Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

Vixen LVW vs Pentax XW vs Delos

GavStar

By GavStar
in Discussions - Eyepieces

Recommended Posts

Louis D

Louis D

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, GavStar said:

As the OP, this thread prompted me to have a go with my 22mm vixen lvw this evening. It's very nice but in my opinion the ES 92 17mm is better in all aspects (apart from size and weight ?). The ES has slightly more fov, more comfortable for me and better corrected to the edge in my f6.3 frac, with whiter presentation. A great eyepiece that wasn't available when I originally posted.

92 vs 65 isn't subtle at all for me.  Even going from 92 down to 76 for the Morpheus suddenly feels constrictive.  I've jumped down from 92 to 72/70 (Delos/XW), 92 to 65 (XL), and 92 to 50 (LV) for kicks, and with each increase in AFOV difference, the feeling of constrictiveness becomes stronger as if the world is shrinking to a singularity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply
GavStar

GavStar

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, Louis D said:

92 vs 65 isn't subtle at all for me.  Even going from 92 down to 76 for the Morpheus suddenly feels constrictive.  I've jumped down from 92 to 72/70 (Delos/XW), 92 to 65 (XL), and 92 to 50 (LV) for kicks, and with each increase in AFOV difference, the feeling of constrictiveness becomes stronger as if the world is shrinking to a singularity.

Louis I meant that the actual bit of sky seen was slightly bigger as shown by the diagram below. Obviously the magnification was higher with the ES so this may well have impacted on my impression. I agree the ES feels much less constructive than the lvw (but lvw stills feel pretty good to me...)

 

IMG_0271.PNG

Link to comment
Share on other sites
25585

25585

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, GavStar said:

Louis I meant that the actual bit of sky seen was slightly bigger as shown by the diagram below. Obviously the magnification was higher with the ES so this may well have impacted on my impression. I agree the ES feels much less constructive than the lvw (but lvw stills feel pretty good to me...)

 

IMG_0271.PNG

For that view the 22mm LVW TFOV is as narrow as I would want to go, but higher mags are better for detail spotting. 

How does the 17 LER do for not having kidney beaning & other black outs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Louis D

Louis D

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, GavStar said:

Louis I meant that the actual bit of sky seen was slightly bigger as shown by the diagram below. Obviously the magnification was higher with the ES so this may well have impacted on my impression. I agree the ES feels much less constructive than the lvw (but lvw stills feel pretty good to me...)

I thought you were comparing the 17mm LVW to the 17mm ES-92, thus my confusion.  Upon rereading, I see you were referring to the 22mm LVW.  My apologies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
25585

25585

Posted
Posted

My inclination is leaning toward the Orion. It's 20mm is a 2 inch ep, while the LVW was 1.25. The extra 12 deg AFOV might be for that reason. 

More intriguing is the Orion being Lanthanum as Vixens are. 

Not heard of it being used by any other optical company but Vixen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GavStar

GavStar

Posted
  • Author
Posted
6 hours ago, 25585 said:

For that view the 22mm LVW TFOV is as narrow as I would want to go, but higher mags are better for detail spotting. 

How does the 17 LER do for not having kidney beaning & other black outs?

For me the 17mm ES is very easy and comfortable to use - never had any issues with blackouts/kidney beaning. I was using the Pentax xw 5mm and the 17mm Es in tandem last night and they had a very similar feel in viewing comfort/eye relief.

I don't wear glasses when observing though. I also used my ethos 6mm but found the Pentax easier to use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Louis D

Louis D

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, 25585 said:

Not heard of it being used by any other optical company but Vixen. 

It's my understanding that the TV Radian line used rare earth glass and that led to it being priced relatively high for a 60 degree eyepiece.  I wouldn't doubt that the Nagler T4s do as well since they were introduced about the same time and at very high prices.  It was the Radian's pricing structure that led to its demise.  TV came up with the Delos and DeLite lines to replace them at a lower manufacturing cost to improve margins.

I've often wondered if rare earth glass accounts for the LV line viewing "darker" than its contemporaries.  They seem to see just as faint objects, but present them and brighter objects as dimmer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
25585

25585

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, Louis D said:

It's my understanding that the TV Radian line used rare earth glass and that led to it being priced relatively high for a 60 degree eyepiece.  I wouldn't doubt that the Nagler T4s do as well since they were introduced about the same time and at very high prices.  It was the Radian's pricing structure that led to its demise.  TV came up with the Delos and DeLite lines to replace them at a lower manufacturing cost to improve margins.

I've often wondered if rare earth glass accounts for the LV line viewing "darker" than its contemporaries.  They seem to see just as faint objects, but present them and brighter objects as dimmer.

On CN I read somewhere the LV line is more neutral in colour, less warm than some TV, probably Delos. 

Having both a LV & Radian 10mm eps, I will compare (also the XW). That's if my eyes are sensitive enough. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Louis D

Louis D

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, 25585 said:

On CN I read somewhere the LV line is more neutral in colour, less warm than some TV, probably Delos. 

Having both a LV & Radian 10mm eps, I will compare (also the XW). That's if my eyes are sensitive enough. 

It's not so much a hue change as a lightness change.  Others on CN have noted it as well, though I haven't been able to find the relevant threads.  It was seemingly corrected with either the NLV or SLV lines, as were the 45 degree fields below 9mm being increased to 50 degrees.  I believe that was an SLV-only improvement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ricochet

Ricochet

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, 25585 said:

My inclination is leaning toward the Orion. It's 20mm is a 2 inch ep, while the LVW was 1.25. The extra 12 deg AFOV might be for that reason. 

More intriguing is the Orion being Lanthanum as Vixens are. 

Not heard of it being used by any other optical company but Vixen. 

TV, Pentax, Zeiss, probably all the top spotting scope eyepieces, and you can bet that the "rare earth" in the Baader Morpheus is lanthanum. The new Orions are made by Long Perng so any brand buying eyepieces from them must be able to use it. If Long Perng have it then you can probably assume JOC and Barsta can or are using it for their premium eyepieces too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
25585

25585

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, John said:

It's probably just me, but when I see the word "Pro" used in the name of a piece of astro equipment I feel just a little uneasy :undecided:

Skywatcher use the word & their ED + Esprit refractors have good reputations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
25585

25585

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, John said:

Thats true - I have the ED120 "Pro" and I can't complain about that one !

 

ED120 is in my consideration list along with the ES 130 & Esprit 120. "Pro" = serious money, serious quality hopefully. 

I would be worried if TV started using the term though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timebandit

Timebandit

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, John said:

It's probably just me, but when I see the word "Pro" used in the name of a piece of astro equipment I feel just a little uneasy :undecided:

 

 

5 hours ago, 25585 said:

Skywatcher use the word & their ED + Esprit refractors have good reputations. 

 

 

59 minutes ago, John said:

Thats true - I have the ED120 "Pro" and I can't complain about that one !

 

 

 

29 minutes ago, 25585 said:

ED120 is in my consideration list along with the ES 130 & Esprit 120. "Pro" = serious money, serious quality hopefully. 

I would be worried if TV started using the term though!

 

 

"Pro" I can live with. It's if ever they start putting  " Turbo " on astro kit , then that would really concern me ? ?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Louis D

Louis D

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Timebandit said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Pro" I can live with. It's if ever they start putting  " Turbo " on astro kit , then that would really concern me ? ?

 

 

 

Professional appellations on photo gear can lead to issues where only amateur gear is allowed (like on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. without a professional photography permit).  "But officer, I'm just an amateur photographer", "Then why does your tripod say professional?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted
On 16/11/2017 at 10:22, YKSE said:

3. Concept of ultra wide eyepiece is not totally new, there's this 120° Koehler in 1960!

http://www.quadibloc.com/science/opt04.htm

 

If the 11 element Koehler was produced to the standards that, say, Tele Vue currently use for the 21mm Ethos, I reckon it would cost £thousands to buy.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.