Explore Scientific or WO Uwan

[Marvaz]

Hello everyone.

I've just recently bought new scope which is Meade 5000 127 ed apo. Today I have received my Nagler 31 mm. I'm thinking to get another episode,. This time I need something between 15-20mm. I've got two options in my mind.

1. Explore Scientific 14mm 82*

2.WO Uwan 16mm.

There is similar cost and these is all I can pay right now. What's yours opinions?

Thanks in advance.

Marek.

[Marvaz]

ES 18mm 82* not 14mm.

[estwing]

lots of good reports on the wo 16mm.........

[John]

I've owned a UWAN 16mm but no ES 82's. My guess would be that their performance would be very similar indeed in your F/7.5 refractor with the 18mm ES showing a little bit more sky than the 16mm UWAN. The decision might come down to small ergonomic factors or price.

My UWAN 16mm was very nice by the way - pretty close to the 16mm Nagler that followed it and close enough to make me wonder why I'd spent the money "upgrading" on that occasion

[John]

PS: I think the ES 18 / 82 is a 2" format eyepiece wheras the 16mm UWAN is a 1.25". Don't know if that makes a difference to you.

[estwing]

I've owned a UWAN 16mm but no ES 82's. My guess would be that their performance would be very similar indeed in your F/7.5 refractor with the 18mm ES showing a little bit more sky than the 16mm UWAN. The decision might come down to small ergonomic factors or price.

My UWAN 16mm was very nice by the way - pretty close to the 16mm Nagler that followed it and close enough to make me wonder why I'd spent the money "upgrading" on that occasion

thats what i read John....they are "that good".

[Marvaz]

PS: I think the ES 18 / 82 is a 2" format eyepiece wheras the 16mm UWAN is a 1.25". Don't know if that makes a difference to you.

There is no difference John. I like robust equipment.

[cs1cjc]

The Explore Scientific 82° series is very nice and excellent value, though I have not used the 18mm. However it has the shortest published eye relief of the range, see: http://www.explorescientific.com/eyepieces/82_degree_series.html The eye lens is set deep in the housing in these eyepieces, so usable eye relief is much less might be expected and I found the 14mm to be very tight.

Conversely, I find the ES 16mm 68° to be a delightful eyepiece being small, lightweight and giving a sharp image of good contrast.

[alan potts]

Have you cosidered the 14mm Meade UWA from Telescope house. This is on offer at 116 pounds. Now I still have the 14mm UWA but the older one, I am rather thinking these are the same spec but I am not sure because they are now listed as waterproofed.

I am sure this is something like if not the same as ExSc do on their range which does not seem to be fully available at Telescope House. Many are listed as not in stock. If I were you I would give them a ring and have a chat, they are very good that way and ask them the differences.

Personally I don't think you would go wrong with the Meade and it costs less.

Alan.

[Marvaz]

Thank you for yours opinions.

Finally I've bought Nagler 17mm T4. This ep will be the best companion for my Nagler 31 mm I think.

[estwing]

can't go wrong with a Nagler..

[8kids]

I've got the 16mm Skywatcher Nirvana it's very nice in my 300pds

[faulksy]

i have the sky watcher nirvanas as well 16mm and 28mm same as the willliams very good,