Mike_S

I’ve decided to go for the APM Lunt XWA 13mm for now as I want a wide field. This would complete my eyepiece collection for now until I add some Delos in the long term. I can’t see a problem with my Myriads visually apart from the eye relief and awkward eyecup not being great but it’s okay, optically they seem spot on. Considered an ES 100 degrees 14mm but the weight put me off as it would need more balancing I think. Not worth it for one eyepiece. I think I’m parting with the idea of any Naglers too as I would end up with too many eyepieces that would be wasteful. 

Sorry guys meant to post this in the “getting started with observing” section. Although perhaps not so much a “getting started question”. 

I mentioned Naglers because they have a very broad range and field of view at the moment is important to me as I’m learning my way around the sky star hopping. Although I’m thinking of getting the next I see some up second hand between APM Lunt 13mm, ES 100 degrees 14mm and Nagler 13mm. Sorry for all the posts just thinking too much. 

Just DSO’s in general, I’m still getting the hang of all this. The easiest ones for now! 

I also have a 30mm eyepiece that gives me 5.66mm. 

Just trying to plan my set which is quite difficult. I’m sorted with planetary with Pentax XW and possibly Delos. Also have a 3.5 and 5mm XWA. The 5 could be used for cores as you say as that’s around 1mm. Thought I would experiment with exit pupil to get the brightness right and filters too. 

I think I’ll get a 13 or or 14mm 82-100 degree next as that seems to be what i’m missing most. 

it’s a real mix and match. Drives you mad. I’m going to end up with a full set of Naglers on top before I decide what to keep 😂 it’s all fun anyway. 

I hear a lot of around 2mm being ideal. Which in my scope would be an 11mm eyepiece. I currently have 9 and 20mm eyepieces that give 1.7mm and 3.78mm. 

Will probably get a 13 or 14mm next which would be exit pupil of 2.45mm or 2.64mm

a 16mm eyepiece would give me 3.02mm. 17mm would give me 3.21mm. 

What do you use? Answers in exit pupil please for now. 

Thanks got some ideas to keep my eye out for. Leaning towards the  XWA 13mm or Nagler 13mm

6 hours ago, Ruud said:

I can only compare Morpheus 6.5 (76°) to Delos 8 (72°). 

In a flatfield f/5 refractor, considering that the M6.5 gives 23% more magnification than the D8:

• Sharpness is very similar. Both are excellent in the centre 72°. That's where the view stops for Delos. Outside 72°, Morpheus 6.5's sharpness gradually drops toward the edge. Delos is slightly better.
• Contrast is very similar. Excellent in both.
• Pincushion distortion is low in both. Morpheus is slightly better.
• Eye relief is copious in both. Non-eyeglass wearers may prefer to use a raised eye cup.
• Comfort is equally excellent. Both have well defined exit pupils and in both the entire afov is easily seen at a glance.

The M6.5 is more sensitive to seeing conditions than the D8 due to its higher magnification, so the stars may actually look sharper in the D8. In good conditions against terrestrial targets though, both eyepieces seem equally sharp to me.

Based on other focal lengths, I'd say that ES 82 with their short usable eye relief are less comfortable than Nagler T6 and much less comfortable than the Morpheus. In ES 82 can't see the entire field at once, and my eyelashes frequently brush the eyepiece. With NaglerT6 I don't have these problems. Also, Naglers look sharper to me, over the entire field and especially at the edge. 

Morpheus are more like Pentax XW and Delos (long eye relief eyepieces) than to ultra wides, which tend to have (much) shorter eye relief.

If you want to go 82°, there is also the 7mm Skywatcher Nirvana / WO UWAN which may be better than the 6.7mm ES 82. My 16mm Nirvana is very Nagler like.

 

Thank you Ruud for a very detailed and helpful reply. Just bought a Pentax XW7mm used as someone responded to one of my wanted adds since I posted this. 

2 minutes ago, A McEwan said:

I have owned a Nagler 13mm T6 for many years, and it's one of the eyepieces I use in EVERY observing session and every telescope (apart from my Lunt). It is a superb performer, as you're probably aware, and very easy to use. It's just a great all-rounder.

 

I also used to own a Pentax XL14 back when I had a selection of the XLs (predecessors to the XWs). I actually can't remember any problems with it, but it was quite a long time ago. I enjoyed using the XLs and remember them being very comfortable and easy to use, with excellent clarity and sharpness.

 

Does it have to be wide-field? If not, a TeleVue 13mm "smoothside" Plossl is about as good as it gets at that focal length in terms of performance, and certainly in terms of bang-for-buck.

Good hunting!

Ant

Yes it will have to be fairly wide field. I need some eyepieces between 11-17mm so a couple in that range really but probably start with 13mm. Either a new APM Lunt or a Nagler used maybe. Thanks glad the Nagler performs well for you as I hear mixed reports with the eye relief but I don’t wear glasses anyway.

I think I need one of these soon. With my 12” F5.3 dob a 13mm would give me exit pupil of 2.4mm. A 14mm would be 2.6mm.

the nearest I currently have to these are 9mm (1.7mm exit pupil) and a 20mm (3.75mm). Both of which are Myriad XWA’s.

what would you recommend? Might get the APM Lunt 100 degree 13mm. Not paying Ethos price new or used. 

Other contenders are Nagler 13mm, Delos 14mm, Pentax XW14mm, ES 82 degrees 14mm but really interested in what you would recommend, perhaps there is a great range of DSO eyepieces I’m overlooking? I’m building up Pentax XW’s and Delos for planetary. 

The wide eye lens looks similar to Pentax XW. I find something like this more comfortable. How do they compare to say Pentax XW 7mm and Televue Nagler 7mm?  Or even the ES 82 degrees 6.7mm? Does it represent possibly the best value for money out of these?

Does bigger eye lens mean more eye relief?

2 hours ago, JOC said:

Its a Skywarchet right angle correct image (RACI) finder, a Celestron cheap and cheerful red dot finder and a dual finder mount for a Skywdtcher attachment off ebay for £8 sent all the wsy from Poland by a guy that 3D prints them.  Though you can buy more expensive  versions from the various big telescope houses.  I went from wasting whole sessions to being able to land on snything I can see with the the naked eye in about 30 seconds flat.

That’s great. Have you ever tried a illuminated Raci like the Celestron?

On 13/07/2019 at 20:35, JOC said:

 

With the arrangement above I can land on anything I can see by eye in about 20 seconds flat.  The RDF doesn't even need to be completely aligned because if the optical finder is aligned with the scope a thereabouts find in the RDF puts the star within the optical finder and then landing on the optical finders crossed hairs puts the star into the telescope.

Which finders are they? And that double attachment please?

I’ve ordered the longer extension tube from Orion Optics. It was around £60 inc p&p. Got some more little goodies in the post so hoping for clear skies this weekend  

oh I kept the Telrad as well. Glad I didn’t sell it with my old scope now I’ve figured out how to use it. 

Right I’ve just ordered the £25 astro essentials Cheshire/sight tube combo and the Rigel collimation cap. That will do me for now. Also got the skywatcher 2” Oiii filter for hopefully seeing the veil as I don’t have an Oiii yet. Can always get an Astronomik in future. Right ban me from FLO and any classifieds sections lol. 

5 minutes ago, jetstream said:

@MSammon you might want to seriously consider a TuBlug from FLO down the road. The combo tool will be good to start with IMHO.

So if I get a TuBlug, which i was looking at earlier. Do I just get that and any laser or do I need the Howie Glatter laser? Is the Tublug an alternative to the combo tool? Really sorry for all the questions. 

4 minutes ago, jetstream said:

You need the combo tool first, for the sight tube feature, to center the sec under the focuser which will automatically give proper offset.

You can then use the laser to line up the sec to primary- put the laser dot in the donut.

You can then use a BARLOWED laser in a Hotech cut out collimator or Glatters TuBlug. This image is from wookies great link.

PS- the combo tool will do all you need... once you de confuse what you see through it IMHO.

http://www.smartavtweaks.com/RVBL.html

Sorry have you got a link to the combo tool I'm confused? Does the HoTech not come with everything for £85? Which one is that in the link?

Christ I thought it was easy enough with just a collimation cap haha. I ideally would like a laser so I don't have to go back and forth from the primary. Saving money for a bit. Will have to get something soon though as I gave away my collimation cap lol

found it here. I don't know why it says it's for a refractor and the reflector one is longer?
https://www.365astronomy.com/Collimating-Eyepiece-for-Refractor-Telescopes-Short-Collimator.html

Can anybody confirm if Castell and Skywatcher are technically the same?

no worries if not. Looks like probably a Castell 2” or an Astronomik 1.25” for now. Not going to pay 2” Astronomik costs new. 

Do you study the charts on what light it lets through quite extensively or do you mostly do trial and error? For example. You decide you want a OIII filter. How do you choose other than budget and what the manufacturer says it’s suitable for? Seen a few second hand around £85 but can get an Astronomik 1.25” for that brand new. How do you decide which to go for? Word of mouth? I bought a 2” skywatcher UHC filter that didn’t make any difference on Orion. Just bought cheap because didn’t know what to go for. Might try a cheap OIII filter just to see. Perhaps the cheaper ones let more light through for light polluted skies or small scopes? No idea really. 

30 minutes ago, wookie1965 said:

Have a read through this it will help you.

http://www.smartavtweaks.com/RVBL.html

I was looking at the howie glatter and tublug but so expensive. The Hotech one is meant to be self centering? I have a cheap Barlow I can try with it anyway.

1 hour ago, cletrac1922 said:

Sam

I use a Saxon 1.25mm Laser Collimator 

Do secondary first, so aligned with dot centre of primary mirror

Then do primary, slightly loosening locking screws

Have target of Collimator, facing down the tube, so can see

I am out a couple of times per month doing presentation in primary schools, scout groups with my club, and very rarely need to re-do collimation

If not transporting your Dob, then be no need to touch once set

John

 

 

 

Thanks, do you check it with a collimation cap or a Cheshire? 

So i gave my collimation cap away with my old telescope I just sold. I have only ever used that before. 

I would like a laser so I can adjust primary mirror without going back and forth to the focuser.

my questions are:

1. Is there nothing wrong with getting the 1.25” set as it’s cheaper? 

2. Do I need a collimation cap and/or Cheshire with this laser set up as well to confirm? Thinking a laser and £5 collimation cap should be plenty?

Had a look at Astronomy Now before. Couldn’t see if the do an online only subscription or what the mailing list would tell us?

Just wondering if I have to subscribe to a magazine or are there good free blog sites? 

What’s the difference between this 1000 oaks one and this Astronomik?

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/uhc-oiii-visual-filters/astronomik-uhc-filter.html