Maxvision eyepieces

[enigma]

I am thinking about getting the Maxvision 1.25" 68° eyepieces (16mm, 20mm, 24mm)  and one of the 2" (probably the 34mm). I do worry a  little about the weight of the 34mm but I am thinking that if I will get a 2" eyepiece it should be something not close to the 24mm. Any reason why any of these eyepieces should be avoided?

[John]

What scope will you be using them with ?. 

[Bart]

I have the 24mm 68* and like if a lot. From other folk here, there haven't been many, if any, bad reviews. Go for it, I'd say

Barry

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I have used a 24mm 68 deg for a while and like it a lot. I have just got a 20 mm for solar work, and for me its eye relief is on the edge of what is usable with glasses, the 16 is definitely not for me (eye-relief wise)

[Pig]

I had the 34mm and it was a very good eyepiece indeed, I eventually replaced it with the 31mm Nagler.   My only criticism of the maxis is there is no rubber eyecup, not that this matters to everyone

[enigma]

What scope will you be using them with ?. 

Probably with all my scopes, but mostly with an 80mm f/5 refractor and 150mm f/5 newtonian.

I have used a 24mm 68 deg for a while and like it a lot. I have just got a 20 mm for solar work, and for me its eye relief is on the edge of what is usable with glasses, the 16 is definitely not for me (eye-relief wise)

I would expect the eye relief of the 16mm to be the same with the 20mm?

[John]

Probably with all my scopes, but mostly with an 80mm f/5 refractor and 150mm f/5 newtonian.

I would expect the eye relief of the 16mm to be the same with the 20mm?

Assuming these are the same as the Meade 5000 SWA range, the 16mm has just 11mm of eye relief which is very tight for those who wear glasses and won't be helped by the flat topped design. Eyepiece ranges don't always have consistent eye relief.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I wonder if these EPs are a "scaled" design (to get a smaller focal length, just scale all lenses down, like Plossl and orthoscopics). In that case the eye relief scales with the focallength (with small deviations due to the degree in which the eye lens is recessed).

[russ.will]

I suspect there's some truth in that.

Presumably that means the leading two elements aren't a negative doublet, which would have made getting two or three focal lengths out of one barrel easier by simply extending the nose piece. On the other hand, they are all remarkably parfocal, which I haven't found to be the case in EPs where a front 'barlow' element pair is the norm.

Russell

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I suspect these EPs have a Erfle/Köhler/Panoptic-like design, which do not have a leading Smyth lens. Looking at the ratios of the eye relief of Meade S5K SWA EPs, I find a fairly consistent eye relief ranging from 0.742 x f  at the short end (f=16mm) to 0.778 at the long (f=40mm). The slight change can be explained by assuming eye relief was measured from the top of the EP, so does not include the (presumably fixed) recess of the eye lens. It does suggest a scaled design (but does not prove it).

[Jules Tohpipi]

I have the 24mm which I'm utterly delighted with.

I also have the 16mm which is not even close to being usable with my glasses on. It's like the FOV has been cut in half. It's contact lenses only with this EP, and even then it's still tight.

But the 24mm is easy, bright and crystal clear.

[itmo]

I have the 24 and 34. They are both good. 34 is veeeeery heavy , but it doesnt seem to unbalance my 12" SW dob. To me it seems that the 24mm MV is a better buy than a baader hyperion. 

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I have used the 20 mm a couple of times now, and the eye relief is just sufficient for me (with glasses). The 16 is clearly off limits for me. Even though the 24 and 20 mm are rather close together f/l wise, they are very nice for solar H-alpha, with the 20 mm giving quite a bit more detail, but the 24 being better at picking out fainter proms.