Does a 2" ep show more detail than a 1.25" at a given focal length?

[tenbyfifty]

i.e. if I was to buy a 6 or 8" reflector, would a 2" ep provide a significantly better visual experience

over a 1.25" , especially WRT planets?

[GazOC]

No, especially with regard to planets.

2" eyepieces excel at giving wide views that 1.25" eyepieces are unable to. For planetary use you just want good, on axis (ie. in the middle) performance, theres no need to get 2" gear to view the planets.

[tenbyfifty]

theres no need to get 2" gear to view the planets.

That's saved me a few bob

Thanks for that.

[GazOC]

You could do a lot worse than picking up a some secondhand orthos to use on planets. They go for around £20-£30 but you'd have to spend a lot more money to get significantly better planetary performance.

[lunator]

You could do a lot worse than picking up a some secondhand orthos to use on planets. They go for around £20-£30 but you'd have to spend a lot more money to get significantly better planetary performance.

I agree with Gaz.

On my 120mm F/L newt the 6mm ortho is ideal for the planets.

I have the 4&5mm for when the seeing allows.

You can pick them up for about £20 S/H

Cheers

Ian

[MartinB]

Have read and read and read about planetary EPs. Although some people swear by their high power radians and pentaxes the consensus seems to be the less glass the better and it is one of those rare cases of not necessarily getting what you pay for. Have seen reports of cheap kelners out perfoming esoteric stuff at 10x the price. So orthoscopics seem to be order of the day. I love my Baader ones that I've just got from Steve http://www.firstlightoptics.com/products.php?cat=41