Should I look at something else as well???

[M4lcs67]

I do have a reasonably extensive range of Hyperions and both ftr's. I really like them and the flexibility that the tuning rings gives me.

With this in mind I do have (what appears to me to have most bases covered). However are there any makes/brands that anyone would recommend to fill in any of the gaps? Looking at something of reasonably good quality. Maybe Celestron Xcel, Televue. I know there are various ranges that Televue do, all with widely differing qualities and prices. Some guidance would be appreciated.

Thanks

[russ.will]

You look very well covered IMHO, as long as you don't suddenly get a fast-Newt itch, which would push the Baaders closer to the edge of their comfort zone.

Otherwise, you're really looking at focal lengths to save you fiddling with the FTRs and even then, I'd imagine something in the 12 & 8mm FLs would be about it.

Russell

[crazyjedi]

12 and 8mm fl sounds like the Pentax XF range could fill that gap!

[faulksy]

or the bgo,s if not bco,s, i have found the ts h-rs real very good from modern astronomy, around 46 quid

[alan potts]

I would say if you are happy with what you have why change. Televue are better eyepieces but in an F 10 main scope I don't really see that the difference is going to worth spending on. However if you were going to go to F5, or thereabouts then the Hyperions would not perform so well.

Alan.

[bingevader]

The Explore Scientific range are gaining in popularity and are a notch up ( knocking on the TV door) in quality without the corresponding price.

And whilst you're on that site, there are still some Maxvisions left (Meade re-brands) but I'm not sure you have any gaps in FL for them to fill!

Cheers

[Cartman]

How are those Maxvisions compared to ES (not talking about AFOV which is clearly a big difference)?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[crazyjedi]

That sounds like a good comparison and a review I would like to read

[alan potts]

It is a review I would like to read! The elements of the SWA UWA range have many similarities with each other. There is only the 18mm UWA, which is different (I believe, ones is a 2 inch) and the 11mm which does not appear in the Meade/Maxvision range, apart from that they are the same glass. There is a belief the coatings could be different though I wonder if this is really going to be so obvious. There is a chance that the glass could be different to but I doubt it.

I have owned the full SWA and UWA range from Meade apart from the 18mm in the UWA dress.

My friend has been to the factory where these were made and has seen the full set up, he does not believe that the differences are great if indeed there are any. I am a bit shocked that no one has had these in bed together yet.

Alan

[Andyj]

Having just taken delivery of the whopping Maxvision 24mm 82°, I would also be interested to hear how it stacks up against its pricier cousins. I have yet to have the chance to try this out properly but am looking forward to that occasion.

[rowan46]

Unfortunately I am not in the position of having 2 eyepieces with the same focal length and i would guess that anybody who has an es 82 won't have rushed out and bought a maxvision one. I have an es 4.7 82 and a maxvision 24mm 82 but I doubt this would be much of a meaningful comparison except for a look at ergonomics and build quality. Not really surprised there has been no head to head comparisons

[crazyjedi]

I have the ES 24mm 68 deg which is a very fine eye piece. And a Meade 82mm 8.8mm which I can also say is very good. If all these eps are essentially the same I'd be amazed if there was a noticeable difference to all but the best trained of eyes..... But then you never know without a proper comparison :-)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[alan potts]

I am doing a comparison at the moment between the 24mm Meade UWA and the Nagler 26mm as I have both. I still think SGL 9 would be a good place to do a head to head with Meade/MaxV and ExSc.

Alan.

[crazyjedi]

That sounds like a good review on the way Alan. SGL would be a great opportunity to do some serious compare and contrast reviews. All that different kit together in one place. Sounds like a good plan!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cartman]

Partly off-topic, but still: I received two ES EP's today, the 14mm and 6,7mm 82° N2.

On the website, it says that these are purged in Nitrogen, but on the EP's itself, it says Argon (both engraved and with the little green round sticker that says Ar). Now I suppose that Argon beats Nitrogen, so I shouldn't complain I think. But I thought it'd be worth mentioning.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Moonshane]

although my main scope is a fast newt, I bought four main eyepieces and then filled in with Televue plossls and BGOs. if you can stand the eye relief, they are every bit as good as anything in my experience other than apparent field. you can get them used for perhaps £50.

[crashtestdummy]

I think explore scientific are changing all their ep's to argon as 2 of my 100° are argon purged but the older 20mm is nitrogen.don't think it matters tbh. I can rate the 82° es range as I have the 30mm and just sold the 18,14,8.8 and 6.7 all great eyepieces

[Cartman]

Then why did you sell them? :-)

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[alan potts]

Maybe he bought something better. I had almost all of the Meade 5000 range and sold them, well most of them. There is always something else in the cupboad to tempt us.

Alan.

[Cartman]

Are those Meade 5000's as good as claimed? I've got two Maxivisions at home for testing, unbranded Meade 5000's if the legend is true... :-)

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD