thanks Ben; more food for thought.

As Gordon (Floater) said, 

36 minutes ago, Floater said:

the voice of common sense and reason

Have to say the 20mm Televue is sharp to the edge and no noticeable coma.
The wider FOV might be good on my AZ4 mount as it is in effect being used as a Dosonian.

 

5 minutes ago, Ben the Ignorant said:

Why do you want to limit yourself to a 50° eyepiece when you could have an Explore 24mm/68° with splendid sharpness and more apparent field (same true field) for a little less money? My 24mm/68° Explore has so much more clarity and edge sharpness compared my Hyperion 24mm/68°, I gave the Hyperion to my brother who is only a casual observer.

Hi Ben

I like the 50 degree viewm mainly because I started with Kelners many years ago and the narrower FOV is 'normal' in my mind.
The sharpness in the Televue is right across the EP and I have a 750mm FL f5 Newtonian, which shows up EP performance good or bad.

My friend runs a Hyperion and that's a nice EP, is the ES 24mm really better?  Having not looked through one I do not know.

In the end what FOV we like and how we perceive an EP performing is a very individual thing, just like choice of clothes, car, phone etc. can be.

1 hour ago, Paul73 said:

It helps to look at Green & Black eyepieces as a savings plan.

I bought a mint second hand 21mm Ethos and sold it again for exactly what I paid 6 months later when I needed to finance an accidental scope purchase...

Go for it!

Paul

Now if only that sounded as good as it reads; I could convince my wife to invest in a logterm savings plan.