What would you use if you couldn't have Ethos?

[John]

Having used quite a few of the 100 degree eyepieces out there I think the differences between them are not just about the wider AFoV. The Ethos range are better performers in other ways than the Naglers as are the ES 100's compared to the ES 82's and the Myriads / XWA's over the Nirvana's and UWAN's. 

The exception is where Tele Vue have developed ranges based on the Ethos concept, ie: the Delos and Delites which seem to pip their 100 degree seniors subtly in some performance aspects.

 

 

[iPeace]

1 minute ago, John said:

The exception is where Tele Vue have developed ranges based on the Ethos concept, ie: the Delos and Delites which seem to pip their 100 degree seniors subtly in some performance aspects.

Out of curiosity: would that be throughout the range of focal lengths, or more so at one end (longer / shorter)?

[John]

2 minutes ago, iPeace said:

Out of curiosity: would that be throughout the range of focal lengths, or more so at one end (longer / shorter)?

Do you mean % light throughput ?

[iPeace]

2 minutes ago, John said:

Do you mean % light throughput ?

Ah, well, I wasn't referring to any specific performance aspect in which the Delos / Delites seem to pip the Ethos (as I'm not really familiar with which performance aspects those are), I was just wondering, given that Delos / Delite are better in some respects than Ethos, whether the advantages of Delos / Delite over Ethos are more apparent in longer or shorter focal lengths. So, for instance, would the advantage of a Delos 17.3mm over an Ethos 17mm be more apparent than that of a Delos 3.5mm over en Ethos 3.7mm?

Perhaps this question doesn't make any sense, so feel free to say so

 

[John]

I ought to say that I've no personal experience of the Delites and have only owned the 10mm Delos so my direct experience in comparing the ranges is very limited.

I've read that the Delos 10mm, when used with a very large dobsonian (20 inches plus) under very dark skies will show really faint galaxies slightly easier than the 10mm Ethos. Here is the report I'm referring to:

http://www.faintfuzzies.com/AboutUs2.html

But, for balance, I've recalled another report from an experienced SGL member that calls the contest between the 13mm Ethos and the 14mm Delos pretty much equal:

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/182067-ethos-vs-delos/

The Delites seem (again from 3rd party reports) to display even more "orthoscopic" performance than the Ethos or the Delos ranges.

The differences we are talking about here are really small and subtle I reckon and all 3 of these ranges are Tele Vue at the top of their game

On the focal lengths, I've found the Ethos range (by far the ones I know best) to be pretty even in terms of performance across the focal lengths.

Pity that they are all now so much more expensive since the recent price rises here

[Highburymark]

If there is a very marginal advantage to the Delos range in sharpness, it's slight enough to be ignored in my experience. And with a difference of nearly 30 degrees in fov, I don't think of the two ranges as head to head competitors. 

[Singlin]

I have come to the conclusion that no matter what excuse or reason you try and create the Ethos is better.

THe Explorer Scientific 14 and 20 100 degree oculars are great but not quite as good.

I have the ES 100 14 and am pleased with it and will get the 20 and the 2x Barlow.

For half the price I am sorted in the full knowledge that the Ethos is better but what I have is more than good enough.

Now I don't have the stress of trying to pretend something is what it is not.

[Timebandit]

5 hours ago, Singlin said:

I have come to the conclusion that no matter what excuse or reason you try and create the Ethos is better.

THe Explorer Scientific 14 and 20 100 degree oculars are great but not quite as good.

I have the ES 100 14 and am pleased with it and will get the 20 and the 2x Barlow.

For half the price I am sorted in the full knowledge that the Ethos is better but what I have is more than good enough.

Now I don't have the stress of trying to pretend something is what it is not.

 

Hello, but are you just trying to convince yourself. Did you not just build yourself a quality dob?. I suspect if good enough was your intention then you would of been happy with a smaller  aperture dob and a less quality mirror?

By wanting a big dob , upping the aperture , upping the magnification, obviously you wanted to see your targets in more detail or draw in targets you could not see with a smaller aperture dob. Was it just good enough?

I think in time you will be swayed to better eyepieces, as I think if we really could we would have the best eyepieces out there, at the end of the day it is budget and costs that prevents us.

As there is no point in having a large aperture,with quality mirror,when your eyepiece is the restraining factor on getting the best from your scope .

This hobby is all about seeing,and your scope set up is only as good as the weakest link in the optical chain. I wonder now you have your big dob and quality mirror in 12 months time you may have a collection of Ethos ? I suspect you may?

[Singlin]

After having looked through both eyepieces on the same f4 telescope I came to the conclusion that the Ethos was better after almost convincing myself that it had to be better.

It would certainly not make any difference to the views through my f4.4 dob.

That is why I built the telekit dob, To get the same performance and finish as an Obsession without paying the higher price.

[Timebandit]

15 minutes ago, Singlin said:

After having looked through both eyepieces on the same f4 telescope I came to the conclusion that the Ethos was better after almost convincing myself that it had to be better.

It would certainly not make any difference to the views through my f4.4 dob.

That is why I built the telekit dob, To get the same performance and finish as an Obsession without paying the higher price.

Hello 

I am surprised that at f4 that you seem to be saying the performance of the ethos and ES are identical , you are almost convincing yourself the ethos is better . I would of thought at these very fast scopes that the ethos would come into its own with an noticeable advantage. And with your telekit dob at again at f4.4 ,again a fast scope I would of thought a noticeable advantage with a ethos. If I remember correctly i am sure the ES are better with scopes of f5 and above. I think i noticed FLO also recommended the ES for scopes at f5 and above. I would of thought therefore there must be a performance difference,  and that reason I would of thought is that they do not give there best performance at below f5. Therefore  for this reason there must be a noticeable difference between ES and ethos, otherwise nobody would buy the Ethos and spend that sort of money when they can get the same performance with a ES at a fraction of the price. From my experience the gains you get from expenditure does diminish the higher the cost goes. But also there is an noticeable gain , even if it's not a major gain? . And with fast scopes below f5 and especially at f4 mark the ethos should shine through☺  . It would be interested for the dob mob to give an opinion as I know they have some big, very fast scopes and if they have put ethos in against ES and see if they consider these eyepieces the same or the ethos shines through which I would of thought around the f4 then it would☺    

[iPeace]

Thanks to all for your responses. I've read a lot I didn't know about beforehand, and that's what I was hoping for. I find Ethos a lot of fun to use, and well worth their weight, bulk and expense, but conversely I enjoy questioning my faith in them, based as it is on very little analysis and comparison. Considering serious alternatives, if only for academic purposes, helps me understand what's so good about them, besides my main reason for using them, being - as stated - fun.

Thanks again.

[Singlin]

I fully respect your point of view Timebandit and I know that you would be very satisfied with the Ethos As I am with my Explorer Scientific.

I am not an optical guru and my choice is purely a personal one after having looked through both eyepieces.

I did however look through the 25mm ES and did not like it as much. The 20mm was great

[Paul73]

I have just replaced a 21mm Ethos with a 20mm ES. The Ethos was Marginally better IMHO. Once a Paracorr was added, the gap narrowed. I'm happy with the ES for the moment, but probably won't be able to resist getting an Ethos or three at some stage in the future.

Paul

[jetstream]

On 2016-08-29 at 16:08, Singlin said:

I fully respect your point of view Timebandit and I know that you would be very satisfied with the Ethos As I am with my Explorer Scientific.

I am not an optical guru and my choice is purely a personal one after having looked through both eyepieces.

I did however look through the 25mm ES and did not like it as much. The 20mm was great

Hi Singlin, thanks for posting your thoughts on these eyepieces. I may be looking at the ES 25mm 100, can I ask why you didn't like it as much?

Gerry

[Singlin]

I found that focus deteriorated 60 percent out and worse further out from that.

The 20 was fine.

I wanted the 25 or 30 but stoped at the 20mm.

Regards,

Simon

[Singlin]

I am not qualified to review an eyepiece.

Reviewing eyepieces is a bit like reviewing food, Some people love a particular one and others do not.

I have been lucky so far in that I have managed to try them out before committing to a purchase.

In my new 16" F4.3 Dob my ED 8mm eyepiece gave spectacular views, It is cheap it is not supposed to 

[jetstream]

2 hours ago, Singlin said:

I am not qualified to review an eyepiece.

Reviewing eyepieces is a bit like reviewing food, Some people love a particular one and others do not.

I have been lucky so far in that I have managed to try them out before committing to a purchase.

In my new 16" F4.3 Dob my ED 8mm eyepiece gave spectacular views, It is cheap it is not supposed to 

Thanks Simon, I value your opinion and thank you for this one. When you say focus deteriorated could you still focus the edges at the expense of the centre? and vice versa?

I heard these can display field curvature quite a bit but I'm most interested in the performance with filters, OIII /UHC in particular. Did you notice any "seagulls" or weird shaped "coma" near the edges?

I'm not surprised you are getting great views with the Astrosystems scope and great mirror set, these scopes control thermals very well and mine dampens vibration in just over a second, allowing excellent high power views. I bet you like M13 in this scope!

Gerry