Money no object? Which planetary eyepieces for my APO

[A40farinagolf]

My Birthday is rapidly approaching and I've a tough decision to make.

Which eyepieces should I buy for my 905mm F7 130mm APO Triplet for planetary use?

The shortest one I have at the moment is an Axiom 7mm and I have a very good quality 2.5x Barlow.

Please assume that money is no object.

[Charic]

Money no object makes it harder to decide, as there are now, no limits?

I had an unlimited budget, but chose to restrict, and am trully satisfied with what I own at present.

My cheaper than a BST WO 6mm SPL ( second hand from a fine sgl member )makes for a fine Planetary EP, as does my 8mm BST and not forgetting my £9 Plossl. Amazing quality for so little money.

Spending a vast amount is not always essential to get the best results. It all depends on your particular system, and your eyes only. We could both look through the same EP/telescope and still see things differently ? Best of luck in your search and final choice.

[dweller25]

For my 128mm F/8 Apo is use the following for planetary :-

7mm Pentax XW giving x148

6mm Televue Radian giving x173

5mm Pentax XW giving x208

I alo have a Leica 8.9 to 17.8 that when used with a good x2 Barlow matches the performance of the Pentax XW's

[Scott]

Money no object makes it harder to decide, as there are now, no limits?

I had an unlimited budget, but chose to restrict, and am trully satisfied with what I own at present.

My cheaper than a BST WO 6mm SPL ( second hand from a fine sgl member )makes for a fine Planetary EP, as does my 8mm BST and not forgetting my £9 Plossl. Amazing quality for so little money.

Spending a vast amount is not always essential to get the best results. It all depends on your particular system, and your eyes only. We could both look through the same EP/telescope and still see things differently ? Best of luck in your search and final choice.

I'd seriously doubt your £9 plossl could compare with pentax/tv etc. It's great that you are content with your budget ep's but let's be realistic. The emporers new clothes just don't wash with me with regards to quality ep's i'm afraid. I'm talking about the best views when I say this, not the best value for money, which I assume is what the op is after if money is no object

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I would go for a Pentax XW7 and XW5, plus a Vixen SLV6 in between. I would go for the SLV rather than a Delos 6 mm because the SLV is parfocal with the XWs. I find that very handy in planetary work. An SLV 4 would be a nice addition as well.

[Moonshane]

3-6mm Nagler zoom for me. Wonderful eyepiece for high power unless you wear specs.

If only they did a 6-12mm too.

[Dude_with_the_tube]

BST explorers are deffinetly not a "plaster" for every scope lol.Despite them being "bargain" or "bang for the buck" they are still only a budget EP with average performance and will not compliment premium telescope

If you read carefully,instrument has been mentioned as 130mm F7 triplet APO what is a superb instrument,as such,you really want quality eye pieces.

Pentax XW mentioned above will be outstanding in your triplet(5mm and 7mm),dont forget the array of Televue :Delos or Nagler in about same focal length.These would be the premium Ep`s and highly recommended by many users.

Other option if you can get on with orthoscopic tight eye relief would be them too in likes of baader,huetech,fujiyama.

[nightfisher]

I'd seriously doubt your £9 plossl could compare with pentax/tv etc. It's great that you are content with your budget ep's but let's be realistic. The emporers new clothes just don't wash with me with regards to quality ep's i'm afraid. I'm talking about the best views when I say this, not the best value for money, which I assume is what the op is after if money is no object

While a 9mm plossl is a pretty good every day eyepiece.............its just not gonna cut the mustard against premium ep`s, in fact judging by the 15mm Revelation i picked recently i regret buying the 9mm (due any day)

I have never looked through one but i would think a Pentax would be hard to beat

[alan potts]

In my opinion if FOV is not an issue then any of the BGO or Hutech orthoscopics will deliver excellent results and there are a fair few to choose from, 4mm, 5mm 6mm 7mm, 9mm and then 12.5mm.

Going up into the more expensive areas of the eyepieces world that give wider FOV's leads me to recommend either Pentax XW at 5mm or 7mm or any of the TeleVue Delos at 8mm 6mm 4.5mm and 3.5mm, it just depends what magnification you wish to start with. I have almost all of the eyepieces I have mentioned  and there is little between any of them in quality but a good deal in FOV and cost.

Alan

[John]

Money no object ?:

The best:

Zeiss ZAO orthos. If you can find them (big if) they are around £400+ each.

Pentax XO 5mm. Out of production but might be obtainable used for £200-£300.

Very, very, very good:

Baader Genuine Orthos / Astro Hutech Orthos / Fujiyama Orthos: All very good planetary eyepieces (the same optics in my opinion) and around £70-£80 new.

Leica ASPH zoom plus a top quality barlow. The seem to compete with the best, despite being a zoom. With a premium barlow budget around £900 but lots of focal lengths are covered.

Pentax XW's / Tele Vue Delos: Around £250-£270 each. Very comfortable to view through and orthoscopic-like performance.

Vixen SLV's: Baader GO performance but with Pentax XW eye relief and viewing comfort and a bit less field of view. Lots less £'s than Pentax and TV too.

Tele Vue Ethos: The shorter focal lengths make superb planetary eyepieces with massive fields of view which helps a lot if your scope is not on a driven mount. £400-£500 each.

Other good options that I've forgotten about as well !

[nightfisher]

Baader genuine ortho`s are also a very good planetary ep

[ronin]

If money is no object then you buy a selection of the best top end ones keep the one you prefer and sell the ones you do not get along with. :grin:

[Paul73]

Just to clear up any misunderstandings. The BST is great great value for money.

I tested my 8mm Delos against my 8mm BST and the bog standard 10mm plossl.

The Delos won.

With a panetary eyepiece, comfort of viewing is a must. So eye relief so short that viewing is akin to being stabbed in the eye really isn't very usefull for a lot of us. The SLVs do seem to be a good balance and handle flaring very well (possiblly a tad better than the Delos to my untutored eye).

The XWs do seem to get very good writeups...

Paul

[RikM]

I'm a happy Pentax XW owner and have no hesitation in recommending them.

[alan potts]

Paul,

I am really shocked to read that about the BST and the Delos :grin: . I will be giving the Vixen an airing soon against the nearest Delos, they can't be at all bad judging by John's report but all of our eyes see different as he posted the other day and I think there is more in that than many believe.

Alan

[Dannae]

Hi,

The smallest number of elements will give the greatest contrast all things considered (coatings, etc) and the TMB monocentrics with only two air to glass surfaces (the minimum possible) are wonderful with regard to this. They are 30 degree field but this isn't an issue with tracking. The TMB monos are still available in certain longer focal lengths and they come up occasionally second hand.

I used them with my f20 8" mak and it was like hitching a ride on Voyager

I would add to the hype surrounding the Delos range, they are also superb. Not crystal clear like the above but very sharp. Short focal length Pentax XO's are also very nice, if a little on the 'warm' colour side for my eyes.

Regards

Dannae

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Hi,

The smallest number of elements will give the greatest contrast all things considered (coatings, etc) and the TMB monocentrics with only two air to glass surfaces (the minimum possible) are wonderful with regard to this. They are 30 degree field but this isn't an issue with tracking. The TMB monos are still available in certain longer focal lengths and they come up occasionally second hand.

I used them with my f20 8" mak and it was like hitching a ride on Voyager

I would add to the hype surrounding the Delos range, they are also superb. Not crystal clear like the above but very sharp. Short focal length Pentax XO's are also very nice, if a little on the 'warm' colour side for my eyes.

Regards

Dannae

But then monocentrics are hopeless in terms of eye relief, and are totally useless for me (with glasses). They also show strong field curvature in fast scopes (just 50% of the field sharp in F/5 scopes according to some reports). Modern coatings ensure HUGE improvements in transmission, and many top manufacturers have changed their orthoscopics from the traditional Abbe design to designs with more glass-air interfaces than the Abbe design (Zeiss orthoscopic microscope eyepieces generally have 3 groups rather than two, as do the Pentax XO designs). Scatter might increase a minute bit, but control of other aberrations might improve.

Orthoscopics are also hopeless in terms of eye relief for those who need to wear glasses, although 25mm types are OK (but not that much "planetary")

[Charic]

auspom......don't pick on the poor Plossl, what's it done to cause so much grief? yet somehow I knew it would fetch the wrong response after I had written it? and  maybe your right, it doesn't compare in many respects with the brands you compare.

The 2 points I was trying to raise, in reverse order, inferred that if we have the same EP/telescope configuration, the best views are in the eyes of the beholder, rather than just an expensive EP.

My eyes may be getting old, but the results I get, I believe to be very good, and  I see what I want to see, albeit on a small scale, but spending  5 times more on an EP isn't going to drastically change what I already have (in my opinion)

An expensive EP alone does not guarantee the perfect visual result for every individual,otherwise we would all have  the same EP's. The expense should guarantee  build quality, fov, clarity of image, no colour cast,  and any inbuilt correction required for edge to edge sharpness, the list goes on.

The first point, 'money no object' just makes it harder for us to select a decent EP on the grounds that there are so many to choose from. Were used to having budgets?

My next Telescope will probably require premium corrected EPs, from looking at some of the signatures and feedback on SGL? and I already  have three  premium Televues on my shopping list? but these are purely based on the grounds of necessity to correct the  final image on the faster telescope. If all I need is a Paracorr, then is there any need to buy any more EPs if I'm happy with what I already have. YMMV

I do like ronin's suggestion #12 , buy everything until you find what you like? and as Michael.hf has just pointed out, some EP's for some folk are just worthless, to them, regardless, So let your eyes decide what's best.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Please refer back to the OP's question: what to buy if money was no object. I have looked through a great many Plossls, and they are worthy EPs, if rather hopeless in terms of eye relief at the focl lengths needed here, and in fast scopes they tend to lag (as to many orthoscopic design, which suffer from spherical aberration). In the F/7 scope under consideration, they should be quite OK, but if you want to get the ultimate quality to match up to the optical performance of an F/7 APO triplet, you might want to match it up with a different class of glass than a Skywatcher Dob (very capable scope, but optically not in the same league as a 132mm triplet). In a run-of-the-mill Newtonian,  the differences in optical quality between very good EPs such as quality Plossls and BSTs on the one hand, and excellent EPs such as the XWs and might not be as obvious as in a top class apochromatic frac.

[A40farinagolf]

Wow - what a response and thanks for all the advice - Consensus view seems to be either Pentax XW or Delos so that's where I'll start my search for either new or S/H.

As per most astronomers I have a sanction manager somewhere indoors so I'm off to do the washing up to earn some brownie points.

[John]

The only thing I'd add to this thread is that I do believe that excellent eyepieces benefit all scopes. When I had a 200P Skywatcher dob i) it had excellent optics and ii) it seemed to do even better with the Nagler eyepieces I used in it at that time

Now get on with the washing up A40farinagolf !!!

[Qualia]

I think there have been a number of quite excellent replies and arriving to this thread late, I'll just make a quick observation.

Whilst looking at your possible eyepiece options, it is a good plan to arrange the eyepieces not only as to cover a range of focal lengths but also giving consideration to the type of object being viewed.

Regardless of the type of scope and its focal length, while my Orthoscopics are great on the Moon, Sun and planets, I usually much prefer a more comfortable wide field design like the Delos for observing DSOs like nebulae and galaxies, and something like a Panoptic when observing star clusters and rich starfields. Thus, in a very real way having two sets of eyepieces - or more - makes very good sense.

Along this line of thinking, my planetary and lunar eyepieces are Baader Genuine Orthoscopics and Tele Vue Plossls. My white light solar uses Panoptics and Orthos. My extremely limited Wide Field Collection are Delos and Panoptics. To this, I feel that adding to the wide field set always makes good sense, for working at high power with Plossls and Orthos is often hard work and there are occassions when I wished I had more comfortable, higher power wide field pieces.

It's also a good idea to have two general, 'all-purpose' eyepieces for each scope and a x2 Barlow or Powermate. I have found that in the 10" f5 these eyepiece are around 2mm and 2.8mm exit pupil respectively. In the 4" f10 around 2mm and 1.2mm exit pupil and in the 3" f6 around 4mm and 1.5mm.

Needless to say, Rome wasn't built in a day and building a decent eyepiece set should be a pursuit taken with calm and joy over the duration of many enjoyable years. I have been working at mine for quite sometime and still only have a few eyepieces, but who cares

No matter what folk may say, I feel your telescope will perform at poorer levels if not equipped with good eyepieces, but again, you don't need a set of the world's most expensive eyepieces to have great observing experiences. I adore my cute little Orthos and Plossls and they cost me about €50 a piece.

Before buying, then, make some watchful and careful consideration and notes of your observing interests and keep on at SGL to really inform your buying decisions. With that kind of recipe, you will gradually create an ideal eyepiece set suited for your own particular interests and pursuits.

[Scott]

auspom......don't pick on the poor Plossl, what's it done to cause so much grief? yet somehow I knew it would fetch the wrong response after I had written it? and  maybe your right, it doesn't compare in many respects with the brands you compare.

The 2 points I was trying to raise, in reverse order, inferred that if we have the same EP/telescope configuration, the best views are in the eyes of the beholder, rather than just an expensive EP.

My eyes may be getting old, but the results I get, I believe to be very good, and  I see what I want to see, albeit on a small scale, but spending  5 times more on an EP isn't going to drastically change what I already have (in my opinion)

An expensive EP alone does not guarantee the perfect visual result for every individual,otherwise we would all have  the same EP's. The expense should guarantee  build quality, fov, clarity of image, no colour cast,  and any inbuilt correction required for edge to edge sharpness, the list goes on.

The first point, 'money no object' just makes it harder for us to select a decent EP on the grounds that there are so many to choose from. Were used to having budgets?

My next Telescope will probably require premium corrected EPs, from looking at some of the signatures and feedback on SGL? and I already  have three  premium Televues on my shopping list? but these are purely based on the grounds of necessity to correct the  final image on the faster telescope. If all I need is a Paracorr, then is there any need to buy any more EPs if I'm happy with what I already have. YMMV

I do like ronin's suggestion #12 , buy everything until you find what you like? and as Michael.hf has just pointed out, some EP's for some folk are just worthless, to them, regardless, So let your eyes decide what's best.

I'm not picking on plossls... I'm picking on £9 plossls High end manfacturers sell plossls too

[Dude_with_the_tube]

i have to agree,there is absolutely nothing wrong with good old plossl or ortho.Some of the plossls and orthos have actually become ICONIC and demand far more money than a few new modern eye pieces and some are so desirable then have become actually a Collectors item.John mentioned a few of these in his post.

But you cant compare a cheap chinese 9 squid plossl against lets say even a Celestron Silvertop or Televue plossl.And i am all 100% with John here,I also DO believe that a good quality EP will compliment ANY scope,be that a chinese run Dob or a quality triplet and i would rather save up and buy one quality eye piece.At the end,if you dont like it,you can always sell it off with no loss.

[Mr Spock]

My choice would be a 4mm Vixen SLV. I used to have a 4mm NLV which was as crisp as an ortho but had the eye relief to make it comfortable to use. x226 is about right for planets and moon.