1st impression upgraded ep on skymax 102

[Erquy]

Hi!

Just wanted to share my first impression in upgrading my ep. Note i am a beginer (started only 1,5 month ago with my 1st telescope skymax 102 synscan alt az goto coming with the 'super' sw 10 mm and 25 mm and the 'economical barlow sw *2.Also i can mention i have very good seeing conditions from my garden (i live in a small town, just south with no light pollution in south direction).

I think it is pretty much consensus reading post that the original barlow and the 10 mm ep are rubbish. I can only confirm it after my upgrade (the 25 is pretty ok): i bought a 8 mm TS HR planetary , a 32 mm TS super plossl and the 2,5 barlow from gso. In short.. It is a new life to my scope!

32 mm vs original 25mm: as expected, much brighter contrast and sharpness, much nicer to look at the moon (25 mm is about the full fov, so a bit more space is welcome) also more comfortable. With the 2,5 barlow, perfect 12.8 mm for the moon and better tan using original barlow. I have not look at dso, but i am sure it will be way better (apart the pleiades, difficult to see andromede or orion nebula withe 25 )

8 mm vs 10 mm: wow! Much better in all terms by far, impressive i was a bit afraid i push it too low (small scope), but no problems at all on jupiter and fantastic on the moon (the 10 does not give much on jupiter) i even manage with the 8 mm +2,5 barlow and not that bad result on moon and jupter!! While being above magnification limits. Not sharp but jupiter band were pretty clear. I think i could have gone for a 6 mm or 7 mm

Looking forward using the barlow for jupiter and saturn... I will post comparison with original barlow.

But as conclusion, i can only recommand to upgrade. As i understood such a mak at f12 does not require that sophiticated and expensive ep (i got that 2 ep and barlow new for about 160€) and are definitively a big step. I cannot comment if going further to more expensive ep would make much more difference to my beginner eyes (apparently reading a number of post, not great difference is to expect for mak between such medium range and higher range ep costing 2 or 3 times more). Experts, don t hesitate to correct me if i am wrong!

[John]

Thanks for posting the review

Your findings seem to confirm that the eyepieces supplied with scopes are just there to get you going but, to get the most out of it, an upgrade is well worth the investment.

[russ.will]

Thanks Erquy. We see plenty of posts showing that the standard EPs are ripped to shreds by fast Newtonians, so it's nice to see someone commenting on the benefits still being obvious in slower telescopes too.

Russell

[Matt Scunthorpe]

For me, the best thing about upgraded, rather than the better views (i cant tell alll that much) is the eye relief difference between the supplieds EPs and the Celestron Xcels

[Damo636]

Nice write up Erquy! As you have found out, the supplied eps are there to give a "taster". They're shortcomings soon become apparant once a couple of better quality eps are added to the mix!

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Nice report. People often say slow scopes are fine with cheap EPs. While they are certainly more tolerant, better glass will give better results.

[Erquy]

Hi

below comparison of the 2 barlow. Pictures taken in same conditions through canon EOS1100d, capture in movrec* 5, stacked and wavelet in Registrax in similar way (about 1500 frames out of 2000).

SW 2* barlow

GSO 2,5*

So clear difference!