24mm Panoptic and 24mm Meade S5000 SWA

[bingevader]

Brilliant report Alan, thanks for your time.

I have the 82° flavoured 24mm MV.

Yes, it's soft around the edge, but personally (sorry Alan  ) I'm delighted they fell off the back of the Meade lorry as I wouldn't have been able to afford an EP of this size and quality otherwise.

Again, thanks to all who buy the premium EPs that allow for the innovations, that enable the clones and copies, that open up the world of astronomy to plebs like me.

[jkwhinfrey]

It's like my mind's being read! First Alan examines the relative merits of the Panoptic and the MV/Meade. Now it's the 11mm Nagler T6? and the ES82 which I've been weighing up. That's what a call service :-))

And you're quite right Alan. The differences we're discussing certainly aren't worth beating yourself up about. Interesting though.

James

[YKSE]

Nice bit of digging John, I think with the first new launch of the so called 100 degree eyepieces if this is an example of more to come I don't see them lasting too long.

Alan.

There're many discussions in the other forum about Meade, putting some facts together with the hear-sayinsg over there, this is my speculative views what happened:

Meade was in deeper and deeper trouble since late 80s after Televue lauched Naglers and Panoptics under protection of patents, Meade tried to response with 4000 UWA 4000 SWA, where 4000 UWA splitted Nagler doublet to two singlets was a success, no kidneybean effect, but slightly dimmer image, and 4000 SWA was a flop. 1993, Nagler ceased to extend the patent protection for Panoptic as shown here. Sometime later, Meade came out with 5000 SWA, which was almost as good as Pan in edge correction (as your test shown here). That is why I guessed the MV was a Panoptic design here, the optical layout in Meades' link given by Ben there was most likely for 4000 SWA.

As shown in John's link, the merger is a Buy-out, ES spent huge cash to come over Meade's R&D portfolios and good-will of trademark. the launch of Meade XWA was ES attempt to charge extra with Meade branding for the same ES products. The failed sale in XWA made ES realize thtat there was absolutely zero value in Meade branding, therefore the quick sale of trademark Meade. 

It's quite fun to know some facts like the patents, and more fun to put the missing pieces together when it's cloudy ouside.  

[Bart]

Probably the Type 6 if it's a 1.25" format barrel. I have read elsewhere that the ES 82's are very close to the Naglers in performance though.

 You're right John Type 6, 1.25" barrel. I like the eyepiece, but liked the ES just as much visually and a little bit more in use. As i said, I could see no difference in what I was looking at, but there was likely some issues at the edge, but I can't say that i remember them, only that everyone says the Naglers are better.

Sigh......I think I miss that EP.........

anyway, back on topic. Alan is right, the 24mm 68* Meade (or MV) i have is a really nice finder EP in my 10", handy when I want to stick to 1.25" EPs for the evening, nothing ugly there at all.

Barry

[alan potts]

I find it interesting that many of us including me use words like 'I could see no difference' and when we write something at best that is all we can report. I liken it the the well known M45 test from a dark site of how many stars can you see without a scope, most people can see seven hence the name 7 sisters, which I have not heard it called for a while. However some can see 10-12 like myself or as many as 18. I am doing another review on the 16mm version of the the same range from Meade though this time I am not using a Tele-Vue eyepiece to compare it to, this may lead to different conclusions. I do have a 16mm TV but feel the wider field that is shows as not really a direct comparison and are not really comparing apples with apples.

It would be nice to borrow a different pair of younger eyes sometimes just to see if there are differences, as good as mine once were I don't think they are quite up to the same standard these days. Now that would be an interesting report, an a first I would bet.

I will say one thing that comes up straight away, it is much quicker working with only one eyepiece, though I will be doing at least two nights on each target which I always try to get in..

Alan.

[John]

The 7 Sisters is 6 Sisters for me "naked eye" from my back yard. The 7th is hinted at on the best nights but only that !

I'm becoming more aware these days that there are a whole range of issues relating to visual accuity and physical facial shape as well as simple useage preferences that impact how each individual feels about a particular eyepiece.

All we can do is to put "Your mileage may vary, and probably will" on each report I think !

[alan potts]

I know you have always said you have some LP John and I am sure if you were out here you would do better than that. I don't know if it's me but another naked eye tester M31 is never that wonderfull to me from here, though I recall from Hull back in the mid 70's I saw it better some nights.  This was from a very edge of town garden though by no means vural, I think the LP has changed a good deal since then not doing any of us a whole lot of good.

Many a time I have stated on site I am a fair LP free zone though the very recent change to new type lighting in parts of the town means I can now see some, when the snow is down it's like someone has moved Birmingham into it's place.

Going back to eyepieces there is no doubt that some are easier to use than others and I am sure these roles would be reversed with other users in a cross-section of astronomers. The SWA 24mm was very demanding on eye-placement, no so that you could not see anything but viewing at a slight angle induced minor visual annoyances that could have very easily been ticked off at astigmatisum.

Alan

[hgjevans]

I've only ever managed six 'sisters' at best - though to be fair I don't think I've ever consciously tried to count them from what could properly be called a 'dark site'. Here it's about five and a half - by which I mean I sometimes think I can see a sixth, though only when they're really high up. My mother (83 now) remembers them especially from the war years, when even the cities (she was in Aberdeen) were properly dark - at least at times. And she only knows them by the name of the 'Seven Sisters'. I'll have to ask her if she remembers actually seeing them as more than that.

[Stu]

I wouldn't class my eyes as anything special, I wear glasses for short sight, but I do remember spotting 8 on one very clear and still night.

http://stargazerslounge.com/index.php?/topic/200894-The-Eight-Sisters%2E%2E%2E%2E

[bingevader]

With out my gogs they're the Splodge Sisters or the Splodgedes.

With specs, 6 is about as good as they get.

I don't wear my glasses for observing, but would have to say, I've been very lucky so far in not picking an eyepiece I can't get on with.

The 82° MV did take some getting used to on the first session with regard to eye placement.

But I remember the same for the 18mm and the 32mm, maybe it's just the wider field of view!

[hgjevans]

... the Splodge Sisters

Weren't they a Motown group back in the 60s?  

 

... or the Splodgedes.

And they were a punk band - I definitely remember them!

More seriously, my MVs have arrived now (24mm and 16mm), and whilst the 24mm is exactly as expected, I am wondering how someone who needed glasses for observing would get on with the 16mm at all - even without specs I'm having to keep the twist-up eye cup very low to be able to see the field stop. That's just me playing around with them indoors - I've not had a chance to actually try them out for real yet.

[alan potts]

Ben,

Now I found eyeplacement on the 24mm UWA Meade fairly easy, which sort of adds weight to what we are talking about. This must be why the Meade brand ones were over twice the price .

Huw,

Congratulations on the 24mm and 16mm, I am working on the 16mm at the moment, let me know either here or PM how you find it for eye-relief in use at night.

The guy I sold mine on to only kept it a week, he could not get on with the ER, it is not 15mm that is for sure.

Alan

[hgjevans]

I'll certainly get back to you on that, Alan, and I must say I'm looking forward to reading your thoughts about its optical performance. Re. the eye-relief - yes, nowhere near 15mm. The slight worry I have at the moment is that I'm pressing my eye so much to the eye cup in order to see the full field that it might result in visible movement of the scope when I actually get to try it out. We'll see. As long as it's okay on that score I think I'll probably be fine with it - but John's point about the shape of the individual user's face is certainly ringing a bell with me - I can see how many poeple might not be able to get on with it at all.

[bingevader]

It has been a recurring comment regarding the 16mm MV.

They certainly were ridiculously good value for money otherwise.

[AstroJon]

I just want to say thank you for such a fascinating thread.

With regard to M45, when I was growing up I distinctly remember being able to count at least 10 on a good dark night but this was from a reasonably dark semi-rural location. The last really good night I remember was back in September 2013 before I got a telescope, on this occasion from a different reasonably dark semi-rural location M31 was visible as a rather clear and extended with the naked eye.

I also own both the MV 24 and 16mm eyepieces. Although I can't offer anywhere near as much information as has already been discussed I can at least provide my experience of using them with a heritage 130p which I would guess is a relatively fast scope at f5.

The 24mm does indeed display stars as "seagulls" towards the edge and it is rather noticeable, I also notice that eye placement can sometimes be an issue, for example sometimes the entire image seems to disappear (blacks out is the best term I can use) depending on where I look through. I do not find this a distraction though and I do find the contrast to be rather nice and it does provide a nice sharp image otherwise. I can't really remember how much of a "seagull" effect is in the 16mm  but this alone I guess shows that it is not so notiecable, note that I haven't experienced the "blacks out" issue with the 16mm. The 16mm is my favourite eyepiece so far and I haven't really noticed the short eye relief being an issue (I am not a glasses wearer though).

I can't offer a realistic comparison with anything other than the standard 25mm that came with the scope (which I think is actually not that bad at all) and the MVs are far superior. As people have said, for the price they are seriously good value for money.

[alan potts]

Jon,

Yes I am sure I could see more in M45 before. I don't know if it is the eyes not as good as they once were,  for my age they are very good I am told, or the atmosphere is not as clear as it once was. Something I really forgot to put in the review which was getting a bit on the long side at the time was, the amount of aircraft that flew through the FOV when I was looking at the comet. It was 5 in total that went through the view over the nights though more could have been to the sides, I don't think these planes help us very much at all when we are observing but make a trip to the far east a fair bit quicker than by boat.

Alan

[AstroJon]

That is a very good point you raise. Taking a look outside first thing in the morning as the sky is starting to get lighter more often than not shows several aircraft trails stretching across the entire sky. I doubt we notice them looking through an eyepiece at night but it must have some effect as you say.

[alan potts]

I think I live on some sort of flight path for air traffic, can see at least 5 aircraft at any time of day and sometimes even more. They seem as if the controllers move the traffic around the sky a bit as it always seems to be in lanes in one part then later on in another area. It is a ragular early evening viewing to see an Air France Jumbo at 17.15 at this time of year come from the same direction, normally at the same time give of take a little for head wind.  Last night I got a KLM 373 crossing the moon before it was dark but sometimes they have their lights on tail so you can see which airline or they are advertising to high flying birds, can give you quite a shock at magnification.

Alan