Cheap Vs Expensive

[AlexB67]

Funnily enough Shane, thats what I've been thinking lately too. 

I don't feel like that. Having said that,  in a way I am glad I never looked through a 500 pounds eyepiece, or a 10 inch DOB so far to see what might be at a club, i.e. I prefer finding out my own way, reading up, learning as I  go, instead of going to a club being fed information and look through top of the line equipment. When I started at that time it would have been like looking through things I could not have, but now, the first time that happens, I know I will already own one, and it will be all the sweeter  .

Even reading this forum when I  wanted to buy my first scope I was not put off. I sensed that reading many threads in eyepieces section before I registered, righto, this is the hard-core elite group    same with scopes, but it did not put me off, I think there is enough around the web, reading between the lines in many posts here to get a good weighted opinion in the end, if starters new to the hobby are prepared to read around a bit.   When I had my first views with modest equipment I was blown away, and still am, and I don't think in the long term  I need to bankrupt myself to get out of it what I want at a reasonable price over time, and I ain't rich

[helicalwave]

Where are all these mythical £60 used Tele Vue's? 

When I decided to improve on my SW EP's, I searched for but could not find any of these hypothetical creatures, so instead turned to brand new Baaders which I know exist, because shops sell them to me and then a few days later, they turn up at my door.

Like alien life, I do believe in these fabled, inexpensive, used TV EP's, I think however, they are all just too far away in space and time for us to ever cross paths.

[Moonshane]

Where are all these mythical £60 used Tele Vue's? 

When I decided to improve on my SW EP's, I searched for but could not find any of these hypothetical creatures, so instead turned to brand new Baaders which I know exist, because shops sell them to me and then a few days later, they turn up at my door.

Like alien life, I do believe in these fabled, inexpensive, used TV EP's, I think however, they are all just too far away in space and time for us to ever cross paths.

I buy either from SGL or Astro buy and sell.

in my case I have (among others) :

used 32mm TV Plossl £60

used 25mm TV plossls £60

used 20mm TV plossl £45

new 15mm TV plossl £55

used 11mm TV plossl £50

used TV Nagler 16mm T2 £110

used BGO 12.5mm £50

used BGO 9mm £50

used BGO 7mm £50

if patient they will come up but be quick or maybe put in a wanted ad.

[John]

There have been quite a number of Tele Vue plossls recently on UK Astro Buy & Sell priced at £50 or less. They don't hang around for long though so you need to keep vigilant and move quickly when one comes up.

With the recent TV price drop, the 8mm, 11mm and 15mm plossls can be bought new for £70 or less each.  

[astronymonkey]

I like to buy the best I can afford with the knowledge imgetting the best views I can. I started nearly 30 years ago with a 60mm tasco frac which I was given but as I couldntafford anything else then I was happy with what I could see.

since then ive made my own 6inch dob for which I bought some basic celestron plossls which fro me were a huge step up is quality as well as scope apertue and that kept me happy for 10 years.

now I have a 16inch and luckily i can afford naglers and ethos but I go for naglers and delos due to the better eye reliefs but what ive noticed is that the more you spend the wider the wider the "sweet spot" extends from thecentr of the field of view. Dearer eyepieces take this further into the 82 and 100 degree fields whereas as the budget eyepieces only manage this near the centre and this becomes more of an issue as the scopes get faster. So with my 16inch at f4.5 I want a wide field to keep the object in view longer and I want a decent eyepiece to keep it sharp as it drifts across the full field, hence the decision to buy premium eyepieces.

this is my main hobby and ive spent years saving and upgrading but if you cant afford the premium stuff then buy the best thats in your budget and enjoy it !

Clear skies

[scarp15]

this is my main hobby and ive spent years saving and upgrading but if you cant afford the premium stuff then buy the best thats in your budget and enjoy it !

Clear skies

 

I think that sums it up really. If you feel that you will sustain a long term interest and continually evolve, to grow in both knowledge and experience in this activity, then taking the longer(ish) term planning , aspiring and saving approach is the way to go. This is perhaps made easier, if you identify with a particular strand of the hobby you feel you want to more fully engage in.

Whilst we are lucky to have plenty of excellent retailers to purchase from, this can be combined with a vibrant second hand market, in terms of both selling and buying.

[bingevader]

this is my main hobby and ive spent years saving and upgrading but if you cant afford the premium stuff then buy the best thats in your budget and enjoy it !

This about sums it up I think (except, it's my main hobby too!  )

Cheers

[TwoPi]

Hi Shane,

I've only just come across this thread - very interesting read. Thanks for taking the time to do this and post the results.

Having just read it all in one go it was interesting to compare the two tests you did. I appreciate there was a long gap between them and that the comparisons weren't identical, but it struck me that whilst your opinions on the mid focal length eyepieces (15mm and 10mm) were similar, you seemed more impressed with the SW 25mm and 5mm results the second time around, whereas with a faster scope I would have perhaps expected the opposite.

Just wondered if you had any thoughts on why this might be? To be clear, not criticising at all, just genuinely interested if you have any insight. I suppose it could be down to many different factors, e.g. different observing conditions, the additional target, passage of time or in the case of the 25mm the fact that you were now comparing the same focal length rather than swapping to the 32mm TV... but interested to hear your thoughts on why this might be?

In any case, great stuff as always!

[TwoPi]

PS: a perfectly reasonable response is 'dunno'!

[Moonshane]

PS: a perfectly reasonable response is 'dunno'!

hi Gav

sorry, I must have missed your post! in a way, the answer is possibly dunno, but I think I was concentrating on a different aspect with the fast scope which makes the test a little skewed. i.e. I seemed to find myself concentrating on the on axis view and really trying to give a favourable report of the cheaper eyepieces as they were genuinely not as bad as I thought in an f4 scope. the time I had was a lot less too and it will be interesting at PSP to see if I can get the same kind of results at a darker site.

[Avocette]

.............. Standard Skwatcher (SW) 25mm  - 48x .................................

.....................10mm Standard SW - 120x .................................................

Having just spotted the reawakening of this year-old thread, I just wanted to check that the SW 'standard' EPs you referred to in your two sets of reviews were the Super 'MA' versions rather than the Plössls (which still seem to be packed with some SW scopes like the 300p Flextube for instance)?

[Moonshane]

hi there

they say 'super' on them so on this basis they are the MAs?

[TwoPi]

hi Gav

sorry, I must have missed your post! in a way, the answer is possibly dunno, but I think I was concentrating on a different aspect with the fast scope which makes the test a little skewed. i.e. I seemed to find myself concentrating on the on axis view and really trying to give a favourable report of the cheaper eyepieces as they were genuinely not as bad as I thought in an f4 scope. the time I had was a lot less too and it will be interesting at PSP to see if I can get the same kind of results at a darker site.

No probs

Makes sense and as you say, interesting to see their performance in the fast scope.

Thanks again for the reports.

[TwoPi]

hi there

they say 'super' on them so on this basis they are the MAs?

There are some photos in the thread http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/194929-stock-sw-25mm-and-10mm-eye-relief/ that might help you confirm one way of the other (look at the photos Rik posted and then the one I posted).

It seems SW have been bundling Super Plossls with some scopes recently.

[Luke]

I'm pretty impressed with the on-axis sharpness of the TS HR Planetary eyepieces that cost around £50 new.

To test the sharpness, I did a mini shootout on the moon between a Delos and TS HR Planetary, using an Equinox 120mm scope. I tried to pick out the tiniest details with the Delos. I then switched to the TS HR, and sure enough, the same detail was visible. Both EP's were impressively sharp on-axis.

Overall, the view with the Delos was slightly more "pleasing", and it was sharper off axis, as expected. What I did notice is that the view was more immediate and effortless wtih the Delos.

All in all, I was greatly impressed given that the TS HR cost about 1/5th the price and the shootout confirmed what I'd already felt using the EP on its own - it was sharper than you might think for the price, and reminded me a bit of my Radian eyepieces, which provide very sharp views on the moon and planets.

It's also quite a comfortable EP to use, with 16mm eye relief.

[steve_w]

Thanks for the very interesting posts..so the general concensus is buy decent ep's until you feel the need to move on

Steve_w

[rl]

I got into astronomy in the early 70s and still have a set of Ramsden eyepieces bought from BC+F under their own name. For those too young to remember optics this primitive..they consist of 2 plano-convex singlet lenses with the curved surfaces inwards facing each other. They have no coatings; you lose 4% at each surface and the scattered light dosen't necessarity leave the optical path...I think they cost me 4 quid each and I thought that was a rip-off at the time. I teamed then up with an 8" f/8 mirror set built into a homemade wooden frame and that was my first serious scope. I did a lot of planetry stuff then, because they were easy to find and I lived in the centre of Birmingham.

Not having used them in years, I recently set them up against my ethos collection just to see how bad they really were, just as a joke. Was the memory playing tricks with some of the sights I remember observing back then.....I used my 12" f/4 scope.

Of course the ethoses won hands down overall, and yet, and yet... ......on planets, if you ignored the reflections, there wasn't that much extra that could be seen in the ethos in terms of planetry detail. They were doing the basic job of any eyepiece..(.not throwing away the detail in the primary image)  quite well.On deep sky stuff the very narrow field (guessing 35 degrees) helps to cut out the worst of the off-axis aberrations. Using the 1/4" the Cassini and Encke divisions were easy on Saturn, as were the belts on the planet. Jupiter was a bit harder since CA is more pronounced, but thee was plenty of detail visible. Globs were clear and well-resolved in the 1/2" . Maybe we sometimes forget that Huyghenians and Ramsdens were the staple fare of the amateur for 200 years and a lot of discoveries were made with them.

Would I go back to them? Of course not through choice. But if I had to I could still enjoy the hobby....we're all spoilt for choice nowadays!

rl

[Moonshane]

I agree completely. In fact, I have changed my signature to reflect a relevant Bruce Lee line.

[Reeny]

...........................Would I go back to them? Of course not through choice. But if I had to I could still enjoy the hobby....we're all spoilt for choice nowadays!

I have just gone back to using the old scope to check the collimation last night on the stars.

It was a shock to the system.

The narrow FOV using the 52degree Plossls will take some getting used to again.

As will the senstive on/off focus mechanism (mostly off focus).

The scope is great up to 100x magnification, then the performance starts to drop off.

The 3" will be used as a holiday travel scope, and as a secondary scope for me when Mrs R hogs the big-un.

OK for the moon and easy to spot targets.

I even got to see a faint dumbell nebula last night.

All on a £60 700x76mm toy telescope like this one, with Skywatcher EP's

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Seben-700-76-Reflector-Telescope-incl/dp/B00426KOQI/ref=pd_cp_ph_0

Regarding the level of performaqnce for the 8" dob, I would say that low mag EP's aren't performance critical.

However - I feel that the 2x Barlowed 16mm Maxvision from ES is at the end of it's performance envelope at 160x mag.

If I went to buy a 5mm for 240x magnification - I would definitely need to step up a performance notch, and maybe go for TeleVue.

[rl]

I think you're doing quite well to get *100 out of a 3" reflector!

I keep something similar for trips abroad. Cheap plastic scopes are best if you're regularly subject to the ryanair customer experience...with a couple of old meade plossls.

RL

[Moonshane]

I have just bought a 114mm f4.3mm newtonian for a small travel scope. along with a 25mm plossl (20x and 2.5 degree true field), 12.5mm ortho (40x and 1 degree true field) and my 6-3mm (83-166x and 0.6-0.3 degrees true field) I think I have a decent travel set. thinking about creating a teeny table top truss or possibly a tripod mounted mini dob.

[Joves]

Good review. I generally go to our local town in my Fiat Panda. Thanks to a very generous and likeable guest I went to the same town this year in a Porsche Cayman S and drove it back. Assuming you don't want to get arrested the difference between the two cars is remarkably slight. (At 50 km/hr the Panda is actually slightly faster than the Cayman S travelling at 49 km/hr.) At Silverstone I would rather circulate in the Cayman S. By a long, long way.

Where am I going with this nonsense? Well, when I travel by night in the Universe it is not, in fact, all that expensive to travel in the optical equivalent of the Cayman S and the journey is more interesting than the trip to our local town. Does that make any sense to anyone but me?

Olly

Am I the only one who p***ed myself laughing at this?