Eyepiece advice

[Glaiden]

I've been thinking a lot recently about buying a wider field ep than I have now (25mm 52° Plossl). I've already found some which looked acceptable, but before final decision I wanted to ask-do you have any experience with wide field low power eps? Can you recommend any to me? And also, what do you think about 32mm PL? Since my funds are a bit limited right now, I'm looking for something cheaper than around 40-50 €. Or maybe I should wait and save? Thanks, any advice is valuable.

[cutepetgroomer]

I am a fan of the wide eps. I only have one currently but I personally wouldn't mind anymore

[Glaiden]

Also, which eyepiece will give better apparent FOV: 40mm 42° PL or 32mm 52° PL?

[ronin]

The 32/40 come out close to identical.

The ratio of change is about 25% in both so it cancels out.

If you wanted then a 25mm BST (the TS NED eyepieces 74€) would give the same FoV as a 30mm Plossl.

I see TS sell the Antares 70 degree eyepiece at 25mm that would give more then either, it is 69€.

As you will have found the wider the FoV the higher the price.

Beyond these it gets plain costly.

One hiccup with plossls is that at 32mm the eye relief can be too much (about 22-23mm), you may find yourself holding your head well away from the actual eyepiece.

[rwilkey]

I would save a bit more if I were you, and perhaps look at the MV's here: http://www.explorescientific.co.uk/en/Maxvision-82-Okular-24mm.html?listtype=search&searchparam=82%C2%B0

[bingevader]

Excuse my confusion, but do you mean a wider field eyepiece or a lower magnification eyepiece? Yes, a 32mm plossl will show you more stars, but that's because it's at a lower magnification. The field of view will remain the same at around 50°.

The 30mm Vixen NPL at £45 gets good reviews.

[triton1]

Maxvision 2 inch 28 mm with 68* fov!great ep sharpe across fov at f5,good contrast and at 95 euro won,t hurt the wallet to much.It,s my most used ep

[cutepetgroomer]

I have a wide field 25mm ep from meade. It's fov is also great as is the eye relief. My meade eps are my favorite ones in terms of fov and eye relief. I have a meade MA 40mm and a meade 25mm. I attached an image of the two to help distinguish the difference the 25mm looks bigger but in terms of power it has a higher power than the 40mm

[The BFJ]

I would wait and save up. I recently acquired a Baader Aspheric 31mm (2in/1.25in) and it gives a great field of view and is fantastically sharp with it. Expensive at around £140 but well worth it for me.

[Charic]

My 25mm BST gives 60° AFOV and the eyerelief feels better than the SW 25mm. It just feels right and is comfortable in use. For wider views I trust my Panaview 32mm 70° AFOV.

[russ.will]

In that scope, and keeping to 1.25" you could do a lot worse (and spend a whole lot more) than the the ridiculous value Maxvision 24mm SWA.

It's a cut above the Baaders and BSTs and pushes the equivalent Televues close. With the exchange rate currently landing one on your doorstep for circa £72, it is a complete no brainer.

Russell

[Paul73]

Like Russell says ^^^^^

Paul

[bomberbaz]

Yeah have to agree with russell that MV performance is very good. However i have an alternative that currently sits in my case. The Skywatcher swa 22mm 70 degree. On a recent side by side with a nagler comparison in an F;4 scope this came out as a dead heat in viewing terms. I got this as i didnt get on with the maxivision (specs wearer) i just found the flat eyecup not to my liking. The sw swa is a much nicer eyecup to me and as i mwntioned above, the performance matches anything else out there at a fraction of the price. On iphone so cant find the link but trust me when i say that its an amazing mid range ep delivering top range performance.

[Astral Enigma]

In that scope, and keeping to 1.25" you could do a lot worse (and spend a whole lot more) than the the ridiculous value Maxvision 24mm SWA.

It's a cut above the Baaders and BSTs and pushes the equivalent Televues close. With the exchange rate currently landing one on your doorstep for circa £72, it is a complete no brainer.

Russell

I'm also thinking about something that will give me a wider apparent FOV - at the moment my widest eyepiece is the one that came with each of my two scopes - the 25mm Celestron Plossl which I guess has a 52deg FOV.

Could you tell me what advantage would this Maxvision give me (if any), and what's the eye relief like - I have found opthalmics quite hard to use for example. Thanks!

[Reeny]

I have the 24mm and 16mm MV eyepieces.

The 24 is big & bulky, and weighs about 200g, eye relief seems to be OK, sometimes requiring the eyecup to be halfway up.

The 16mm is supposed to be shorter on eyerelief - but I never noticed it myself (as a none spectacle wearer).

Some of you will be looking at the 66 degree £30 eyepieces sold under various names - It's the one with the gold band around it.

Please don't bother if you have an 8" dob.

I got the 6mm to test out 200x magnification before getting the Delos, and it just didn't perform at F5.9.

Lovely wide views, excellent eye relief, but I never got the best out of it compared to the Maxvisions and Explore Scientific 82^o

It might be a good eyepiece in some scopes, but not in mine

The 68-degree Maxvision products will be the best place to put your money.

Then start looking at the ES 82's

One good eyepiece will always out perform 2 or 3 bad ones.

[YKSE]

I have the 24mm and 16mm MV eyepieces.

The 24 is big & bulky, and weighs about 200g,

Just a comment on the weights of the MVs, the 24mm weighs 400g on my scale, and 16mm about 160g.

[Astral Enigma]

Just a comment on the weights of the MVs, the 24mm weighs 400g on my scale, and 16mm about 160g.

Odd - 100% variation there in weights!! Just one other point - I think I saw somewhere that it is a 1.25" barrel not 2", but I can't see anything that says anywhere now! Currently I'm only using 1.25" so that would be another set of costs, though perhaps worthwhile. 400g is a lot though, almost equivalent to a can of beans typically!

[Reeny]

My error,

I went off memory and guess work, neither of which was accurate.

It was another Eyepiece which was around 200g.

The Maxvision specifications are here for reference

16mm http://www.explorescientific.co.uk/en/Eyepieces/Maxvision-68-Eyepiece-16mm.html

and the 24mm http://www.explorescientific.co.uk/en/Eyepieces/Maxvision-68-Okular-24mm.html

I got this one to save me using the 2-inch adaptor - it is definitely a one and quarter inch fitting.

68^o at 24mm is the widest you can go before the barrel restricts the field of view.

If you can handle 850g, and have a 2-inch adaptor - this is another one to consider for wide views

Nearly twice the price though.

MaxVision/Meade 24mm 82 degrees http://www.explorescientific.co.uk/en/Eyepieces/Maxvision-82-Okular-24mm.html

[Astral Enigma]

Thanks for the clarification Reeny.  I'm only interested in 1.25 inch barrels at the moment, which I assume these MVs are (though I can't see it stated). I'm a little confused by the reference to them being 'good edge sharpness for f/5' - what does that mean for an f/10 scope (which both on mine are!)? Can anyone clarify that for me?

I'm seriously considering the 16mm one at the moment, as I don't have a prime between my Celestron 25mm EPs that came with the scopes (assume 52deg FOV?) and my 10mm Hyperion - though I do have a zoom that covers that midpoint. 

If I get on okay with that then the I'd consider the 24mm MV  as being an improvement on the Celestron ones that I have - wider FOV, better quality - anyone got any ideas on that? What differences would this give me?

Thanks in advance for anyone's help!

[Ruud]

Some eyepieces work better in slower scopes (f/10) than in faster ones (f/5) because these eyepieces can't handle off-axis rays that well. Generally, if an eyepiece works well at f/5, it will also work well at f/10. An f/10 telescope is "less demanding" than an f/5. A case in point are the expensive Brandon eyepieces. They work great in an f/14 telescope like the Questar for which they seem to be made, but in an f/5 telescope, a Brandon gives a truly disappointing performance.

I have an f/5 and an f/10 telescope. My cheap 20mm Erfle eyepiece is quite good in the f/10 (almost the whole field of view is sharp), and quite bad in my f/5 (the image begins to deteriorate for stars only halfway out to the field's edge). In my f/5, at the very edge of the field of view, the 20mm Erfle is completely useless. The Maxvision 68° eyepieces that I have are all very good at f/5 (and above). I really like their quality. 

Comparing the 20mm Erfle to the 20mm Maxvision is like comparing a transistor radio to a Hi-Fi stereo set. You can hear the news on both, and even enjoy a bit of music, but if you have a discriminating ear you will prefer the Hi-Fi.

Just get the MV 24mm 68°. You'll love it.

[Astral Enigma]

OK thanks. The 16mm MV was ordered this morning... if that seems good then the 24mm may well follow. Though with a CCd/CMOS imager to order too (probably the new Celestron Burst) and a new high-spec PC about to be ordered, I guess I need to draw a line somewhere!! I'd quite fancy a new Pentax K3, too...

[bomberbaz]

Some eyepieces work better in slower scopes (f/10) than in faster ones (f/5) because these eyepieces can't handle off-axis rays that well. Generally, if an eyepiece works well at f/5, it will also work well at f/10. An f/10 telescope is "less demanding" than an f/5. A case in point are the expensive Brandon eyepieces. They work great in an f/14 telescope like the Questar for which they seem to be made, but in an f/5 telescope, a Brandon gives a truly disappointing performanc

A little off the OP's topic but I just had a look at the brandon EP's and they look surprisingly ordinary for a very big price tag. http://www.harrisontelescopes.co.uk/acatalog/Vernonscope-Brandon-12mm-Eyepiece-1.25--Flat-Top.html

[Dude_with_the_tube]

Brandons have a pedigree and are very high quality eye pieces.Brandons are highly thought after in USA (specially the old vintage Ep`s) and not overly common in UK,but i bet a few people do have them stashed up.Considered as very fine planetary eyepiece.Aparently even the thread for filters is different and only brandon filters will fit.

never looked through one myself,have been recommended by quite a few people,but kind of other priorities got in first.For sure i will get one at some point and test fire it.

There are quite a few reviews on brandons,very interesting reading material. 

[bingevader]

A little off the OP's topic but I just had a look at the brandon EP's and they look surprisingly ordinary for a very big price tag. http://www.harrisontelescopes.co.uk/acatalog/Vernonscope-Brandon-12mm-Eyepiece-1.25--Flat-Top.html

Ah, but they conform to military specifications, for when you are out doing your military amateur astronomy. 

The price tag of the MV EPs compared to the similar (if not identical) Meade range has brought them down to the outskirts of the realms of the budget EP, making them ridiculously good value. If they'd been around when I got the 8", I'd have definitely gone for them.

[rwilkey]

OK thanks. The 16mm MV was ordered this morning... if that seems good then the 24mm may well follow. Though with a CCd/CMOS imager to order too (probably the new Celestron Burst) and a new high-spec PC about to be ordered, I guess I need to draw a line somewhere!! I'd quite fancy a new Pentax K3, too...

Astral, note that the 24mm MV is a 2" (50.8mm) barrel.