celestron X-cel lx eyepieces

[aerohound73]

Hi was considering getting some X-cel eyepieces . I have a skywatcher 127 mak. just wondering what peoples opinion of the Celestron X-Cel lx series eyepieces are.How good are the optically/performance wise over Plossl's?

Also do you think its worth the money to spend on Naglers,ES or other high priced eyepieces.How better are they over plossl's?You opinions would be appreciated.Thanks

[paul schofield]

Hi Zerohound and welcome to the lounge. I have never tried the Celestron X-cel LX series but they are held in high regard generally and have been recommended to me by SGL members. There are a lot of posts regarding these eyepieces in the Eyepiece Discussions section.

[Lenny147]

I have the 9 + 7mm and they give some excellent views, nice bit of kit.

[johninderby]

Plossl is just a type of eyepiece and can range from the cheap and nasty to the excellent Televue Plossls and so the name Plossl means nothing quality wise. I'ts how well they're made that counts.

I really like the Xcel LX eyepieces. Very nice performers, and in a 127 Mak they'd be just as sharp and contrasty as the Naglers, and you only notice the Naglers wider field of view. In fact they're still very, very good in a fast scope as well.

The Televue plossls would be very similar in performance to the Xcel LXs but with a much narrower field of view.

John

[Foggymike]

I'm really happy with mine. The only problem is there are none wider than 25mm so I'm looking at other options there.

[simon]

i have 2 X-cel LX EPs , and am pleased with them, great eye relief and very comftable.

[Qualia]

I'm really happy with the X-Cel LXs. They're well corrected at the edges, have excellent eye relief and have been tested down to about f4. In my own forgiving f/10 there is a pleasent field of view, they're well corrected, there is no distortion at the edges, there is wonderful contrast and colour, and the star image is sharp, pin point, throughout. The x2 barlow is also a cracking piece of kit. I was fortunate enough to have tried it along with Tele Vue's basic barlow and rightly or wrongly figured that in the future the latter might cause me problems due to its length. Performance wise, with my inexperienced eye, I could see no difference.

I have heard that perhaps just a little cheaper but also worth checking out are the BST range and also feel that if you can get your hands on russian eyepieces, this might also be a worth while avenue of investigation. The Tal's 25mm, for example, is a lovely plossl to have in your kit.

[4lefts]

what qualia said. i have the 9mm and the 25mm, they're nice. i'm glad i the barlow is good too - there doesn't seem to be much feedback about it. good to hear it lives up to the rest of the range.

[rory]

what qualia said. i have the 9mm and the 25mm, they're nice. i'm glad i the barlow is good too - there doesn't seem to be much feedback about it. good to hear it lives up to the rest of the range.

id not heard much about the barlow either,like a well kept secret.

[chesty]

looking at these myself

[nightfisher]

I must be the only person to have had a problem with the x-cel lx, i got a new 7mm, and on first light it had debris between the glass elements, i now use BST explorer`

[simon]

I must be the only person to have had a problem with the x-cel lx, i got a new 7mm, and on first light it had debris between the glass elements, i now use BST explorer`

did the seller replace the EP?

[lhuchison]

another vote for the x-cels . I have 3 , 7mm, 18mm and 25mm all perfect, a big upgrade from the supplied EPs i had. Can,t fault them