Any feedback on the ES 82° 30mm?

[Ben Ritchie]

I'm about to pick up 8.8mm and 14mm ES 82° eyepieces, and i'm getting seduced by the 30mm too. On the outside it looks a lot like the 'holy hand-grenade' 31T5 Nagler, which i've always loved. Anyone compared the two, or have other feedback? I'm possibly rubbish with search, but couldn't find anything on the forum. I'm aware that they're very big and heavy but have very solid focusers in my 'scopes

The major downside to the 31T5 for me has always been the price, I don't tend to do a lot of very widefield viewing so it's a lot of money to have tied up in an eyepiece I don't use all that much. The ES looks a bit more reasonable on that front; my 35mm SWA to part-fund it.

[Stargazer_00]

It is a lot of investment if you aren't planning on using it much. I know there is a certain allure to owning a gigantic eyepiece like that (before you get one certainly) but when you have the novlty of a giant eyepiece soon wears off.

In your scopes it will give extremely wide field and low mag views. If you get on with the 34mm though this should perform slightly better as it will have a marginally smaller exit pupil coupled with a wider view. So that is a real plus.

I guess if you can afford it, then why not? I avoided getting one so far as 24mm sufficed to my needs. I'm shortly going to go up a few steps of aperture and bring with it more focal length at which time a 30mm UWA becomes a requirement for me. I will get a 30 ES 82 then, or try to source a 31T5.

[Ben Ritchie]

It is a lot of investment if you aren't planning on using it much ... I guess if you can afford it, then why not?

This is very true that it's a lot of money if underused; one of the reasons i'm happy with the 34mm SWA is that it was very cheap! So it doesn't bug me that it's sitting in the EP case. Performance is very good too, it's not far behind the Panoptic in my view.

"Afford" is complicated, I think I work more on a balance between how much it costs against how much it is used. I don't mind expensive if I feel i'm getting value from it, but with the 31T5 the balance was never right. Same with the Ethos line. Superb, but suddenly you have a £1000+ eyepiece case with three eyepieces in it! I'd rather run four or five £100ish eyepieces, even if it means missing the last few percent in absolute performance. The ES range looks like it fits the bill pretty well here.

In your scopes it will give extremely wide field and low mag views. If you get on with the 34mm though this should perform slightly better as it will have a marginally smaller exit pupil coupled with a wider view. So that is a real plus.

Yeah, that was my thinking - I wouldn't use with the TV76, a 24mm SWA is more than enough for rich-field browsing of the summer sky, one of my favourite ways to spend time. The AP is a f/8 so a 30mm ultrawide is a better fit, and i'm likely to get a large SCT (Meade 10", C9.25 or C11, haven't decided yet) which would also work well. That's part of the reason for picking up a 14mm.

[andrew63]

I did read a review on here a few months ago, a member compared a 30 ES to a nagler 31 and i think he was very pleased with the ES. Hopefully someone will recall this for you in detail.

andrew

[Space Dragon]

I just tried out my new to me ES 82º 30mm last night for the first time and have to say I think it's great.

It's my first 82º and I've never looked through a 31T5, so nothing to compare it to, but edge correction was as good as in my 24mm Pans, no noticeable pincushioning and it yielded some nice detail.

I found it easy to look through and could not make it blackout or kidney bean when I tried.

From what I've read this is as close to the 31 Nagler as you can get, i think I'll be keeping this one anyways.

[Stargazer_00]

I think as a general rule the ES will perform extremely well at F6 and slower. In this speed I don't see the TV costs as being worthwhile.

If, on the other hand, you favor F5, F4+ then I suspect the price of the TV products becomes ever more relevant.

I'm shortly moving from a F4.7 to a F4.5 and am starting to wonder if I'm going to need better eyepieces. Some of the flaws in the ESs are borederline for me as tolerable. It's funny I never thought of myself as fussy but this hobby really has pulled out a perfectionist side of me I didn't know I had. I know if I buy one Delos I'll end up getting rid of all the eyepieces in due course

[alan potts]

There is a review on Cloudy Nights site comparing the 31mm Ngaler to the 30mm Meade UWA. This has the same glass elements as the ExSc and was made in the same factory, though lens coating could be different, they are not going to be miles apart on the performance. It is worth a read. I bought the 30mm on the strength of this alone but have since changed it for the Nagler, don't ask me why maybe I am just a snob.

Alan.

[Stargazer_00]

For the extra 1mm, of course!

[Mark in Macc]

Mine is the first thing in my diagonal and quite often there for most of the night. A very good combination with my OTA, but F10 is not really demanding. It is very easy to use with good eye relief and well made. I got mine through a friend in the US and at £160 it was superb value. A definite keeper for me.

[russ.will]

I absolutely love mine. I actually don't find the eye relief as tight as the 1.25" ES82s (and they're not bad) so it's lovely and relaxing to sit and look through for long periods. In the F9.4 frac, it shows a huge pool of pin point stars to the edge, with only a slight break down as you approach the field stop. In the F4.9 Dob, it's much the same story, with the coma of the Newtonian being a far more significant aberration.

It is a bit of a lump though, even more so when attached to a coma corrector, the whole assembly resembling a stick grenade. Sometimes this is good - 1kg of EP helps move the refractor balance point updward for easier viewing near zenith. Sometimes it is bad - You need some serious weight on the rear of the Dob to prevent the motor clutches slipping against the imbalance.

Finally, budget a few extra pence for a rigid plastic end cap for the barrel. The bottom element is very close to the bottom of the barrel and the soft rubber item that ES supply, is prone to touching this element.

Russell

[John]

I think it was Damo that compared the Nagler 31 to the ES 30 / 82 a little while back. I can't find the report offhand but I seem to recall that his conclusion was that any differences were so slight as to be of no consequence and I think he kept the ES 30.

I have the 31mm Nagler but got it before the ES 30 / 82 was on the market plus it cost just £200 (!!) so there is no point in changing it. I don't use it a great deal to be honest as the light pollution in my area "greys" the background sky too much at low power. The ES 20 / 100 is a good alternative showing almost as much sky and darkening it more. I love the "endless pool of stars" effect the 100 degrees gives too, especially with the eye cup folded down.

I'll keep the big Nagler though as it's a sort of iconic eyepiece and the views of the Veil Nebula with my ED102 refractor alone justifies it's place in my eyepiece case

[alan potts]

That's what I call a bargain John, I paid 340 for mine which I have now received and I thought that was good, I am now going to cry in the corner.

Alan.

[John]

That's what I call a bargain John, I paid 340 for mine which I have now received and I thought that was good, I am now going to cry in the corner.

Alan.

Mine has some slight marks on the coating on the eye lens which the previous owner deemed enough make a substantial reduction to the price. They don't affect the performance at all of course but who was I to argue ?

The price you paid was a good one - I believe they cost something like £550 new.

[Ben Ritchie]

Thanks folks, and Alan you didn't overpay for your 31T5 IMO, John just got a bargain. £340 is about right.

The great thing about these forums is that you sometimes get a nudge in the right direction that you're not expecting, and Stargazer_00's comment that "It is a lot of investment if you aren't planning on using it much." is just that. Flicking back through my observing notes it's clear that I don't use the 34mm SWA much and i'm not unhappy with it, so why replace it?

I'm going to pick up the 11mm 82° ES too instead, won't keep all three but on paper i'm torn between the 11mm and 14mm so i'll try both and keep the one I prefer.

[Dunkster]

I use the 30mm in my SCTs and it gives very satisfying and immersive views, and I find it very comfortable to use too. In the C11 it gives about 93x so the sky is already giving good contrast with pin points all over

Btw, if you're considering an SCT, maybe use that to steer your dilemma. Just bear in mind the longer focal lengths involved...the 14mm is 200x in the C11 for example. I've never used the 11mm in the C11, but at about 185x it's pretty much my most used EP in the C8...dark sky, sharp stars.

[Ben Ritchie]

Btw, if you're considering an SCT, maybe use that to steer your dilemma. Just bear in mind the longer focal lengths involved...the 14mm is 200x in the C11 for example. I've never used the 11mm in the C11, but at about 185x it's pretty much my most used EP in the C8...dark sky, sharp stars.

Yeah, i'm a bit stuck with the maths as i've not yet decided which SCT to buy, other than somewhere between 2350 and 2700mm focal length. 14mm would make a nice high-power for the C11, while the 11mm would do the same for the C9.25 or Meade 10".

To complicate my thinking more, I might just happen to have clicked 'buy' on this...

[Astro_Baby]

Me and Steve have done some glass swapping on the ES30, Nagler and Pentax XW30. So far we have had only one night and the sky was far from its best.

The Nag and and the Pentax both had the edge on the ES but only by a hair. Stars were sharp to the edge as near as I could tell in an F5 on all EPs, no ghosting os scatter issues on the ES. The only real difference we could see on the night was M81/M82 where the Nag and the Pentax could see a better granularity in the centre of the galaxies. Like a scattering of sherbert whe the ES showed a more smoky centre.

Considering the price of the Nag ( and the Pentax come to that ) its a hellish amount of extra cash for a very small difference. If your NASA or a serious reseracher its probably worth it. For the average Joe Blow, and tat inlcudes me, unless you have wads of cash, its probably not worth it. I know I could never justify spending that sort of cash on the Nag and only have the Pentax cos one came up at a good price and even that makes me wince and if I think about it too long I let out an involuntary yell. i am hoping Freud was right about repression of unpleasant experiences....the pain of that cash leaving my purse still hurts

We are hpong for a better night where we can run them off and ai will weite it all up at some point.

[Stargazer_00]

Thanks folks, and Alan you didn't overpay for your 31T5 IMO, John just got a bargain. £340 is about right.

The great thing about these forums is that you sometimes get a nudge in the right direction that you're not expecting, and Stargazer_00's comment that "It is a lot of investment if you aren't planning on using it much." is just that. Flicking back through my observing notes it's clear that I don't use the 34mm SWA much and i'm not unhappy with it, so why replace it?

I'm going to pick up the 11mm 82° ES too instead, won't keep all three but on paper i'm torn between the 11mm and 14mm so i'll try both and keep the one I prefer.

I have them all (see signature) and they all have a use. I think you'll find you might just hand on to them all

[alan potts]

Ben, If it is any help: I have used an 11mm in the 12 inch LX about as many times as I have been on the TV, twice, I do however use the 14mm on the same scope often, I also have the older Meade 14mm UWA and found it to be a very good eyepiece for the last 4 years, though now I use it in the top mounted scope because it is smaller than some others. This is an eyepiece that I believe John owned and if I recall he liked it to. For me it can hold it's own with the best for most things. It would be very nice to read a report from Astro Baby when they have some good clear skies to do a side by side with the eyepiece collection. Alan.

[Stargazer_00]

I think the focal length of your scope has alot to do with eyepiece recomendations so I always try to tailor my advice based on my experience in my scopes compared to the posters scope. For instance an 14mm in my Dob is awesome and probably the best eyepiece in my box for galaxies but it's not the same in my smaller 150p. For that I'd need the 8.8 to get the same field of view / magnification. Clearly there are exit pupil differences to consider too as aperture changes.

In terms of "looking at them" as John would say, all these ES eyepieces are great in the hand. I still find myself wondering how they pack all that punch into such tiny eyepieces, remarkable really.

the 14mm is my current favorite in my scopes, when I upgrade my scope to a 14" (looking like next week at the moment!!) I suspect the 18mm may start to become my favorite as then that would give 88x. the 14mm would then give 114x which might actually be pretty darn good too

[Dunkster]

Yeah, i'm a bit stuck with the maths as i've not yet decided which SCT to buy, other than somewhere between 2350 and 2700mm focal length. 14mm would make a nice high-power for the C11, while the 11mm would do the same for the C9.25 or Meade 10".

To complicate my thinking more, I might just happen to have clicked 'buy' on this...

The 20 would show a good bit of sky in any of those scopes The focal length of the C11 is 2800mm and I like to use my 17mm Ethos in it as much as possible (got to justify the spend somehow ) but the views are just stunning. I've used it for both planetary and globs

The 14 (either 82 or 100) should be a safe bet too... 200x in the C11 is not too much to ask of a half decent night, or would give a nice framing picture of globs in a C9.25. And that's just the SCTs... you have other scopes too

Oh and congrats on your clicking, btw

[alan potts]

Graham, I agree, the poster was talking of a possible C11 which is not a million mile away from my scope. If he were to go with that the 11mm would still be an eyepiece that would only get tube time on the very best nights and in this case I still think the 14mm would be the correct eyepiece. However the smaller C9.25 would be able to use the smaller focal length more often. The 11mm also seems to be the sites pick of the crop as well, so I guess it, as you say come down to the scope in question. Alan.

[Ben Ritchie]

The 20 would show a good bit of sky in any of those scopes The focal length of the C11 is 2800mm and I like to use my 17mm Ethos in it as much as possible (got to justify the spend somehow ) but the views are just stunning. I've used it for both planetary and globs

Yeah, 20mm is a favourite focal length of mine - the thinking is that it'll be a great low power eyepiece in the 130EDT (it shows almost as much sky as the 34mm SWA!) and a great medium-high power (120-140x) eyepiece in whichever Cxx I buy. I'm expecting it to get a lot of use

I'm stumped now though as I hadn't realized that the ES 11mm and 14mm seem to be out of stock everywhere - i'm was going to import from the USA, because $99 vs. £160 is an easy choice even after tax/shipping, but can't find them. Might go for the 12mm Pentax XF instead, bit more money, but should be spot on for a C9.25 or Meade 10" even if it is a touch high powered for the C11. Or watch and wait to see if a 14mm Radian turns up used. A nice Plossl seems an obvious choice, but under 15mm they have too little eye relief for me.

Really need to decide on an SCT, which would help my analysis a lot

[John]

I think you will enjoy the ES 20 / 100 Ben

I've had mine long enough now to have given it a run out in all my scopes and it's done very well indeed. With the eyecup rolled down the views seem vast and highly immersive. It's pin sharp across the whole FoV with my F/6.5 and F/7.5 refractors and the only thing I can see near the field stop with the F/5.3 dob is a little coma.

Amongst other things, it's been great for viewing Comet Panstarrs against the starry backdrop

[Dunkster]

I'm stumped now though as I hadn't realized that the ES 11mm and 14mm seem to be out of stock everywhere - i'm was going to import from the USA, because $99 vs. £160 is an easy choice even after tax/shipping, but can't find them. Might go for the 12mm Pentax XF instead, bit more money, but should be spot on for a C9.25 or Meade 10" even if it is a touch high powered for the C11. Or watch and wait to see if a 14mm Radian turns up used. A nice Plossl seems an obvious choice, but under 15mm they have too little eye relief for me.

Or, for about the same price as the XF, order from http://www.explorescientific.de/eyepieces-c-8964.html