Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

skies the limit new bst???

bullettooth

By bullettooth
in Discussions - Eyepieces

Recommended Posts

bullettooth

bullettooth

Posted
Posted

Was browsing ebay yesterday and noticed that skies the limit had some different ep's on there. 58degree flatfield bst for £34.75 are these the same as the explorer's/starguiders but with a different design outside or something else from a different manufacturer?

anybody have a clue about these?

cheers

Martin

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 25
  • Created
  • Last Reply
bullettooth

bullettooth

Posted
  • Author
Posted

That is one of the TMB Planetary clones that appeared a few years ago. Optical spec is the same as the Planetary II eyepiece Skies the Limit sell. :)

ahh ok. thanks alot for that.

so are they any good? would you get one of these or the bst star guider?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fredster

fredster

Posted
Posted

I think the BST Explorer/Starguider has the bigger following. I don't think there is much in it from what i read in the past. The Explorer has a better finish and a slightly wider field (58 v 60). The TMB clone is cheaper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cs1cjc

cs1cjc

Posted
Posted

TMB planetary's have 6 elements, these have 5.

So not a TMB Planetary.

At 5 elements more chance of a Super Plossl like design.

No. TMB Planetary eyepieces have 5 elements, except for the 9mm which has 6, whatever the claims on suppliers sites. There is a 2-element Smyth (barlow) (3 element on the 9 mm) followed by the a Konig arrangement (see: Eyepiece - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) which has three lenses in two groups. This last section is identical for all focal lengths for all focal lengths with only the field set is differing. Genuine TMB eyepieces are only available through Astronomics and High Point Scientific in the US. So far as I can tell, all those available from UK sources are copies, even those that have the TMB logo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
great_bear

great_bear

Posted
Posted

Yes that's right - I remember there being some debate about this on cloudynights when someone disassembled the "6-element" TMB and found out it was - as you say - a 5 element eyepiece after all.

Piecing together whatever information is out there, the unbranded "TMB" eyepieces (often called - incorrectly - "clones") are apparently from the same manufacturer but with a small, optical design change.

Can you explain further why you think the UK sourced TMB ones are not the real article?

- it has bothered me that they don't look the same as the current "official" ones from Astronomics in the USA.

rgds,

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cs1cjc

cs1cjc

Posted
Posted

Astronomics who are authorised by TMB (see: http://www.tmboptical.com/) have said publicly that other TMB labelled eyepieces are not genuine. I found that the pair, genuine and UK sourced, appeared not to be from the production line. It seems to me "copy" and "clone" are generous terms where a respected trade mark, in this case TMB, appears to be used without authorisation and on a product of inferior quality.

In passing, the planetary eyepiece design by Thomas Back is not patented. I do not know what other protection the design might have. However TMB and TMB Optical are registerd trademarks in the US.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vincenam

vincenam

Posted
Posted

I've been trying the 12mm BST Explorer and 12mm Flat Field from Alan @ Sky's the Limit with my 6" F8 dob. I wanted an EP to replace my 13mm Baader Hyperion, which although has a wider FOV than these two, I find the light drop off at the edges very off putting. To be honest there's not much difference optically between the BST and the FF. They're both sharp to edge to edge and the light drop off is minimal. Sometimes I thought perhaps the FF edged performance with my TAL x2 Barlow but I prefer the build quality of the BST, so that's the one I'm keeping.

For £47 and the buy and try option, it's a great EP with great service.

Al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Space Beagle

Space Beagle

Posted
Posted

The BSTs are such good value for money, build and performance wise, it's no surprise they seem so well liked on here! I had to sell off a nice little collection of TeleVues recently and am just gathering together a set of the BST's to replace them at the moment. I am actually very happy with the 'down-grade' so far as the quality of the BST's is so good! Ok, so i've lost some of the wide FoV and superb contrasty views of the TV's, but, hey, these BST's are actually quite good too, for my eyes anyway!!

Doc

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rwilkey

rwilkey

Posted
Posted

It looks like the Sky Watcher FF to be honest, with the added BST label. I recently saw the SW 7-21mm zoom advertised by Alan under the StarGuider banner, hoping to capitalize on the BST Explorer reputation I presume. Link here: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Starguider-7-21mm-1-25-Zoom-Telescope-Eyepiece-Lowest-Price-in-the-World-/380482031362?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item58967f0f02

Link to comment
Share on other sites
great_bear

great_bear

Posted
Posted

It looks like the Sky Watcher FF to be honest

No, it's the "TMB Designed" planetary eyepiece - there is no doubt on this.

Alan must half been half asleep when he typed BST into the ad, unless of course the supplier now has decided to start branding these as BST Planetaries or somesuch...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
great_bear

great_bear

Posted
Posted

Astronomics who are authorised by TMB (see: http://www.tmboptical.com/) have said publicly that other TMB labelled eyepieces are not genuine.

Erm... No... They've stated that the TMB eyepieces they sell are "the only ones authorised by the estate of Thomas M. Back." This is a fairly empty statement, but you can be clear of what the statement doesn't mean:

1. It doesn't mean Astronomics is the only licenced reseller.

2. It doesn't mean ones sourced elsewhere are not genuine.

I found that the pair, genuine and UK sourced, appeared not to be from the production line.

That's no surprise really. When Bill Burgess and Thomas Back discovered that the factory was exercising what they believed was their right to sell unbranded versions of these eyepieces, Bill and Thomas cut their ties with the factory, and later editions were made elsewhere.

It seems to me "copy" and "clone" are generous terms where a respected trade mark, in this case TMB, appears to be used without authorisation

"Appears" is the operative word here. Details of the contractual dispute between Burgess/TMB and the factory are not public knowledge, so we have no insight into whether the factories behaviour is reasonable or not. It would not be uncommon for such contracts to be based around a stated number of units being sold, with provisions stipulated about what can happen if those targets are not met, so it's entirely possible that the factory is behaving legitimately. Maybe not. Unless it goes to court, we may never know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cs1cjc

cs1cjc

Posted
Posted

The TMB Optical web site says to contact Astronomics

http://www.tmboptica...d.asp?cat_id=14

Michael Bieler, owner of Astronomics has indeed said that their eyepieces are the only ones that are authorised. Surely this is clear. Consequently, I would any regard any other TMB labelled eyepiece as being no more likely to be genuine than an Omega labelled watch bought on a back street market. When I compared the two, the UK sourced TMB labelled eyepiece was not of the same manufacture or quality as an authorised one. They are not the same product and the UK sourced one is inferior. I will post them to you to look at, if you are not convinced. Let the buyer beware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
great_bear

great_bear

Posted
Posted
Consequently, I would any regard any other TMB labelled eyepiece as being no more likely to be genuine than an Omega labelled watch bought on a back street market.

The story of these eyepieces is documented. There is no need for speculation about "counterfeits" when the truth about them is already known. TMBs were originally made in a factory we shall (for the sake of argument) call "Factory A". After manufacturing these for a while, TMB (to be strictly accurate "Bill Burgess & Thomas Back") discovered that this factory was independently selling the eyepieces themselves.

Needless to say, there weren't too happy about this. A dispute developed, and as a result, TMB moved production to another factory. Let's call this "Factory B". Factory B is where the current stock of eyepieces as sold by Astronomics were made.

So you are comparing eyepieces made in "Factory A" with eyepieces from "Factory B".

Naturally they are different. Glad to hear that they've improved.

Of course it wouldn't be right for me (or indeed any other casual observer) to comment on the rights and wrongs of the situation, since we have no interest in the terms and conditions of the TMB / Factory contracts, let alone know who did what, when, why and how.

What we can say however, is that this is all a great shame - since what should have been an important contribution to the range of eyepieces on the market, is now sullied by disputes and arguments over quality etc., and certainly the internet arguments over whether these eyepieces are sharp or soft (from some quite respected observers) has had the unfortunate effect of making them a range some people will want to avoid...

All very sad really...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • 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.