3 quality EPs for Heritage 130P

[blackbody]

Hi from Stockholm everyone! I am new here. After many years of astronomy interest I finally bought a small scope, a Heritage 130P (650mm, 5.1", f/5)

 

I would like your opinions as am about to invest in some EPs. The mandatory beginners thread? :-) As this is my first scope I don’t have any EPs or barlow except the std 10 and 25mm. However I find it more than likely that I will upgrade or get a second scope, maybe a bigger Dob, in a few years.

 

I am aiming for only 3, to keep it simple, to cover all from planets/lunar, DSO and max FoV. 

The focal lengths I am thinking of are:

High x130-x160, exit pupil 1mm = 4-5mm 

Med x60-x65, exit pupil 2mm = 10-11mm

Low x26-x30, exit pupil 5mm = 22-25mm

 

When searching candidates I have been looking for wide (68º+) AFoV, viewing comfort and not too short eye relief. After doing some research I have come down to this selection:

High: Explore Scientific 82º 4,7mm   x138, 0.59º, 0.94     (mag, TFoV, exit pupil)

Med: Explore Scientific 82º 11mm     x59,   1.4º,   2.2

Low: MaxVision 68º 24mm                x27,   2.5º,   4.8

 

Does this make sense? Can I spend my money wiser?

Will I miss to much by restricting to only 3 EPs? 

Would they be disproportionate with this small Dob? Balance issues?

Any recommendations?

 

Thanks!

Göran

[rory]

I had a 24mm and 16mm maxvision pair . Along with a bresser telextender . I found those two e /ps combined with the Barlow gave me 24/16/12/8mm combinations . These were used with a f/6 200mm Newtonian .

[John]

I've merged your two threads and left a link to this thread in the original section you posted it in 

[AlexB67]

Hi Göran,

I have this scope, I have the 20mm and it weighs quite a bit, the 24mm is quite a bit heavier again. I think it will be okay, though you may have to rebalance the scope on the dovetail a little. I had my concerns when I first got the 20mm in the post and noted how heavy it was, but it is no bother at all for the Heritage.  That said, the 20mm is 266 g versus 386 g of the 24mm. Perhaps others can comment that got some heavy eyepieces for this scope.  I am not sure I'd want to go very heavy though. Not that it helps  a lot in that I can't tell if it would be too much or not, but just to be aware of it if you have not considered it before.  If you are used to the stock MAs that weigh like a feather, the Maxvision eyepieces are hefty things.  Perhaps you could experiment and put some weights on the scope beforehand and see how you feel about it.

[Naemeth]

I wouldn't stick that much weight on that focuser myself, I stuck to around 160g - around the weight of TeleVue plossls which work very well for the scope.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I personally like the 24mm MaxVision, which (apart from being on of my favourite solar EPs) works well in our kids mini-Dob, and the focuser of that scope handled the 380g weight well.

[happy-kat]

I have the maxvision 16mm and the GSO 32mm the later considerably lighter then a mv24mm and same FOV i think.

Also have williams optics 6mm but not tried it yet

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

The GSO 32 has the same true FOV as the MaxVision 24mm, but the latter does give a darker background due to the smaller exit pupil. Also, if you use wider field EPs for shorter focal lengths, teh 50 deg apparent FOV of a  Plossl can seem restricted.

[blackbody]

Thanks for the input everyone!
 

I understand the Maxvision is a well regarded EP, but a bit heavy for the H130P. I have only read reviews, threads and numbers and really have no hands on experience with the EPs on my list.

What do you think in general about MV 68º and ES 82º with this scope, is it overkill? Would a BST or X-Cel LX be just as good, but with smaller AFoV? 

[YKSE]

Hej Göran!

My recommendation is to go with MV and ES, as members have mini-dob mentioned no issue with the weight. These EPs will be great ones too when you get your second scope.

If you do your observing mostly at home and live in central (or northern) part of the city, you might consider to get the 6.7mm ES instead of the 4.7mm, since in heavier light-poluted cities, 4.7mm will be seldom used (maybe just splitting doubles or looking at the Saturn).

[happy-kat]

I like the views in my maxvision 16mm 1.25 in my heritage 130p. If i barlow it I have to drop the truss slightly.

[AlexB67]

The reason the weight is more of an issue potentially compared to some of the other mini dobs is that the 130p is  flextube design, not solid, and only has two trusses, it is quite long extended with focal length 650mm, this may affect collimation a bit if it flexes a bit too much as well as upset balance. 

That said, as much as the 130p may look a bit like weak like a toy scope, it is remarkably solid ( looks deceive ). For the 20mm all I did was just tightened the tension knob slightly and I was good to go. I did not even have to move it on the dovetail. I think it will probably be okay with the 24mm, when I put my 260gr 20mm MV on it it is not as if I feel it couldn't take some more, but hopefully we will get an answer from someone who has loaded up the 130p a bit more with some hefty eyepieces around the 400 g range so Goran knows for sure and can buy in peace   

[AlexB67]

I am stupid not to think of it earlier.  Seeing I just received a pentax eyepiece today ( mainly for use in the bigger Dob ) but no doubt I will try it in the 130p, I just noticed it weighs 380 grams apparently.

Goran, I can test my pentax eyepiece for you later on today, that weighs about the same as the 24mm Maxvision, I'll let you know how that works out

[Schorhr]

Hllo Göran,

usually I am not a big fan of zoom eyepieces, especially if the field of view gets narrow at one side, but check out the Astrozoom kits and modified HR Planetary (for example 4mm/5mm @ 58º afov), or check for other zoom solutions with larger avof.

http://vangestel.de/astrozoom/produkte/zoomkulare

http://vangestel.de/astrozoom/produkte

or contact in english; http://vangestel.de/astrozoom/kontakt

 

Keep in mind the eyepieces you mentioned are rather expensive, and those three eyepieces you mention allready buy you a new 8" dobsonian with enough left for one or two simple wide angle eyepieces ;-)

 

If this is going to be your main telescope, I'd go for 4mm to view the planets. I even use the HR Planetary with 3,2 and 2,5mm (the latter was so cheap it was no question if I should get it or not).

But with 4mm you should be on the safe side regarding mirror quality (which varies).

A 32mm Plössl may be a budget solution that gives a larger exit pupil (when the sky is dark enough this can be an advantage even though the field is a bit narrow, 52 degree afov)

If you use similar heavy eyepieces you can adjust the balance a bit, I even use it with my DS camera...

HR Planetary (45€ shipped) and the 66 Degree wide angle (30-40€ shipped, cheaper in china) are another solution that works well on the little telescope (though the HR Planetary work better at f/5 regarding field sharpness).

[bingevader]

If your ultimate intention is to upgrade to a larger dob, then it is wise to consider your options now. 

However, if you are likely to keep the heritage, then it might be worth buying some cheaper, but good quality EPs now for that and waiting and seeing what you end up with.

The Vixen plossls and the BSTs (or the 16 and 24 MVs) would be very good for this and at a reasonable price.

As well as the weight issue which I'm sure your fellow Heritage owners on SGL will be able to answer (some have several 'scopes and large EPs they'll be able to try as AlexB67 has already suggested) the 4.8mm in a large focal length dob will give a great deal of magnification.

The MV 16, 24 and a barlow also seem a popular option.

Cheers

[alan potts]

Welcome on board, Blackbody.

I have had the Meade versions of two you are thinking of and I cannot see a great deal wrong with that selection as the 11mm from ExSc is reaconed to be the pick of the crop.

Alan

[AlexB67]

Good news on the weight Göran, I just put my pentax in the Heritage and it eats the 380 grams for breakfast, no bother at all, at this rate I'll be trying to rest an elephant on it  .  It was more than not just putting in the eyepiece, including actual observing at various angles for about 40 minutes.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Hej Göran!

My recommendation is to go with MV and ES, as members have mini-dob mentioned no issue with the weight. These EPs will be great ones too when you get your second scope.

If you do your observing mostly at home and live in central (or northern) part of the city, you might consider to get the 6.7mm ES instead of the 4.7mm, since in heavier light-poluted cities, 4.7mm will be seldom used (maybe just splitting doubles or looking at the Saturn).

At the small exit pupil of a 4.7mm EP, LP will not be a problem (in fact, the 6.7mm will suffer more). On planets LP is not a problem either, due to their high surface brightness.

[YKSE]

At the small exit pupil of a 4.7mm EP, LP will not be a problem (in fact, the 6.7mm will suffer more).

Can you explain it in more detail?

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Can you explain it in more detail?

If a source has high surface brightness the background caused by light pollution is largely irrelevant, because the object has more than enough contrast. High magnification also helps, by reducing the background brightness. The same effect occurs when you replace a 32 mm Plössl (exit pupil 6.4 mm in this scope) with a 24 mm SWA (exit pupil 4.8 mm at same true FOV). The same number of background photons is spread out over a larger apparent FOV, making the background darker.

[happy-kat]

Thought to add my barlow and maxvision 16mm would not focus on juipiter i could not get enought out focus the focuser almost fell out. I must have used the barlow with my 25mm stock eyepeice in my little 70mm mak

[Schorhr]

You could add en extension tube or try if you can lock the ep into place without inserting it all the way into the barlow (though this will lso increase the brlow's effect a bit).

[blackbody]

Thanks Alex for the effort with testing! Good news, keeping my options open, and... thats a nice breakfast.

Bingevader, I definitely see the point in getting something cheaper (and lighter), and then Vixen and BST would be high on the list. Suppose I would not upgrade to a bigger Dob but wanted to get 90% out of the 130P, would it still be no point in buying ES/MV?

In combination with the 130P, just considering optical quality, how much better would ES/MV be vs. Vixel Plössls/BST? x2 better? Or would it even be hard to distinguish the difference?

YKSE, Yes I live pretty close to Stockholm center, heavily light polluted, but will be observing from darker sites as well.

[Schorhr]

The best eyepiece in a small telescope will show less then a large telescope with a simple eyepiece.

The HR Planetary or BST perform very well on the little f/5 telescope, it's the best bang for the buck. And roughly 60 degree aparrent field of view is plenty in most cases.

The cheaper 66 degree eyepieces won't show a sharp outer field but still perform well given the price.

It is almost impossible to say a 12mm BST is X% better then a 12mm Plössl.

The view comfort, better coating, more apparent field of view and outer sharpness and contrast may increase the subjective performance in the range of 1-10% perhaps.

No doubt, a great wide angle eyepiece will blow you away, but it does not show two times more.

Good luck choosing some eyepices!

[YKSE]

I agree with Marcus about his assessment.

I've not had ES or Vixen NLV, can't say anything about them. My HR planetary EPs work quite well on my first scope 130P (F5), with just very little astigmatism in the outer 10-15% field, and good viewing comfort as I wear glasses. BSTs are about the same quality, maybe just a tiny little more astigmatism in the edge, and you will notice the difference between a MV and a HR or BST, because the contrast is higher in MV, stars are tighter in the edge, and wider FOV enhance the viewing too. I can't though give a percentage about how much better it is.