Vixen LVW 42mm vs Panoptic 41mm

[Andymarrison]

I'm looking to finish off (for the time being, anyway...!) my EP collection with a really long focal length EP for all those lovely open clusters. Does anyone have any experience of how these two EPs compare, e.g for sharpness to the edge; contrast; comfort of viewing (I don't wear glasses); and (gulp) weight?! The Vixen is about £100 cheaper, but then neither EP is inexpensive so this isn't really a big factor in the choice. Thanks!

[Mr Spock]

I use a 42mm LVW and I can say it is sharp right to the edge. It's also one of the most comfortable eyepieces to look through - almost like gazing through an open window!

[E621Keith]

I use a 42mm LVW and I can say it is sharp right to the edge. It's also one of the most comfortable eyepieces to look through - almost like gazing through an open window!

+1 LVW42 is a really good eyepiece, especially for SCT.

[alan potts]

Andy,

I have the 41mm Panoptic and a 40 mm Meade SWA, Both are very good but the Panoptic is better in my F7 scope, it is too bigger exit pupil to use on the the F 5.3 but that has not stopped me trying, the Panoptic is sharp at the edges and the Meade is not so good.

With your scope at F10 I would get the Vixen if I were you, Keith always gives good advice and clearly knows what he is talking about. I only bought the Panoptic because I am an eyepiece snob. I only still have the SWA because no one will buy it. Both my eyepieces are about 1kg so don't drop them on your foot.

Alan.

[alan potts]

Andy

Just a thought, I do not know what the Vixen weighs but I would think you could have balance issues with your 8 inch CPC.

I use my diagonal and eyepieces on a 12 inch and I use a balance system. I am not sure that your scope would like this one bit without such a system.

Something for you to think about.

Alan.

[Andymarrison]

Thanks Alan - I was slightly concerned about the weight and, since I was in that neck of the woods yesterday, popped into the Widescreen Centre in London to look at a Panoptic in the flesh. It is indeed massive, and weighs about 1kg. I believe the Vixen is significantly lighter, so if so that would be another plus. Otherwise I could drop back a few mm and go for a 35mm of some sort. Hmmm...

[alan potts]

Andy,

That may well be a good thing to do. The 35mm Panoptic is a heck of an eyepiece and somewhat lighter. The thing with buying all this long F/L stuff is the weight. No one selling it ever tells you about balance and that is important too even on a SC fork mount. The other thing is the balance system costs as much as a very good long eyepiece, well almost.

I would try to get hold of a Vixen to see the weight or see if anyone on site has the same scope as you and have done the same. I would not buy a Panoptic 41mm and put it on a 8 inch CPC even though it is probably the best long F/L eyepiece on the market.

Hope this of some use to you,

Alan.

[alan potts]

Andy,

Something else you could do and have sharpness is the TeleVue. 55mm Plossl, it gives you the same real FOV as a 41mm but but scaled down a bit.

You could also go down the road of using a focal reducer and using you existing eyepieces. I do this and have found that you can use a F/R with a 2 inch system with an eyepiece up to but not beyond 28mm. I stress the findings are on a 12 inch scope and may not be the same for an 8 inch.

Alan.

[Dunkster]

I wouldn't worry too much about balance with the LVW42 on a CPC... it's about half the weight of my ES82 30mm and my 8SE handles that like a champ! I have the tube almost all the way forward on the dovetail for using a 2" SCT diagonal and clearance isn't up to much on an SE mount, but the CPC is good bit more.

[E621Keith]

While the Vixen isn't a light eyepiece, it's not heavy either. Mine weights 545g, a bit less than your Ethos 13.

[alan potts]

Dunkster,

The CPC and my scope are totally different to a mounted scope, when you put a mass of eyepiece and diagonal on the back it puts a lot of stress on the mount motors, there is nothing to move to relieve the stress so you have to balance with a bolt on system.

They are tolerant up to a point but I don't like to over do it.

Alan.

[Andymarrison]

That's great advice thanks everyone - I definitely won't go for the leviathan TV Panoptic 41mm, but will certainly check out the 35mm and maybe also the Vixen 42mm. I really like the idea of trying a 55mm Plossl, too - I hadn't thought of that, so will have a look at that one too. Must remember in future not to take the mickey out of my wife for shoe shopping in future...it strikes me that my EP shopping is not too dissimilar...

[25585]

Has anyone got or tried the Vixen 50mm NLV?

[John]

Here is a short report on the LV 50mm:

https://www.cloudynights.com/articles/cat/user-reviews/eyepieces/eyepieces-14mm-55mm/vixen-lanthanum-50mm-eyepiece-r259

Difficult to find much on the NLV 50mm

[25585]

As LVWs are getting harder to buy in the UK (interesting what Vixen will replace them with), I have bought a 42mm. Some LVWS now can only be imported from the USA, which adds VAT, customs & courier admin of course. 

 

[Doc]

I would look at the Televue 55mm or the Meade 56mm, in a F10 scope they should be pretty good.

[Louis D]

1 hour ago, 25585 said:

As LVWs are getting harder to buy in the UK (interesting what Vixen will replace them with), I have bought a 42mm. Some LVWS now can only be imported from the USA, which adds VAT, customs & courier admin of course. 

 

I'd get after your representatives to end this practice.  When I bought a 14mm Morpheus from the UK to take advantage of the exchange rate, I paid no sales tax (VAT equivalent), no customs ($800/day/person exemption), and no broker fees (shipping via Royal Mail/USPS usually avoids that here).  I saved $60 over the US price.  Why shouldn't there be reciprocity between the US and the UK when it comes to trade, especially as you're leaving the EU?  The US has already gone first forgoing tax revenue on UK imports.  I've raised this point before, but as a rugged individualist, it just burns my buttons to have governments get in the way of individual trade.  In the US, having the government tell us how much fuel economy cars should get is another irritant for me.  That, and banning incandescent light bulbs in the interest of energy conservation.  Let the market decide these things.  If high cost LEDs and CFLs are better, they will win out based on sales.  The same goes for high fuel efficiency cars or even electrics.

Sorry for the rant, but unnecessary government interference in many areas of daily life irritates me to no end.

Alright, back to astronomy.  I would agree on getting a very long focal length Plossl for an f10 scope as a first step toward widest field.  Alternatively, pick up a 40mm Maxvision and decloak it to save weight and bulk if you can find one.

[John]

2 hours ago, 25585 said:

As LVWs are getting harder to buy in the UK (interesting what Vixen will replace them with)......

 

I did wonder if the LVW replacement would be the SSW:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/vixen-eyepieces/vixen-ssw-83-degree-eyepieces.html

Originally it was thought that they would break through the ultra wide field / really long eye relief barrier but it turns out that they have the field width but eye relief is specced at 13mm and is probably a little less in terms of what is useable.

I did test the SSW's here if it's of any interest:

As for paying duty on imports to the UK - good luck with getting that changed.

 

 

 

[25585]

Maybe there will be a Delos rival introduced (hopefully cheaper) though probably made in China. 

A hybrid of SSW & LVW with less FOV.

Since the LV lineage was first introduced, it's been caught up with by TV & Pentax + other LER random models. Vixen need to perhaps re-design from the ground up though Ep designs generally may have reached their limit. Different Fl zoom ranges have not been tried much. Compare with camera zooms which cover all focal lengths in usually 3 lenses. 

[Louis D]

12 minutes ago, 25585 said:

Compare with camera zooms which cover all focal lengths in usually 3 lenses.

And are far more complex optically than any eyepiece.  It's all a matter of economies of scale.  There simply isn't a large enough market for astro gear world-wide to make it worthwhile to design fancy zoom eyepieces for us.  Notice that the best zoom eyepieces (Leica, Zeiss, Swarovski, Meopta) were designed for spotting scopes which have a far larger market.

[John]

The Pentax XW's have been around for as long or longer than the LVW's as far as I know replacing the XL's in 2003. Rumour has it that they (the XW's) were originally intended for the spotting scope market as well.

I thought most camera zooms had many lens elements in them ?. This is a Pentax 70mm-210mm F/4-F/5.6 for example (showing the elements that move):

 

[Louis D]

4 hours ago, John said:

The Pentax XW's have been around for as long or longer than the LVW's as far as I know replacing the XL's in 2003. Rumour has it that they (the XW's) were originally intended for the spotting scope market as well.

The Vixen LVWs came out no later than 2000 based on online reviews on excelsis.com.  I'm pretty sure I remember looking at them when I bought my Pentax XLs in 1998.  I took a pass on them after having owned an LV and not really caring for their stiff rubber eyecup.  It appeared that the LVWs had a similar cup.  The Baader Hyperions appeared around 2003, give or take, if I recall correctly.  The Pentax XLs, XWs, and XFs were all intended for spotting scopes originally, except for the 2" 30mm and 40mm focal lengths.  I'm sure the astro market also figured in their design choice to use a 1.25" barrel.

4 hours ago, John said:

I thought most camera zooms had many lens elements in them ?. This is a Pentax 70mm-210mm F/4-F/5.6 for example (showing the elements that move):

Exactly what I was saying.  Check out the Tamron 16-300mm lens diagram.  Of its 16 elements in 12 groups, it uses 1x hybrid aspheric, 2x LD, 3x molded-glass aspheric, 1x extra refractive index glass, and 1x ultra-extra refractive index glass elements.  It also has autofocus motors and image stabilization.  Yet, you can pick one up for $500 or less here in the states.  Imagine what sort of a zoom eyepiece could be made with all of the design freedoms imparted by the use of all of those exotic lens elements.  My heart races at the mere thought of it.

[25585]

I guess the "zoom" best suited to ep use is one of those turrets. I have seen a Takahashi one but no eps in it. Quite cumbersome. 

 

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I have the Vixen LVW 42mm which works very well in my GP-C8. I would not go for a 55 or 56mm Plossl as they produce a much greyer background, lower magnification, and no more FOV. The LVW doesn't get very much use, I must say, as I usually put the Nagler 31T5 (Panzerfaust) in the diagonal for starters. For some very faint, extended objects under really dark skies, the LVW shines. Originally I had a TMB Paragon 40mm, but I sold that after not using it that much once I had the 31T5. I  regretted the sale, which is why I got the LVW 42mm. The latter is not quite as comfortable as the TMB Paragon, but great nonetheless. The Paragon is no longer made, but the SW Aero 40mm is a clone, which could be a good alternative to the LVW. The Paragon 40mm is the most comfortable EP I have ever looked through, and ideal for outreach, I found.

[25585]

The Widescreen Centre emailed me today to say they no longer have LVW 42mm. 

SLVs are plentiful everywhere but not the Ws. 

So it looks like for wide FOV eps the Panoptic is left without competition in the 40s now, a least it has good eye relief for the price.