Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_android_vs_ios_winners.thumb.jpg.803608cf7eedd5cfb31eedc3e3f357e9.jpg

THL22

Help me select my proper eye piece lengths

Recommended Posts

Hello Gazers!

I need some help ones again. 
Lets say I have a scope with a 150 diameter and a 1800 mm focal length.(f/12) I'll supplied with an 28mm eyepiece.
I would like to know which lengths I should get? I'm in the market for PST pieces.
These are the lengths they offer:

2x barlow
12mm
15mm
18mm
25mm
8mm
5mm
3,2mm

All have a field of view of 60 degrees. In which order should I buy them? 

Clear skies:.)

365astronomy-BST-explorer-ED-eyepiece-ki 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi THL22, low power first, so the 25mm, then medium power 12mm, then the 8mm for the Moon.  That will get you started. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rwilkey said:

Hi THL22, low power first, so the 25mm, then medium power 12mm, then the 8mm for the Moon.  That will get you started. 

Awesome! But I got a 28 Apex 2" skymaster piece. Won't that overlap with the 25? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 25mm will darken the background sky more, I find the 28mm Apex a bit clumsy to be honest and the quality is not up to the 25mm, you will notice quite a difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rwilkey said:

The 25mm will darken the background sky more, I find the 28mm Apex a bit clumsy to be honest and the quality is not up to the 25mm, you will notice quite a difference.

Ah very good to know! Thank you so much:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

rwilkey advised me way back, and no regrets so far.
Having all the BST's I would start with the 12mm first - high power (matches your scopes focal ratio, then work from there ) the 8mm next to give a squeeze more power, but the scopes aperture and conditions at this power will diminish what you will see, then whatever you fancy next. The supplied 28mm will be ok, but the BST may have a better field of view with its 60° afov, though you don't mention the brand of your 28mm.

Which ever order you buy, its probable, you'l buy more!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Charic said:

rwilkey advised me way back, and no regrets so far.
Having all the BST's I would start with the 12mm first - high power (matches your scopes focal ratio, then work from there ) the 8mm next to give a squeeze more power, but the scopes aperture and conditions at this power will diminish what you will see, then whatever you fancy next. The supplied 28mm will be ok, but the BST may have a better field of view with its 60° afov, though you don't mention the brand of your 28mm.

Which ever order you buy, its probable, you'l buy more!

haha yes I'm quite sure of that! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like to go for relative magnifications. So have 5, 10, 20, 32, 55 with a low power barlow for any other.

Have added models for better eye relief but keep to the five focal lengths above.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 25585 said:

I like to go for relative magnifications. So have 5, 10, 20, 32, 55 with a low power barlow for any other.

Have added models for better eye relief but keep to the five focal lengths above.

 

Can you explain when I should pull out the barlow? From "playing" with terrarium i''ve found that I like to take it out when for instance I want to look at saturn and even a 3,2mm eyepiece doesn't show much more than a "ball" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a 3.2mm ep is going to give you x563 magnification, which is too much for your scope give the rule of thumb of 2x aperture.

not seen where in the world you are, but here in the UK, days of good enough seeing for that kind of mag are very rare.

what you gain in size, you will lose in detail.

you are also starting to get a very small exit pupil (0.3mm) so you will start to see floaters.

8 & 12 I think are good starters, as already mentioned, and then decide if you want to replace your 28 :)

 

Edited by rockystar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, rockystar said:

a 3.2mm ep is going to give you x375 magnification, which is too much for your scope give the rule of thumb of 2x aperture.

not seen where in the world you are, but here in the UK, days of good enough seeing for that kind of mag are very rare.

what you gain in size, you will lose in detail.

you are also starting to get a very small exit pupil (0.5mm) so you will start to see floaters.

8 & 12 I think are good starters, as already mentioned, and then decide if you want to replace your 28 :)

 

Good advice! Stellarium ofcourse doesn't show if the magnification is too much. Can you explain this rule?
For example with an 150 mak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, THL22 said:

Good advice! Stellarium ofcourse doesn't show if the magnification is too much. Can you explain this rule?
For example with an 150 mak

indeed, stellarium has some very nice zoomable pictures:)

I've update my calculations by the way, they were a bit off.

As far as I'm aware, It's similar to resolution of a digital photo: low resolution, the less you can zoom in before the image is distorted beyond recognition. So the aperture of the scope is a bit like the resolution.

with a bigger mirror (or lens) you can collect more photons so can "zoom" in more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2x the aperture is the often quoted upper limit before the image quality degrades too much

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, rockystar said:

2x the aperture is the often quoted upper limit before the image quality degrades too much

aah ! so I basically cant magnify above 300x. But how do I know what my magnification is? And which eyepiece is too much?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if this stating the obvious, but the basic equations are:

Magnification = Telescope focal length / Eyepiece focal length

True field of view = Apparent field of view / Magnification

Exit pupil = Eyepiece focal length / Telescope focal ratio

 

So, for example, the 25mm 60 degree afov gives:

1800 / 25 = x72 magnification

60 / 72 = 0.83 degree field of view

25/12 = 2.08 mm exit pupil

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Stu said:

Sorry if this stating the obvious, but the basic equations are:

Magnification = Telescope focal length / Eyepiece focal length

True field of view = Apparent field of view / Magnification

Exit pupil = Eyepiece focal length / Telescope focal ratio

 

So, for example, the 25mm 60 degree afov gives:

1800 / 25 = x72 magnification

60 / 72 = 0.83 degree field of view

25/12 = 2.08 mm exit pupil

Might be obvious for some but I needed this! Thanks! I'm saving this info for later!

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am reading this discussion and I wish to interfere with a question.  The telescope has 1800mm FL I think that's way too much for low power observation, 28mm gives 64x and 25mm gives 72x. I think the quality in the views at these powers will be affected by atmospheric conditions all the time while looking at objects requiring low power, other then planets.

I wonder if some kind of reducer of focal length might be a thing to consider from the very beginning for these very slow telescope.

(The question could be useful for the OP too, I never know)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, N3ptune said:

I am reading this discussion and I wish to interfere with a question.  The telescope has 1800mm FL I think that's way too much for low power observation, 28mm gives 64x and 25mm gives 72x. I think the quality in the views at these powers will be affected by atmospheric conditions all the time while looking at objects requiring low power, other then planets.

I wonder if some kind of reducer of focal length might be a thing to consider from the very beginning for these very slow telescope.

(The question could be useful for the OP too, I never know)

I guess the thing is Maks are just not designed for low power viewing. There no reason not to try a focal reducer but often a longer focal length eyepiece, perhaps even a 55mm Plossl for instance can be just as effective.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At 1800mm focal length you are not really going to get low power. The 25mm BST will still give 72x and that falls very much at the mid range.

Sticking to my genral rule I suggest one at the f number so 12mm, one a bit lower and one a bit more. In this case that would have to be the 8mm and the 15mm. After that the 25mm as that is more medium the low in the scope. Forget the 5mm (360x) and the 3.2mm - 562x is more a joke then anything.

The jump from 12mm to 8mm seems too much on the scope, realistically you are likely to find a 2mm step better. For that reason I wonder if the Vixen SLV's would be a better range as they have a 25mm a 12mm and then a 10mm and a 15mm. Not sure on the performance of the SLV's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Stu said:

I guess the thing is Maks are just not designed for low power viewing. There no reason not to try a focal reducer but often a longer focal length eyepiece, perhaps even a 55mm Plossl for instance can be just as effective.

That's a fair point ... thanks Stu.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/08/2017 at 21:26, ronin said:

At 1800mm focal length you are not really going to get low power. The 25mm BST will still give 72x and that falls very much at the mid range.

Sticking to my genral rule I suggest one at the f number so 12mm, one a bit lower and one a bit more. In this case that would have to be the 8mm and the 15mm. After that the 25mm as that is more medium the low in the scope. Forget the 5mm (360x) and the 3.2mm - 562x is more a joke then anything.

The jump from 12mm to 8mm seems too much on the scope, realistically you are likely to find a 2mm step better. For that reason I wonder if the Vixen SLV's would be a better range as they have a 25mm a 12mm and then a 10mm and a 15mm. Not sure on the performance of the SLV's.

This is where Barlows come in useful. They can offer a focal length/magnification combined with a prime ep that falls between your prime eps' magnifications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Kronos831
      Hey guys!i need to make this quick! I want to get a new 6mm eyepiece.I have a 8" f6 dob and i want to get a nice 200 mag and put the telescope to its limits at 400x
      The most i ve seen with is 240x for Jupiter and Saturn .i ve heard they looked stunning at 400x and i am keen on trying it.Ive got my eyes on a 6mm Skywatcher UWA eyepiece.and i have a Bst Starguider 2z Barlow lens.And i seem to be having problems with my 8mm Bst Starguider (300x in total).the bst has a 16mm eye relief and a 21mm lens diameter,but when i barlowed it and look at the moon yesterday,it was hard finding the right spot to look through the eyepiece and when i moved the image disappeared.I dont know if it will have that effect on planets,when I looked at mars it was fine but i definitely want to avoid that from happening again.Will it happen?
      The Skywatcher eyepiece i want to buy has a 16mm eye relief too.I dont want to make the same mistake now , i want a 6mm eyepiece at the price range of 50-70 euro either from flo or amazonuk.If the Skywatcher will have similar results,can you suggest another one?
    • By Kronos831
      Hey im just in the brink of buying my accessorie set! I m just wonder if i should buy a 8MM BST STARGUIDER eyepiece or not.
      I m going to be seeing planets as well as planetary , emission and other nebula. So is it worth it? it will give me a x150 And 300X (barlowed)magnification
      I dont think i ll be able to use the 300x too much as it will get blurry.
      BTW how blurry does it get
       
       
      The 8mm is another 50 bucks so thats quite a lot for me(14 years old )
      Just want to know if its worth it!
       
    • By Kronos831
      Helloooooooooooo as many of you in the last post told me "this is certaintly not your last eyepiece delema" .Turns out you were right...
      I am really weighing my options here!
      Either i get 3 BST STARGUIDERS : 12 mm 8mm and (18 or 25mm)
      or a Baader Hyperion ZOOM 8-24mm eyepiece. Both options seem very tempting... although the baader is significantly more expensive, it seems as a better option.
      What do you think? 
    • By N3ptune
      I came up with this idea a few weeks ago, to verify which BST Starguiders are the true favorites among users. From 1 to 7, 1 being your favorite + telescope informations.
      Could be interesting to see the results.
      BST Starguider 25mm : ?
      BST Starguider 18mm : ?
      BST Starguider 15mm : ?
      BST Starguider 12mm: My first choice, the only one I tried yet! 200x1000 Newton F5
      BST Starguider 8mm : ?
      BST Starguider 5mm : ?
      BST Starguider 3.2mm : ?

      I trow this into space.
       
      2018-01-19 Update:
      Starguider FL changed from 3.5mm to 3.2mm (little error)
    • By drbones
      I was wondering what people's experiences are with using the wider angle eyepieces with a fairly fast Newtonian and what they'd recommend?
      Currently looking to upgrade to a couple of very wide angle eyepieces to help with viewing DSOs and to make manually following objects like the smaller planets with our 10" dob a bit smoother compared to the current 7mm plossl we're using.
      As I understand it, the more budget 82 degree eyepieces will struggle vs a higher quality, lower FOV eyepiece due to the faster scope, but I was curious as to what the "minimum" (for lack of a better word) I should be looking at for an 82/100 degree eyepiece should be? I'm in the UK so any eyepieces available in the UK/Europe should be fine.
      Some of the series I was looking at would be SW Myriad, the ES 82/100 degree series, Meade series 5000 UWA and there also seems to be a series of 100-degree eyepieces that get sold under a few different brands, one of which is the TS XWA series. Looking at both a ~20-28mm and ~5-9mm EP to pair with a 2x barlow for a good range of magnification, and will probably be purchasing a coma corrector at some point.
      Are there any of these I should be looking at avoiding in particular? A small amount of aberration at the edges isn't really a huge issue as I'm not expecting perfectly sharp images across the whole field, just wanted to avoid the worst offenders on fast scopes so I know what to avoid and what to keep an eye out for second hand as well.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.