Tele Vue Plossil

[Caldwell 14]

Are they really worth £30-40 more than say... a Meade 4000?

[Stephen]

I'd say yes as they are tested down to f4 whereas others aren't

However a second hand one should only set you back £50 or so?

[Jaxxxxx]

Hey,

I asked myself this very question a few months back and really its a personal choice and would strongly recommend trying some TeleVue eyepieces out at an amateur astronomers club if that is possible.

I decided in the end to go with the TeleVue Radian eyepieces as for me they offered superb optics with the eye relief I was craving over the non-TV Plossls I was using at the time.

In short to try and answer your question... There is no doubt of the pristine optics and sharpness of TeleVue eyepieces including the Plossls however the main thing really for me being a TV fan is the build quality and decent customer base and great customer service. Are they worth £30 - £40 more in my honest opinion yes because you are buying into a quality item and look, works and feels great.

TV Plossls may be 3x the price and in honesty you wont get say 3x sharper images however with anything the price hike always shoots up for even the smallest percentage when buying into a brand such as TV.

Hope that helps

[andrew63]

I have a few, and although only a 50 deg field of view, that field for sharpness, contrast and light throughput is at least as good as any lens costing several hundreds of pounds - and yes they are excellent value if bought used, as they are often for sale.

andrew

[Ags]

I've read more than one "can't tell the difference" thread comparing TV and other plossls. Perhaps there is a big difference at F4, but I am not so sure there is much of a difference in a normal scope. All plossls have the same optical design (except for the five element 'super plossls') so why would you expec a difference in performance?

[DeejayP999]

I once owned pretty much all of the TV Plossls. Then I obtained some GSO Plossls with a scope that I bought second hand. Side by side comparisons on the same nights/same objects/same scopes showed no discernable difference to my eyes.

The Televues didn’t stay long after that.

Caveat: My scopes are all f7 and slower. I’m told that the TV Plossls are better corrected for fast scopes.

[andrew63]

TV are not the only quality plossl, but unfortunately the likes of celestron and meade have seriously degraded their products - if you look through an ultima or proper super plossl you'll see the difference - but credit to TV they have maintained that quality.

As i say, field of view apart, they match or exceed visually, virtually any other lens costing big bucks for under £50 used!

andrew

[AndyH]

Are they really worth £30-40 more than say... a Meade 4000?

No.

A TeleVue plossl isn't some wonder eyepiece. You're paying the extra for the brand, and very nice build. The optics are very good too, but there are other plossls that will give equally good views. What you're looking for in a plossl, is a sharp contasty view and a good clean field stop. TeleVue gives that, but so do others.

Andy.

[keithatrochdale]

I would not be without my set, IMHO well worth it; especially second hand.

When the for sale section returns, here is a good place to collect them.

[AndyH]

Agreed, regarding their cost second hand. But they don't appear for long. You need to be quick

[Moonshane]

I find Televue plossls (I have a 32mm and a 15mm and previously owned an 11mm) to be really excellent. They provide superbly sharp and contrasty views with lots of details. They are not much 'worse' than other high quality eyepieces like Ethos and Naglers, just with a narrower field.

As with all optics, a small difference in optical quality affects the price massively so even if only 'very slightly' better than average the price will be exponentially increased as it takes more and more time to make a smaller and smaller difference.

For me they are well worth the difference in price, especially used. They also sell quickly so you can change your gear round if you want to quickly too.

I do find the eye relief a bit unfomfortable on the 11mm (and probably the 8mm too but not tried it) and I am happier with BGOs at shorter focal lengths such as the 9mm and the 7mm I have, even though their ER is technically shorter than the 11mm.

[keithatrochdale]

I forgot to mention, when changing eyepieces, it is great to not have to re-focus too much, often not at all.

[callisto]

The differance is noticable, ie in fasts scopes below f5

[Capricorn]

These days it may be questionable if they are worth more then other plossl's, TV prices are going up and you are probably looking at £40-50 more.

They are however good, the main aspect seems to be that a horror story is rare, very rare.

Concerning the fact that the design is fixed, yes it is, but that is the design not the reality. The doublets have to be be made with the optical centres the same and the lens has to have the designed edge thickness and the glass types have to be matched, the actual curvatures also need to be accurate. So there are the basic parameters that have to be controlled.

I suspect that TV simply control these parameters better, at least up until now.

With the advance of technology new grinding machines will now be more accurate and consistant, also the Chinese manufactures will be able now to ask for and get better and more consistant glass. In effect the "budget" chinese plossl's will catch up with makes like TV. Whether or not they remain as budget I wouldn't like to guess, however I suspect the cost of a TV plossl will be close to £100 soon.

[Moonshane]

already there! TeleVue 32mm Plossl Eyepiece 1.25"

[Donkeiller]

I once owned pretty much all of the TV Plossls. Then I obtained some GSO Plossls with a scope that I bought second hand. Side by side comparisons on the same nights/same objects/same scopes showed no discernable difference to my eyes.

The Televues didn’t stay long after that.

Caveat: My scopes are all f7 and slower. I’m told that the TV Plossls are better corrected for fast scopes.

I have to agree. Bought a TV 32mm Plossl as I thought it would be an improvement over the 32mm from the Celestron eyepiece kit.

In back-to-back comparisons I could not see ANY difference in my two scopes, a f/10 SCT and f/6.2 'frac.

In the end I bought other (long eye relief) EPs because the shorter focal length EPs were a pain. Sold the kit as a single item, so still got the TV 32, but NOT because I think it is better.

[RikM]

The faster the scope, the more you will see the benefit of TV and other premium EP's but none of these will show you things you can't see in a budget EP.

[Caldwell 14]

Mmmmm, not convinced that TVs' will be any advantage in my fl10 frac judging by the above.