Best eyepieces for Mag 1 Portaball

[osbourne one-nil]

In a couple of weeks' time, I'm going to be the new owner of a Mag 1 Portaball (8" model) and I'm really quite excited. The current owner says the beefiest eyepiece he's used with it is a 6mm Delos, which has a weight of 1lb. Luckily, I've already got one of these so that's good, but at the other end of the scale, does anyone think I can improve on my 24mm Panoptic? Can I get more field of view out of a 1.25" eyepiece? I know a 32mm Plossl will give the same apparent field of view with a lower magnification, but I've never quite understood if there'd be any benefit in that? 

I do have a 15mm Panoptic too (which they don't do any more)  so I'm probably fairly well covered already, unless I should think about a 19mm Panoptic and a 11mm Nagler to fit the gaps?

[John]

If you want to stay with the 1.25" fitting, the 24mm Panoptic or 32mm plossl will be showing you just about as much sky as that format can. The size of the barrel limits the diameter of the field stop you see. If you want more sky then you will need to move to 2" eyepieces but I appreciate that balance can be an issue with the Portaball design. You will be able to fit most deep sky objects within the field of view that a 24mm Panoptic gives you though.

They are reputed to be fantastic scopes with the amazing Carl Zambuto mirrors so congratulations on your forthcoming ownership of one 

[osbourne one-nil]

Thanks - the mirror is only 8 months old too (the current owner's replaced it) so it should be sparkly. 

The scope's got a 1.25" focuser and I don't think I'd be wanting to change it, even if it were possible. I've got my TV85 for that anyway...or my 10" Sumerian which is f4.8 (if I keep it). 

I do, somewhere, have a 32mm Meade series 4000 which was my pride and joy for many years. I'll dig that out and compare the view. 

[alan potts]

I believe the 24mm Panoptic is as good an eyepiece that money can buy. I had one of these and also had the 24mm Meade SWA, some think the ExSc version of this eyepiecec is better. Now I firmly believe that electronic equipment would be required to tell the difference between these two brands and there is nothing to suggest that the ExSc is any better as far as I know, it could even be the other way around.

Based on my tests which I cannot share firsthand due to my Son putting my notes into the wood burning heater, I believe the 24mm Panoptic is a better eyepiece, not so much in an F10 scope but I could recall better edges in the Mak/Newt which is a good deal faster. The other thing is, I have read a good many times words to the effect " I wish I had never sold it ".

I have never seen anything on your forthcoming scope but it sounds as if it is a top line piece of kit, congratulations!!

Alan.