250PX Upgrades

[Koje]

Hi peeps, I would like to use your knowledge if I may.

I have just purchased a Skywatcher 250PX Truss tube. This is the first scope I have owned myself although I have used others. I realise it is a fast scope which need quality eye pieces. The standard eye pieces seem to be rated as average at best.

After a lot of reading I plan to upgrade to an 8mm for Planetary and a 24mm Wide view for general observing. (and also flock the scope)

My question is which manufacturer should I consider for these? I don't mind paying for quality (within reason) but I want to get the right kit for the scope. Are their any other must have sizes? What do people with 200P/250PX scopes use?

Thanks

Koje

[Paul73]

Hi Koje

I'm pretty happy with my set up (See signature). The only change that I would make at the moment is swapping the 28mm for a Explore Scientific 82°.

The MaxVision 24mm 68° is a great general purpose eyepiece. It all depends on how much you want to spend....

Paul

[kev100]

Hi Koje,

I've got the solid tube 250PX, and would definitely recommend the 68 degree 24 and 16mm MaxVision EPs. I also use a 9mm Revelation plossl for planetary viewing, and I think it's pretty good (definitely better than the 10mm that came with the scope.

Kev.

[nicks90]

i'd choose less eyepieces and buy a coma corrector. Fixes a multitude of sins that fast scopes create, meaning you can get away with 'cheaper' eyepeices.

i have a Sw 300 dob which is nearly as fast as yours. my 2 main eps are a panaview 32mm and a maxvision 16mm. I could get much better eps, but i am saving for a CC instead. that should tidy up the worst of the abherations, otherwise they are good well corrected eps for not a lot of money.

[Polar Bear]

It depends on how 'fussy' you are and whether you want perfect star shape to the edge of the field (never bothered me) and you will get what you pay for.

I have the solid tube 250px and predominantly use just 2 EP's. A Baader Hyperion zoom 8-24mm and a Panaview 32mm (both in 2" fitting)

Neither are sharp right to the edge but the Baader is superb for not having to change EP's (gives you 50x - 150x mag in the 250px) and for zooming straight in when you find your object.

It is pretty good on planetary (Jupiter at 150x) and is superb on the Moon (you can instantly frame your view) and is proving good for white light Solar imaging and visual with my 66mm ED APO

The Panaview is good with the 250px and gives that little more 'room' at 32mm but do not expect it to be sharp across the whole field (say 70-80%)

Hope this helps

Paul

[bingevader]

Budget?

[Koje]

Thanks for all the input. I don't think I am 'fussy' enough to worry about a comma corrector. If I had tracking and was going to do imagery then sure, especially when I could buy a nice eye piece for the cost of a good corrector.

I had not considered the Baader Hyperion. Would I see much difference at 8mm between the Hyperion and say an 8mm LVW?

Budget wise I know the scope is not ideal for planets so I am happy to pay extra (i.e LVW money) for a 7 to 8mm. Where at 24mm to 32mm I could probably get away with spending less. That's my logic, may be wrong though

[Paul73]

Don't discard the Teleview Delos Range. They work exceptionally well in your scope. My 8mm is lovely.

I haven't tried the LVW's but they will be good if the SLV range is anything to go by. The Delos would give you a noticeably wider FOV which allows you to use it on a wider range of targets. This is important as there is a big gap between the 24mm and the 8mm. I would seriously consider dropping in something in the 14-16mm range.

BomberBaz (Steve) has some of Delos eyepieces on the classified for a very reasonable price at the moment.

Paul

[rwilkey]

Thanks for all the input. I don't think I am 'fussy' enough to worry about a comma corrector. If I had tracking and was going to do imagery then sure, especially when I could buy a nice eye piece for the cost of a good corrector.

I had not considered the Baader Hyperion. Would I see much difference at 8mm between the Hyperion and say an 8mm LVW?

Budget wise I know the scope is not ideal for planets so I am happy to pay extra (i.e LVW money) for a 7 to 8mm. Where at 24mm to 32mm I could probably get away with spending less. That's my logic, may be wrong though

Hi Koje, forget the Baader Hyperions, they do not perform well in fast scopes.  However, the LVW's work very well, but as always with good quality products, this is reflected in their cost.  The Maxvisions are also very good, and at 68 degrees will give you as wide a view as the Hyperions woul have, the recommendations of a 16mm and a 24mm are sound choices in this range.

[Koje]

Teleview Delos look very nice but also very pricey. I think I will go with an LVW 8mm. I may try and get a 24mm, 32mm and 16mm (in that order) second hand. I guess I need to get posting as I cannot see the classifieds so there must be a minimum post count.....

Thanks for the help.

[John]

Teleview Delos look very nice but also very pricey. I think I will go with an LVW 8mm. I may try and get a 24mm, 32mm and 16mm (in that order) second hand. I guess I need to get posting as I cannot see the classifieds so there must be a minimum post count.....

Thanks for the help.

You need 50 posts plus a months membership to access the classifieds section but meanwhile the UK Astro Buy & Sell website is worth keeping an eye on:

http://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/

On the eyepieces, the LVW's are great but don't crop up much on the used market as they tend to get overlooked in favour of the Delos and Pentax XW's.

The Vixen SLV's are really good and less expensive but have a "standard" 50 degree field of view rather than the 65 degrees of the LVW's. The Explore Scientific 68 degree eyepieces get good feedback and are less expensive than the Pentax, Tele Vue and Vixen equivalents. 

[nicks90]

Budget wise I know the scope is not ideal for planets so I am happy to pay extra (i.e LVW money) for a 7 to 8mm. Where at 24mm to 32mm I could probably get away with spending less. That's my logic, may be wrong though

Firstly your scope will be killer on planets! 1200mm focal length and big aperture is wonderful for some great detail at higher powers. 10" of light grasp will ALWAYS show more detail than a small frac! It might not have the overal contrast of a mega bucks refractor, but it does gather more light, meaning you get the same 'brightness' at a larger image scale enabling you to see more detail. If you do want more contast, you can always make an 'aperture mask'. Search on here for info, but i found it made no real difference other than making jupiter dimmer.

unfortunately you have the cost for eyepiece selection the wrong way round!

Low power eps show much more nasties than a high power ep - or at least you dont notice it as much.

My 9mm cheapy plossl with 50deg field of view works mega in my F5 12" dob, even the rubbish 6mm kelner i got free off a mate works ok. But the 32mm panaview gets messy towards the edges. The lower the mag and wider the field of view, the harder it is to make the view great. I;m sure someone on here will tell you the technical reasons why, but for the life of me I cant remember the techy reason.

[John]

......My 9mm cheapy plossl with 50deg field of view works mega in my F5 12" dob, even the rubbish 6mm kelner i got free off a mate works ok. But the 32mm panaview gets messy towards the edges. The lower the mag and wider the field of view, the harder it is to make the view great. I;m sure someone on here will tell you the technical reasons why, but for the life of me I cant remember the techy reason.

Most eyepieces look pretty good on axis, ie: in the central area of the field of view. With faster scopes the scope and eyepiece abberrations get more severe as you move away from the optical axis. Coma from the newtonian system increases as does astigmatism which tends to be present in lower cost wide field eyepieces. Often you get a nice mix of the two issues in the outer parts of the field of view which makes diagnosis tricky.

I guess if all we had were plossls and orthos, coma correctors would not sell so well to visual observers !

[Dude_with_the_tube]

i had a 250PX for relatively long while and tried a bunch of different eye pieces.As soon as you dont go mega wide (100 deg) coma corrector should not be on your buying list. I understand paying premium price aka top shelf eye pieces is out of question,then i would strongly suggest to have a look at: 24mm MaxVision 68 degree,this EP will work perfectly fine in your scope.If you can afford a bit more,then 24mm Ex Sc 82degree will be a cracking buy.Alternatively time to time a nice Televue Nagler in 22mm pops up used but expect also tp pay around 200+ for it.For your high powers in 6-8mm range once again go for the Ex Sc 82 degree 6.7mm or 8.8mm versions.They are about 100quid a pop .Obviously Delos and Pentax XW are crackers but if you cant afford 170-190 for second hand then Ex Sc will do the job perfectly.

I am only suggestin gyou the 82 degree range because your scope is manual and with that FOV it will be much easier for you to keep the object in view as with an EP with 50 degree FOV.

Also think of eyepieces as a long time investment.Scopes will come and go,but a good eye piece could sometimes be a challange to find for a good price,especially if you are after something different or special.Same like in photography,body of the apparatus can be bought separately and sometimes also cheap (nit literally) however,the lens is the most costly part of it

Clear skies and good luck with whatever you go for and enjoy it.

p.S. a direct alternative to Ex Sc range is Meade 5000 series UWA`s. same price,same optics only different body.

[MattJenko]

I have the solid tube 250px and have a variety of different EPs now. The Hyperion Zoom is my least favourite in the scope. It is much happier doing visual in my slower refractor. It is not terrible, just noticeably worse than my other EPs with a curiously huge different focal point than my other eyepieces.

I also have the MaxVision 28mm (2" EP) and it is lovely, much nicer than the 24mm shrunken dim view the Zoom gives at its lowest power and much wider and significantly crisper than the stock EP. I also have a second hand 10mm TeleVue Radian, which is great for mid/high power, and when this is good, it is really good. I actual spend most of my time with the MV 28, and drop to the TV 10 when power is needed. I have recently added a 6mm SLV for those planet/moon/excellent seeing views to get to my highest power without barlows, and the limited time I have had with this suggests it was a very good decision. I am a glasses wearer when observing so my choices are long eye relief choices, so I have discounted many very good EPs.

[Polar Bear]

Thanks for all the input. I don't think I am 'fussy' enough to worry about a comma corrector. If I had tracking and was going to do imagery then sure, especially when I could buy a nice eye piece for the cost of a good corrector.

 

I had not considered the Baader Hyperion. Would I see much difference at 8mm between the Hyperion and say an 8mm LVW?

 

Budget wise I know the scope is not ideal for planets so I am happy to pay extra (i.e LVW money) for a 7 to 8mm. Where at 24mm to 32mm I could probably get away with spending less. That's my logic, may be wrong though

The scope at 1200mm is good for planetary, an 8mm EP will give you 150x. What is not so good is the standard dob mount at such high magnification as it was not really designed for this and is the reason I have my 250 mounted on a Skytee. You do not need to spend LVW money (unless you want to) to get good planetary views with the 250px. I use a simple Celestron Japan 7mm Orthoscopic when the viewing permits. A good Orthoscopic can be had for £50-£70 new and much less secondhand.

The Panaview 32mm at £79.00 is good value for wide field.

[John]

The scope at 1200mm is good for planetary, an 8mm EP will give you 150x. What is not so good is the standard dob mount at such high magnification as it was not really designed for this and is the reason I have my 250 mounted on a Skytee. You do not need to spend LVW money (unless you want to) to get good planetary views with the 250px. I use a simple Celestron Japan 7mm Orthoscopic when the viewing permits. A good Orthoscopic can be had for £50-£70 new and much less secondhand.

The Panaview 32mm at £79.00 is good value for wide field.

Thats interesting. I find the traditional dob mount outstanding at high powers. I regularly use my 12" dob at 265x, 318x and even 400x and the mount is very steady and the damp down time of any vibrations that do occur is very rapid. John Dobson came up with a really amazing design I reckon

[Koje]

All good food for thought.

I'm swinging towards ES 8.8mm and 24mm 82deg, they sound like the best performance/cost mix.  

Also the 32mm SW Panaview looks a good option.

Once my wallet has recovered I will look at a 14mm and a 28mm probably second hand.

[AndyWB]

I use a 250px, and my eyepiece range is:

BST Starguiders - to be honest, the 5, 8 12, and 15mm would be enough. I found them far better than the eyepieces that came with the scope. Yes, I'm sure there are better eyepieces, but I had these from my first scope, and they're still good bang-per-buck.

Vixen SLV - 6mm - I got this to give me x200 for planetary. x240 was too much fairly often, and x150 too little. It might not have the same field of view, but it's a lovely eyepiece. I used it for a fantastic view of Jupiter on Friday.

Vixen NPL - 30mm - Struggles a bit with the speed. Bearable, but out performed by the more expensive…

Maxvision - 28mm - Lovely, wide field. a bargain bit of glass.

I've also tried all the Hyperions apart from the Zoom on my 250px - and they were rubbish. LOTS of coma. I wouldn't recommend them.

[Polar Bear]

Thats interesting. I find the traditional dob mount outstanding at high powers. I regularly use my 12" dob at 265x, 318x and even 400x and the mount is very steady and the damp down time of any vibrations that do occur is very rapid. John Dobson came up with a really amazing design I reckon

I agree that once a target is found there are no issues with a standard Skywatcher dob base. Maybe I have been spoiled with the smoothness of big fork mounts and an unstressed NEQ5. I just did not get on with the dob mount on my 250px even with a bearing fitted to the base and soon went for the Skytee which I find much better. It is a case of whatever suits.

Paul

[John]

I agree that once a target is found there are no issues with a standard Skywatcher dob base. Maybe I have been spoiled with the smoothness of big fork mounts and an unstressed NEQ5. I just did not get on with the dob mount on my 250px even with a bearing fitted to the base and soon went for the Skytee which I find much better. It is a case of whatever suits.

Paul

I agree Paul. You need to try some of these things out before you can decide which is the one that suits you best.

[Koje]

Thanks all for the info. I have so far picked up:

8.8mm Meade 5000 82deg (used)

14mm Meade 5000 82deg (used)

32mm Sky watcher Panaview (new)

Once my wallet (and my wife) has recovered I will try and get Meade 5000 24mm.

Very impressed with the Panaview for the money. Sure you can see the difference with the Meade 5000 lenses but at 32mm it is very nice indeed and I think 70deg is enough.

Question - Is it worth looking into anything less than 8.8mm or even a barlow? I have only had a few hours outside so have not had a chance to view planets yet, will I ever get to use anything less than 8.8mm?

[Paul73]

Yes. 6mm is useful. But I would get something in the 20 to 25mm range first.

Paul

[Bart]

Yes. 6mm is useful. But I would get something in the 20 to 25mm range first.

Paul

I'd agree. A 6mm will be useful on nights of good seeing and when you have become accustomed to nudging

I have a 10" and have used ES 82*, BSTs, Naglers, Maxvisions, ES 100*s and BCOs.

The Naglers and ES 100* are expensive nad good as you'd expect

The ES 82* are mid range cost and excellent also

The BSTs are lower price range but perform really well.

The BCOs are lower/mid range price, have a narrow FOV, but give beautiful views.

If you can get them secondhand, even better

For the 10", i regularly use the MV 24mm 68*, Nagler 11mm (but the ES 11mm 82* was just as good), a Pentax XF 8.5mm and a BCO 6mm.

I've recently bought the BCO 18mm and 10mm secondhand, but only used them in the 16", but I imagine I'll be using them in the 10" frequently

Good luck,

By the way, your wife will NOT recover from the spending expedition you are about to embark on - Har Har

Barry

[Andy78]

Spot on AndyWB for the BST range. Ive only got the 15mm so far in my case but its mt moat used ep. Im certainly going to buy the others aswell as a 32mm Panaview for my scope.