Jump to content

TMB Planetary EPs


Recommended Posts

I've never considered these things as I thought they were ... very expensive.

I didn't realise they were just £66 new.

Compared to an orthoscopic at £20-£30, are they worth it?

The most attractive feature is of course the 20 extra degrees FOV 8)

I think I'll keep my eyes (just mis-typed eyepieces - I'm getting obsessed!) peeled for a 4/5mm S/H

Andrew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 30
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I 'think' they are just Ortho's with a wider FOV, but am not sure. Anyway from all accounts they are excellent on Planets, which is wierd 'cos a wide FOV is not really necessery for planets :D

Anyways I did think about getting one but just got a plain ortho instead but I did read up on them and everyonesaid they were great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a 7mm TMB which in my 14 inch dob gives a high mag. However I have used it when seeing and transparity have been excellent and the image slightly lacks the quality of other eyepieces (teleview plossel and radian) that I have used in the same conditions.

But for the price it is a good trade off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I 'think' they are just Ortho's with a wider FOV, but am not sure. Anyway from all accounts they are excellent on Planets, which is wierd 'cos a wide FOV is not really necessery for planets :D

good point blinky...

I have a 7mm TMB which in my 14 inch dob gives a high mag. However I have used it when seeing and transparity have been excellent and the image slightly lacks the quality of other eyepieces (teleview plossel and radian) that I have used in the same conditions.

Thanks Jakey. I was hoping for a comparison against orthos rather than TVs though!!

Andrew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the things about Orthos is that the narrow fov makes the planet appear a little larger, psychologically. You will never fill the fov with a planet anyway, so the narrow fov isn't such an issue. The other main use for Orthos is looking at doubles, which also doesn't need a large fov.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking about getting a good quality ortho for when Mars hoves into better view.

I had set my sights on one of the Baader orthos, and hadn't considered others. I know this sort of thing can be subjective, but is the TMB 'better' than the Baader?

Geoff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just my own experience with the TMB, last year i compared the views using a 5mm TMB planetary and a 6mm antares ortho using a Tak FS102.

The view of saturn was noticeably sharper with the ortho. image was good in TMB, but there was a difference.

I would expect a Baader ortho to be at least as good as the japanese made antares,if not slightly better.

mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would expect a Baader ortho to be at least as good as the japanese made antares,if not slightly better.

mike

I've used both the Baader orthos and the Antares and the Baaders are noticably better. But then again, they do cost more... :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I 'think' they are just Ortho's with a wider FOV, but am not sure. Anyway from all accounts they are excellent on Planets, which is wierd 'cos a wide FOV is not really necessery for planets :D

Apparently the TMB/ BO Planetary's were designed with dob use in mind.. The idea being that you can let the planet drift across the wider FOV and not have to adjust the dob so often. The thing that appeals to me about the TMB/ BO Planetary's is the extra eye relief.. Viewing in comfort at high mag's sounds appealing :).

Scott

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eyepieces are so subjective. I thought the TMB was a well balanced eyepiece. Not quite the sharpness or light throughput of an Ortho but not too far removed. On the otherhand, the extra FOV and eyerelief made for a far more comfortable experience. So you ended up enjoying the view that much more anyway.

I sold my 9mm TMB and ended up replacing it with a Baader Geniune Ortho. The two weren't in my possesion at the same time so can't do a direct comparison. But i kept the Ortho 1 week. The views were good but my Orion Ultrascopic gave equally good views and was nicer to use. But ultimately i long for a TMB again or perhaps the 'cheapy' Pentax XF 8mm. I really liked that format of a high power eyepiece with a widefield, good eyerelief, excellent edge to edge sharpness but not comprimised too much on image quality.

Just my view. Yes an Ortho is marginally (at the most) better but the viewing comfort far outweighs that. But i've never been a huge fan of the ortho.

Russ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Okay, thanks for the responses guys, but I'm still undecided :wink:

I've received two offers in response to a wanted ad for a 4mm ortho/TMB planetary:

- A Celestron volcano top ortho for £46 delivered from Germany

Pros: fewer elements - sharper and brighter. Cons: limited eye relief, price :shock:

- A TMB/Burgess planetary for £45 delivered from an SGL member.

Pros: greater FOV to let the planet drift, greater eye relief, get it soon. Cons: price (unbranded ortho would be half the price)

Should I go for either of these or wait for an offer for a cheap ortho?

Does anyone know the actual eye relief on the average 4mm eyepiece?

cheers!

Andrew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A word of warning with high powered Ortho's.........they don't have eye relief! Very much an acquired taste for the planetary connoisseur. I have a 12mm and 18mm Ortho (both Circle T Volcano top).....love em. I would never go higher than 9mm with an Ortho. Rather barlow the lower power versions with a decent barlow to get the desired mag. That way retain some form of viewing comfort. I keep buying the cheap 4-6mm Orthos when they come up and then immediately sell them again. But everyone is different and a lot of people like the purity of the Ortho design and will not compromise.

Both of my Circle T VT Ortho's came up on Ebay, one for £12 and the other £14. But if i had the cash I would just go with the TMB again.

Russ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never considered these things as I thought they were ... very expensive.

I didn't realise they were just £66 new.

Compared to an orthoscopic at £20-£30, are they worth it?

The most attractive feature is of course the 20 extra degrees FOV 8)

I think I'll keep my eyes (just mis-typed eyepieces - I'm getting obsessed!) peeled for a 4/5mm S/H

Andrew

Andrew, where are you finding TMBs for £66, and orthos for £20? :shock: Please post some links!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here you are SW

http://www.telescopehouse.co.uk/page.aspx?theLang=001lngdef&pointerid=CD806098E532419F85792C1F788D79FC&action=lnk

and, just as an example:

http://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview_archive.php?view=12180

(I did mean S/H, btw)

Russ,

I knew eye relief was limited, but if it's literally like... 4mm, then maybe not!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

erm Karlo !!

65.10 (includes postage)

I was illustrating to SW where it's sold for £66. I hadn't realised FLO stocks them when starting the thread.

I was actually inteding to point out that FLO is (yet again) cheaper in my last post but forgot. sorry.

cheers :wink:

Andrew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got the 4mm in my 200mm f6, and tbh the seeing needs to very good to really take advantage of it, so I'm a little disappointed but look fwd to clear skies at Kielder to justify it's purchase. I will however plant o get the 7mm(most likely) or 8mm for more general use. I like them a lot and I think good value for the money. (love the adjustable eyecup too- not a spectacle wearer but imagine this to be useful)

Karlo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have found the best eyepeice for me are Ortho.

On most night the 6mm (x200) is fine and even the 5mm can work well.

The 4mm does require a good night but will reward you with an excellent view.

Overall I think the advantages of the ortho design outweigh the disadvantages and at the price (£20) I got them you can't go wrong.

Cheers

Ian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've just sold/selling my 9.7/9mm Plossls and am replacing with a 9mm TMB Planetary from FLO. My decision was based on the 20mm eye relief (across the whole range!) compared to 9mm (Ortho) and 7mm (Plossl) - I'm a spec wearer and theres no fun in bumping into the eyepiece at high mag (I found the double-double last week). Also, as you have already discussed the field is bigger so you can watch it drift a bit if tracking is an issue. I did consider the Meade 5000 9mm but the eye relief is still a bit iffy for me. I'll let you know how I get on.

Huw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm curious but as a glasses wearer, but I push my specs onto my forehead when I'm at the eyepiece. Does anyone else do this?

I'm curious about orthos because of the lack of eye relief. I prefer my eyeball right up close to the glass. Saying that, I've got a 5mm BO/TMB planetary and I love it..

Tony..

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.