X-Cel LX Barlow or two more eyepieces?

[greglloyd]

I've currently got the 25mm and 7mm X-Cel LX eyepieces for my 200p. I was looking to get a mid power (around 100x to 133x) and a high power option (preferably around 240x to 300x).

I'm aware that over 200x is difficult with our climate but I frequently get good enough conditions to get very good sharp detailed views at 171x and feel that with Mars and Jupiter I could probably push the power up more to see that detail even better.

I'm also looking a power around 100x to 120x to get closer views of DSO's because at 171x I get great views of M3, M13, M82 for example - but with objects like M51 I find that the galactic disk is dimmed a little too much. For example I could see hints of spiral structure last night at 48x (25mm) but lost that almost completely at 171x. I'm thinking that 100 to 120x would be the ideal.

So my options are to either go for the X-Cel LX 12mm (for 100x), 9mm for (133x) for the mid power and X-Cel LX 5mm (for 240x).

Or, I could go for the X-Cel LX 2X Barlow to bump my 25mm up to 120x and the 7mm to 342x.

I'm wondering which the best option would be. 342x seems a little too high maybe for our seeing conditions. Though maybe useful on steady nights. Also, since I haven't used a barlow in years I'm not sure whether modern barlows affect image brightness and quality as much these days??

What's your thoughts? Two dedicated eyepieces or the barlow which will work out cheaper?

[greglloyd]

p.s. That's 12mm OR 9mm - not both!

[ronin]

I prefer individual eyepieces, so my choice would be the eyepieces.

Hopefully someone with the X-Cel barlow will come along to give an idea of it's quality/performance, it is one I have not heard much about, but the eyepiece are rated well.

Half my reason against a barlow is just having more bits to swap and move around.

[greglloyd]

That's been my approach in the past. With my last scope I had 4 X-Cel LX eyepieces giving the mags I needed.

I sold off that lot when I got out of the hobby for a while.

I'm curious about the Barlow but probably will end up going for individual eyepieces to keep the number of glass elements down to preserve brightness and contrast

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[Joe G]

I believe most guys want to know how much magnification their scopes / eyes can handle when viewing ,say planets & the moon. I also believe by reading in these forums most have or would like to try a barlow if only to see what all the fuss is about. Now would be the best time to find out with Jupitor, Mars & Saturn visilble in the night skies. So fwiw my advise is to go for a 5mm & a 2x barlow ( preferably one which allows the endpiece to be removed to also provide x1.6 approx)

The barlow can also be used with your 25mm to give good mid range viewing & 3.5-4.5mm with your 7mm

Later you can get, say a 12mm to compare directly with your barlowed 25mm & get you down to 8mm & 6mm respectively. That & a Telrad would not be dangerous money to make the best of the real nice scope you have. Hope this helps

[russ.will]

I'm not generally a fan of Barlows, etc, but having tried a few (including the "legendary" TAL 2x Barlow) I now have two that in planetary terms (ie, something in the center of the FOV) I find hard to tell apart.

The absolute bargain is the GSO/Revelation Astro 1.25" 3-element 2.5x Barlow because it is £35 or less. I was considering the X-Cel Barlow when a member from these very parts pointed me at the GSO and they weren't wrong. Don't worry about the 2.5x bit, because magnification (as with 2x barlows) tends to vary a bit depending upon where the optical center of the EP actually is and so 2.25x is probably more like it. No, the point is it is fully multi-coated, with a blackened interior and edge blackened lenses. With central subjects and apart from the increase in eye relief, it was every bit as good as my ES Focal Extender and excellent in terms of light scatter - bright subjects just out of view, if anything, are slightly harder to detect than with the ES FE.

Which brings me to FEs. Focal Extenders (such as the ES, Meade or TV Powermates) are four element designs that deliver pretty much exactly their quoted magnification and no increase in eye relief. Like a Barlow, they double the telescope's focal ratio (rather than halve the EP focal length) which gives the EP an easier ride. The difference between my ES FE and the GSO is really how much crisper the image stays as the planet drifts toward the edge of FOV. In the ES it's pretty much pin sharp all the way to the point where the EP starts to fail, whereas the GSO starts to loose it a bit in the outer 25% of FOV.

In other words, the extra money on the ES delivers pretty much exactly the same experience as using an EP of half the focal length. The GSO is close, but keep the object closer to the center and hover a bit further back from it. Another way of looking at it is that I personally think the ES is a bit better, but if the bottom fell out of my financial world, I flog the ES and be happy to live with the GSO.

Why have I got both? Depending upon the scope, one pushes the focal point out (GSO) whilst the other pushes it in (ES) which can be beneficial depending upon the scope and whether you want to attach a camera to it for a laugh, or want more ER from your EP.

My ES FE, incidentally, landed from Hands On Optics in the USA for a shade over £87 including import duty, VAT and handling. I rambled on about it here and John had it for a while and said (IIRC) it gave up little, if anything to his Powermate. I'll let him comment further, if he so wishes.

Russell

[Astro Imp]

I've been considering the X-Cel Barlow for some time as I'm very pleased with the eyepieces I have but feel that the extended ER would be more than I would want. In view of this I will probably add to the eyepiece collection.

[paddy1977]

Hi lads, im considering getting one or two of the X-Cel LX eyepieces, are they good? Just after getting my first scope a Celestron 130SLT, i got it second hand with the Celestron eyepiece kit included, from review's ive read online these eyepiece's in the kit could be better (althought i thought Saturn looked great) i just want to get the most from the scope and the X-Cel LX pieces look reasonably priced with some good reviews, any imput would be apprecited, thanks!

[bingevader]

My experiences with the 200p. Although a bargain 2nd hand, I only really use the 5mm on the moon and even then I usually use a barlow with the 8mm or 7mm more often. So I suppose that's one vote for the barlow!

The 12mm and a barlow would give you the magic 200x which when conditions are good is lovely on Jupiter.

Are you after a full set?  Or would you consider alternatives? 2nd hand 11mm TV plossl would be very nice and I don't know what the 12mm WO SPL is like, but the 6mm is lovely and I actually find it a little brighter than my 7mm X-Cel LX.

And just to make matters worse!  On DSOs, I find 14mm to be very good indeed in this 'scope. Still the brightness with out the fuzziness.