What eyepieces to stay away from?

[SionR25]

Hi everyone,

I'm hoping to get some new eyepieces for my 200p, but I see a lot of people recommend different eyepieces and it seems that it is mostly down to personal preference, with most offering a big upgrade to the standard 'shipped with scope' eyepiece. This does make picking a new eyepiece for a newbie quite difficult . Seeing as there are all these recommendations with the only limiting factor being budget, are there any eyepieces that are pretty much universally agreed as bad, so I know what to stay well clear of? I think this may make my choice easier .

Thanks in advance,

Sion

[Naemeth]

Huygens, Ramsden, Kellner / MA (Modified Achromatic), Reversed Kellner.

Those are all the cheap ones, and you usually get Huygens in really cheap department store scopes.

Plossl, Ortho, Erfle, Nagler, TMB should be fine .

[RikM]

The difficulty with eyepieces is that everyone's eyes are different so you don't know what's going to suit you until you try. The best thing is to try and get along to your local astro society when they have an observing evening and have a go with a few different types and see what fits you best. Actually, the difference between kit eyepieces and upgrades isn't that dramatic in most cases. What is different is that you can get eyepieces with wider fields of view or longer eyerelief, which can make the whole viewing experience much more pleasant.

[John]

As well as the ones listed above, I'd also avoid the older style Skywatcher LER eyepieces, sometimes sold in a set with filters at a discounted price if you bought a Skywatcher scope. I never really enjoyed the GSO Superwide 2" eyepieces that I tried either.

As Rik says, it's a personal thing though - some folks can't abide Naglers.

[Adrian]

I'd stay away from the Meade QX range. I tried a 20mm and it was the worst eyepiece that I've looked through that didn't come with a scope - immediate return. Even at f10 in an SCT jupiter was a squished oval shape (astigmatism?) with no detail anywhere away from the centre of the fov.

My 18mm BST explorer showed more, despite being 10 degrees less afov, as it was good to the edges.

[swamp thing]

I'd stay away from the Meade QX range. I tried a 20mm and it was the worst eyepiece that I've looked through that didn't come with a scope - immediate return. Even at f10 in an SCT jupiter was a squished oval shape (astigmatism?) with no detail anywhere away from the centre of the fov.

My 18mm BST explorer showed more, despite being 10 degrees less afov, as it was good to the edges.

+1

Those QX eyepiece are simply awful. Optical junk. I got the 26mm with my old LB. I actually thought the scope had some real optical problems until I replaced it with one of my own. It went straight back in its bolt case. Never used it again.

[John]

+1

Those QX eyepiece are simply awful. Optical junk. I got the 26mm with my old LB. I actually thought the scope had some real optical problems until I replaced it with one of my own. It went straight back in its bolt case. Never used it again.

+2 for that

The 26mm QX is poor. Why Meade supply it as standard with their scopes is beyond me

[SionR25]

Ok, thanks for the advice guys . At the moment I am thinking of getting a 12mm and 18mm BST, 9mm TMB Planetary and a 30mm Vixen NPL, buying each as funds allow. Anything in that lot you would stay clear of or does it sound ok? I do have a 2x barlow to go with them.

Sion

[E621Keith]

For optical qualty Avoid Ramsden, Hugyen and modified achromat, and cheap zoom. Short focal length Kellner should be avoided as well.

Also avoid Televue , because it will bankrupt your wallet. Once you get one, you will want another, then the whole set .... ££££

[Rob_UK_SE]

My shortest lived eyepiece experience was courtesy of the old Celestron X-Cel (not the newer LX version). On paper they looked quite attractive with good eye relief etc, however, they suffered horrendous amounts of kidney beaning. They were promptly returned to the store.

Considering your budget, perhaps stay away from all things green (Tele Vue). Once you start down that path it's most certainly a slippery slope towards a full set. Not a bad thing as such, but very bad for the wallet.

Best regards,

Rob

[Adrian]

Ok, thanks for the advice guys . At the moment I am thinking of getting a 12mm and 18mm BST, 9mm TMB Planetary and a 30mm Vixen NPL, buying each as funds allow. Anything in that lot you would stay clear of or does it sound ok? I do have a 2x barlow to go with them.

Sion

Those sound like excellent choices. You might consider the 8mm BST rather than the 9mm TMB. I have owned neither, but I have read comparisons between the 2 lines of eyepieces and the BST explorer line are generally preferred. (I can't find the threads at the moment).

Found one http://stargazerslou...m-bst-explorer/

[SionR25]

Those sound like excellent choices. You might consider the 8mm BST rather than the 9mm TMB. I have owned neither, but I have read comparisons between the 2 lines of eyepieces and the BST explorer line are generally preferred. (I can't find the threads at the moment).

Found one http://stargazerslou...m-bst-explorer/

Ok, thanks for that link, will get the BST 8mm .

Thanks again for all the help guys ,

Sion

[cs1cjc]

I think it is difficult to recommend the TMB branded eyepieces sold in the UK, because they appear not to be those authorised by TMB Optical.

[Dave Dubya]

I quite like Celestron's 2" E-Lux eyepieces. And the Skywatcher's super wide Panaview give some pretty good "wow" images.

I know some people who wouldn't think of paying less than a few hundred for an eyepiece because of it's supposed amazing quality. Yet I've got an inexpensive 8-24mm zoom eyepiece that I use all the time, which some would say is a load of Rubbish, but it's practical and gives comfortable viewing.

So, as RikM says above, if possible try a few out before buying and see what suits you. At the very least, most Plossl eyepieces should give you an improved view compared to the Super-MA eyepieces that came with the telescope (which are fine for getting started).

[SionR25]

How good are the Meade 4000 plossls compared to the Vixen NPL as they are around the same price. If it helps I have a budget of about £100 to get about two-three eyepieces. I would like a 6mm for planetary and lunar, then something to replace my 10mm, something between 9-12mm and then something about 20mm.

I was thinking of the TMB 6mm, Meade 4000 12.4mm and then a BST 18mm (keeps changing every few hours , too much choice )

Sion

EDIT: There is also the Meade 4000 zoom eyepiece, I read somewhere that zoom isn't always as good but it could be good for convenience. Anyone know how good this one is?

[Capricorn]

If you get 3 different makes then each eyepiece will have a different focal plane so you will have to (probably) make a fair change in focus when changing.

The BST's are supposed to be parfocal so only a little adjustment on the focuser ahen you change eyepieces. It may seem a small almost irrelevant aspect but it is very useful, and very good when changing for low to high magnifications.

You will get a similar (hopefully) thing if you bought the TMB's only.

Also the BST's are reckoned to be decent on your scope from previous peoples experience.

[John]

I think it is difficult to recommend the TMB branded eyepieces sold in the UK, because they appear not to be those authorised by TMB Optical.

I agree. I think it's rather misleading that they use the TMB brand name when promoting them. Rather insensitive to the late Thomas Back's family too

[alan potts]

I agree with all said about the QX , I think it is short for quality xstinct, Meade make some good gear, very good gear. I agree with, I think it was John, why they supply this with their scopes. This was a business discision made in the pub.

Alan

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I agree with all said about the QX , I think it is short for quality xstinct, Meade make some good gear, very good gear. I agree with, I think it was John, why they supply this with their scopes. This was a business discision made in the pub.

Alan

In the pub? More likely next morning, after a LONG stay in the pub, some dodgy "maybe if we eat this artery-clogging stuff we will have less of a hangover" food, wondering how on earth you ended up wearing a tutu, a packet of aspirine for breakfast, because they had to go to a meeting.

The QX was chosen not just because it was cheap, but more importantly because it showed less detail, and therefore the view hurt the hangover-riddled brains least. Thus, it seemed like a good idea at the time.

That at least is my theory

[Pete Presland]

it should be more a question of what ones to buy rather than avoid, i think the meade 4000's offer excellent value for money on the 2nd hand market.but it is a very personal thing really, i have gone through a few different brands over the last few years.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I have some exquisite views with the Meade Series 5000 14mm UWA in a range of scopes. Don't get me wrong, Meade make some excellent stuff

[Adrian]

In terms of 30-32mm Plossl, I think you will be happy with the views through any of the major brands: Meade 4000, Celestron Omni, GSO or Vixen NPL. Whichever you can get for the best price at the time really.

Although, if you have a 2" focusser on both scopes then you may want to go for a 2" eyepiece for wide views (the Skywatcher Aeros are good in f5 scopes like yours, but are a bit more expensive than the Panaviews) as you can get a nice wide fov.

[Andymarrison]

I've been really impressed with the Baader Hyperions, but I've only used them in pretty slow SCTs and nothing as fast as your f5.

[alan potts]

I agree Meade 4000 very good value, I use one in my Vario finder as it is many times better than what came with it, it say this because you should not call what Baader sell with this an eyepiece. Meade in general do make some very good eyepieces , I have many. If we just talked about what was good all the time, we could just copy paste most of the replies.

Alan.

[SionR25]

Keeping in mind that little focus should be needed changing between the BSTs, would a 5mm, giving 240x (the smallest BST) be too much magnification for the UK as I have heard 200x is the limit for the UK?

Sion