WO 28MM uwan and Skywatcher 28mm Nirvana eyepieces.

[Guest]

Hello.Can anybody tell me if these two eyepieces are the same specifications ,but with different company names on them please.

They are The Williams Optics 28mm UWAN 82 degree field of view and The Skywatcher 28mm Nivana 82 degree.If they do happen to be the same specs,do you think that the quality control would be tha same on both?

Thanks,

Martin.

[crashtestdummy]

Yes same eyepiece with different branding

[John]

I've used both UWAN's and Nirvana's. They are the same apart from the branding. Very nice eyepieces 

[Guest]

Thanks for that info.I am going to buy a wide field eyepiece.Probably the Nirvana.

[John]

Way back in 2009 I posted a comparison report on the 28mm Nirvana, the 31mm Nagler and the 30mm Pentax XW which might be of interest:

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/53645-3-big-eyepieces/

[Lorne]

Way back in 2009 I posted a comparison report on the 28mm Nirvana, the 31mm Nagler and the 30mm Pentax XW which might be of interest:

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/53645-3-big-eyepieces/

Review read by myself 3 years later and duly acted upon 

[John]

Review read by myself 3 years later and duly acted upon 

No regrets I hope 

If there had been a few more in the range, the UWAN's / Nirvana's would have cleaned up in the ultra wide field market I reckon.

[TractionMan]

Way back in 2009 I posted a comparison report on the 28mm Nirvana, the 31mm Nagler and the 30mm Pentax XW which might be of interest:

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/53645-3-big-eyepieces/

Awesome report there! Very good read as I'm contemplating to purchase the 28mm Nirvana. While my PanaView works (cheapskate panic purchase), I'd like a bit more contrast when searching for those faint fuzzies.

[astronymonkey]

I use the uwan 28mm as my widefield eyepiece andmits a phenomenal eyepiece even at f4.5. At this ratio the exit pupil is pushed beyond 6mm which is a bit big for me but the views are so nice im happy to lose a bit of light. Focus is crisp and clean even at the edges and its my first choice deep sky eyepiece .

the only thing to watch for is the weight as at 1 kilo it can require rebalancing although I manage in my lightbridge with a fixed weight which means it stays balanced with the uwan or without.

On a clear night its only rarely beaten by my t4 naglers which for some reason show sharper diffraction spikes, and are slightly crisper which may be down to better coatings etc but they are pretty close and for some reason the uwan seems to give a nicer, less "stressed" view if that makes any sense .

cheers

[TractionMan]

Found another option/clone that looks just like the Nirvana and WO version but at a better price. Anyone who knows if it is the same?

http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p2757_Astro-Professional-28mm-UWA-82--2--High-Perfomrance-Eyepiece.html

[John]

I reckon it is the same eyepiece. I've seen them also branded as Orion (USA) when they are called the "Megaviews".

[callisto]

Awesome report there! Very good read as I'm contemplating to purchase the 28mm Nirvana. While my PanaView works (cheapskate panic purchase), I'd like a bit more contrast when searching for those faint fuzzies.

Dont knock the PanaViews, there not a bad eyepiece for someone on a tight budget

[TractionMan]

I reckon it is the same eyepiece. I've seen them also branded as Orion (USA) when they are called the "Megaviews".

That can get a bit confusing sometimes. Different brands, same products.

[TractionMan]

Dont knock the PanaViews, there not a bad eyepiece for someone on a tight budget

I don't knock the PanaView. It's a nice EP, but 38mm is a bit too much in a fast scope such as my dob. Really like the wide FOV though.

[John]

That can get a bit confusing sometimes. Different brands, same products.

It is confusing but very common though. In some cases the bodywork has been changed but the optics remain the same which is even more confusing.

The question that is very difficult to answer though is whether the big name brands get better quality or higher spec units whereas the "no name" ones are subject to less QC checks, have lesser quality coatings etc.