Eyepieces and filters ?

[Moz]

Having just purchased a celestron mak 127 and looking at it in detail a number of questions have arisen I know I haven't bought the best of the best but one that people on the whole seem happy with and I am overall happy with as well and my stage of learning . On looking at the moon filter supplied it had a crude plastic thread with poor seams and this got me wondering if the eyepieces are also of a budget type to ..

So would my viewing be improved by a better eyepiece ie 25mm and 10mm straight replacement or are the eyepieces ok and spend money on a decent sub 10mm and sub 25mm to fill the gaps so to speak .

And lastly do they make filters with metal threads . I noticed that celestron did a kit of filters and eyepieces for around the £150 mark and were on offer for £72 direct from ovl within 3 months of a celestron purchase anyone had experience of these .

And breathe .....lol

[rory]

most people dont really bother to much with colour filters. narrowband filters are more popular.(uhc / or oIII filter) yes they do make them with metal threads.

as for eyepieces. well the general agreement is that normally the 25mm supplied is good enough for now ,while the 10mm is usually not good at all. ( not alwaysthe case though)

if you were to buy a new eyepiece or two id first consider what you most like viewing ,planets or dso ect.

common initial upgrade of e/p's include -

celestron x-cel lx

starguider/bst explorer

vixen npl

meade4000 /gso plossl

televue plossl.

these vary in price a little between about £30-£35 for npl's to £80 or so for tv plossl.

the bst 's are VERY popular within these forum walls by the way.

i wouldnt bother with a celstron set to be honest. the filters wont be of much use so your paying forthree or four basic plossl's that you could get individually cheaper no doubt.

clear skies.

[Moz]

I would sat that seems a fair assessment ..the 25 mm is reasonable and sharp but I struggle a little obtaining real sharp image with the 10mm and with a Barlow even worse ..thanks on heads up on different types ..I'll look on eBay and the other sites I have informed about .

[rory]

http://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview.php this is a good second hand site.

bst/explorers are available from skies the limit via his e bay site.

of course theres a ton of info if you do a search on the eyepieces section here of particular brands.

theres also alot more knowlegable folk than me who will give good advice .

[great_bear]

Having just purchased a celestron mak 127 and looking at it in detail a number of questions have arisen I know I haven't bought the best of the best but

Hmmm... Well... Those 127s are no slouches... You'd struggle to find a better scope at that size without leaping into the realm of super-luxury scopes at boutique prices like Questar etc. which run into thousands of pounds. At the last meet of the Baker Street Astronomers in Regent's Park, I was struck by the almost overwhelming preponderance of the 127 and its smaller brother: It's a good, standard telescope.

Useful enough to keep for a lifetime - irrespective of any more telescopes you buy in future (so hang on to it! :-)

got me wondering if the eyepieces are also of a budget type too... So would my viewing be improved by a better eyepiece ie 25mm and 10mm

Yes.

I noticed that celestron did a kit of filters and eyepieces for around the £150 mark and were on offer for £72 direct from ovl within 3 months of a celestron purchase anyone had experience of these .

I think you mean SkyWatcher - OVL do SkyWatcher.

They've improved that kit recently. It has better eyepieces now. I've had some of those SkyWatcher Plossls before. They're OK - a bit like the Revelation Plossls but a bit more clunky in fit-and-finish.

As a kit though, it's not a good choice for your scope because:

1. Coloured filters aren't much use in these smaller scopes

2. The 7.5mm is too powerful under most conditions

3. There's no 32mm - the focal length you really need with your scope

With a scope like yours, you really only need two eyepieces:

1. A 32mm Plossl (like this one)

2. A 12mm Plossl (like this one)

You can buy more expensive Plossls like Tele Vue, but in your scope you will not notice any significant improvement for the price.

In summary - for your particular scope (which is an F12 telescope) - you will not find any significantly better-performing eyepieces than these. You can find wider-field eyepieces, but they won't be significantly sharper, and you can't get them in 32mm or longer in the 1.25" format (it's physically impossible)

The eye-relief is comfortable enough on the 12mm not to need a long eye-relief eyepiece.

(unless you're wearing spectacles at the same time, but most spectacle wearers would not need to wear their spectacles at the 1mm exit-pupil this eyepiece will provide when placed in your particular telescope)

Later on, you may want to "push" your scope's ability with a 9mm for evenings when the weather is particularly good, or alternatively purchase a focal-length between the 12 and 32mm - but I'll bet that neither would spend as much time in the focuser as the above.

[Moz]

Brilliant thanks makes sense , I probably mis led you into thinking the whole scope was a little shonky and that's not the case the tube itself and mount I was happy with I was eluding to often the accessories that come with are not always as good as the main bit that's I guess where all manufacturers try to cut costs and improve profits . Still not knowing a lot about telescopes this information is valuable . I have a large range of prime large aperture Nikon lenses with my dslr and I know that the std lenses that come with these So called kits are the poor relation to the heavy weight lenses that are available professionally whilst the cheeper lenses perform well for everyday use for 90% of people the top lenses offer so much more but at a price but the difference for me is stunning SoI guess in summery in saying I didn't want to spend decent money on an eyepiece unless there was a marked improvement on viewing , I think the general consensus is have a couple of good quality bits which don't push the scope to beyond its ability ( is sub 8mm) and a piece that offers a wider less magnified view 32 mm .

[alan potts]

Two very good answers there from Great Bear and Rory. Alan

[bingevader]

Excellent as always!

Isn't SGL fab.

I can vouch for the Meade 4000s.

Got 2 with the etx90 and I've not replaced them.

The TV plossls are very good indeed.

(I'm not sure I'd go below 11mm with a plossl though, the eye relief gets quite tight)

And, everyone raves about the BSTs.

So, some food for thought!

Cheers