Wide angle eyepieces in SCT / long focal length scopes

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I think the 1.3° FOV I get was worth the investment, especially because I needed a 2" visual back for my flip mirror. For really wide-field views I also have a separate scope: the 80 mm F/6 APM, which gives over 5° FOV, well over any 8" Dobsonian

[Dunkster]

If you're worried about wide fields of view, a Mak or an SCT is the wrong scope for you  however, small and short focal length refractors make a great companion, so your average finder scope will do a nice job of objects like M45, but you could always go bigger...an ST80 for example is cheap and weighs very little and would mount nicely on top of a C11. Or get a nice pair of binoculars...

The Edge HD features are NOT all about photography, the flatter field and lack of coma make for some beautiful views with whatever eyepieces you choose, and depending on how you store your scope the vents could be useful for cool down. I've not yet found a reason to use the mirror locks though   I use a Pentax XW 40mm with mine with and without the reducer, for about 0.95 (f/10) and 1.35 (f/7) degrees respectively.

None of these are necessarily cheap options, but quality views never are...you just pay your money and make your choice

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

You don't have to restrict yourself to an average finder either

This gives 4.4 deg FOV (maximum). The ST80 gives 3.9 deg maximum with 1.25" EPs. You need to go to 2" for these short refractors to get even wider (5.7 deg for my APM 80mm F/6)

[25585]

On 23 January 2014 at 16:15, John said:

I've read quite a lot of threads over the years about getting the max FoV from an F/10 SCT. By the time focal reducers, 2" diagonals and long focal length eyepieces have been considered I'm often tempted to suggest that it's simpler (maybe less expensive too) to buy a used 8" F/6 dob for £200 or even less to use when a wider field is needed.  

Ideally. But having bits to extend a catadioptric's range of uses, is good from storage, travel, portability POVs. 

Easier focusing is a good advantage to reducers in its own merit. Cheaper than an after market focuser to improve on the OE. All compromises though. 

[John]

8 hours ago, 25585 said:

Ideally. But having bits to extend a catadioptric's range of uses, is good from storage, travel, portability POVs. 

Easier focusing is a good advantage to reducers in its own merit. Cheaper than an after market focuser to improve on the OE. All compromises though. 

I'm flattered that you should trouble to comment on a post I made over 3 1/2 years ago