Jump to content

Carl Zeiss 2x Abbe barlow magnification setups!!!

denis0007dl

By denis0007dl
in Discussions - Eyepieces

Recommended Posts

denis0007dl

denis0007dl

Posted
Posted

Here you can see how looks like simplest and most effective Zeiss barlow setups to achieve magnifications from 2.2x, 3.2x, and 4x, with Baader Heavy Duty T2 Quick Changers, and 40mm extension tubes!

It is very easy to operate with these setups, and setup is very strong!

Tottal lenght at 4x is 20cm, and tottal weight at this setup is only 300grams!

4x setup

post-23247-0-23364700-1424178398_thumb.j

3.2x setup

post-23247-0-49642200-1424178458_thumb.j

2.2x setup

post-23247-0-55357900-1424178497_thumb.j

and other picts....

post-23247-0-52147500-1424178529_thumb.j

post-23247-0-59163600-1424178557_thumb.j

post-23247-0-61895800-1424178602_thumb.jpost-23247-0-37579600-1424178632_thumb.j

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 26
  • Created
  • Last Reply
michael.h.f.wilkinson

michael.h.f.wilkinson

Posted
Posted

Interesting. I am looking for a 4x quality Barlow for my new SolarMax-II 60 / ASI174MM combination. It has to be 1.25" compatible and although I prefer a tele-centric solution, this might be worth a look. Given the price, I could also look at the Baader 4x Telecentric. I have a 1.25" -> T2 thread adapter, which would give the right fit. The magnification is correct and it is optimized for H-alpha, unlike the Zeiss Abbe Barlow (which is no doubt, excellent)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
denis0007dl

denis0007dl

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Denis

Nice pictures of different combinations! :smiley:

Have you tested the bombination with Baader VIP barlow?

Thank you! :-)

Approx 1.5 year ago I push Vip barlow little above 3x, and image was not so clean as Zeiss barlow produce, but VIP is great at 2x!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
michael.h.f.wilkinson

michael.h.f.wilkinson

Posted
Posted

I just checked out the price of the Zeiss. Not bad for the type, but the 4x Tele-centric is only a touch more expensive, and when you add the cost of the Baader Quick-changers to the Zeiss, I would think for my application the Baader TZ4 is better. Lacks the flexibility of your neat solution, but I already have 2x, 2.5x, and 3x in my arsenal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
denis0007dl

denis0007dl

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I contacted them couple times about purchase, as well Baader directly, and all told me same: they are long time discounted, and will not be produced anymore.

I would like like everyone I suposse, that they start new production of Zeiss 2x barlow, as well ZAO II or ZAO IIIs!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
denis0007dl

denis0007dl

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Denis,

I think I still prefer the Powermater though as the eye-relief stays the same but I know you like your shorter orthoscopics so the Barlow would be an advantage for you, it is one thing I have never tried out. 

Alan

Thats right Alan, I use Powermates only with binos.

Barlows like Zeiss, TMB and APM beat Powermates in image chrispness, and have more neutral toned image, and you can see that ONLY if you have all mentioned in same time, and do head by head comparation!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted

Thats right Alan, I use Powermates only with binos.

Barlows like Zeiss, TMB and APM beat Powermates in image chrispness, and have more neutral toned image, and you can see that ONLY if you have all mentioned in same time, and do head by head comparation!

If someone is going to be that fussy about image quality, surely they would prefer not to use any such device, whether Powermate or premium barlow, at all ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
denis0007dl

denis0007dl

Posted
  • Author
Posted

If someone is going to be that fussy about image quality, surely they would prefer not to use any such device, whether Powermate or premium barlow, at all ?

Powermates are GREAT, and it is very subtile difference between them and mentioned barlows!

I like both PMs and barlows, but prefeer premium barlows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted

Powermates are GREAT, and it is very subtile difference between them and mentioned barlows!

I like both PMs and barlows, but prefeer premium barlows.

My point was that not using a Powermate or barlow elimiates even the slight chance of introducing any abberrations at all and for the purist would be the way to go ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
denis0007dl

denis0007dl

Posted
  • Author
Posted

My point was that not using a Powermate or barlow elimiates even the slight chance of introducing any abberrations at all and for the purist would be the way to go ?

Thats truth!

Non barlowed eyepieces rules, that is why orthos and monos give best performances, but they do not offer comfort of FOV and eye releaf like for example Deloses, XWs and simillar have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
denis0007dl

denis0007dl

Posted
  • Author
Posted

thats the way i go,no barlows or powermates in my box.Dont even use OCS or any sort of GPC in my binoviewers either. :D

Binoviewers are different story: due nature of each beamsplitter errors, when using eyepieces 10mm and lower in focal lenght, these errors becomes visible.

Thats where GPCs, Powermates barlows and simillar helps solving this problem ;-)

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.