Jump to content

help what 12 mm is good quality


Recommended Posts

after some replies to my post , it seems a 12mm eyepiece would be a good edition .

im very new to this , so any reccomendations would be great i have seen this one which has a good review but is £70

Celestron 12mm X-Cel LX eyepiece 1.25"

is there a good quality one which maybe cheaper i guess its a case of pay what you get for

thanks andy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think in that price bracket the XCEL-LX will be hard to beat if the reviews are anything to go by. http://stargazerslounge.com/discussions-eyepieces/163180-celestron-x-cel-lx-v-bst-explorer-eyepiece.html

A Baader Genuine Ortho falls into the same price bracket but you will be giving up fov and eye relief for slightly sharper optics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could get a BST Explorer for £41, but it would be beaten in quality by the Celestron X-Cel LX at £69 or its Meade equivalent at £79 (you may prefer the Meade look). All of these would be beaten by the 12.5mm Baader Genuine Orthoscopic at £72 which is largely accepted as pretty much unbeatable optically - provided that the 45-degree view doesn't bother you.

Shorter Baader Ortho focal-lengths (below 9mm) can require you to get uncomfortably close to the eyepiece, but - provided you don't wear glasses - the 12.5mm has no such issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eye relief is the distance your eye needs to be from the top lens of an eyepiece so that you can see the full field of view. It's expressed in mm. Some designs need your eye close to the eyepiece top which some people find OK but others find uncomfortable. This is quite a personal thing.

Eyepieces also have varying fields of view which is expressed in degrees, eg: 40, 50, 60, and so on degrees. The more degrees the wider the field of view and the more sky that the eyepiece will show, compared to one of the same focal length with a smaller field of view. Some folks like wide fields of view and some like a normal or even a narrow one. Wide field and low power is good for large astro objects like M31.

Hope that makes some sense !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eyepieces are, or can be, a very personel thing.

Have read that an eyepiece with greater then 68 degrees means that you have to move your head/eye in order to see everything.

If so that then a wider field may be nice but some may not want to have to move in order to see everything.

So wider may sound better but could be something you would find annoying.

Of the various ones I have I find that the BST's seem the best for performance and budget. Have the feeling that to get better will cost me signifiantly more, and that possibly that extra performance would not warrent to extra cost.

To the OP, the BST's are good and for the cost will take some beating. They do a 12mm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget the humble plossl. Simple design, good sharpness and light throughput and given a bad name by the poor quality of cheap chinese ones bundled with scopes. I have had some excellent plossls and can be bought from around £30 and above.

andrew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • 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.