Your View, My Eyepiece

[Charic]

I presently have the two modified achromat Eyepieces, the "Super" 25mm & 10mm supplied with the Skyliner 200P. My intentions are to purchase a 5mm 15mm & 32mm lens to complement the original lenses ( with the option to upgrade the originals to Plossls in the future). Now Ive been looking at the TeleVue plossls and the Meade series 4000 super Plossls. Has anyone had one of these lenses, and changed or had the opportunity to try the other, and what if any, was the difference. Explore Scientific 68 Series have some wide angles to consider too. I`m wanting good eye relief, wide angles and the options to fit filters at a later stage. Ive also noted here, that members seem to have a selection of eyepieces from several brands rather than a set from the same brand, like buying the best bits like TEAC, Technics, DUAL, in the old days of buying Hi-Fi, buy the best of each?

[andyboy1970]

My experience of eyepieces is that you need to try them in your scope and with your own eyes as they are a very personal thing.

Not all eyepieces suit everyone. Personally I don't get on with Televue Ethos eyepieces so luckily I found this out before spending £400+ on one.

Also your scope operating at f6 will be more forgiving with budget eyepieces than a faster scope i.e. f5/f4.

I know several people with the same scope as yourself and the Baader Hyperions seem to be popular.

Hope it helps.

[Zuben Elgenubi]

If good eye relief and a wider field of view are considerations then you may want to think carefully whether Plossls fit the bill. In the shorter focal lengths the eye relief can be rather tight for some people (particularly those who wear glasses), though others get along with them quite comfortably. Plossls also have a narrower field of view than some eyepiece designs, generally around 50 degrees I think.

As already mentioned Baader Hyperions are one upgrade option, and you may want to look at the BST Explorer/Starguider range. I have the same scope as you and I find the BSTs to be very good (wider view/nice and sharp etc) relative to their cost, definitely an upgrade over the stock EPS (although the 25mm was actually fairly good).

Also, I'm not sure how much use you would get out of a 5mm eyepiece. I have a 6mm TS HR Planetary giving 200x and that is too much on some nights. On good nights it only really get used on the moon and the planets. I'm sure 5mm would be usable at times though.

First of all though, just use the EPs that come with your scope and see how you get on with them for a while before worrying about upgrades - enjoy what you have!

[ronin]

The eye relief on a plossl is about 2/3 the focal length, so for 5mm 15mm & 32mm, you will be almost touching the top lens with your eye. TV do not make a 5mm plossl, they start at 8mm.

The 32mm will have about 24mm of eye relief, you may have to hold head and eye well away from the eyepiece, meaning it moves a bit so the image "wanders".

As you want good eye relief adn wide fields I would say that plossl's do not match the requirements.

Is it correct to assume that you are looking at around £80 per eyepiece ?

That being the rough cost of TV's.

The ES 82's have a good name, but generally fair bit more the £80 here.

For the price that it seems to be there are:

BST Skyguiders @ £47.

Celestron X-Cel @£65.

There are 2 "new" 70 degree eyepieces around, Celestron and not sure whose name is on the other.

As I cannot locate either cannot give a price.

Consider a few of the same brand and model, they tend to be closer to being parfocal and that makes swapping over somewhat easier. Things might still be in reasonable focus in the next eyepiece.

[Ohmless]

I wouldn't recommend a plossl below 12mm as they eye relief is too small. I get smudges on them and it ruins the eyepiece for the rest of the observing session.

the sterling plossls are a great value. I love my 25mm one after owning it for over a year. Definitely better than a Meade or Celestron plossl. http://store.smartastronomy.com/stsepley12.html

I also like the BST starguider/explorer eyepieces. I own and am delighted by the 5mm, 8mm and 12mm ones. They are very comfortable and have a wider field of view than a plossl. http://stores.ebay.com/Skys-the-Limit-Astro-and-Optical/BST-Starguider-ED-/_i.html?_fsub=2568750014

[John]

There are 2 "new" 70 degree eyepieces around, Celestron and not sure whose name is on the other.

As I cannot locate either cannot give a price.

Maybe the new Skywatcher 70 degree eyepieces are the ones you are referring to ?:

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-eyepieces/sky-watcher-swa-70-eyepieces.html

These are "new on the block" but early reports on the 3.5mm one seem promising. They are very large eyepieces though. It will be interesting to see how they shape up - I'm hoping to get some to review for the forum soon

[bingevader]

I have both TV and meade 4000 plossls, but not in the same FL.

The TVs give slightly crisper views with slightly more contrast, but to my mind in this 'scope there's not a WOW, blow your socks off difference.

The 5mm will be pushing it a bit in the 1200mm Skyliner. I have the 5mm X-Cel LX which is very good for the price, but only on good nights, it's the 6mm WO SPL that gets used most at high magnifications and the 11mm TV plossl if that's still too much.

If you're not a glasses wearer, then eye relief is a very personal thing, the 11mm TV is fine, but I wouldn't go much lower ( the 9.7mm 4000 meade plossl is about it for me!)

Check out what's left of the Maxvision EPs too! They're re-branded Meade 5000s and so the same bits of glass at half to a third the meade price.

Some people like to collect little (or rather huge in some cases!) families of EPs, but just choose what's best for you and at a budget that's best for you!

Cheers

[Charic]

My choice of 5,15,32 was to fit around the 10 and 25 to give a fine rage of EP`s. simply to say to myself. Full Set. 5mm

andyboy1970..........looking at the baaders next.

Zuben Eigenubi.......Likewise, BST`s will be checked out. Im surprised with my "Super" 25mm compared to what I have on the celestron (thats in the way now ?) Its definately a better lens, but we all know, there is always better, and at a cost too. I was impressed looking at the Moon with the celestron, I saw relief that Ive never seen before, so cant wait to get the Skyliner on target(Bad weather at present) Having the 5mm is just so that I have one. Ive read some reviews, and it seems 12-15mm is as High a power as I would need?

Ronin...... Yeah 8mm comes in at about £70+ My reasons for the TV Plossl`s are they still seem to be regarded as the Gold Standard of lenses, and it normally takes some achievments to attain rewards like that, however technology and quality is always improving. I`m liking the reviews on the Explore Scientific series lenses. Wide views/Good relief ect. I wear Glasses for fishing, shooting, driving, just makes things a little sharper for me, but most of the day, no glasses are worn. As for prices, maybe another £20 at a push?

Ohmless....point taken.

John........SW SWA` look very good. Its between SW and ES at present. Oh decisions, decisions.Like andyboy1970 mentions above about personality 1000 lenses all produced to the same standard and given to 1000 astronomers, they will all give their own feelings and impressions, because everyone is different to how they approach their reasoning. And you`d still be hard pressed to make a decision, from the mix of answers received. If only things were just straight forward.

bingevader.......Yeah! maybe 240X using the 5mm is pushing it a bit, unless conditions are perfect. It will also reduce the total cost of the lenses if I ommitted that lense totally. I`ll play with my "Super" 10 a little more to see what its offering for the Moon and other celestrial bodies, once Ive tried some real darksky viewing.

Back to studying. take care all.

[Charic]

My choice of 5,15,32 was to fit around the 10 and 25 to give a fine rage of EP`s. simply to say to myself. Full Set. 5mm........ should have read.........My choice of 5,15,32 was to fit around the 10 and 25 to give a fine range of EP`s. simply to say to myself. Full Set. (Must use spell checker next time?Lol)

[TwoPi]

+1 for the WO SPL 6mm in a 200P. 20mm eye relief so very comfortable to use - I really get on well with this EP and it's given me some great views of Jupiter, Saturn & the Moon.

That said, in the eyepiece forum you'll see I am considering getting something around the 5mm mark (i.e. 240x in my scope) for when conditions allow, but if I do (and don't end up with a zoom that covers 6mm) I imagine I will still hang on to my WO 6mm as this has been a real planetary workhorse for me.

Hope this helps.

[cotterless45]

You'll be pushing it with 5mm in the Skyliner, except in excellent seeing. Very often an 8mm flatfield will give good results,

Nick.

[Charic]

Wow! study over for today.

My 1200/203/f5.91 scope is mathematically capable of using lenses of 3mm to 41mm (that’s 29x to 400x magnification) but this is the extremes of performance for this scope, and must be in perfect "dark night" and "seeing" conditions. That said, I’d like to own an eyepiece set of 6,8,10,15,20,24,30mm That would cover all situations. Now that’s a serious amount of money there, but I want my collection asap. I use Nikon primary lenses for my photography, and for the same reason, primary lenses offer more, whereas the zooms are still catching up? However, If my reasons to change the two supplied lenses, are just for better quality eyepieces, then could you manage with a 30mm, 10mm & Barlow x2. That would cover from 40x to 140x magnification, through quality constructed lenses. Thats got to be a better option, as long as the Barlow is of excellent quality with a 3 or more element construction.

What’s your say?

[Charic]

Q. If you divide the telescopes focal length by the aperture, the end result is the Focal Ratio, in my case Skyliner 8" 1200/203.2= 5.90 or f5.9. Now If use a 2x Barlow, which doubles the focal length of the telescope, does this now have the responding result that the focal ratio now becomes 2400/203.2=11.8 or f11 ?

Numbers? The Skyliner is an 8" reflector. The conversion to mm is to multiply by 25.4 which = 203.2 Although the Scopes label says 200mm which equates to an f6 scope.

So does the focal ratio remain static or does it change, cant find info anywhere at the moment.

[Zuben Elgenubi]

Yes, the 2x barlow effectively doubles the focal length to 2400mm and the focal ratio to f11.8 - or f12 if rounded up.

I believe the aperture of the Skyliner is 203mm and presume it is generally referred to as a 200mm scope for the sake of convenience. I may be wrong though.

[Charic]

Zuben Elgenubi.......Cheers, your right on both accounts. I did eventually find something about the focal ratio. I knew the Focal length changed and assumed the focal ratio did too, but just could`nt find the information. So with a barlow, I`ll have a `fast` & `slow` scope with the benefits each has to offer. Three nights of cloud cover, lets hope it clears soon! cant wait to get out, firstly to confirm my collimation with a star test. Now back to lens comparisons.

[TwoPi]

Hi Charic, if you're thinking Barlow then you might also want to consider a focal extender as an alternative. Pros and cons to each, but have a look at Russell's review here of the ES focal extender.

Also you may want to bear in mind that whilst there is logic in your approach, there is also some amount of faff if you think you will be continually inserting and taking out the Barlow or FE whilst also swapping eyepieces.

Funnily enough I'm also going through this debate right now. I want more power for planetary observing and I can't make my mind up whether to get a FE or another eyepiece... decisions, decisions!

[Charic]

TwoPi.......yeah, Its difficult to choose. I`m studying the Explore Scientific ES68 and ES82 series lenses at present, they seem durable, and easy to clean ( my lenses sit in my pockets when outside). I`ll then compare with the Skywatcher SWA`s which also look good too. No matter how few or many lenses we end up with , we`ll still be changing and swapping every few minutes. The SWAs seem to have dual barrel fittings, so that would reduce some changes, especially the wider view models, whereas other brands jump from the 1. 1/4 to 2" barrels.

A zoom would be good, but they have their drawbacks. Ive got rain ahead for at least the next two nights, so more time to study. There will be other lenses to view, but the ES and SWA`s for now. take care.

[Charic]

TwoPi.....A Barlow has cropped up many times today, not in my search to decide on some lenses, but for their use in laser collimation? So might be the best option for increasing the amount of lenses(virtually) and tweaking the scopes optics when required.

[TwoPi]

Hmm, to be honest I've never been a fan of laser collimation, a Cheshire works much better for me!

[AlexB67]

Yes, the 2x barlow effectively doubles the focal length to 2400mm and the focal ratio to f11.8 - or f12 if rounded up.

I believe the aperture of the Skyliner is 203mm and presume it is generally referred to as a 200mm scope for the sake of convenience. I may be wrong though.

God bless thee old imperial units, they should be banned my now. Interesting point mind you, you are right I think, it is 203mm but some other models like revelations IIRC are exactly 200mm, and 250mm for their 10 inch, so make sure when buying that they don't sting you for the extra few mm :0)

Anyway hardly a worthy difference as you say. A bit more naughty, many sellers state the 10 inch sky-watcher skyliner as f/5, at this point it starts becoming a bit more important IMO, when it is in fact f4.7, and don't get me started when they start quoting optical performance like 1/x wave when it is not really. Some vendors can be a bit inaccurate/misleading with little details.

FLO has it right, but all in all, no wonder the hubble mirror turned out the way it did and the scope is now up for sale there. :0)

[TwoPi]

FLO has it right, but all in all, no wonder the hubble mirror turned out the way it did and the scope is now up for sale there. :0)

[Avocette]

Interesting point mind you, you are right I think, it is 203mm but some other models like revelations IIRC are exactly 200mm, and 250mm for their 10 inch, so make sure when buying that they don't sting you for the extra few mm :0)

Anyway hardly a worthy difference as you say. A bit more naughty, many sellers state the 10 inch sky-watcher skyliner as f/5, at this point it starts becoming a bit more important IMO, when it is in fact f4.7

A propos of nothing - I recently measured the mirror of a Skyliner 250px, quoted on the manufacturers printed label as 254mm, and found it was 256mm maximum and 255mm minimum diameter. I was doing this to check that the 'doughnut/paper reinforcing ring' really was in the centre. In fact the ring was distorted, the inner circle (hole) and outer circle had centres about 1mm different from each other. And the centrepoint of the mirror was displaced from the centre of either the hole or the outer ring by a further 1mm. All a bit annoying since the definitive article by Niels Olof carlin 'Collimation with a Barlowed Laser' mentions the 'diffraction limited field [in an f4.7 mirror of] only 2mm across!' (his exclamation mark).

By the way Charic, have you read the article 'Eyepieces - the very least you need' by Warthog, pinned at the top of the 'Getting Started General Help and Advice'?

[Charic]

Avocette.........Over and over again Ive read that article, and still undecided? Ive got visions of  6 / 10 / 12 / 15 / 20 / 25 / 30 & 40mm  all under one brand, smaller sets, Barlowed sets, the list goes on. As I write, Im contemplating on buying just two lenses, an 8mm & 32mm to complement the original skywatcher  MA "Super" 10mm & 25mm lenses. With a 2xBarlow, that would effectively give me 4 / 5 /  8 / 10 / 12.5 / 16 / 25 & 32mm,  pretty much covering the extremes of my scope. If the two newest lenses work out satisfactory, then I`ll replace the skywatcher brand to the  newer Brand. Again,  I cant decide on brands at present, so back to viewing. (ES68, Meade4000, ?Plossle). Take care.

[nerointegrale16v]

ive got a 200p

have 6.5 plossl (£14.99 from the auction site)

7.5mm

standard 10mm

standard 25mm

2"  32mm ostara astro (helping me a lot to navigate around)

next im going to try the TMB planetary eyepieces maybe 5mm or pushing a 4mm

martin

[David55]

I've also got a 200p dob. I have 9.6mm, 12.5mm and 25mm Meade SuperPlossls, a x3 Meade Barlow and the two lenses that came with the scope.

For deep sky observing I use the excellent 32mm wide angle Skywatcher Panaview through which I've found many of the Messier objects. If I need more magnification, I use the 12.5mm SuperPlossl.

For planetary observing I use the 25mm SuperPlossl and a Williams optics 6mm lens for x200 magnification.

I've also found a Rogel QuikFinder invaluable for both kinds of object.