Zoom Eyepiece question

[adder001]

Hi Folks

I have been looking to upgrade/increase my eyepiece collection. I currently just have the standard 10mm and 25mm eyepieces that came with my Orion Starmax 90mm Mak-Cass both of which are very good and a 2 x Barlow.

I was thinking of maybe a 15mm and maybe a 7mm so my range would be:-

The focal length of my scope is 1200

so with the two new lenses my complete range would be

48, 80, 96, 120, 160, 170, 240 and 340 x magnification.

First question would the 340 be too much for my 90mm scope and second I have been looking at maybe getting a zoom lens rather than using lots of different lenses.

(I am mainly interested in planetary observing)

This was something that I saw

https://www.harrisontelescopes.co.uk/acatalog/SkyWatcher_7-21mm_Zoom_Eyepiece_1.25_.html#SID=239

Has anyone had any experience of one of these or is there anything better preferably around this sort of price range(maybe could push to a bit more).

Thanks in advance

 

[Highburymark]

Both of your top magnifications (340 and 240x) will be too much for your telescope - even the 7mm eyepiece giving 170x will only be useful for the moon and nights of excellent seeing for planetary. If I were buying another fixed length EP, I would go for something around 16-17mm, which would give a maximum of 8mm when barlowed and a nice spread of options. But I think the zoom is a better choice. It's a pretty decent and well priced ocular that will give you a lot of flexibility.

[Highburymark]

PS - have a read through of the "expensive disappointment" thread on this forum from yesterday - there's a lot of advice there that would apply to you - good luck and enjoy whatever eyepiece(s) you decide on

[adder001]

Thanks for your replies, it is as I suspected with the top magnification

[John]

On the zoom selection, the 7-21 budget ones are quite a bit worse in quality than the 8-24 ones. I've owned a couple of the 8-24's (a Celestron and a Skywatcher but both the same unit) and they were better than I expected. I've tried one 7-21 and it was poor by comparison.

 

[Highburymark]

54 minutes ago, John said:

On the zoom selection, the 7-21 budget ones are quite a bit worse in quality than the 8-24 ones. I've owned a couple of the 8-24's (a Celestron and a Skywatcher but both the same unit) and they were better than I expected. I've tried one 7-21 and it was poor by comparison.

 

Realise I didn't read the original post closely enough - I was actually basing my comments on the 8-24 - i haven't experienced the 7-21. Had an interesting night's stargazing last month at dark sky site in Oxfordshire comparing six different zooms, and the Skywatcher 8-24 impressed in F10 SCT. Only negatives were edges were blurry and FOV limited, but for the money it is great value. 

[N3ptune]

My beginner opinion,

People here told me to get fixed focal length eyepieces instead of a zoom, and I did not really believe them a few weeks ago. Someone also told me the Zoom is a great tool for educational purpose, to learn the various magnifications, this was also true. It's a great for experimentation to compare 18mm against 10 mm against 8mm etc.

BUT soon after, I started to use a 28mm, 2 inches wide field of view eyepiece against my 24mm zoom with the narrow 40° field of view.

--> It did not took long before I became disappointed with the zoom, especially @ 24mm 40° AFOV setting. (24 - 25 mm is an important size for me to enjoy)

The bottom line was this (For me)

-24mm with uninteresting AFOV but sharp quality.
-8mm with interesting AFOV but blurry quality.
-Utilization of Barlow 2x was barely possible from +-12mm to 8mm settings. (Actually impossible for me with my Celestron 24 - 8)
- This zoom was quite interesting especially between 18mm to 12mm

I don't know about the skywatcher one, but It might cover you suggested 15mm and even give you 18mm.

The thing has limitations but it's a great educational tool. (: I would now take a fixed focal length eyepiece to watch the planets with at least 60° AFOV.

[Ken82]

Well i must say although im not a visual person my baader zoom is my favorite eyepiece. I appreciate its pricey in comparison but brilliant 

[Dave In Vermont]

If a FOV with stars being close to sharp across it is important, the Vixen LV 8 - 24mm zoom EP is a cut above the others - excluding the Baader Mark III Hyperion - due to Vixen's use of a Lanthanum-glass lens element. Though they look identical to others, such as the Seben 8 - 24mm, they are better. Unfortunately the price of these has gone way up. $199.00US over here in Podunk last I checked. The Baader is better - yes - but doesn't really qualify as a 'grab & go' due to it's large size. For a 'take-with' zoom, I carry the Vixen.

An amusing historical footnote: Some years back TeleVue offered a 8 - 24mm zoom EP. And charged rather more money than the others out there. And the TV one looked identical to the then-cheap Vixen. As it turned out, it WAS the Vixen - just re-branded at the factory as a TeleVue with different coloured markings. Someone blew the whistle on this situation. In their defence, TeleVue admitted it was true. They were getting them from the same place as Vixen. But TV went on to say that they only took the best one's from each batch. That story did not appease their would-be customers.

TeleVue withdrew their 8 - 24mm zoom from the market. I've heard this story never made the rounds in the UK or Europa, but it sure did in the US.

Go skydiving on the Moon? Get a zoom!

Dave

 

[Roy Challen]

I have the Vixen 8-24 zoom and can definitely recommend it although I read that QC can vary. I got a good one it seems.

[Paul73]

I have a Baader 8-24mm zoom and find it very good when you consider that it is just one eyepiece. I was surprised at how good it was. Together with a 28mm, it is my travel eyepiece collection (with the matched barlow).

N3ptune's comments sum up the limitations of most zooms (incl this one). So I wouldn't recommend it as an alternative to the fixed focal length eyepieces.

Paul

[Highburymark]

Of course it all depends on funds. Baader will provide a lifetime of quality viewing. But as an introduction to zoom astronomy, the Skywatcher is just £52 - half the price of a premium plossl.

[Dave In Vermont]

The Baader is a great piece of glass! But the inexpensive 8 - 24mm zooms seem to be surprisingly good as well. Much less money than the Vixen or Baader, they are all competent for what they do. Just stay away from the 7 - 21mm range zooms - they seem to get more complaints than praise. And by their optical nature, the 8 - 24mm zooms have a rather narrow FOV in their upper-range of 24mm.

Dave

[adder001]

Firstly thanks for all your replies.

Well I have finally made a decision after what seems like a lifetime of searching the internet for prices, reviews etc. I nearly got the skywatcher but I read a lot of really good reviews about the Meade Series 4000 8 - 24mm Zoom Eyepiece 1.25".

The cheapest I found was at rothervalleyoptics £70.

I have spent a little more than what I wanted to but I thought I might as well get what appears to be the best that I can afford(maybe a tad more).

Just hope that it ends up being worth it.

I will post a report when I get it if the clouds permit (just hope the box isnt full of clouds that get released when opened

Once again thanks for all your advice

 

[adder001]

Well it arrived and I am very pleased with it. Good quality and a nice solid heavy feel to it. Managed to test it on the moon and Jupiter so far and it works very well. The adjustment is very smooth and hardly any refocusing is needed.

I compared the 10 and the 24 settings to the Sirius Plossl eyepieces that came with my telescope and I reckon it is about the same as them. The thing that I prefer however is that the eyepiece is physically bigger which makes for easier viewing even when down at the 8 setting.

I will probably only use this now as I could not really see a difference between my individual lenses and this albeit only tested on two objects.

[BGazing]

Hyperion is really good in slow scope, but, as someone said, treat it as 8-20mm as the 24 mm is too narrow and get something with wider angle as a low powered eyepiece.

Having a zoom is super convenient in my 127 Mak, especially in winter :).