Vixen HR 2.4mm

[mikeDnight]

6 minutes ago, iPeace said:

It was my utter satisfaction with the 2.4mm that got me interested in the other two. Very much a lunar-only proposition for me, but promising enough to be worth trying.

I quite fancy trying these out on Mars this coming apparition but finances currently won't allow it. I shall have to rough it with my beautiful but inferior LV 2.5mm and wait for inspiration from you.  I think I could easily smuggle them past the wife!

[iPeace]

2 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

I quite fancy trying these out on Mars this coming apparition but finances currently won't allow it. I shall have to rough it with my beautiful but inferior LV 2.5mm and wait for inspiration from you.  I think I could easily smuggle them past the wife!

I should bring them to a star party somewhere for everyone to try.

[Doc]

In my scope:

2.4mm = x350

2.0mm = x420

1.6mm = x525

So not impossible but wouldn't get used much. As you say a lunar/double star splitter only

[iPeace]

1 minute ago, Doc said:

In my scope:

2.4mm = x350

2.0mm = x420

1.6mm = x525

So not impossible but wouldn't get used much. As you say a lunar/double star splitter only

Mine are shorter - but very nice - fracs (600, 400, 360 focal length). So magnification is - given our average conditions - somewhere between 'within reason' and 'nice try'. Aperture is also smaller (85, 71, 60) so resolution is limited and exit pupil will dim the image - but on a nice, bright Moon, it's worth it. Have really enjoyed the 2.4mm and also use the 2-4 Nagler Zoom for lunar detail so I had enough confidence to talk myself into getting the full set.

[Doc]

I've always wanted the Pentax 2.5 XO and as you know these are like rocking horse poo, so maybe this would be an alternative. How does the Vixen HR range compare to the likes of Pentax XO, Zeiss, TMB etc.

[Doc]

Just read this, very impressive.

https://astronomyconnect.com/forums/articles/field-test-of-the-vixen-hr-eyepieces.36/

[iPeace]

5 minutes ago, Doc said:

How does the Vixen HR range compare to the likes of Pentax XO, Zeiss, TMB etc.

Can't say. Have never tried anything similar before. This dude/guy/chap may have:

https://astronomyconnect.com/forums/articles/field-test-of-the-vixen-hr-eyepieces.36/

 

[Piero]

30 minutes ago, Doc said:

How does the Vixen HR range compare to the likes of Pentax XO, Zeiss, TMB etc.

There are a few comments about the comparison between the HR 2.4mm and XO 2.5mm on CN. The common opinion seemed that the HR is really right there, but with additional comfort. It's a great eyepiece. On my TV60, it showed me a level of detail at 150x on Jupiter that was only matched by the Zeiss zoom and Docter, but at a lower magnification (~110x). And at 150x, it gave an image that was nearly as bright as my previous 5mm Vixen SLV (which was a good one). 

On my Tak 100, I use my 2.4mm HR on Solar and Lunar observation, when the seeing is sufficiently stable and is superb. It also barlows very well, easily up to 2x (~1.2mm). Above that, the view starts to soften a little bit, possibly due to the seeing. That is 616x though!. Said this, a view of the Moon at those high mags is impressive in my opinion.  

Longer focal lengths for the Vixen HR line would be like having a set of ZAOII I reckon. I'd love to have a 4mm and a 3.3mm, or a 10-8mm to barlow with the Zeiss barlow..  

[Doc]

A Vixen line up similar to a ZAOII would simply amazing.

[Piero]

I agree.. Vixen has been rather naughty to tease us with those short focal lengths, without offering anything more usable at that level of quality. 

[Piero]

I find this paragraph by W. Paolini very important:

"When testing the Vixen HR eyepieces, given the extreme magnifications they would produce, methodical preparation was a must. Simplistic common sense led my expectations to present a probable outcome of poor performance. However, skill and experience taught me that much preparation was needed prior to taking this excursion into ultra-small exit pupils and demandingly high magnifications. My preparations included: thoroughly acclimating my eyes in preparation for the dimmer views, utilizing my most precision optics, ensuring the optics were precisely collimated, fully thermally acclimating the optics prior to observing, and finally to patiently wait for skies where both stability and transparency were up to the demanding task. "

 

...and continues...

"As I detailed in my many observations, taking quality optics to these extreme levels with the Vixen HR precision eyepieces allowed me to enjoy familiar lunar and planetary targets in rewarding ways. The impressive image scales of these very high magnifications made the targets exceedingly easy to observe, resulted in views of lunar landscapes with highly accentuated dimensionality, revealed more details on crater floors than I would have noticed otherwise, and even revealed additional details relative to the color and brightness variations in the atmospheric bands of Saturn." 

This last text was also my experience with the 2.4mm HR.

[Timebandit]

19 minutes ago, Doc said:

A Vixen line up similar to a ZAOII would simply amazing.

 

Yes a modern version of the king of the Ortho ZAO would be great. The HR could be the eyepiece that you could get without being as rare as hen's teeth, and at a reasonable sensible price when you compare them to some of the super wide eyepiece like the Ethos or even the Nagler nowadays  . So the HR could be the modern replacement for the ZAO, if vixen go ahead with more focal lengths?

 

 

[iPeace]

Well I had a really good lunar session with Bjorn the Borg 71FL and got to use all three of the HRs for the first time. In short, it's a resounding, booming YES.

The respective magnifications of 167x, 200x and 250x were handled very well and the views were well worth the floaters - naturally worst at highest mag, but I could ignore them easily enough.

Really nice, unstrained viewing, a sensation of effortlessly making the most of what's there to be had, only gently brushing up against the boundaries imposed by the conditions and the capabilities of the gear.

These may never be mainstream favourites, but in my little niche, maxing out a short, high-quality refractor, these eyepieces are absolutely lovely.

[Timebandit]

 

 

25 minutes ago, iPeace said:

Well I had a really good lunar session with Bjorn the Borg 71FL and got to use all three of the HRs for the first time. In short, it's a resounding, booming YES.

      

These may never be mainstream favourites, but in my little niche, maxing out a short, high-quality refractor, these eyepieces are absolutely lovely.

 

 

The likes of the ZAO series were also not main stream favourites. But for the dedicated  planetary and lunar observer if you want the best sharpness, clarity and contrast in an eyepiece then you are willing to go off the beaten track and purchase a niche eyepiece at a high cost. The HR really does seem to be gaining a lot of interest from such folk especially considering the rarity and cost of an original ZAO.  

 

 

[Piero]

It sounds great!  If I were you, I would also try the 2.4mm on Jupiter when it becomes visible in the evening. Despite the short exit pupil, it gave me some surprising and nice views on a good night. 

I'd love to have a 4mm and 3.3mm Vixen HR, so that I could use:

- the Nikon zoom + Zeiss barlow 2x up to 4.5mm when the seeing is normal,

- 4mm on Venus / Mars / Jupiter / Solar,

- 3.3mm on Venus / Mars / Saturn / Uranus / Neptune / Moon(s) / Solar,

- 2.4mm on Venus / Mars / Saturn / Uranus / Neptune / Moon(s) / Solar,

- and finally the 4mm-3.3mm-2.4mm + Zeiss barlow 2x to get 2mm, 1.65mm, and 1.2mm for crazy Lunar floating times. The 2mm could also be used on Mars and Venus on a steady night..

[Piero]

@iPeace   have you spent some other nice time with the 2.0mm and 1.6mm Vixen HR?    .. maybe with the TV-85? 

[iPeace]

8 hours ago, Piero said:

@iPeace   have you spent some other nice time with the 2.0mm and 1.6mm Vixen HR?    .. maybe with the TV-85? 

Not quite yet - there haven't been many nights clear enough to observe at all, much less to do any detailed work at high magnification.

But I have a great comparison in store with the 150 Mak incoming. The Nagler Zoom at the 6mm setting should give 300x. So will the 2mm HR in the TV-85. Side by side on the AZ8, should be interesting.

[Piero]

14 minutes ago, iPeace said:

Not quite yet - there haven't been many nights clear enough to observe at all, much less to do any detailed work at high magnification.

But I have a great comparison in store with the 150 Mak incoming. The Nagler Zoom at the 6mm setting should give 300x. So will the 2mm HR in the TV-85. Side by side on the AZ8, should be interesting.

There have been some clear nights over here instead. Last night was also clear and steady. Unfortunately I have got a cold since Christmas day. Nevertheless I observed out on the 26th but eventually it wasn't a good idea as it made things worse.. shame! I was really looking forward to some nice views of waning moon at +300x !

[Piero]

Other targets that should be interesting to observe with these short fl eyepieces are tight double stars, Mars, Venus, bright planetary nebulae, planets' moons, and maybe even Saturn on a very good night, I reckon. Maybe also Mercury.

I found that reducing the exit pupil works quite well for Venus. 

[Louis D]

3 hours ago, Piero said:

Other targets that should be interesting to observe with these short fl eyepieces are tight double stars, Mars, Venus, bright planetary nebulae, planets' moons, and maybe even Saturn on a very good night, I reckon. Maybe also Mercury.

I found that reducing the exit pupil works quite well for Venus. 

I'm thinking globular clusters might also be interesting to see if their cores can be resolved better.

[Piero]

1 hour ago, Louis D said:

I'm thinking globular clusters might also be interesting to see if their cores can be resolved better.

I observed the double cluster cores with the 2.4mm and it worked okay considering the low exit pupil (0.32mm).

The issue is that the Airy disc becomes larger. I have not yet observed globs with the HR 2.4mm, but it is something I plan to do. 

 

The way I see is that these eyepieces can be used in an "unconventional" way in "conventional" telescopes. 

 

PLANETS

- Moon / Sun. Assuming one is not much affected by floaters, they can help visualise tiny craters and terrain undulations (mooM) or the shapes in granulation, tiny features in the penumbra and umbra regions (Sun);

- Mercury. I observed this at ~180x with the TV60 and ZZ plus Powermate 2.5x (yes, the shape of the whole thing was weird!) during last solar transition. This was like using a 2mm f.l. eyepiece. It was a nearly perfect circle. Very impressive!

- Venus. They can offer a nice view of this very bright planet by reducing the exit pupil. I found that the intense brightness was the main reason why I did not have nice views of this planet with my TV60. As it is rather small, zooming in allowed me to get a reasonable size and reduce its brightness. A single polarising filter can also help reduce the glare in my opinion.

- Mars. I have not seen this with the HR. Being a very small planet, under very good seeing conditions, the 2.4mm HR could work (~0.3mm exit pupil). Dunno with exit pupils below 0.3mm. Mike ( @mikeDnight ) certainly knows this!  

- Jupiter. Maybe some colour on its Moons?

- Saturn. I read on CN that some experienced observers managed to observe Saturn at very high mag (exit pupils of 0.3-0.2mm) under excellent sky conditions. My Tak was delivered when Saturn was already too low in the sky unfortunately. I will test this this year. Aside from the planet, they might help spotting a moon close to the planet? 

- Uranus. Moons?

- Neptune. Moons? 

 

DOUBLE STARS (main application, possibly)

- very tight double stars that cannot be fully resolved or just resolved?

- MAYBE double stars with large difference in brightness (e.g. Sirius). Assuming the seeing is cooperating, I'm aware that one one to split this is to move A just outside the FOV. An ortho ep can help with this. I wonder whether very high mags can also help with this by dimming the background sky and reducing the surrounding glare (not the star brightness as this is a point source!). I will give a go at this when Sirius is better placed.

- very tight double stars with different colours. In this case colour resolution has to do with the eye and not the telescope. 

 

BRIGHT PLANETARY NEBULAE

- there are some experienced observers (D. Knisely included) on CN who have successfully observed bright PNs at very high mags (~0.3mm exit pupil). I need to read and understand more about this, but as far as I understood, the success in using high mags is due to the fact that the eye has a poor capability of resolving low contrast targets. This can be done on PNs because they are compact and small. I will try this on the Eskimo nebula, as it was one cited by them.

[mikeDnight]

23 minutes ago, Piero said:

 

- Mars. I have not seen this with the HR. Being a very small planet, under very good seeing conditions, the 2.4mm HR could work (~0.3mm exit pupil). Dunno with exit pupils below 0.3mm. Mike ( @mikeDnight ) certainly knows this!  

 

It's funny you mention exit pupil, as paulastro and myself were discussing only last night, how many observers seem to - perhaps - overly concern themselves with numbers - exit pupil being among their concerns. I mentioned to Paul that I never give exit pupil a second thought, and he told me that he doesnt concern himself with it either. Personally i feel that looking at numbers can give a completely misleading impression of how a telescope or eyepiece can perform. I'd have no hesitation in buying all three of the Vixen HR eyepieces, if I had the readies, as I'm sure I'd find a use for them. With a tiny disc such as that shown by Mars currently, there's a need for increased image scale and the HR's sound perfect for a keen planetary observer. 

 

[Piero]

8 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

It's funny you mention exit pupil, as paulastro and myself were discussing only last night, how many observers seem to - perhaps - overly concern themselves with numbers - exit pupil being among their concerns. I mentioned to Paul that I never give exit pupil a second thought, and he told me that he doesnt concern himself with it either. Personally i feel that looking at numbers can give a completely misleading impression of how a telescope or eyepiece can perform. I'd have no hesitation in buying all three of the Vixen HR eyepieces, if I had the readies, as I'm sure I'd find a use for them. With a tiny disc such as that shown by Mars currently, there's a need for increased image scale and the HR's sound perfect for a keen planetary observer. 

Well, I like maths and I like to use it as a reference tool.   

Of course it does not replace practice.

[Timebandit]

 

 

It's the old fool proof method that "seeing is everything" and number crunching and theory can be discussed over and over again.

Personally my final verdict on a scope or eyepiece is what view I can get. If the views stand up to scrutiny then numbers mean nothing ?

 

 

[Louis D]

8 minutes ago, Timebandit said:

 

 

It's the old fool proof method that "seeing is everything" and number crunching and theory can be discussed over and over again.

Personally my final verdict on a scope or eyepiece is what view I can get. If the views stand up to scrutiny then numbers mean nothing ?

 

 

True.  For instance, I get so tired of folks saying it's a waste to have an exit pupil bigger than your dilated pupil.  If it's the only way to get to a widest field of view to encompass a large object, it's my right to waste photons to see it in such a manner.