Meade Series 4000 vs Series 5000 2" Plossls

[enigma]

Has anyone compared the Meade Series 4000 56mm 2" Super Plossl (52º) with the Meade Series 5000 40mm (or 32mm) 2" Super Plossl (60º)? Is the Series 5000 really worth the much higher cost (given that for about the same price there are wider eyepieces). The Series 4000 at the current price seems to be of good value.

[Capricorn]

The comparison isn't really valid.

The 4000 series are plossls - 4 elements in 2 symetric groups, the 5000 series are not, they have 5 or 6 elements in the eyepieces, so not an actual plossl.

You would not be comparing like to like.

[enigma]

They are advertised as Plossls and 5 elements is not uncommon for this type of eyepieces. If they are not true Plossls why call them like this and not something different?

[John]

The first generation Meade 4000's were 5 element "super plossl" design when they first came out and were made in Japan. Meade subsequently dropped the extra lens element and then moved production to China.

I've used a few Meade 4K Plossls over the years and they are decent plossls. I've not tried a Meade 5K Plossl but I have read quite a lot of mixed views on them - some love them some don't. In principle they should offer the prospect slightly better optical performance than the 4K's through the use of better quality glass and coating technology I would have thought.

Sorry I can't offer you a first hand back to back comparison.

[Merlin66]

I had a full set of the Series 4000 5 element (Japan), as well as the later Chinese 4 element and the Series 5000 Plossls.

The 5000 series outperformed the 4 element series in clarity, edge of field and general throughput, but the original 5 element 4000 series held their own very well, and I prefered them.

(I've subsequently sold both sets and still use my 25 year old TV plossls)