eyepieces for 100/1000

[foffof]

I have a refractor 100/1000. What is the most appropriate oculars that i can use for planets. Is there significant difference in terms of performance between using carl zeis jena 0.965 orthoscopic eyepieces and skywatcher plossls for example? Is there a significant difference between 6 mm orthoscopic and 7.5/6.3 mm skywatcher plossls on this f/10 scope/? Are skywatcher good eyepieces or I have to buy more expensive oculars? Thanks.

[Astro_Baby]

Depends what you want to spend really. The scopes F10 so it will be kind to EPs. Depends whether you want a widefield view (pretty pointless for a planet but some people prefer widefields) if its purely planetary a good ortho would be nice and sharp. Baader GOs about £70 new or Circle Ts around £55 new. Some people prefer the BGO for its coatings, others prefer the Volcano topped Circle Ts for viewing comfort, Circle T Volcano tops can be gotten from Lyra Optics in the UK.

I have both and prefer the Volcano topped ones. Personal preference.

Going widerfield but retaining ortho like sharpness look at the Pentax XWs but a whole load more cash.

Orthos have nominally better eye relief than Plossls (not that I have ever really noticed).

So in a nutshell......

Sharp, cheap but narrow field of view OR

Sharp, widefield but expensive.

Personal experience.....Orthos, sharp and contrasty. Nothing else quite does the business.

If ortho is your bag you can still go expensive ZAO II...no idea what the view is like, waaaaaaay out of my price league. Pentax XOs....pricey and hard to find these days and only available in 5 and 10mm.

If planetary is your thing you need a good range because you will always want max power and that may vary depending on viewing conditions....how many you want/need will depend on a) what the budget is and how serious you are. Some planetary fans have whole sets of them in every possible focal length. I get by with just four orthos.

Thats my Brain dump on it

[Capricorn]

Plossl will operate pretty good, Skywatcher I am not sure about. You never read of people saying how good they are.

The Vixens get good reports, as do GSO plossl's. Probably about £30 a piece.

As to focal lengths, for planetary work look at 8mm, 10mm and 12mm, and something like 20-25mm for wider work.

Wouldn't go much if any below 8mm.

The scope is too small for Mars, well martian detail, and 125x is good for Saturn. My best view of Saturn was through a 1000mm FL scope and an 8mm eyepiece. Jupiter will be OK at 80x = the 12mm eyepiece.

Say those 4 as if the conditions prevent the 8mm then the 10mm should be usable, if not then fall back on the 12mm.

One consideration is the eye relief of plossls, there is not a lot at the 8/10/12mm eyepieces so if you wear glasses then forget plossls and consider the BST's say 8mm, 12mm, 25mm.

[foffof]

Thanks. Ihave an eyepiece for wider field and I amm looking for somethnig for planets. I wonder if 7.5 mm skywatcher plossls at 133x will give good planetary viewing(because they are the cheapest) and is there a significant difference between this eyepiece and 6mm csj 0.965 inch orthoscopic ocular?

[Moonshane]

when considering any eyepieces above those that are 'good' there's a definite law of diminishing returns i.e. you get less and less improvement for more and more money. is it worth it? only the buyer can say. there will be a difference but possibly only experienced planetary guys might see it and only then in the best (rare) conditions.

for my views, I agree almost completely with Astro Baby above and prefer orthos (BGOs in my case) generally for planetary and lunar.

on a side note, I see you seem to start several similar threads in quick succession and this might lead to views being scattered. much better to continue similar issues within the same thread as you'll bet better responses on the whole.

[John]

Good orthoscopics will perform better than low cost plossls, in my experience. I've briefly used a Zeiss ortho (a ZAO II) and I've owned a TMB Supermonocentric for a while which are reputed to offer Zeiss ortho type performance. I have to say the Baader Genuine Ortho's / University HD orthos (same eyepieces) matched the TMB Supermono under all but the very best seeing conditions and even then the differences were very small.

I feel the Baader Genuine Orthos offer the finest planetary performance available unless you are really, really fussy and can afford the £400 that the ZAO II's and TMB Supermono's cost.

That said, I prefer a wider angle of view and more eye relief now so I'm a very happy user of Pantax XW's which offer these features plus "ortho-like" performance as Astro_Baby says.

If you can't find Baader GO's then the classic Japanese "circle-T" volcano top orthos deliver excellent high power performance too and they can be picked up for very little on the used market.

If your 100/1000 refractor is decent then it should be able to handle more than 133x. You would probably find a 6mm or even a 5mm eyepiece useful for the right objects under the right conditions.

[John]

......on a side note, I see you seem to start several similar threads in quick succession and this might lead to views being scattered. much better to continue similar issues within the same thread as you'll bet better responses on the whole.....

Just to say that I've locked two other threads on this topic so that feedback on this can be concentrated in this thread and confusion / duplicated posting avoided.

Hope that's OK foffof

[foffof]

i am sorry for duplicating threads. My scope is with quality objective- maybe the old purple tal 100r objective. and i wonder what is the most appropriate oculars for observing jupiter. I found some old 0.965 orthoscopic oculars 10 and 6 mm and i wonder is it worth to buy them and is there difference between the viewing through them and the viewing through sky watcher 7.5 mm and 6.3 mm plossls.

[foffof]

Isee some problems with details of jupiter above 130x from my town and i wonder if this is because of the eyepieces or the conditions.

[E621Keith]

Thanks. Ihave an eyepiece for wider field and I amm looking for somethnig for planets. I wonder if 7.5 mm skywatcher plossls at 133x will give good planetary viewing(because they are the cheapest) and is there a significant difference between this eyepiece and 6mm csj 0.965 inch orthoscopic ocular?

Price - a used CZJ ortho cost around €190, which is more than a whole set of SW plossl eyepiece new (€24 each or €179 for the package with 4 plossl, a red torch, filters, and flight case).

The 0.965" Carl Zeiss Jena (CZJ) ortho is often rated as equal to the Pentax SMC ortho on CN and better than the BGO. It should have better contrast and resolution than to a SW plossl.

Since you mentioned your scope is a 100/1000 refractor and you have CZJ ortho, would it happen to be a Zeiss APQ 100/1000 fluorite triplet?

[foffof]

I mentioned that i found somebody who are selling carl zeiss jena ortho 6mm and 10 mm and i wonder if it is worth to buy them. About my scope there aren't any marks on it because it is old 100/1000 from 20-30 years ago, as i see the obective it is purple and i suppose that it is a tal 100r obective, in addition to i bought the scope without eyepieces.

I'm sure that the scope is old but can somebody tell me what is the difference between carl zeis apq 100/1000 obective and tal 100r obective?

[foffof]

I found interesting link with different types of obectives( two 100/1000 lenses): http://alag3.mfa.kfki.hu/astro/giantlenses/100mm.htm

[John]

If you could post a picture of your scope, it would help identify what it is. The older TAL 100 / 1000's (about 15 years old now) do have strongly purple lens coatings.

[foffof]

i have problems to attach my pictures but the lens are purple so i think they are tal 100r

[foffof]

how can i attach pictures from my card or hard disc?

[alan potts]

I would go for a 6mm second hand Radian, few can match it, it has good eyerelief and if you can get a S/H one you protect your investment.

That is not to say the eyepieces that others have mentioned are not good.

Alan.

[Astro_Baby]

The skywatcher plossls are good solid budget plossls but they wong match an orthoscopic.

Your views of jupiter may be poor because its so low in the sky at the moment.

As already said much would depend on how much you want to spend.

[foffof]

Thanks for all useful posts! I still wonder if for my f/10 scope i will see difference between plossls and orthos in the center of the fov, not on axis? For instance if skywatcher plossls will give the same details visible as czj 0.965 orthos, because of f/10? Is it possible to see more detail on jupiter, for example the great red spot, with orthos and this detail can't be visible with skywatcher plossls?

[John]

Thanks for all useful posts! I still wonder if for my f/10 scope i will see difference between plossls and orthos in the center of the fov, not on axis? For instance if skywatcher plossls will give the same details visible as czj 0.965 orthos, because of f/10? Is it possible to see more detail on jupiter, for example the great red spot, with orthos and this detail can't be visible with skywatcher plossls?

My experiences are that the differences are much more subtle than that. It's rare that even very expensive eyepieces show something that just can't be seen with a low cost eyepiece in the same scope, under the same viewing conditions.

What separates the better performing eyepieces is that the details such as the Cassini Division in Saturn's rings and Jupiters Great Red Spot are just a little better defined or a little easier to pick out. Whether you will notice the difference can only be found out by trying both types and seeing for yourself !

Astronomers are a picky bunch though and small improvements are sought after, often at some expense. It's nice to think that your gear is doing the best it can in the viewing conditions at any particular time

The cause of poor views is most likely to be the viewing conditions though, including the low altitude of Jupiter early in the night at the moment. These issues can make the finest equipment perform poorly.