9 - 10 mm eyepiece suggestions?

[michaelmorris]

I've packed up after another great evening observing and drawing double stars. I seem to keep reverting to my Meade 4000 series 9.7 mm Plossl. It seems to offer the ideal focal length and field of view I want.

Can anyone one suggest a significantly better eyepiece with the similar FOV and magnification?

Thanks.

[Putaendo Patrick]

Honestly the Meade 4000s are pretty good and I doubt you're going to find anything significantly better. What you may find will be largely a matter of personal preference, and you'll really need to do a side by side comparison. It could be interesting to compare the Meade with some of the so-called Orthos of similar magnification.

In particular, one I might look at is the Siebert Optics star-splitter http://www.siebertoptics.com/SiebertOptics-Ortho page).html

 They are available in 8.9mm, 9.4mm and 9.9mm as well as a whole range of other sizes. I've used but never owned some of these (and the higher power Planetarium series) and liked them, although you do need to get used to them! No idea, though, if there is a UK distributor.

A side-by-side comparison with the older Meade 3000 9.5mm would also be fun - but any difference better or worse would be quite slight I suspect.

[alan potts]

Michael,

Large improvement I really feel is out of the question no matter which eyepiece you use. How about trying a 9mm BGO/Hutech orthoscopic, it has a little less FOV but these are very sharp with good all round control. The 10mm Classic ortho would also fit the bill and is closer to the 9.7mm you are using. Both would be very good for doubles.

Alan

[nightfisher]

I have not used one but from what i have read on here the 10mm classic gets very good feedback

[Roy Challen]

10mm Vixen SLV, or if you can find one, CZJ 10mm ortho.

[Dave In Vermont]

3 hours ago, Putaendo Patrick said:

Honestly the Meade 4000s are pretty good and I doubt you're going to find anything significantly better. What you may find will be largely a matter of personal preference, and you'll really need to do a side by side comparison. It could be interesting to compare the Meade with some of the so-called Orthos of similar magnification.

In particular, one I might look at is the Siebert Optics star-splitter http://www.siebertoptics.com/SiebertOptics-Ortho page).html

 They are available in 8.9mm, 9.4mm and 9.9mm as well as a whole range of other sizes. I've used but never owned some of these (and the higher power Planetarium series) and liked them, although you do need to get used to them! No idea, though, if there is a UK distributor.

A side-by-side comparison with the older Meade 3000 9.5mm would also be fun - but any difference better or worse would be quite slight I suspect.

Thank you, Patrick! I somehow missed finding Siebert Optics - right under my nose! A very welcome addition to my long list of suppliers.

-

Dave

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

If you can live with the eye relief of a 9.7mm Plossl, the suggestions of using an ortho are of course obvious. If you like more comfort, the SLVs are stunning performers. My absolute favourite is however the Pentax XW 10mm. Totally awesome. More FOV of course, but really like a comfortable 70 deg ortho in performance.

[Timebandit]

Hello. An eyepiece of similar fov and magnification. Then a plossel it must be , as such I have a old Televue 10.5 mm of Japan and absolutely loved it, IMO a great eyepiece, i still remember when I first acquired it and used it in the scope . I was taken back by the clarity and sharpness it showed . It was my first proper quality eyepiece and is still used today, it still can hold its own also in the eyepiece case ☺

If we are allowed to dip into the Ortho pot then yes the XW or maybe the legendary ZAO

[Mr Spock]

Those old Meade 4000's are quite capable. I'm not sure others would be significantly better; a little better and more convenient perhaps.

The Plössl is limited in eye relief rather than performance. An Ortho would be slightly better quality wise, but, with the lack of eye relief again.

The obvious replacement would be the SLV. Ortho like performance with 20mm eye relief.

[faulksy]

as michael wilkinson pentax 10mm

[YKSE]

As many has already said, if you're fine with eye relief, 10mm Baader Classic ortho is among the most suitable replacer, easy to buy new and inexpensive. We all different definition of "significantly", I would guess that optically 10mm BCO is among second-tie top performer, with some astronimcally costly EPs like ZAO II, TMB supermono, Pentax XO, etc as first-class ones.

It'll be very interesting to read your comparison after upgrade

[Fozzie]

I changed from an 8mm TV plossl to the 9mm SLV and haven't regretted it...  however if your ok with the shorter eye relief than the Baader and Hutech ortho's at £50 and £80 are options..

Mind you for the extra cash the 20mm ER on the SLV's, of which there is a 9mm and 10mm offering, wins hands down for me.. 

[Davesellars]

If you can cope with the 10mm eye relief (for me this is quite comfortable) of the 10mm BCO then this would be difficult to beat optically. It's as sharp as a very sharp thing.  You may want more FOV though for use with an SCT (I use mine primarily with my refractors so rather more FOV to start with).  The Explore Scientific 82 series are pretty well regarded - perhaps check out the 8.8mm?

[Highburymark]

Good as the Meade plossls are, the TV plossls are better in every department. Although at this end of the range I find all plossls and orthos uncomfortable

[michaelmorris]

I'm in a quandry about eye relief.  On the one hand, being able to wear my glasses to observe would be more comfortable and probably result in slightly better views (I have a slight astigmatism in my right eye).  On the other hand, I like pushing my eye into the rubber cup as it helps cut out the surrounding light pollution when observing and helps me concentrate on the target.

Decisions, decisions ...

 

[faulksy]

28 minutes ago, michaelmorris said:

I'm in a quandry about eye relief.  On the one hand, being able to wear my glasses to observe would be more comfortable and probably result in slightly better views (I have a slight astigmatism in my right eye).  On the other hand, I like pushing my eye into the rubber cup as it helps cut out the surrounding light pollution when observing and helps me concentrate on the target.

Decisions, decisions ...

 

or go somewere dark and you wont have to worry about surrounding light pollution

[bingevader]

18 hours ago, michaelmorris said:

significantly better eyepiece!

Nope!

8 hours ago, Highburymark said:

Good as the Meade plossls are, the TV plossls are better in every department.

I'd have to disagree with you there!

Certainly not better in every department in my 'scope.

No difference in sharpness, marginally better contrast in the TV and a slightly different hue.

[Mr Spock]

I had a Meade 4000 6.4mm I used with my OMC-140 when I had that. Gave me what is still my best ever view of saturn at x313. Those were the days when saturn was high in the sky though.

[Highburymark]

23 hours ago, bingevader said:

Nope!

I'd have to disagree with you there!

Certainly not better in every department in my 'scope.

No difference in sharpness, marginally better contrast in the TV and a slightly different hue.

I still have a full set of Meade 4000 plossls bought around 1998 - sadly they are not the Japanese made 4000s which get such a good press. They are still very good, but - particularly on HA solar - they are outperformed by the TVs.

[John]

I've owned a few 4000 series Meade plossls over the years including the Japanese ones. They are pretty competant plossls but not quite as good as the Tele Vue plossls IMHO (based on the examples I've owned and compared). The Meade 3000 9.5mm series was at least as good and possibly a wee bit better than the more expensive (then) 4000 9.7

As for the nicest 10mm eyepieces I've used, well the 10mm XW holds that "crown" for me followed very closely by the Vixen SLV 10mm and the Baader Classic Ortho 10mm.

The last mentioned eyepiece is really quite a bargain at <£50 IMHO.

 

 

 

[spaceboy]

You could try a Fujiyama ortho as Glen is retiring and he is selling the last ones off at a steal http://www.lyraoptic.co.uk/Eyepieces.html

[Roy Challen]

11 minutes ago, spaceboy said:

You could try a Fujiyama ortho as Glen is retiring and he is selling the last ones of at a steal http://www.lyraoptic.co.uk/Eyepieces.html

Wow! That is a bargain, weren't these £80 or so a little while ago? I haven't used them myself, but everything I've heard about them is good. Them and the Baader Classics are two ranges I'd really like to try - especially at these prices.

[John]

The Fujiyama's are a great deal at that special price. More or less par focal with each other as well.

[bingevader]

On 19/07/2016 at 21:16, John said:

I've owned a few 4000 series Meade plossls over the years including the Japanese ones. They are pretty competent plossls but not quite as good as the Tele Vue plossls IMHO (based on the examples I've owned and compared). 

In my kit, they're more than competent and the differences are marginal, but yes, the TVs are slightly better, but it is marginal.

It was more the, "in all departments" that I'd disagree with.  

[Dave In Vermont]

Every fan of the Orthoscopic eyepieces (I've never met one I didn't like!) owes it to themselves to bookmark the link to University Optics in Ann Arbor, Michigan-USA. They have ortho's from at least one supplier on hand at any given time. And they are happy to ship worldwide:

http://www.universityoptics.com/125inch.html#HD

I've found quite a few excellent ones there.

Have fun,

Dave