ES 2x teleextender 1 1/4 inch

[rowan46]

I won this on eBay a month or so ago for the princely sum of £57 add postage and tax and it cost about £80. This is the best Barlow type thingy I have ever used there appears to be no degredation of image at all. I have just used it on my 4.7mm eyepiece which takes my scope well above its theoretical maximum of 160 and it gave me 204x magnification. admittedly it was on the moon but even so I am happy with it. I may even keep my es 4.7mm now.

[crashtestdummy]

I have the 2x 2" version,worked out about £120 after taxes and shipping but not had that much use of it yet.maybe I should take a stab at the moon at 400x to see what its got

[John]

Russell (russ-will) loaned me his 1.25" ES Telextender for a while and I agree, they are very nice pieces of kit - very much like the Tele Vue Powermates but at somewhat less cost

[alan potts]

I had the the 2 inch Meade 5000 version of the same thing a while ago and agree much the same as the TV Powermater and enough change for a good feed.

I also had the 4.7mm Meade UWA which I thought was a very good eyepiece, why did I sell it? It is a very good step eyepiece with the scopes I have to the maximum power, though not much use on the long focal lengths.

Alan

[russ.will]

I won this on eBay a month or so ago for the princely sum of £57 add postage and tax and it cost about £80. This is the best Barlow type thingy I have ever used there appears to be no degredation of image at all. I have just used it on my 4.7mm eyepiece which takes my scope well above its theoretical maximum of 160 and it gave me 204x magnification. admittedly it was on the moon but even so I am happy with it. I may even keep my es 4.7mm now.

I agree. I've had a few Barlows and never got on with them. The shift in eye relief was unwelcome and optically, their presence seemed rather obvious.

The ES Focal Extender was like mana from heaven, because it simply isn't noticeably different to using an EP of half the focal length. Prior to it's arrival, Barlows were a make do prospect and I was reluctant to shell out too much on one. The ES although costing more than my most expensive Barlow to date, was cheap by comparison, because it immediately delivered three extra focal lengths of near-as-dammit the same quality to my eyepiece case.

Not that you need it now, but I was so taken with it, I wrote a review on it.

Russell

[rowan46]

I agree. I've had a few Barlows and never got on with them. The shift in eye relief was unwelcome and optically, their presence seemed rather obvious.

The ES Focal Extender was like mana from heaven, because it simply isn't noticeably different to using an EP of half the focal length. Prior to it's arrival, Barlows were a make do prospect and I was reluctant to shell out too much on one. The ES although costing more than my most expensive Barlow to date, was cheap by comparison, because it immediately delivered three extra focal lengths of near-as-dammit the same quality to my eyepiece case.

Not that you need it now, but I was so taken with it, I wrote a review on it.

Russell

Just read the review and a right proper job you did. Which is good because it saves me a job. I agree with every word. I also have never had a Barlow that cost so much but then I have never had a Barlow that works so well.

[Stargazer_00]

This is a focal extender though

[crashtestdummy]

Potato potato

[russ.will]

This is a focal extender though

Your point?

Russell

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