What is the visible benefit out of better eyepieces?

[robkmaeda]

Hello.

Being an astronomy newbie, I have a very newbie question. Everywhere I read says that the stock eyepieces coming with my SW Mak127 are mediocre at best (for the 25 mm) and horrible for the worst (the stock 10 mm). I have been using them for a couple of weeks now and have been able to the stripes and moons of Jupiter, the andromeda galaxy as a faint smear and the orion nebula as a faint cloud surrouding some bright stars. I know I can't expect Hubble level views, but would better eyepieces really improve my viewing and if so, how? Would I see things clearer? Brighter? For now I am thinking that the main problem with my scope is the shaky alt/az tracking mount, but should I also be thinking more about improving the optics?

Thanks in advance for any help,

Rob

---

I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=46.134476,6.213675

[jimmyjamjoejoe]

Sorry to hijack the thread, but i was thinking about buying one of those scopes. Is the mount really that bad? I take it from your comment the tracking movement isn't smooth, and while i don't intend on doing any imaging, shakey observing will get annoying really quickly... How is it if you don't use the tracking?

[Veracocha]

Rob, is there an astro group where you are?, you might get some idea of what suits you by looking through other members eyepieces to help you judge what works for you. I remember looking through some Badder Hyperions at SGL6 and decided to buy the whole set and I would now say that these are good eyepieces but even better ones are available.

[enigmacell]

I would really love to know what the benfits are too. Is it just small things like the hue around the outside or is there a dramatic difference. There are some dramatic differences in price anyway.

Could someone post up a picture of what something looks like in a cheap eyepiece and one at the high end? Is it like a picture taken from a disposable camera and an SLR?

[Veracocha]

Eyepieces are an individual thing, what might work for you might not work for someone else; you need to go out and meet other astronomers/groups/starparties to get an overall feel. I don't think a photo through eyepieces will pick up the subtle differences that the naked eye will provide.

[Moonshane]

if the current eyepieces work for you then stick with them for now. better quality will provide more contrast, sharpness and possibly a wider field but at your focal ratio the differences will be smaller than a fast system like a f5 dob.

in your position I'd be looking to buy a wider field eyepiece I think.

if you don't have a red dot finder this would be a good buy and as you say a sturdier mount but there's always more stuff to buy so take your time and enjoy what you have.

[robkmaeda]

Thanks for the feedback.

Regarding the mount, it is okay, but it does shake for a few seconds after finding an object and focus is a bit of a chore (turn, wait, look. . .repeat). My only comparisons are with the microscopes I use for my job and they are rock steady when placed on the massive motion dampening tables we have. Still, the shakiness is okay when you consider the weight. It is so light that you can quickly pick everything up and go.

In response to the suggestion about finding a star observing groups in the area, it is a great suggestion. I'll look into it.

[glowjet]

As has been said eyepieces are a personal thing no matter how much money you throw at a top quality lens it won`t improve things if the seeing is not good, where they excel is in the resolving power, clarity and wide FOV, at a recent star event I had the opportunity to vue Jupiter through an Ethos and there was just no contest compared to other ep`s I had looked through that night and the seeing was no all that good either, but there again the cost of this lens is almost twice the outlay of a first basic scope. And a tip for those who do get the jelly wobbles from their mounts, try a bag filled with sand or something similar hung from the center, this can help to dampen vibrations

[Macavity]

Re. the mount - The tripod is often the weakest link. Try extending it a little LESS than fully. The alt-azimuth mount is rather near the limit, with a MAK127. Sadly there are few (budget, portable) alternatives. If you have a regular observing site, worthwhile throwing down a few "ornamental" paving stones. <G> Or burying 3 blocks, flush with the lawn surface etc.

[todd8137]

hi rob if the orion nebula did not make you go weak at that knees,like it does every time i see it then not a lot else will lol,its mega i love the orion neb itsa knee wobbler for me i could not wait for it to come back have you seem any clusters or gob clusters (favs of mine) m57 as well thats lovely and the dumbell i woke my good lady up at 01:30 a couple a years ago to show her she was not impressed at all

as all ready said eps are a personel thing some like the budget eps and they work well others like the bank busting ones

cheers now

[bish]

More expensive eyepieces will make a difference, but not necessarily a huge one and it's difficult to quantify as it is an individual experience. I was just as wowed by Saturn in my old cheap eps as I am now in my more expensive ones - but I can tease out smaller details now. To state the obvious, it's only worth it if you have the spare cash for it - otherwise enjoy what you've got because the difference can be quite subtle.

[studio1one]

I think you there is a law of diminishing returns with EPs.

Between the very bottom end and the mid range the difference is huge. Between mid range and high end its quite big. Between high end and top end it's not so big.

As much as the quality of the EP for me the comfort is equally important, different shaped skulls and eyes make different eyepieces work for different people. It's no good having the best optics in the world if you cant look comfortably through the glass.