A weight on my mind

[Floater]

I am in the process of trying to move forward with/upgrade my eyepieces.

I'm fairly sure the EPs supplied with my scope are 'ordinary' and have been happy with only the 25mm when viewing the moon and Jupiter. The 10mm, and/or use of an inexpensive Barlow, delivered poor results. I know this could be due to poor seeing, etc.

I have a Televue zoom now, bought from Astrobuysell, but have had no chance to use it properly due to pea-soup skies. (The curse of those who buy new equipment, I believe.) Nevertheless, given what I have seen through it, I'm encouraged.

I await, with some excitement, delivery of another purchase from the buy sell site, a Widescan III 2'' 30mm lens. My hope is that I can use it for deep sky observing.

I also have a plan - and you folks will have thought of and, perhaps, tried everything that I can think of - to use a TV Powermate with it for planetary viewing.

However, I know the Powermate comes in at around 1lb+ and though I've not yet got the Widescan EP, I guess it will be substantial.

Will it all be too heavy? Is my plan too simplistic?

All thoughts, pointers and comments will be welcome - despite being almost frazzled already!

[John]

I've owned a Widescan III 30mm and I currently own a Powermate 2" 2x but I've never owned both at the same time !

The Powermate will amplify the 30mm Widescan III fine but the resulting combination will be pretty heavy and bulky. I reckon a dedicated eyepiece would be a better bet to be honest with you.

At F/8 the WIdescan III should be pretty decent but it won't like faster scopes I'm afraid.

[Moonshane]

personally I'd buy a used Televue plossl at £50

to illustrate my point, here's a pic of my 13mm Ethos, 1.6x 2" barlow and paracorr

here's a pic of my 9mm ortho pls paracorr to get the same sort of magnification

[Floater]

Hmmm. As I feared.

It did seem too simple a plan. And I'm already discovering that simple is wot it ain't when it comes to stargazing ...

Nevertheless, glad to hear the Widescan gets a thumbs up, and I have no plans to go to a faster scope.

Thanks John and Moonshane.

The upshot is I'm not heavy at heart ...

[Floater]

Moonshane, double thanks for the pics. The cliche about a picture and a thousand words is more than applicable.

Good of you to take the trouble.

[AlexB67]

personally I'd buy a used Televue plossl at £50

to illustrate my point, here's a pic of my 13mm Ethos, 1.6x 2" barlow and paracorr

here's a pic of my 9mm ortho pls paracorr to get the same sort of magnification

That's one bazooka Shane  . Wouldn't fancy that on the 150 skyliner for balance. 

[John]

If you use a Powermate with a 20mm ES 100 the effect is rather startling too (see below) although to be fair the Widescan III 30mm eyepiece is not quite as big and heavy as either the Ethos 13 or the ES 20 / 100. 

[Floater]

Yes, it's obvious my modest 150 would struggle with such a combination.

I'm humbled by the effort you Lounge gurus put into answering my beginner's queries.

Typing 'thanks' so often makes me think I should perhaps set up a keyboard shortcut ...!

Seriously though, thanks for your time and trouble.

[rwilkey]

Hi Gordon, in my opinion you wouldn't want to Barlow/Powermate a 30mm ep, better to use shorter focal legnths, esp. for planetary.

[alan potts]

I agree with Robin on this, don't powermate a 30mm wide field eyepiece. I tried it just for fun with the 21mm Ethos and needed my passport as I was in Romania.

Alan.

[Floater]

Thanks guys.

You add weight (och, these puns keep coming by themselves!) to the strong advice against trying to 'cheat' a way in.

Have no fear, I've heard loud and clear and won't go down that route.

I'll save my pennies for a shorter F L eyepiece. It would be nice to match up another 2'' Widescan so I'll keep trawling the buy/sell markets.

[John]

Thanks guys.

You add weight (och, these puns keep coming by themselves!) to the strong advice against trying to 'cheat' a way in.

Have no fear, I've heard loud and clear and won't go down that route.

I'll save my pennies for a shorter F L eyepiece. It would be nice to match up another 2'' Widescan so I'll keep trawling the buy/sell markets.

The 30mm Widescan III was the only 2" model made as far as I know. I also owned the 20mm, 16mm and 13mm in the series and they were all 1.25". All were stated as giving 84 degrees apparent field though.

[estwing]

I've got a pic on my iPhone of my 21E in a powermate in a paracorr but can I get the pic on here?,no!

[Mark in Macc]

If you use a Powermate with a 20mm ES 100 the effect is rather startling too (see below) although to be fair the Widescan III 30mm eyepiece is not quite as big and heavy as either the Ethos 13 or the ES 20 / 100.

Startling it may be John, but that ES 20 mm 100 deg Powermate combo looks brilliant.

[Floater]

John, thanks for the heads-up on that. I'll not look for that match I had in my head ...

Stymied at every turn, it seems.

However, my second-hand 30mm Widescan arrived today. It looks beautiful. The sky looks horrible. But forward is the only way to look, no?

Given no chance of a lower FL Widescan match, any suggestions on the 2'' eyepiece front?

The president of my local astronomy club, a lovely guy called Torcuil Torrance, edged me toward the 2'', lower power eyepieces. He tried to persuade me away from the zoom, but I've gone ahead anyhow (headstrong?), but took his lead on the Widescan.

The thing is, this thread started 'cos I was worried about weight; now I'm in another morass!

On the bright side, the sky must get brighter - mustn't it??!?

[rwilkey]

Hi Gordon, there are no 2" examples of ep's in shorter focal lengths (for a reason!), better to stick to 1.25"s, say the Explore Scientific 82 degree series, or the 100's, great ep's, I have the 82's, 14mm and 11mm, both bought on ebay s/h, and they are incredible.

[Floater]

Thanks again, Robin.

However, for your interest, I saw a 2'' 14 mm piece offered as part of a package sell-off on Astrobuy. Or I ought to say it was described as 2''/1.25'' inch and 'about 25 years old'. In fact, I replied to the ad but got no reply. Apparently the EPs had been sold ... But, strangely, the same package is still on offer under a different ad number.

If your curiosity is stirred, it is ad number 77226 in the eyepiece etc. section of Astrobuysell.

Now I have perhaps picked you up wrong - I have only just put on my L plates, after all! - and 14mm may not be included in what you mean by shorter FL or maybe it's the 2''/1.25'' bit that's throwing me.

But whatever, thanks for your reply to my post.

Happy to hear more ...

[John]

Thanks again, Robin.

However, for your interest, I saw a 2'' 14 mm piece offered as part of a package sell-off on Astrobuy. Or I ought to say it was described as 2''/1.25'' inch and 'about 25 years old'. In fact, I replied to the ad but got no reply. Apparently the EPs had been sold ... But, strangely, the same package is still on offer under a different ad number.

If your curiosity is stirred, it is ad number 77226 in the eyepiece etc. section of Astrobuysell.

Now I have perhaps picked you up wrong - I have only just put on my L plates, after all! - and 14mm may not be included in what you mean by shorter FL or maybe it's the 2''/1.25'' bit that's throwing me.

But whatever, thanks for your reply to my post.

Happy to hear more ...

You can get all sorts of eyepieces with a 2" skirt (including the 14mm above) but they are actually 1.25" eyepieces. My 13mm, 8mm and 6mm Ethos eyepieces fall into this category and I use them in a 2" focuser because they are pretty heavy eyepieces.

The Meade 4000 14mm has a hybrid 1.25" / 2" barrel housing 1.25" optics but is a very heavy eyepiece (more than the Widescan III 30mm) so using it in a 2" drawtube makes sense for security. It's a very fine eyepiece by the way - quite a step up from the Widescan in faster scopes.

[Floater]

Thanks, John.

Had kinda guessed that I hadn't understood fully.

But that's another wee step ahead ...

[John]

Thanks, John.

Had kinda guessed that I hadn't understood fully.

But that's another wee step ahead ...

No problem. The world of eyepieces is just as complicated and confusing as the world of scopes, maybe more so in some ways 

[rwilkey]

Thanks again, Robin.

However, for your interest, I saw a 2'' 14 mm piece offered as part of a package sell-off on Astrobuy. Or I ought to say it was described as 2''/1.25'' inch and 'about 25 years old'. In fact, I replied to the ad but got no reply. Apparently the EPs had been sold ... But, strangely, the same package is still on offer under a different ad number.

If your curiosity is stirred, it is ad number 77226 in the eyepiece etc. section of Astrobuysell.

Now I have perhaps picked you up wrong - I have only just put on my L plates, after all! - and 14mm may not be included in what you mean by shorter FL or maybe it's the 2''/1.25'' bit that's throwing me.

But whatever, thanks for your reply to my post.

Happy to hear more ...

Hi Gordon, yes, there are planty of 2/1.25" combinations out there, Baader Hyperion's, Tele Vue etc to name but a couple, I always think these sit better in 2" focusers, however, the field stp on them is at the 1.25" size, ie approx. 27mm as opposed to around 47mm on a 2".  It depends what you want out of them.  In most cases they only have 1.25" filter threads, but with the Baader you can fit a 2" filter or a 1.25" filter.  With the 2" one you just unscrew the 1.25" nose and place the filter in between that and the nose, a bit clever really.  In my opinion, magnified targets such as planets are better viewed with 1.25"s.  But 'your mileage may vary' as they often say in these instances.  Eyepieces I find are always a very personal choice.

[Floater]

Robin,

John and your good self have explained very well where/how I was a bit mixed up.

Eyepieces are, indeed, complicated and, after reading wads and wads of stuff on SGL and elsewhere, your comment about EPs being 'a very personal choice' just about hits the nail on the head.

If only my skies would clear and I could get some viewing done I might have more chance of making that personal choice!!

Best regards.

[rwilkey]

Hi Gordon, eyepieces and their variations is one of the most complex things to understand in astronomy, and on top of that we all have likes and dislikes, dependant on what we want to view.  Before Bill Paolini so comprehensively beat me to publishing a book on eyepieces I was in the middle of trying to explain what was happening in this very important minefield, here is an extract from the introductory page that may be of interest and pretty much sums up my views without me having to re-iterate too much, hope this helps:

What are telescope eyepieces and what do they do, also why do they do what they do, and why are some better than others at what they are supposed to do?

Telescopes don't work without an appropriate eyepiece with which to view with, and this immediately makes the eyepiece a very important part of the construction of the telescope, in fact, it is the other half of a very finely tuned optical system that has been developed over 400 hundred of years.

However, advances in technology over the past 150 years has set the scene for a number of choices that may be made by the amateur astronomer, based on the construction and the quality of the optics themselves.

But what are these choices, and how can the ordinary person in the street (in this case a person new to amateur astronomy) decide on what eyepiece to buy and what performance it is likely to yield?

Astronomers will debate this hotly, and coupled with this there has been a recent plethora in the number of new telescope eyepieces coming to the market, so much so, that the amateur astronomer has been left confused and in a quandary over which is the best eyepiece to buy for their given viewing preferences, and on top of this, will it work well in a given telescope focal length or ratio (f/4 for example).

There is surprisingly, very few writings on telescope eyepieces, and many scattered notes, and anything of any substance may have been written some time ago, or before the present plethora, such as Chris Lord’s classic ‘Evolution of the Astronomical Eyepiece’ of 1996. However, in the last ten or so years, competition in the market place, and the increased demand by both amateur and professional astronomers alike, coupled with the optical manufacturing base moving from Japan to China, where labour is very much cheaper, has meant that good quality eyepieces can now be acquired by the amateur astronomer as well as the professional.  Not, of course, forgetting the manufacturing base in the United States, where prices remain reasonable compared to those of the UK.

At the end of the day, amateur astronomers will say the choice of an eyepiece is a very personal choice, made according to viewing preferences, and this is largely true, but how do you make that choice in the first place, and how do you know which is the right eyepiece for you and your telescope?

EDIT: Please note that this is a personal view

[Floater]

Robin, that seems to be a faultless appraisal of what faces a newcomer to stargazing and the huge amount of products on the market, as well as the seemingly unending advice, debate and discussion about what's best for this purpose and that situation.

Your input on the subject has been, and is, most welcome. In my now-ended career (as a journalist) a large part of what I did involved attempting to condense or even crystallise what others had written. Thank goodness my tasks never included trying to produce something definitive on astronomical eyepieces!

At present I am at peace with the idea that I will have to make up my own mind, based on where the hobby takes me and, of course, my budget. Your list of eyepieces is little short of awesome but I'm sure that your collection was amassed over a substantial timeframe.

As I wrote before, roll on clear skies! For without building up experience in viewing I'm stuck on 'pause' for the time being ...

As aye, best regards.

[estwing]

there we go not very good piccy