Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

100 deg EPs to glass wearers?

YKSE

By YKSE
in Discussions - Eyepieces

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 114
  • Created
  • Last Reply
John

John

Posted
Posted

If history shows us another thing, it's that you won't change the minds of TV owners that quick, if at all! :grin:

Russell

I've been a great fan of Tele Vue eyepieces over many years but when I've come across something better I've been happy to switch my loyalties. Thus far though the Pentax XW is the only such example that I have come across, and they cost a little more than the Tele Vue equivilents.

The Leica ASPH zoom could be another but I've not used one as yet and they cost around £650 although you do get a number of focal lengths covered for that investment. The Docter 12.5mm is another candidate but it's more expensive than the 13mm Ethos.

There are a number of eyepieces that come very close to Tele Vue performance for a lot less money which is good progress. What has been missing, so far at least, from my experience, is something that is fully as good, to my eye, as the Tele Vue equivilent AND costs less.

If Meade or anyone else can achieve this then they will have my full attention :smiley:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
russ.will

russ.will

Posted
Posted

Let's see if there any good at F3.9 ;)

Is a TV without a coma corrector? ;)

Jesting aside, it's that old nugget of the horse for your particular course. Is a Porsche Cayenne better than a Range Rover Vogue because it's faster on a road, when I live on a farm? No it's not, but it is half the price and I actually live on an F5 road....

My point was that regardless of the status quo, in the near future we WILL have EPs that offer all of the best qualities available now, for less. It may be TV that shifts the Paradigm, but statistically it's more likely to be the Chinese.

Mind you, that is where TV manufacture, so the future could be a blend of my nebulous predictions.....

Russell

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted

That poor chap on CN with the new MWA has the weight of the astro world on his shoulders!

Yes, I feel for him. Really though it takes some time to sort out the qualities and quirks of a new optical product. His scope is an F/10 SCT so it's not going to really challenge the eyepiece much either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted

Well someone's had a bash with one on CN....

Yes, the feedback so far is patchy but some issues seem to be indicated that warrant more thorough testing.

One is being sold on Astromart after just a single use which seems a little odd  :undecided:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alan potts

alan potts

Posted
Posted

I htink John hit the nail on the head with the mention of a SC scope at F10. I have owned 18 Meade Series 5000 eyepieces which is all but 2 of them. The two I have never had are the 40mm S Plossl and the 18mm UWA. Just by way of adding to the list I have the 40mm SP in the case belonging to a friend of mine.

I have just been putting two other Meade's the 24mm and 16mm SWA through the mill in the LX and with the past history I have with these and the very recent I have to say they work very well at F10. For me though there are  issues once we start to speed up, not serious ones at F 5.26 but issues nonetheless, I would like to have a good look through these in my new scope when it comes, F4.3 should find them out.

I firmly believe the new 100 degree Meade's will deliver at F 10, a lot faster though should be interesting as I feel most of this type of eyepiece are aimed at being the property of Dobsonian owners and as I said before there can't be too many F10 Dobsonians.

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites
YKSE

YKSE

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Looks like both CN:ers who bought the 21mm MWA had got rid of it. I think Meade has a VERY serious situation, they need to come up really good explanations about how the the EPs can be out of the specification so widely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bomberbaz

bomberbaz

Posted
Posted

Looks like both CN:ers who bought the 21mm MWA had got rid of it. I think Meade has a VERY serious situation, they need to come up really good explanations about how the the EPs can be out of the specification so widely.

Can you elaborate on why they got rid please? ( provide link if needed). If the fov isn't has wide, what are estimates of it, do the suffer any type of visual irregularities etc, like to know the full issue please
Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted

I think the post in that CN thread suggesting that Meade should have marketed these as 85-90 degree eyepieces with quite generous eye relief makes a lot of sense. If they perform well in faster scopes they would have occupied a unique niche then. Maybe Meade need to withdraw them, re-brand and re-launch them ?

Makes you wonder how well the new Meade management understand the astro market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
YKSE

YKSE

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Disappointing for sure, but I guess we should have known :(

Things that sound too good to be true.........and all that.

Yes, absolutely.

When the eye lens diameter was measured only 30mm in that OP's first post, something is not quite right about AFOV and ER, if we assume ER is 17mm as estimated in the above thread, using the same formular mentioned above here(afla is AFOV)

D/2=ER*tan(alfa/2)

we get

tan(alfa/2)=D/2/ER

or

alfa=2*arctan(D/2/ER)=2*arctan(30/2/17)=2*arctan(15/17)=2*arctan(0,882)=2*41.4=83 deg.

it agrees better with estimated AFOV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alan potts

alan potts

Posted
Posted

As I said either in this thread or another very recently, Meades Marketing department write cheques the optical engineers can't cash. I have seen this with the company I worked for, wonderful marketing but not always the full story. It is not that long back that their new mount was withdrawn or they had many problems with it, changed the model number I believe.

The other thing I have found with Meade is they are well overpriced, all these glossy catalogues have to be paid for, I am not saying they don't have them but I can never recall seeing Tele-vue and Pentax doing the same, all the money goes into the optics and QA not the hype. What I did find interesting is just how many of the fellow astronomers smelt a rat on this one, they clearly have more brains than i have.

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bomberbaz

bomberbaz

Posted
Posted

Quite - who on earth suggested that ??? :rolleyes2:

Think I mentioned there might be a lot of interest from spectacle wearers in the MWA if they lived up to the hype, which clearly they are not doing so. I also mentioned there might be a few cashing in on the Ethos in favour of these. I didn't use the term "flood" though !

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted

Think I mentioned there might be a lot of interest from spectacle wearers in the MWA if they lived up to the hype, which clearly they are not doing so. I also mentioned there might be a few cashing in on the Ethos in favour of these. I didn't use the term "flood" though !

I used the term I think but it was slightly "tongue in cheek" :smiley:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
russ.will

russ.will

Posted
Posted

It's a shame, but it's also weird.

Still, it's a bit early to damn them on the say so of one user who's squinted between clouds on a couple of nights and another who's only looked at a wall. In that same thread someone pointed out that a 90deg aFOV, with Nagler T4 ER and EOFB no worse than most of what's out there is still an interesting EP at the price it costs. When you're looking through it, it hardly matters waht the marketing man says if it ticks all of your boxes.

Russell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • 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.