Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

TMB 6mm planetary (Type II) 1.25" eyepiece

scottydog

Recommended Posts

ronin

ronin

Posted
Posted

They have a good name and not really heard any complaints as the performance to price is good.

However the 127 is 1500mm FL and with a 6mm eyepiece that means 250x.

Suspect that is at the limit of the scope and beyond the normal limits of seeing conditions in the UK. Usually 200x is reckoned to be the sensible max and again not all the time.

So the use you get of it could be minimal, couple of tmes a year if conditions are right. If they do a 7.5mm I would suggest that, (actually I would say get a 10mm and forget magnification). However the lure of magnification is great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RikM

RikM

Posted
Posted

I get my best views with the 127MAK with an 8.8mm EP. A 10mm + 2x barlow is generally too much.

I have heard that the TMB II are nice EP's for the money, as are the TMB clones and TS HR planetary. All supposedly very similar but I have no direct experience with any of them.

That didn't help at all did it :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
scottydog

scottydog

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for all the info :(

Think I may look at a slightly lower mag than the 6mm - any suggestions as I don't think the TMB comes in anything other than 6 or 4mm :)

I have a 32mm GSO on order as they've had favourable words written about them on here & which I'm led to believe will be good for wider FOV's?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Moonshane

Moonshane

Posted
Posted

it depends on your circumstances (e.g. if you wear glasses to observe) but my best eyepiece at that sort of magnification (178x) is a 9mm Baader Genuine Ortho. Superb value for money.

The field is narrow but for planetary use you don't need a wide field, especially if you have tracking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
scottydog

scottydog

Posted
  • Author
Posted
it depends on your circumstances (e.g. if you wear glasses to observe) but my best eyepiece at that sort of magnification (178x) is a 9mm Baader Genuine Ortho. Superb value for money.

The field is narrow but for planetary use you don't need a wide field, especially if you have tracking.

Yes I do wear glasses to observe!

You say 'superb value for money' - how much we talking? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted
Yes I do wear glasses to observe!

You say 'superb value for money' - how much we talking? :)

£73 each but if you wear glasses to observe ortho's are probably not for you.

I agree with Shane that Baader GO's are superb performers though - you would have to pay a couple of hundred £'s or more for anything better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BazMark

BazMark

Posted
Posted

I got bitten by the magnification bug when I first had my SW127 Mak and purchased the 6mm TS planetary HR. Knowing what I do now I wouldn't recommend it for this scope. It does push it to it's absolute limmit and though I have had some reasonable views with it they have been rare. My best views have been with a 16.8mm ortho barlowed 2x to 8.4mm. Based on that I would not recommend an eyepiece stronger than 7 or 8mm for this scope.

Hope this helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Moonshane

Moonshane

Posted
Posted
£73 each but if you wear glasses to observe ortho's are probably not for you.

I agree with Shane that Baader GO's are superb performers though - you would have to pay a couple of hundred £'s or more for anything better.

yes, I agree with John, glasses are a no no with orthos. the only possibly exception is a barlow 18mm to give 9mm but there are much easier and cheaper options, especially for such a slow scope.

maybe the 8mm BST is a good suggestion as above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tyr

Tyr

Posted
Posted

I was thinking along similar lines to Scotty and have basically the same scope.

I'd like a little more magnification than I get with my 9mm plossl and already have a 15mm BST which I'm very happy with.

I wasn't sure whether to think about an 8mm BST, a x2 barlow + my 15mm or one of the TMB design EPs.

I'm not sure if putting say a Celestron Ultima in front of the BST is going to affect the image brightness much.

But for the price of the Barlow I could get 2 more of the BSTs

Tyr

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 years later...
AndresEsteban

AndresEsteban

Posted
Posted

Don't know about the SW 127 Mak fl1500. But I have a 3-in f/16.4 old refractor and I currently use it with a 9mm Plössl (x139) a handmade 8mm modified König (x156) and a 6mm Huygens HM (x208). From my experiences the 6mm gives quite good images of Jupiter so I think a better eyepiece would certainly outperform the 6mm Huygens. I'm seriouslyy considering buying this eyepiece. At 6mm I'm working at x70-per-inch without problem. I believe it would perform well with the 127 Mak too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr Spock

Mr Spock

Posted
Posted

I have a 6mm TMB. It gives me x392 in the C9.25 and is really sharp on those odd steady nights we get. They do perform better with long focal length scopes, it wasn't as happy in the 250 Newt I had before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AndresEsteban

AndresEsteban

Posted
Posted

I have a 6mm TMB. It gives me x392 in the C9.25 and is really sharp on those odd steady nights we get. They do perform better with long focal length scopes, it wasn't as happy in the 250 Newt I had before.

@Mr. Spok: Thanks for your observation ragarding long focal lenght telescope. I'm going to buy one TMB Optical Planetary Type II 6mm 1.25" and I'll share the results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AndresEsteban

AndresEsteban

Posted
Posted

From all posts of people more experienced, I've selected the following advices:

1- Telescopes with long focus or slow scopes (high f/ratio, about f>10), almost any type of eyepiece may be used, even the regular ones. Of course the better the eyepiece, the better the image, but here's there's not any "magical eyepiece" here.

2- Telescopes with short focus (low f/ratio, f<10) do not tolerate bad eyepieces, only the best. So here, good or excellent eyepieces will really make the difference!

So if you have a telescope with long focus, it's not necessary to buy very expensive eyepieces. But for fast scopes you will certainly need to rip off your wallet in order to have a decent eyepiece. That's the bad side of faster scopes, you need excellent eyepieces, period.

Yes, I know, a faster scope, mainly a refractor means less space and transport, manipulation facility but... it's a pitty that  3" to 5" f/16 refractors are discontinued.

An interesting article, although not in this forum, about the TMB Planetary Type II along with many others:
http://www.cloudynights.com/item.php?item_id=1935

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.