10mm 82/83* EP - Celestron Luminos or Vixen SSW??

[cloudsweeper]

Nearly made a decision, but some comments from owners of these would be much appreciated, please!

The Luminos is a chunky (but not excessive) 340g; the Vixen is 220g.  Nice, but too nice??

Reviews suggest the Vixen has minor issues for the price.

And I have Celestron XCel LX EPs and a Celestron 'scope, so recognise the quality of that name.

Money-wise, the Celestron at about £100 is 50 or 60% cheaper, which suits my budget.

Any comments/experiences most welcome, thanks!

@John - thanks a lot for input already received!

Doug.

 

 

[nightfisher]

Doug, is this new eyepiece to be used with the 127 Mak? if so i wonder if you would benefit from such a wide angle ep, this being the case maybe a different ep but i might be wrong and if so i think i would go with the Luminos

[cloudsweeper]

11 minutes ago, nightfisher said:

Doug, is this new eyepiece to be used with the 127 Mak? if so i wonder if you would benefit from such a wide angle ep, this being the case maybe a different ep but i might be wrong and if so i think i would go with the Luminos

Thanks, Jules.  Yes, with my long f/l, the TFOV would not be that great, but I'm working on the principle that any increase is good, and the wide view through the EP itself would be nice - "immersive" rather than claustrophobic, as they say!

Doug.

[nightfisher]

Here is my thought, the luminos is a pretty good EP and would give a very nice view in the Mak, at some stage in the future you may well end up with a bigger scope and the Luminos would be good for this

[cloudsweeper]

7 minutes ago, nightfisher said:

Here is my thought, the luminos is a pretty good EP and would give a very nice view in the Mak, at some stage in the future you may well end up with a bigger scope and the Luminos would be good for this

Yes - already thinking about an 8SE - even longer f/l - so I'll need all the AFOV I can get!

Good to hear you think the Luminos is a good EP - I'm already watching a new one at a good price on Ebay!

Doug.

[nightfisher]

Have you seen this    http://www.firstlightoptics.com/clearance/celestron-luminos-eyepieces.html

[Chris]

Hi Doug, 

I really rate the Luminos. I had both the 7mm and 15mm at one time and they are the most immersive 82 degree EP I've come across. More immersive than both the Nagler and ES82 which I've also owned. With the ES and Nag's it's like looking through a small port hole, you need to peer around the corner to see the full field of view, but with the Luminos you can see 90% of the field of view without having to press your eye right upto the glass, and 100% of the FOV wihout much effort at all. 

Having said the above, I've heard the 10mm is the weekest in the range as some people report edge of field brightening with these EP's. The 10mm is suppose to be the worse culprit for this. I only saw mild EOFB with mine, no more than some other eyepieces I've tried. I especially liked the 7mm Luminos, It was fantastic in my old frac for planets, really sharp and contrasty, I would definately have another one further down the line. It's a shame there are such big gaps in the Luminos range.

I've tried the Celestron XCel LX, I did a head to head with the BST's and prefered the BST's (less blackouts due to eye positioning plus the BST's some how felt more immersive even though they are both 60 degrees). I think the Luminos would be a step up for sure, just a bit of a caveat regarding the 10mm being the supposed weakest in the range.

I like Vixen kit, and really like their SLV 50 degree EP's. However, I've read one or two reviews of their new range which suggested they weren't worth the money, but they are available at FLO a bit cheaper than they were. I think they were £249 when they first appeared.  

 

[Chris]

The Baader Morpheous would be worth a look! 

[cloudsweeper]

18 minutes ago, nightfisher said:

Have you seen this    http://www.firstlightoptics.com/clearance/celestron-luminos-eyepieces.html

Yes, thanks!  I keep an eye on FLO - SGL sponsors!  £95 is much better than £199/249 for the Vixen!

Doug.

[Ruud]

Ciel et Espace published a comparative review of six 10 mm eyepieces involving a lot of optical bench tests. See here. It is a rare review as it involves mostly objective criteria.

The eyepieces tested are TV Delos, TV Ethos, Pentax XW, Nikon NAV, Takahashi UW and Celestron Luminous. They came in in the order in which they are mentioned here.

Although the Luminous came in last, it performed very well in the field of lateral colour. Only the Delos scored better.

The problem with the Luminous is that it is a mess at f/3.5 and quite bad at f/7. The reviewers remark, however, that the Luminous might perform well in slow telescopes. Based on other sources I've read this is indeed the case.

Your Mak is slow, so if you buy the eyepiece exclusively for that telescope the Luminous is a good choice, especially if the price is right. If however you're after an eyepiece that you might also want to use in a faster scope, like for instance a Dob, the Luminous is not recommended.

[cloudsweeper]

@Chris Lock:

Thanks, Chris - that's very helpful indeed.  I reckon that under £100 for a quality, wide angle item will be well worth it, even if there might be minor "issues".  As you say, all others exhibit some small defects of one sort or another!

Hope the weather improves so I can actually get out, instead of sitting here looking for more ways to spend money!

Thanks again, I appreciate the benefit of your experience!

Doug.

[cloudsweeper]

@Ruud: Thanks!  I have f/11.8, so should be OK.  If I move up to an 8SE, that'll be f/10.  But if I wanted to use an f/6.3 reducer on the 8SE, then from what you say, I might run into problems with image quality - if my embryonic appreciation of these matters is correct!

Doug.

[jetstream]

A lot of people bash the luminos series, and for this reason would not recommend them. I have the 23mm,10mm and 7mm and like them. Re sale will be poor, so I would look at ES 82.

[Chris]

I bought mine all second hand for about £70 pounds a piece, and sold them for about the same. The guy I sold them to really liked them, and put up wanted ads for the remaining 10mm, 23mm, and 31mm  

Just to give you one example of re-sale. 

[Daniel-K]

Id definitely consider the ES 11mm 82 far better than the luminos. 

I had set of the Axioms which are better than the luminos. They just never felt crisp enough for me.

I switched to ES and never regretted it for a moment.

[Chris]

42 minutes ago, Daniel-K said:

Id definitely consider the ES 11mm 82 far better than the luminos. 

I had set of the Axioms which are better than the luminos. They just never felt crisp enough for me.

I switched to ES and never regretted it for a moment.

What f/ratio scope was this with Dan? I found the Luminos pretty crisp in my old CED100 f/9 refractor, especially the 7mm on the planets, that was very good. 

I agree that the ES82's will be much sharper down at say f/5, but dont you find the little porthole effect with the 82 degree range a bit annoying? With the ES100's it's much better, but they are 2" EP's that wont fit the OP scope.

The ES68's a great but only go down to 16mm as it's a scaled design and ER gets pretty tight even at 16mm.

Morpheus by Baader seem to be winning everyone over, defo worth a look, 76 degrees and good ER.

[Daniel-K]

23 minutes ago, Chris Lock said:

What f/ratio scope was this with Dan? I found the Luminos pretty crisp in my old CED100 f/9 refractor, especially the 7mm on the planets, that was very good. 

I agree that the ES82's will be much sharper down at say f/5, but dont you find the little porthole effect with the 82 degree range a bit annoying? With the ES100's it's much better, but they are 2" EP's that wont fit the OP scope.

The ES68's a great but only go down to 16mm as it's a scaled design and ER gets pretty tight even at 16mm.

Morpheus by Baader seem to be winning everyone over, defo worth a look, 76 degrees and good ER.

F4.5 16" with SIPS. The 7mm was probably the best. Really good for resolving globs.

What is thisport hole you speak of?

[Chris]

1 minute ago, Daniel-K said:

F4.5 16" with SIPS. The 7mm was probably the best. Really good for resolving globs.

What is thisport hole you speak of?

The porthole effect refers to the view you get when the rubber eyecup is in the up position and you can only see about 50-55 degrees of the FOV, but you know it extends much further if you peer round the corner. If you have the eyecup rolled down you can see much more but your eyelashes wack the eyelens  

I've only found this with the 82*, the 68* and 100* are much much better.

@ F4.5 even with SIPS I'd also definately choose ES over Celestron, either the 68* or 100* would be better for viewing comfort in my opinion.

In a slow scope the Luminos do seem to do a good job.

Maybe one idea for the OP would be to buy a second hand examples of both types, try them, and keep the one they prefer?  

[cloudsweeper]

More interesting/useful info - thanks all round.  Could be ES - I already have a couple.  I'll re-think my "range".

Doug.

[YKSE]

1 hour ago, cloudsweeper said:

More interesting/useful info - thanks all round.  Could be ES - I already have a couple.  I'll re-think my "range".

Doug.

Do take your time to think over the whole range, and try to take into account of your next scope(s?) too, that's what I've done since I'm not interested in testing different eyepieces, nor buying and selling activities, just use them as tools for observing.