Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

£1,000+ for an Eyepiece!


DRT

Recommended Posts

I was just looking at Telescope House website for something I could buy with the coins in my pocket and noticed a link to this on the home page:

Explore Scientific 120° Ar purged Eyepiece 9mm @ £1,019.00 - WOW! :eek:

I have read comments here about ES representing good value compared to TeleVue. Can we expect the TeleVue 120° to be £2,000+?

I really, really beat myself up when I pull the trigger on a £200-£300 second hand TV. Is there anyone out there who has spent a grand on an EP?

{and do you want to sell it for £500? :wink: }

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 48
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The UK prices of Explore Scientific eyepieces are quite a bit higher than they can be bought for in other parts of the world. Nevertheless the 120 degree 9mm is still listed at $900 in the USA and there may be additional local taxes to add to that. 

The Nikon Nav HW eyepieces are a similar price:

http://www.apm-telescopes.de/en/eyepieces/more-74-ultra-wide-angle/other/nikon-nav-hw-17-mm-eyepiece-corrector-eic-14.html

I've never spent that much on a single eyepiece. My Ethos 21 is my most expensive but it was bought used from an SGL member for considerably less than these prices !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eyepieces confuse me only one will give the optimum exit pupil for a particular scope so wouldnt it be better to have one eyepiece and lots of scopes of differing focal lengths.

Alan

This makes me think of a new question.

My other passion in life is Vintage Port and fine wine. Yes, I know how to needlessly spend money on things made of glass. Experience has shown me that fine wines benefit from being tasted from expensive glasses. The science or BS behind that is irrelevant to this discussion, but the principle is important.

Eyepieces and Telescopes are to astronomy what wine and wine glasses are to wine tasting. I find no pleasure in tasting a fine wine from a cheap and nasty wine glass. So is there any point in putting a £300 eyepiece in an entry level telescope?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This makes me think of a new question.

Eyepieces and Telescopes are to astronomy what wine and wine glasses are to wine tasting. I find no pleasure in tasting a fine wine from a cheap and nasty wine glass.

So out of interest if you had your eyes shut would you think a fine wine was a cheap and nasty one?

The optics on an entry level scope are not likely to be as good as the expensive eyepiece so you'd do just as well with eyepiece optics to match but the dear one wouldn't make it worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to try to use eyepieces of as good a quality as possible on the basis that they give whatever the scope and conditions a chance to deliver the best they can.

My first proper eyepieces were good quality Vixen orthos followed by Tele Vue plossls. This was back in the 1980's. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So out of interest if you had your eyes shut would you think a fine wine was a cheap and nasty one?

If it was, then yes I think I would. I'm happy to have a separate discussion about the rights and wrongs of smelling coal dust in a fine wine, but I was merely using the analogy to generate a debate about eyepieces and telescopes :wink:

The optics on an entry level scope are not likely to be as good as the expensive eyepiece so you'd do just as well with eyepiece optics to match but the dear one wouldn't make it worse.

I think that's my point. Forgive the pajoritive terms, but a cheap scope will always be a cheap scope regardless of how expensive the glass is at the pointy end.

Another anaolgy would be that there is no point in putting Formula 1 tyres on a Lada :smile:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to try to use eyepieces of as good a quality as possible on the basis that they give whatever the scope and conditions a chance to deliver the best they can.

My first proper eyepieces were good quality Vixen orthos followed by Tele Vue plossls. This was back in the 1980's. 

That's very good logic, John.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess it depends on how much dough you have. I'm sure there's plenty of rich folks with big apos and every Ethos in the list gathering dust somewhere. For me, my Yorkshire and Scottish heritage pose a significant obstacle to paying more for something that I honestly believe it's worth. It would have to be a pretty special eyepiece for me to dig that deep.

Now if you come up with a 1mm 120° eyepiece with 600% transmission and some sort of space alien technology that cancels out the aperture diffraction in my scope - you might just have me interested :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

plenty of rich folks with big apos and every Ethos in the list gathering dust somewhere.......

Yup  plenty of not so rich folk suffering the same.... Good old British summer  :grin: 

LOL - Yup. I guess maybe we should call the hobby "telescope collecting" in the UK :D 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is actually supposed to be an "optimal" glass design for tasting wine (and it varies depending on the wine -- champagne being notably different).  I don't know how much of that optimal design is based on science and how much is just part of the "baggage" that surrounds any hobby or profession, but I know an awful lot of glasses aren't of that design.  So I think there's certainly a basis for being particular in that instance.

Whether that means the glasses have to be expensive or not I couldn't say, but I always found that some glasses are far nicer to handle than others and having a glass that's a pleasant weight and balance in the hand might well assist in setting one's state of mind.

Perhaps it isn't that different from having a really good night's observing when one's kit all works perfectly and everything is "just so" compared with the same night when there are set-up problems and other difficulties that get in the way of concentrating on the entire point of the kit in the first place.

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Astronomy's greatest irony? The most recommended beginner scope: the 8" f/5 Dob!  

Immediately a fairly stern test of eyepieces. Cause (pause) for thought?  :duckie: :duckie: :duckie: ! ;)

Or perhaps simply the demographic turning up at Astronomy Club "beginners meetings"

is not the same as internet astronomy forums - Young, rich, "fit" (physical sense) lol  :p

So much is still *specific need* and (intangible) future commitment?

[iMO] There's a lot to be said for a MAK102 (sic) on GoTo mount.

Of course, it helps if the latter has non-dead batteries too, but... :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

plenty of rich folks with big apos and every Ethos in the list gathering dust somewhere.......

Yup  plenty of not so rich folk suffering the same.... Good old British summer  :grin: 

Good point and very true at the current time :smiley:

You don't have to be wealthy to afford good eyepieces though. I'm certainly not well heeled !. It's taken me 30 years to gradually build up my set buying and selling on the used market, adding a few £'s each time to make a step up, where I feel it's justified.

I certainly can't afford items that don't pull their weight - if I feel something is not delivering it goes ! :smiley:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The non-dob versions of the 200P are f/5 I think.  That's caught me out in the past.  The 200P dob is f/6 and the 200P on an EQ5 is f/5, but I'm not aware there's anything to obviously indicate that.  Perhaps the 200P dob should be a 200PL, similar to the 150 :)

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I regularly use a £250 Pentax XW 10mm in a £40 s/h ST80. The good glass makes the cheap scope sing. I have been very impressed by how much improved it is. I think this is the practical result of John's thinking. I did need to tweak the focuser and sort the collimation but for an hour's tinkering I have a very useful airline portable holiday scope.

I also think the 250PX is not necessarily a good beginners scope. I love mine, but I knew before I bought it that it would require a sizeable investment in eyepieces to get the true benefit. The 200P f/6 Dob works very nicely with midrange eyepieces, I borrowed the Meade version for a couple of months from my astro society and it was quite happy with Revelation Plossls that just didn't make the grade in the 250PX.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Red wine goes particularly well with all scopes and indeed all eyepieces :laugh: I also think a good bottle of plonk aids the solar observing experience.

That is as far as the analogy goes for me :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have to say my 200pl is the f6 dob version that got mated on a eq5 mount. Im quite happy with that given the more relaxed eyepiece requirements.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Derek,
 
I think John started a thread about this eyepiece some weeks back and to be honest the 21mm Ethos which was secondhand at 550 pounds is about as much as I am ever going to go to. I really don't think at 9mm there is a great deal to gained by having the extra 20 degrees, other than being able to say I have got one. I realise TV do not make 9mm F/L in the 100 degrees series but if they say offered either 8mm or 10mm in even wider FOV, I don't think I would be running out to spend. They could well be 1500 plus if this ever does happen but personally I doubt that Mr Nagler would go down this road, it's not like Tele-Vue to copy.

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting topic, I have the f5 200p eq, use it with vixen npl eyepieces. At 40ish quid each I would guess these are low to mid range? Never had any probs with coma or poor edge of field, generally very impressed. I'm not trying to big up my setup. Just wondered what problems I should be on the lookout for and if an upgrade would be of great benefit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting topic, I have the f5 200p eq, use it with vixen npl eyepieces. At 40ish quid each I would guess these are low to mid range? Never had any probs with coma or poor edge of field, generally very impressed. I'm not trying to big up my setup. Just wondered what problems I should be on the lookout for and if an upgrade would be of great benefit?

Vixen NPL's are very nice eyepieces, certainly not low end. You can't always judge eyepiece performance solely in the price. Yes, they are more reasonably priced, but they are optically good, mechanically okay, they are cheap because they have only medium (relatively narrow by modern standards) apparent field of view and quite tight eye relief. When you want good optics plus a wide apparent field and long eyerelief in a very well constructed piece, this is where it gets expensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.