EP upgrade-erm..

[BiG JiLM]

Hi chaps (& chapadesses? but alas I assume its another 'man-cathedral' here, which is fine of course).

Ive done my research quite thoughrally, so I thought, after buying a Celestron 130EQ as my 1st scope I decided 1st port of call and buy a decent EP upgrade over the bog std 10mm, as has been advised etc. An 8mm Vixen NPL arrived next day so I was eager to see the difference. Erm bar it being a fraction more magnified of course, there is no difference. Not an iota. The image quality is -exactly- the same: no sharper, no more detail. I'm pretty dissapointed tbh and concede to a feeling of having wasted £35 at the drop of a hat.. and after the pages I read? I dont understand; now maybe Ive missed a trick- but Im sure I did proper reading up on this being a good EP, and it being a plossl, and it being a considerable step up from the std came-with non-plossl cheapies.

So, 1stly Im wondering if its indeed a plossl/ what I ordered. You see it has no 'plossl' ID as such on it as most do (and therefore to claerly ID/ differentiate its quality from my cheapy 10mm). It has no part number, or no serial number even (? odd) only 'Vixen NPL 8mm 50* fully multi-coated'. The receipt says '1x Vixen 8mm NPL-3' which maybe means 'mk3' but thtas of little significance here, is it?

any help- appreciated. Thanks JiLm

[Matt Scunthorpe]

Hi chaps (& chapadesses? but alas I assume its another 'man-cathedral' here, which is fine of course).

Look forward to seeing the womens comments on that.

I upgraded to a SW plossi and i dont see any difference apart from the increased magnification. I have heard people say that as you get more expeienced you train your eye to pick out more detail etc, which the higher quality eyepeices will help with. So i'm looking at it as something that will come with time and going to stick with the eyepeices i have for the time being.

[knobby]

Hi Jilm

I changed my sw 10mm that came with my scope for a celestron lx excel 7 mm ... Massive improvement ! From what I've read it seems that the cheapo 10mm that comes with the scope is ok ish but appears to have qc issues , maybe you got a good one .

Also with the 8 mm you now have its pretty high mag. So you news to ensure the scope is fully cooled and that the seeing is good .

With the higher mag. It will highlight poor seeing

good luck with it , plenty of people rate the vixen !

[Capricorn]

Options:

1) You got a good 10mm with the scope, some of them will be decent by the law of averages.

2) You got a poor NPL. Images of NPL's do not appear to state Plossl so your's is normal.

3) Scope badly need collimating.

4) Do NPL's handle f/5 scopes OK ?

5) I assume that the mirror is parabolic but nothing states this, if it is not then give up as an f/5 spherical will produce a poor image.

6) If you have the erecting prism etc in the path this could be the limiting factor and no eyepiece will give it's best. A scope is for looking at the sky, the marketing idea of adding an erecting prism just basically upsets everything as the prism is not intended in the mirror design and is cheap and poor.

I would bet on the erecting prism.

[crazyjedi]

Hmm yes there are lots of gals on here- I'm sure they'll chip in a comment.

I don't use my stock SW 10mm that came with my scope but I do have a 12mm TV Radian which is a big improvement in image quality over the SW10mm stock EP.

[crazyjedi]

I'm assuming your's is the Celestron 130EQ Astromaster which is a fast F5 scope. Fast scopes such as this (and mine too) are rather unforgiving of lenses. The Vixen NPL range are well thought of and should be a step up from the stock 10mm lens. The step up to the NPL won't be as pronounced as if you had got yourself something more pricey such as a Meade 5000 lens or a Televue lens.

I think Capricorns suggestion that the erecting prism in your scope could be the issue might be right though.

[66mikeg]

I was wondering what the problem was with the standard SW 10mm as mine seems to give reasonable quality views even when used with the SW barlow, I was steeling myself for some more expense but I intend holding fire until we get some really clear skies before making a final decision. The 10mm, 25mm and barlow supplied as standard are good value IMHO.

[crazyjedi]

The 25mm that came with my scope was actually reasonably good (though now replaced by ES24mm 68 degree) I found the 10mm fuzzy and dim. the barlow was ok if a little bit fuzzy.

I think there may be some QC issues with the stock lenses on these scopes as there is some disparity of opinion on them.

[Spec-Chum]

I quite like my 10mm actually, once I really started using it. My 12mm sterling is better in all respects but the 10mm is certainly usable, especially when Barlowed

[wookie1965]

I found my skywatcher 10mm not bad and my scope is an f/5 so when i upgraded i did research and got a eyepiece i knew would work well with my scope i.e 8mm BST

[BiG JiLM]

I'm assuming your's is the Celestron 130EQ Astromaster which is a fast F5 scope. Fast scopes such as this (and mine too) are rather unforgiving of lenses. The Vixen NPL range are well thought of and should be a step up from the stock 10mm lens. The step up to the NPL won't be as pronounced as if you had got yourself something more pricey such as a Meade 5000 lens or a Televue lens.

I think Capricorns suggestion that the erecting prism in your scope could be the issue might be right though.

Not an erecting prism issue: the image is upside-down (the comes-with 20mm Celestron is an erecting EP. the 10mm is not).

"The Vixen NPL range are well thought of and should be a step up from the stock 10mm lens".. which is exactly what I thought,had read many times so I bought one. As I say it is absolutely identical in image quality and detail/ sharpness as the cheapy 10mm.

Oh well I guess I sell it on ebay, but this was a complete waste of money tbh I'm not particularly happy about.

[rory]

Not an erecting prism issue: the image is upside-down (the comes-with 20mm Celestron is an erecting EP. the 10mm is not).

"The Vixen NPL range are well thought of and should be a step up from the stock 10mm lens".. which is exactly what I thought,had read many times so I bought one. As I say it is absolutely identical in image quality and detail/ sharpness as the cheapy 10mm.

Oh well I guess I sell it on ebay, but this was a complete waste of money tbh I'm not particularly happy about.

i think if your like me and quite new to this game, some of the improvements are subtle and even unnoticable to a novice at first. just wondered how many times have you used it ? might be worth giving it a few sessions before making a decision. i had a simlar issue when i swapped my 20mm kelner that come with my celestron and replaced it with a 26mm meade plossl. and for the life of me i never noticed any change . eyepieces are a very personal thing so im told, so what is great for one observer is not agreeable to another.

[BiG JiLM]

i think if your like me and quite new to this game, some of the improvements are subtle and even unnoticable to a novice at first. just wondered how many times have you used it ? might be worth giving it a few sessions before making a decision. i had a simlar issue when i swapped my 20mm kelner that come with my celestron and replaced it with a 26mm meade plossl. and for the life of me i never noticed any change . eyepieces are a very personal thing so im told, so what is great for one observer is not agreeable to another.

rory Im pleased to meet you (Im cyber-shaking your hand right at this mo.. as Im a Rory too).

Wise words perhaps.. I have only used it a few times sure, but I did so with an open mind (tho seemed to come to the same conclusion however much I tried to tell myself its better than the 10mm!) so Ill give it a chance before ebay.

One thing I find annoying with it is the eye-relief is so small the lens smears slightly as Im an oily so-and-so at the best of times: so add in a slightly dirty lens in and it aint lookin too rosy tbh. My other plossl a 32 mm (non-branded) seems a pretty good quality item in comparison, it has crisp images (as I really did expect this would have) seems solid, better made. Altho the vixen seems realtively heavy, its feels 'cheap', moreso than the bog std 10mm its meant to be far superior to. mm...

Thanks for the ideas/ replies tho chaps (and astro-chicks). JILm

[rory]

let us know how you get on. if you do end up selling ,you should get a good chunk of your outlay back which could be put toward another at some stage.

clear skies Rory. (top name sir)

[Eastridge]

I have read thru and am I really the first chapess to reply ???

Made me think and we are quite rare on here - even a photograhpy forum I dip into has more women.

Anyway, I felt the same after I bought my first 'decent' eyepeice - could hardly see any difference. We re-checked collumation ( have you done that or is your scope not the sort that needs it?) and still very marginal. I have concluded that either the 10mm I had supplied was one of the rare good ones or I am simply not yet expeienced enough to see those differneces. I have kept it as it provides a different focal length.

In your case I'd be influenced by the fact that the eye relief isn't really enough for you, can you return it ( FLO allow returns ) or ask the seller if you can swap it for another, maybe getting a focal length you don't have already?

Sharon.

[BiG JiLM]

I have read thru and am I really the first chapess to reply ???

Made me think and we are quite rare on here - even a photograhpy forum I dip into has more women.

Anyway, I felt the same after I bought my first 'decent' eyepeice - could hardly see any difference. We re-checked collumation ( have you done that or is your scope not the sort that needs it?) and still very marginal. I have concluded that either the 10mm I had supplied was one of the rare good ones or I am simply not yet expeienced enough to see those differneces. I have kept it as it provides a different focal length.

In your case I'd be influenced by the fact that the eye relief isn't really enough for you, can you return it ( FLO allow returns ) or ask the seller if you can swap it for another, maybe getting a focal length you don't have already?

Sharon.

It would be great to have 50/50 chaps and chapesses.. yet Id bet on it being 90% blokes (in sheds) and 10% fillies (in.. whatever the female equivelent of a shed is. a shedess?).

Thanks for reply- collumation.. just the word is scary; Ive dipped but yet to read thoughrally of it. My eye and the + do seem to be very central tho, so I sort of assume its correct(?). That said the reflector is well designed with 3 accessible bolts rearside, and I am good at taking stuff apart/ fixing (hifi amps for eg) but w'out a collimation thingy/ & its expense it'd seem a heft just aftter the EP (and may not even be needed anyway if it is 'spot on'), Im a bit reticent to take it to bits as Im still learning it it just seems 'if I [removed word] it up Im really ganna kick mesel a reet proper one in the nuts'.

[rory]

you dont need to take it to bits ror, its not hard . i bought my reflector after a year or so with a refractor. now id never so much as been in the same room as a reflector telescope, and im not a d.i.y type as such ( ask the misses ) but i made a deliberate point of taking the secondary out and the primary to see how it fits and how it moves ect. and it made me alot more confident in the whole concept. however simple collimation check can be done with a 35mm film case with a pinhole in the lid. theres alot of info on the net.

one popular one is here http://www.astro-baby.com/collimation/astro%20babys%20collimation%20guide.htm

and if you have questions ask on the forum here , theres alot of guys AND gals who are always willing to advice step by step if need be.( not me mind, im to noobyfied myself to really give tech help)

[BiG JiLM]

Cheers rozzer, ror, or rors/ other names Im referred to as.

Actually Ive seen one amazing tutorial on YTube of collumation (parts 1 to 9, so in depth 'Collumation OCD' is mentioned!) which has me confident of taking apart, collumating and redoing: in fact it looks just the thing I'd enjoy a sunday afternoon's nerding over!

I'll look into getting a lazer thingy then.. but a bit annoying after the £35 EP.

Ive also noticed the NPL is 'darker' (like its got an ND filter on) compared to my clearer/ brighter 10mm cheapie & my 32mm plossl. Does that seem right? not to me it doesn't. In fact such a waste of dosh Ive decided to ask 1st Light to see if its a dud, or, why its not (evidently to me now) even quite up to the std of the cheapie 10mm its meant to woop/ replace.

Cheers anyway folks.

[BiG JiLM]

http://www.astro-bab...ation guide.htm

terrific link btw- much appreciated.