MalcolmM

I followed @HollyHound's advice and got the Oklop Padded Bag & Backpack for 9.25" SCT. It fits the Mew180 very well. The only issue is that the weight (primary mirror) sits at the top of the bag when the bag is used in the rucksack mode; makes it a little awkward to carry this way. I'm not sure if this is a good way to transport the Mewlon or not; vertical with the mirror 'up'. I would be very interested if there are any views on this. Malcolm

I pretend to myself they are too big, too heavy and have those horrible undercuts. But the reality is I can't bring myself to spend so much on an eyepiece! Luckily I have never tried one 🙂 Malcolm

Great advice and I'll check out that article thanks. Malcolm

I would be temped to keep it if I were you, assuming the proceeds are not immediately required. One, a four inch refractor is reputed to be one of the best all round scopes in terms of performance and portability. Two, you hear so many stories on here of people who regret selling good gear; mind you, this tack has led me to accumulate an embarassingly large amount of gear! Malcolm

I've used the next ten year's astronomy budget. Need help here 🙂 Malcolm

I see, from another forum, you have done some comparisons with the TLPs. I get the feeling, from all I have read, that they are very good eyepieces but not necessarily a huge step up from any other premium eyepieces. Would you tend to agree? I suspect they would be excellent in the Mewlon, but I can't believe I would find them noticeably better than my Tak Abbes or Masuyamas (but I'd love to be proved wrong 🙂 ) Malcolm

I'm glad you like it. It has a reputation of being a planetary/lunar scope but I find it great as a deep sky scope too, with 2" eyepieces. It has given me some 'wow' moments, with much brighter views than the 4". Double cluster (which just fits in to the FOV), Orion Nebula, M13 and Wild Duck Cluster being particularly notable. The only disappointment was the Pleiades not quite fitting into the FOV despite a FOV calculator suggesting it would. Malcolm

Having just re-read this thread thanks to @PatientObserver and @JeremyS bumping it (if that's the correct expression), I figured I should answer my original question having owned both scopes for a while now. As others have said, when the conditions line up (cooling, seeing etc) the Mewlon gives very noticeably better lunar and planetary views than the 4". On deep sky, if you can ignore the smaller FOV, the Mewlon's extra light grasp makes for much more spectacular views. Despite being a bit heavier, it's just as portable as the 4" thanks to the clever finder/handle and is easy to lug around and attach /detach to/from mounts. The only areas where the 4" beats it (in my experience) is cool down time and tightness of the stars; it's a fabulous scope, but it's not a refractor 🙂 Malcolm

That's a beautiful setup @PatientObserver. Great views on a clear night, and a great view just sitting in the corner of the room when it's cloudy 🙂 Malcolm

I've eyed this zoom a number of times. It looks great and would, I think, be perfect for a Mewlon. My reservations though are it's size and weight, and the small FOV at the 24mm setting. It's quite a bit heavier than the 5mm XW which I find to be bigger and heavier than I ideally like. That being said, I often use the Masuyama 32mm in the Mewlon for deep sky and it's approaching the weight of the Pentax zoom! Malcolm

I've never tried one either. I'm just not drawn to them, which is a bit strange given the universally excellent reviews they receive! Malcolm

My collection is quite small compared to yours @Louis D. That makes me feel much less guilty 🙂 Malcolm

I wish I knew! It just sorta happened! I realise it's both daft and decadent! And now I have them I'm really reluctant to get rid of any of them as I've read so many posts from people selling eyepieces and then immediately regretting it! I do like the option of using different eyepieces as they give very different viewing experiences and some suit some scopes better than others. The Masuyamas are mostly used in the Mewlon for example. I'm trying desperately hard not to buy any more but the new TLPs and the Masuyama orthos are proving hard to resist 🙂 Malcolm

I think it was your enthusiasm for the XWs that persuaded me to try them @IB20. Good call 🙂 Malcolm

You're quite right @John, my mistake! Thanks for the correction. Malcolm

It's tight but I find it ok. In fact, compared to the 3mm eye relief of the TAO 4mm, it's huge 🙂 Malcolm

I have tried to do a comparison of my 10mm eyepieces. I used my Tak FS60CB, as this is the fastest scope I have and I thought this would be the toughest test for the eyepieces, particularly the wide field ones. This is unscientific, no hard data and numbers, just my impressions. The eyepieces are: Tak 10mm LE Tak 9mm Abbe Ortho (OK, it's not 10mm, but it's close!) Baader Classic Ortho 10mm Masuyama 85 degree 10mm Pentax 85 degree XW 10mm The targets were the moon and the Perseus Double Cluster - this was all I had time for before the clouds rolled in. The scope was the Tak FS60CB giving a magnification of 35.5 (and 39.5 for the TAO) The main takeaway from this experiment was that if any of the eyepieces were my only 10mm eyepiece, I would be very happy with it. To my relatively inexperienced eye, there was not a huge difference in any of them (aside from FOV differences). My favorites were the 9mm TAO and the Masuyama. My least favorite was the Pentax ... but there is a twist at the end to this! Tak Abbe Ortho This little eyepiece was simply sharper and presented more contrast than all the others. Moon features just popped and Perseus's stars were pin point sharp to pretty well the field stop. There was not a huge difference to the others, but I could definitely see a difference. It's a narrow FOV, particularly noticeable after using one of the 85 degree eyepieces, but if I'm using an ortho, I'm looking for detail, not a panoramic view. I find this eyepiece very easy to look through and I love that it is very light. Masuyama Call me strange but I enjoy just holding this eyepiece (as I do for the whole range up to the 32 if I'm honest!). It is beautifully built! I could not really perceive any difference in sharpness or contrast with the TAO on the moon but I think the Masuyama may just have rendered the star colours more vividly in the double cluster. Sharpness was woeful from roughly half way to the field stop in the fast FS60CB, but hey, that still gives you 40 degrees of loveliness! Oddly, the poor outer 40 degrees of FOV do not bother me, even when looking at star clusters but I realise for many this would be a show stopper. It's actually quite hard to see the whole FOV; you really need to press your eye down virtually onto the lens. Don't use this eyepiece in a slow, undriven setup! I also really like the soft eyeguards; very comfortable to use. Tak 10mm LE I don't really have to much to say about this eyepiece. I like it. I used it a lot until I got the 9mm TAO. I still use it in binoviewers. It's sharp, the contrast is good, colour rendition is similar to the TAO, but it just lacks a little bit of zing that I'm afraid I cannot quantify or even qualify! Baader Classic Ortho This one surprised me. I was expecting it to be noticably worse than the others, being a fraction of the price. But it is really good. Not quite as good as the Taks or Masuyama, but very close. It's the lightest of them all, and so has a less robust feel to it, and I'm not really keen on the winged eye guard, though it's comfortable enough. I do not use this one much but bang for buck, this one is hard to beat. Pentax XW This Pentax range gets great reviews. It's a hand grenade compared to the others! It's very well built and feels very solid. The rotating eye cup oozes quality! But I found it a little less sharp with a little less contrast than the others, and the colour rendition was not as vivid as the Masuyama. The image is sharp pretty well to the field stop though so for slow, undriven scopes, this would be a winner. It was also easier to see the whole FOV in the Pentax than in the Masuyama. So, while I was a little disappointed in this one, I realise it's not really a fair comparison when the competition is Orthos. My big beef with this one is the size and weight. But that's just me, I like small and light! Eyepieces are very personal. One person's supernova is another person's piece of space junk. There are so many variables; type of scope, fast or slow scope, driven mount or manual, one's own eyes, weight and balance (eyepiece weight, not one's own weight 🙂), wide FOV or narrow FOV, type of target ... so I'll not be offended if anyone vehemently disagrees with my impressions 🙂 I would be very interested as to what eyepieces you prefer and why. The Twist So I have maybe given a poor impression of the Pentax. Early this morning (the comparison was done a week ago or so) I was observing the Moon and Jupiter with my Tak FC100DC. I was alternating between a Tak Abbe Ortho 4mm and 6mm wishing I had 5mm Ortho. The 4mm was just slightly too much, the image becoming ever so slightly soft. The 6mm was a lovely sharp view but just begged for a little more. I suddenly remembered I had a 5mm XW hidden away. Hidden, as the house is in disarray with some work being done to it. Anyway, back to the Pentax. Wow! Perfect! It gave me the perfect magnification for the conditions. I did not try detailed comparisons on sharpness or contrast, I just enjoyed a fantastic view and really appreciated being able to rove my eye over the full 85 degrees of sharpness! Jupiter too was a fabulous sight and seeing it suspended with the full 85 degrees of dark background makes for a wonderful sight. My Pentax eyepieces are not going anywhere! Malcolm

Probably my most used scope! It's a joy to use and very easy to use being so small and light, and it puts up great views for a mere 60mm. It'll take x140 (TOE 2.5mm) and beg for more! Go for it 🙂 Malcolm

Tak FS60CB and Masuyama 32mm gives a huge 7.6° Sometimes I use this combination as a finder, dual mounted with a Mewlon 180 on a Giro Ercole. It's a lovely combination to use. Malcolm

Quicksand? I thought it was sweetly scented cotton wool! Regardless, having fallen in, I'm in no hurry to escape 🙂 Malcolm

Your 76mm is my 60mm. I think you are stronger than me 🙂 Malcolm

This little scope is so easy to use, such fun to use and gives such good views (for 60mm) that it is probably my most used scope. I suspect it will not go as deep as your 70mm, nor will it resolve as much detail but it is very capable and very versatile care of extenders and objective units. Pop it on a light photo tripod with a light video fluid head (or any other light mount of your choice!), keep it handy and you can take advantage of very short observing opportunities. I used to love getting in 10 minute lunar sessions before leaving for work in the winter mornings. You mention using it for widefield; with a 28mm Erfle eyepiece, it has a larger FOV than my 15x70 binoculars. Anyway, I'll stop there, I've said it all before 🙂 Maloclm

Thanks @Louis D, thats lots of great advice. I tried some of the Kitakaru with it's eyeguard rolled down and noticed severe kidney beaning (or maybe blackouts, too far inwards as you mention). It's certainly a great way to play with kit during the day and when there's full cloud cover! Malcolm

My phone camera and technique are probably not helping! I actually find the Kitakaru much easier to look through than the Nagler, but they are very different eyepieces with very different focal lengths, so probably not a fair comparison. Malcolm

Just for comparison, here's a Nagler 16mm in the same setup. This time the FOV goes from 0 to 33cm. Apologies to @Louis D for using his technique; I don't think I have achieved the quality of his images. Malcolm