2" vs 1.25" Eyepieces

[Wikiastro]

I've recently upgraded to a skywatcher 150p and I'm dead chuffed with it!  (Especially now that some of the guys down at Wakefield and District Astronomical Society helped me out with the really wonky collimation that it came with).

It comes with a combination 1.25/2" focusser and, never having used one, was wondering if there are any advantages to the 2" format?  Was lurking on here last night and discovered astroboot with its many bargains and was thinking about expanding my ep collection.

Dave

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

2" EPs show a bigger chunk of the sky. That is really the only difference.

[ronin]

They are really for wide angle views and they are big. 1.25" to 2" sounds a fairly small step, it isn't. If you have a dobsonian it will need a rebalance of some sort.

You say the people at Wakefield and District Astronomical Society helped...

A simple question how many of them had a 2" eyepiece and used it in preference to the 1.25".

I  am guessing very few or none.

If none that could be an indication to their usefulness.

Now I have one, a 20mm.

In the 8 years of having it I can honestly say it has never been used.

I am puzzled by them as they often seem to have a similar field of view to a 1.25" eyepiece.

Get one and try, it will keep you happy.

One other factor is if you have one then the swap eyepieces means taking out the 2" putting in the 1.25 adaptor then the 1.25 eyepiece.

[CodnorPaul]

I have a 2" EP and use it quite often - find the wider views useful when viewing larger objects and multiple objects in 1 FOV (M81 and M82 for example).  Now my main other EP is a Baader Hyperion Zoom so I use a 2" nose on that also, and that means I can use 2" filters.  But swapping an adapter in takes 2 seconds and is a lot quicker than changing filters over between EPs.

My advice - get to an observing session with Wakefield and District Astronomical Society, I assume the have them regularly, and ask to try one.  And yes, they are a LOT bigger!

[lonebod]

I am heading down the same route as CondnorPaul. In the process of choosing by low power 2" wide angle ep now.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[triton1]

I too have two a 28 and 22 and use them a lot mainly for d.s.o,M81,M82 and the Leo triplet easily fit in the same fov.

[RichM63]

I use my 32mm 2" WA all the time. I first bought it for the 150P and was blown away by the wide field views of a dark sky. Which is why I bought it in the first place.

But they are grenade big, however a pleasure to use, and you can almost cast a glance towards it to see something.

Downside, I can get lost in the immersion experience.

However, don't get mezmerized by over hype, 1.25" EPs are great and are popular for very good reason.

[lonebod]

As a general rule, 24mm and above seem to be 2". I think something arroud 20 to 30mm for your scope with a 68° or above fov would be good for you whether it's a 1.25 or 2" EP.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[lonebod]

When I say 24 or above seems to be 2", it more that's what a lot of people see to have in a 2".....

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[John]

2" eyepieces are not all huge and heavyweight. The photo below shows my Baader Hyperion Zoom (with it's 2" barrel fitted) next to a recently acquired Baader Hyperion Aspheric 31mm 2" eyepiece. As well as being little larger than a 1.25" Baader Hyperion the 31mm weighs just a little bit more than the zoom but there is not much in it. The 31mm Hyperion Aspheric delivers an apparent field of view of 72 degrees which means it shows nearly 60% more sky than a 1.25" eyepiece of around that focal length can show.

[Wikiastro]

Thanks for all the advice folks.  I didn't realise this would have such strong opinions.  So, basically, the bigger 2" eyepieces tend to give a bigger FOV.  Makes sense to me.