ES 82deg 24mm or 30mm Opinions

[Fozzie]

Morning all..

I'm considering one of the above, leaning towards the 24mm as my wide field EP..

Hoping to gain some considered opinions, I've read the cloudy night thread on the topic, but it doesn't really give a definitive answer...

Many Thanks

Fozzie

[swamp thing]

With your scope I'd opt for the 24mm.

I use a 20mm 82deg eyepiece and seldom need or use anything bigger in my 10" Dob.

Only a handfull of giant objects need the field of a 30mm 82deg eyepiece. Don't get me wrong it's nice to have one, but I'd get the 24mm first.

[John]

Looking at your current 82 degree eyepieces, I'd be thinking of the 30mm because the step between 18mm and 24mm is not that great in practice with a 1000mm focal length scope. The 30mm is a heavy beast through so you may need to adjust the balance of your scope.

Ha ha - Steve and I take a different line  

[crashtestdummy]

30mm for me,awesome eyepice.I used one with my old 12" and 16" scopes and only got rid because the exit pupil in my 22" project is too large.

[Phil Creed]

Looking at your current 82 degree eyepieces, I'd be thinking of the 30mm because the step between 18mm and 24mm is not that great in practice with a 1000mm focal length scope. The 30mm is a heavy beast through so you may need to adjust the balance of your scope.

+1.  What he said.

I've got the U.S. version of the Explorer 200P (Orion 8" f/4.9) and this is my low-power ocular of choice.  Basically, the same field of view as a set of 25x100s, only with substantially more aperture.  Most folks can handle a 6.1mm exit pupil, too.  Even if your pupils can't quite open that much, it doesn't change the fact you've got about as wide a field of view as you can squeeze out of a 2" focuser.

Clear Skies,

Phil

[Moonshane]

where you observe most, do you see a big difference between the sky background brightness when using your 32mm and 25mm plossls?  this would be a good test to do as the results will be similar with the 24mm / 30mm 82 degree eyepieces ignoring field. if the sky is still pretty dark with the 32mm then I'd say the 230mm but if it's noticably darker with the 25mm I'd say the 24mm.

also, if it's the eyepiece that I think it is, the 30mm is 'comedy big' and very heavy - it is substantially heavier than my 26mm Nagler which is actually the eyepiece I'd recommend if you can stretch to a used one.

[AlexB67]

With your scope I'd opt for the 24mm.

I use a 20mm 82deg eyepiece and seldom need or use anything bigger in my 10" Dob.

Only a handfull of giant objects need the field of a 30mm 82deg eyepiece. Don't get me wrong it's nice to have one, but I'd get the 24mm first.

I have 28mm Maxvision 68 degrees, it is lovely and rarely found I need more in my 10 inch, yes there will be a few exceptions where I might say I want more, but as you say,  on the whole I find it very luxurious as my current lowest power in terms of the FOV it provides    .  Anyway it gives me about 1.6 degree FOV, the only time  I recall recently where I felt give me a bit more  was quite a few weeks ago around the Markarian chain. Two galaxies were just on opposite edges of the FOV on the borderline of fitting in, but I am just taking luxury here and seeing how many I can pack in.

Personally I stopped at 68 degrees ,and this is just my personal preference really as I felt with 82 degree coma would be become a bit of an issue in my f4.7 scope without coma correction. The Explorer being f/5 I think for the  82 degrees would be on a similar sort of borderline in how much of the FOV would be affected compared to the 68 degrees in my scope, so that is probably as far as I would want to go, but that is just my preference for the lowest mag views longer focal length eyepieces in that sort of range.   

For the OP a 68 degree or so would be a bit tidier in the sense that would you want the extra FOV and darker sky versus a lighter background and less FOV to bag the same amount of sky, but in the process have tidier view across the FOV, this will be very much a subjective preference, but perhaps worth mentioning.  Depending on the quality of the sky you observe in, under a poorer skies the larger exit pupil will be less favourable of course, so keeping the exit pupil lower with wider FOV would again be a good attribute to have.

[Fozzie]

Mmmmm divided opinions here...

[Fozzie]

Now I had been thinking about a 68deg over 30mm one...

I think the 25mm TVP gives a darker more contrasty view...

[Moonshane]

with the 25mm TV plossl, you get 1.25 degrees of field. personally, I am happy with this sort of max field in my main scope, especially as more field = (usually) less magnification and therefore bigger exit pupil which with my main scopes being f4 is not a good thing in a light polluted area. any more field than this and I tend to thing about a wider field scope than a wider field eyepiece - e.g. I recently got a 6" f5 and a 130mm f5 to give me some more options. both were cheaper than one new eyepiece of any quality. I am lucky though that I have a case of decent eyepieces already.

I find sometimes that I get 'bored' rather quickly with an ultra wide field and it quickly leads to a higher power eyepiece going in to get a bit closer once I have found the object but even finding the object is sometimes harder when the sky is washed out so hence my choice of 26mm Nagler. all that said, I much prefer the TV plossls and BGOs on the moon and doubles to the Nagler and even Ethos eyepieces but that's maybe just me.

there's no rush, you have a good range of ep's as it is.

[Dude_with_the_tube]

nothing against TV plossls or any other branded plossls,but for low power i do enjoy wide fields of view.But everyone is different.In your set up 24mm 82 deg should do nicely.doesnt necesseraly has to be an ES,there is currently Meade 5000 series 24mm Ep for sale in Classifieds by Allan,cracking EP and bargain price.I have and had both meade and Es and there is no difference in optical performance.

[bingevader]

Don't be divided by the opinions! Get both! 

I also have the 18mm ES 82° EP and love it and don't find the gap between that and my 24mm 82° EP to small (x67 to x50, it'd be x55 to x42 in your 'scope). I invariably start with my 32mm EP and return to it throughout the night. I actually prefer the view through the 82° 24mm to the 25mm TV plossl on some objects. The TV plossl seems to give too much contrast at times. The lights are lighter and the darks darker, but I seem to lose some of the subtle variation that I get through the 82°. Just my 2p.

[Fozzie]

And a welcome 2p at that... I think some times it's how the EP frames an object rather than how much fov you can see, and the subtle differences in the contrast and appearance between the different ep's gives you a chance if hitting a sweet spot...

[russ.will]

Don't forget to have a look at the Maxvision UWA EPs too, as these are simply Meade UWAs with the badge whipped off. Very, very good value considering these are all the same optics. Indeed, the SWAs are so cheap, you can hedge your bets and buy two...

The 24mm SWA has the advanatge of being 1.25", which means less faffing about with SW focuser adaptors in the dark etc.

Russell

[Fozzie]

Here's a question russ.. Does the 24mm 1.25" have any disadvantage over the 2" 24mm which the ES variant is... My 18mm is the 2" so focus adaptor juggling will be a must from there downwards..?

[bingevader]

FOV, the 1.25" is 68°, the 2" is 82°. You can buy a 1.25" to 2" adapter. I don't find the juggling much of an issue really, because for most DSOs it's detail, not magnification I'm after, or I'm wanting to frame the object in question. If I do decide to ramp up the magnification, then I slip on the adapter. I did try looking at M81 and its supernova through a 6mm EP. the SN was brighter, but the galaxy was poor. 

[crashtestdummy]

That's just down to surface brightness as the galaxy is spread out for it's magnitude whereas the supernova is condensed.

[John]

If it's SN2014J then it was in M82 rather than M81. As said above, the SN will appear as a pin point of light whereas the rest of the galaxy is diffused light of varying contrast. You can see fainter point sources than you can diffused ones.