Do you have one FOV that suits you best, and why?

[Alan White]

I have found I keep settling back at 50-52 degree eyepieces, I find wider an immersive experience, but for me uncomfortable to view.
This has come from experiencing varying lovelly eyepieces so far and drawing my conclusions.

So my question based on my own experince is; 
Do you have one FOV that suits you best and why?

As always your input and thoughts are appreciated, Alan

[Alfian]

I have a  bit of a problem in as much that I like low power wide field views (not all the time) so wide fov EPs  are useful and I have a couple of 68 degree EPs , but I can't say I find them truly comfortable to use. I'm happier sub 60 degree. I have a couple of Altair LERs of 55 degree and I really like them. I don't know why it works out that way, its probably just a personal eyesight thing.

[cloudsweeper]

My EP AFOVs range from 58* to 82* - generally 68s at the higher FLs, 82s mid-range, then dropping off again at lower FLs.

But what I mostly go for are the highest possible TFOV values at low mag which help with larger objects, star-hopping, and recognising patterns - all subject of course to cost and weight!

Doug.

 

[ronin]

I have ended up with 60 degree eyepieces, I suppose as much from the cost. I bought the whole set of BST's when they were Explorers and were I think £36 each at the time.

Seem to recall someone saying that above 60 or 68 you have to move your head to see "around" or "into" the corners. Suppose that if you cannot see the edges/field stop at say 70 degrees what does 82 offer. Suppose however that means I should shut up and try an ES 82 before condeming them.

At this time I am content with the 60 degree ones, I do have a few 70 degree items that I will have to start using again.

[Starlight 1]

Meade 16mm SWA . and in my tak 106ed is a big wow every night.

[Ruud]

A view of around 70 degrees pleases me most. It frames everything so well, being neither cramped nor overly large. Seventy degrees feels just fine!

[Starlight 1]

Just thinking can you get a EP that cover 88 fov. never looked to see.

[cloudsweeper]

 

18 minutes ago, Starlight 1 said:

Just thinking can you get a EP that cover 88 fov. never looked to see.

Off the top of my head (and without checking), there are EPs with 100 degrees and more of AFOV.  As has been remarked, they might present problems with moving your viewing position to get full advantage, not to mention edge of field distortions.

Doug.

[John]

I tend to prefer wider fields of view and always have done way back to my 1st scope 30+ years ago. My current eyepieces cover 40 through 110 degrees so I have plenty of choice. Sometimes I'm in the mood for orthos and plossls, often I like to go wider and sometimes hyper wide is what I'm after.

The "why" for wider fields for me is that all my scopes are on undriven, alt-azimuth mounts so a wide field helps with tracking at high magnifications. I can manage without it though eg: when I'm using my 2-4mm Nagler zoom.

 

 

 

[Louis D]

Needing long eye relief due to my massive astigmatism, I've mostly settled on the 65 to 76 degree, long eye relief offerings out there.  I did just get an ES-92, and it is magnificent at 92 degrees and 17mm of usable eye relief.

[Moonshane]

I have used wider eyepieces (Ethos, Nagler etc) but find that 68 degree fields are ideal for me but I am happy with 50 degrees too, especially for binoviewers. My main gripe with newer wide fields as I have said many times before is that I really like lunar observing and found there to be a lot of false colour off axis in the newer wide fields (13mm Ethos, T5 Naglers and Delos) when observing our closest neighbour. Therefore I stick now to eyepieces that don't have such aberrations (mainly plossls at 50 afov, Delites 62 afov and Panoptics 68 afov)

[Timebandit]

 

Hello. I have eyepieces from low 40d fov up to the Nagler , William optics uwan at 82d fov

For me it depends which scope I am using. In the refractor which I use for mainly planetary and lunar I am more than happy to use Orthos at the low 40d fov . These Ortho views are not only very sharp, but I feel they add to the experience by concentration the eye onto the target and not the surrounding space. Therefore I feel I pick out more details on planetary , lunar with an Ortho of narrow fov .

In the dob I love the Nagler/uwan 82d fov for location of the target, a bit of a finder I suppose. But for actually observation in the dob I much prefer the 70d fov of the Pentax XW. These eyepieces are great as it is still easy to keep the target in the field of view with a non motorised mount with good old nudging. But also I can use the whole of the fov of the XW without adjusting my eye position. I just find the Pentax XW at 70d does everything I need it to with keeping the target nicely framed , nudging no problem, no need to move my eye position to get the benefit of the full 70d fov and all with the bonus of excellent Ortho like Optics.☺

 

[ronl]

As with Ronin, I have the BST's and I find 60 degrees is perfect, but having a driven mount it

doesn't really matter, my target stays at the center anyway, once I have the twist up eye-cup

about half way, this gives me my comfort zone, so I am very happy indeed with 60.

[scarp15]

I enjoy the ultra wide field of view, which applies to each of my three manually driven scopes. I also enjoy 72 wide and 50 degree plossl AFOV when these focal length / optical design are applicably required. The main feature which applies in each case is comfortable eye relief and eye placement. 

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I much prefer EPs with 68-72 (MaxVision SWA, Pentax XW, and TV Delos) or around 82 (UWA, Nagler) to the 50 deg types by now, but much depends on the EP design.