If you were only alowed one eyepeice it would be a.........

[Stargazer_00]

I wouldn't say that

[alan potts]

Earl,

In fact this same thread was done by me about 8 months back with almost the same question being asked, I just didn't state an F number in my ask. I think so far most have replied as you asked the question, it can only be answered based on the scopes people have, I have a few and 20mm Nagler will work well in all of them and faster.

Maybe people want some clear skies.

Alan

[Qualia]

I'm not convinced with the argument on the previous page which regards eyepiece brands being irrelevant and that it is only the focal length which should be our concern here. Apart from the already mentioned fact that the given EP would have to be tested down to f/4, it is a bit like someone arguing that reading The Sun Newspaper or a Jackie Collins is like reading a Chomsky or Steinbeck or Melville because, afterall, the 'prefered subject matter' is pretty much the same (we are dealing with either 'news items' or the manner in which human beings behave towards each other) and furthermore, all the given examples contain exactly the same letters of the alphabet, follow similar grammatical rules and even the words are more or less the same. It's a topsy-turvy world where the kitsch and tacky are appointed the status of excellence.

I think there is a reason Pentax and Televue crop up time and time again, year after year on top-best lists. It's because they are exceptional EPs.

Speaking on a personal account, just to put this into some kind of perspective, I pretty much followed the essential idea contained within the OP and recently sold on a load of EPs just to get 'the-one'.

Out went my Hyperions, X-Cel LXs (which I imagine are better or on par with BSTs etc) - the entire lot, some 5 EPs - for just one premium EP. And the results? Well, the Delos literally blows them out of the proverbial water. There's simply no comparison as there isn't any sensible comparison which can be drawn between a Jackie Collins and a Melville or Steinbeck. We're talking about a different league of excellence, insight, craft, quality and depth. Is it worth that difference? Well, yes, of course it is.

I apologise to everyone if this sounded like a rant and I hope it didn't come out that way. It's just that I take this with a passion and worry about a world which by analogy can place the Spice Girls or a Justin Bieber on the same table as a Beethoven, a Radiohead or Beatles.

[Oblong]

Earl,

Difficult to tell from your original question whether you were looking for specific advice or initiating a desert-island-eyepieces discussion. For a bit more explanation, here was my thought process:

Let's say you want an exit pupil to be somewhere in the 5-1mm range for general use. This limits the focal lengths to between 20mm (5mm exit @ f/4) and 15mm (1mm exit @ f/15), or maybe a little shorter. Now, the field of view I need depends a lot on the focal length. A 20mm Plossl gets a lot in on a small Newt, but the length on the f/15 scope could be anything from 900mm upwards. Above 2000mm focal length, and I would probably be spending all the time looking through the finder. So, I'll assume the worst case scenario and go as wide angle as I can (and hope the scope can take 2" EPs). It needs to be well-corrected, too, if that wide view is to be usable at f/4.

Add to this a bit of brand loyalty, sticking with what we know, and the feeling that if we're only allowed one eyepiece, then by jingo we're going to make it a good 'un, and I think that explains most, if not all the replies here. There are also some interesting points raised about ergonomics, eye relief, et al.

Having said that, in your OP you say "f/15 today, f/4 tomorrow". If the f/4 scope is almost a certainty, then I would err towards something optimised for that end of the scale, which would allow shorter focal lengths to enter the equation.

[Dunkster]

Are we allowed a barlow/teleextender ?

[russ.will]

Quiet an interesting set of reply's and very varied.

A long way from the question been answered I feel.

The question as asked, has a very wide, non-specific remit. That invites a wide set of opinions, which overlayed with personal viewing habits and preferences, will never nail down one EP that everybody would, or could, agree on.

Maybe you could elucidate your parametres further as, if nothing else, it will stop me making an "Bottom" of myself again?

Russell

[scarp15]

will never nail down one EP that everybody would, or could, agree on.

Russell

Be democractic, take a vote, so far

20mm nagler - 2 votes

14mm Pentax - 2votes

13mm Ethos - 2 votes

Not sure if I have missed something

[Stargazer_00]

unbranded 10mm super plossl. everyone underates this little devil, to their peril!! serially though my vote would be the zeiss zoom Keith mentioned

[estwing]

13 Ethos....

[Earl]

The question as asked, has a very wide, non-specific remit. That invites a wide set of opinions, which overlayed with personal viewing habits and preferences, will never nail down one EP that everybody would, or could, agree on.

Maybe you could elucidate your parametres further as, if nothing else, it will stop me making an "Bottom" of myself again?

Russell

Well Im looking to own one eyepiece, as im not a visual type id still like it to be good, and be usable in any scope.

[russ.will]

Okay, do you have a budget in mind, or is it a 'If it's that good, then I'll pay for it' kind of decision?

The Pentax and Televue EPs are the real deal in any scope, but you are going to pay for that capability. Like the list above, I'd probably lean toward something in the 14mm range, just because it's always turned out to be the most used EP in my case in all the scopes I've had so far, but they have only ranged from 540 to 1500mm. If it were me with your scope, I'd probably lean toward something a little longer in the 18-20mm range as the circa 100x magnification is a good one for seeing a lot of objects. Barlow either and you'll have a decent planetary EP too.

If top dollar for this one-off purchase isn't an issue, then you won't go wrong (at either focal length) with the TV and Pentax EPs suggested. If they're a bit rich, then have a look at the Explore Scientific ES82 and ES100 ranges. People who have compared them (and I haven't at any length) say they get within an ace of the premium brands, but for quite a lot less money.

Russell

[E621Keith]

Well Im looking to own one eyepiece, as im not a visual type id still like it to be good, and be usable in any scope.

There is no 'one' magical eyepiece that will work well in any scope. A 14mm gives around 40x magnification in a 3" apo which is only usable for wide field. When the same eyepiece is put into a C14, it will give a magnification of 300x, which is only usable for planets and double stars.

If you are only allowed one eyepiece, you should get a zoom. Multiple fixed focal length eyepiece is a luxury.

[alan potts]

Nicely put Keith.

This is so much a question of scope not speed as you said. If we have scope speed in the mix then we know only a few deliver. On the other point my main scopes run from 3048mm down to 805mm if I count the little 70mm's thats 420mm.

Alan.

[Superdavo]

It can't be a zoomed eyepiece because you would struggle to find the object, how about a really high quality 15mm

[Stargazer_00]

i think if you can afford one really good eyepiece then why not spend that money on 4 or 5 middle range eyepieces and actually have some versatility. get 8, 12, , 18, 25 BSTs. they perform well enough in all scopes. if yo uarent visual the difference between those and a TV wont be immediatly obvious to be honest. its only pure visual that spend hour after hour at the eyepiece that really warrant buying that level of quality. if you just want something to stick on a scope on occasion then BST are terrific value for money and show fantastic views for their price.

[Astro_Baby]

Well if you want cheap as its not your main area I would suggest a singe eyepiece is pointless. It has so little flaxibility. My choice of the Pentax XW 10mm was based on it being used in a large number of scopes. But if you were truly buying as a sideline I would get three or four orthos, they will perform better than most and will give you some flexibility in what you observe.

I would go for somethimg like 6mm, 12mm, 18mm and a 32mm Plossl. That would be cheap enough and give you pretty good views for a small outlay of cash. Secondhand you could probably get the lot for £150 if you shopped around and were patient. Still less than half the cost of something like a TV or Pentax.

[E621Keith]

It can't be a zoomed eyepiece because you would struggle to find the object, how about a really high quality 15mm

What do you mean? A typical 8-24mm zoom with 40deg AFOV @24mm will show the same amount of sky (98%) as a 14mm XW. A Leica ASPH zoom and Zeiss 6.7-25.1 will show 9% and 18% more than the 14XW

If you can't find the object in the zoom, then you won't find it in the XW either.

[swamp thing]

How many Barlows are we allowed?

[Moonshane]

well, given all the subsequent discussion and with the original meaning of the question now clear I have had a rethink and my answer is now.......26mm Nagler. it's nothing to do with it being a Televue eyepiece at all. it's simply the most expansive, intuitive/easy to use, comfortable and most impressive eyepiece I have ever looked through. I include my 13mm Ethos in this evaluation which along with my 6-3mm Nagler zoom will be my three last eyepieces sold if I ever hit hard times.

[AWR]

Hmm tricky,

When I occassionally get the big dob out, I love the views through my 35mm Panoptic. I rarely take it out of the focuser.

The scope I mostly use though is my Lunt which the 9mm TS planetary works just great in.

But my favourite is my 15mm Vixen plossl.

Andrew

[ollypenrice]

The answers above have been mostly TV this, Pentax that, etc. That's irrelevant. The important bit of any of the statements above is the 10, 12, 14mm part, not who made it. The one eyepiece to rule them all, is about the objects you view, not the lettering on the EP.

If you find that a 14mm Nagthos XW is your most used EP, that FL would still be your most used EP if you lost your job and fiscal pressure made you flog your collection for cheaper alternatives. You'd flog your Nikon/Pentax/TV/ES and buy the best EP you were best able to afford of that focal length.

As far as dense goes - I'm willing to put money on the fact that I have a greater gravitational attraction than you do. If you disagree, then there only one way to sort that out - SUMO!!!!

Russell

Not quite true. Maybe I'd have a 13mm if it were an Ethos but I'd have to go for longer if it only had a 50 degree apparent field.

I'd be torn between a 13 Ethos and a 26 Nagler so clearly have similar taste to John and Shane. Trouble is, having only one EP would be darned expensive. Think how many telescopes you'd need!

Olly

[Stu]

I would go for a 17mm ethos. Goes all the way from a x28, 3.54 degree fov in my TV76, up to x235 for planetary in the mak. Sorted :-)

Stu

[russ.will]

Not quite true. Maybe I'd have a 13mm if it were an Ethos but I'd have to go for longer if it only had a 50 degree apparent field.

I'd be torn between a 13 Ethos and a 26 Nagler so clearly have similar taste to John and Shane. Trouble is, having only one EP would be darned expensive. Think how many telescopes you'd need!

Olly

Can you have too many scopes? I 'downsized' from three to one as I was abandoning attempts at imaging. Seven months later, I've got three again, albeit the TAL Alkor was worth paying £40 for, just to obtain the box!

Russell

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD using chubby fingers. Sorry.

[Stargazer_00]

If you live in a desert with many clear nights a year then having lots of scopes is fine as they'd each get a good amount of use. For me having only a few nights a year I think it only warrants a main scope and a grab and go and possibly, maybe, because my main scope is always a large dob, a dedicated long FL, large apeture SCT just for planets and moon... this would be a real luxury though.

grab and go should be as versatile as possible, and I think I have that spot filled nicely with (what I consider to be almost the perfect starter scope/setup) a Explorer 150p on AZ4. This could only be improved with a VX6 in my honest opinion.

main scope as big as dob as you can carry

luxury planet/moon scope; i'll probably look to get a C8 for my AZ4 once I have everything else I need and am at a loss for what to buy

[John]

I have a strict 3 scope agreement with my other half. So I have 4 ....... (one is in the loft though)

Edit: I've slapped my own wrist now for sidetracking Earls thread.