SCT and Meade SWA set ?

[kirkster501]

Guys, do you think these will work in a SCT - Celestron C11 with a 2" WO diagonal?

Meade 5000 Series Super Wide Angle Eyepiece Set

Alternatively was looking at getting the 19mm and 27mm Panoptics.

This would leave me requiring a quality high power and also a wide field EP when my bank balance recovers.....

I don't mind paying for the quality.

Appreciate your thoughts please.

Steve

[John]

The Meades would work fine I reckon. If your scope was faster the Panoptics would be better but in an F/10 you probably won't see any benefit. Get yourself a 2x Powermate / TeleXtender and you are covered for high power too - 12mm will give you 233x and 8mm 350x (the latter is possibly OTT most of the time in the UK though).

Check around on the pricing though - the Meades have been heavily discounted recently.

[JamesC]

The 34mm and 24mm are excellent. The eye relief of the 16mm is too tight to be comfortable - don't get it. You can get the 34 and 24mm at good prices here and here. I believe these eyepieces are being phased out which is why they are a good price.

These eyepieces worked very well in my f5 dob when I still had it. I expect you'll be able to get cheaper eyepieces that work just as well in a slow scope like your SCT, but I'll leave others to advise you on that.

I can't comment on the panoptics, but I'm sure they're excellent.

[swamp thing]

Hi

I have observed with an observing buddies SWA,s through his Skywatcher 10" newt, and have to say, they work very well indeed.

So in your long scope they would be more than enough to yield excellent results.

As John said, shop around you can get some great deals on the Meades at the mo.

I did own a 27mm pan (wish I'd kept it ) just superb, one of TV best.

Regards Steve

[JamesC]

Just checking the eye relief stats:

34mm SWA - 26.4mm

24mm SWA - 18.4mm

16mm SWA - 11.9mm

14mm UWA - 15.6mm

I found the 11.9mm eye relief way too tight. I think it's because the eye cup gets in the way a bit. The 14mm UWA is very comfy to use though.

[John]

The Panoptic 19mm has just 13mm of eye relief but a mm or so can make a real difference. Strange that the Meade SWA 16mm is tighter than the 14mm

[JamesC]

I've used a nagler with 12mm eye relief and not found it a problem. I think the issue is that the eyecup of the Meade covers all the front face of the eyepiece, except for the lens so the lens is a bit recessed. I could still see the field stop if I really nestled my eye into it but it just wasn't comfy - at least not for me.

Actually I've also got the 3-6mm nagler zoom. That has 10mm eye relief and I don't find it uncomfy. The only problem is that I get eyelash grease on the lens.

[Stephen]

Double check my numbers, but I think it works out cheaper to buy them individually and a case from astroshop dot eu ?

(Edit) Sorry seen it's already been suggested above

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

The 14 UWA is very nice indeed, although its eye relief is closer to 14.5mm than to 15.6mm. Just a tad tight for use with glasses (but still OK). Otherwise outstanding in four scopes so far: my 8" SCT and APM 80 F/6, and Olly's TEC 140 (F/7) and 20" F/4.1 Dob. Really Nagler-like performance in the lot (and I have the 17T4 to compare it to). The SWA have similarly good rep. I doubt that a TV Panoptics give a significantly better performance.

[andrew63]

I can also vouch for the meade 20mm SWA - but perhaps it would be too close to the 24mm in use for you.

By the way, not used the the 16mm - but by many accounts it is an extremely sharp lens, perhaps the pick of the bunch and outperforms the 15mm Pan.

andrew

[kirkster501]

Great advice - thanks guys.

So, do you think the TV Pans, altthough very nice, are a bit OTT in the C11? I would be a paying 50% of their [considerable] cost to get just a few percent extra what I could get from the 5000 SWA?

And any alternatives to the 16mm in terms of eye relief? I dont wear glasses (for observing).

TIA, Steve

[swamp thing]

Great advice - thanks guys.

So, do you think the TV Pans, altthough very nice, are a bit OTT in the C11? I would be a paying 50% of their [considerable] cost to get just a few percent extra what I could get from the 5000 SWA?

And any alternatives to the 16mm in terms of eye relief? I dont wear glasses (for observing).

TIA, Steve

IMO Yes