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_solar_25_winners.thumb.jpg.fe4e711c64054f3c9486c752d0bcd6f2.jpg

drbones

Minimum quality 82degree+ eyepiece for f/4.9 newtonian?

Recommended Posts

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, welcome, drbones, since this is your first post.

I have an f/5 newtonian and these widefield eyepieces: Myriad 110° 5mm and 3.5mm, Panorama 82° 7mm, Maxvision (Meade) 82° 18mm, TS 82° 4mm, Explore 82° 4.7mm, Meade 82° 24mm. They all perform great with negligible differences at the very edge. The 4mm TS has a tiny bit more lateral color than its Explore 4.7mm counterpart, but costs less, so value is the same (and great!).

Other differences, the amount of crescent effect, or the tiny loss of sharpness near the diaphragm are so minute, I don't bother with them when observing. I looked for them when testing the new gear, but now completely ignore them in real observing time. All of them keep double stars split at the extreme limit of the field, and Airy disks remain tight and round. Lunar craters beraly lose detail in the same test (there is also some slight  change of performance between night and day, but it appears to vanish when my eyes get used to the new items).

Seems that all these optics which are derived from Tele Vue ideas work great, no matter what the interpretation by competitors is.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would agree with Paul that the ES eyepieces are very good value for money and give excellent performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For a fast scope consider Meade series 5K UWA, ES 82° or William Optics UWAN and its re-branded identical twins.

I have a 16mm Skywatcher Nirvana (one of the WO UWAN clones) which performs excellently in my f/5 refractor.

The Meade 5K UWA get a good press over at Cloudy Nights.

Personally I don't like ES 82°. I bought an 11mm ES 82° which had an eye relief that was uncomfortably short. The stated eye relief would have been long enough, but in practice it fell short. I returned it for that reason: my eyelashes touched the glass if I wanted to see the field stop and I would've had to clean it after every use. Optically very sharp and well suited for f/5. The field stop was unsharp, btw, but that didn't bother me much.

Celestron's 82° offering seems better for f/10 and slower.

Bye. Good luck choosing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any 82/100* eyepiece will be fine at f/5 unless you're super critical? in which case get the ES which are great at f/5 or the Televue's that work down to f/4!

One of my favorite 82* EP's is the Celestron Luminos. these have relatively good eye relief unlike many other 82* EP's, and the 7mm & 15mm are great for just £95 a pop.   

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/celestron-eyepieces/celestron-luminos-eyepieces.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never looked through a Luminos. But, at that price, it is tempting......

Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Paul73 said:

I've never looked through a Luminos. But, at that price, it is tempting......

Paul

The only downside I noted was some reflections when viewing close to the Moon and not the best range of focal lengths. Great build, eye relief, and sharpness apart from that. I found the 7mm to be a great wide field planetary EP in particular, that one was my favorite I'd like another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Ben the Ignorant said:

First, welcome, drbones, since this is your first post.

I have an f/5 newtonian and these widefield eyepieces: Myriad 110° 5mm and 3.5mm, Panorama 82° 7mm, Maxvision (Meade) 82° 18mm, TS 82° 4mm, Explore 82° 4.7mm, Meade 82° 24mm. They all perform great with negligible differences at the very edge. The 4mm TS has a tiny bit more lateral color than its Explore 4.7mm counterpart, but costs less, so value is the same (and great!).

Other differences, the amount of crescent effect, or the tiny loss of sharpness near the diaphragm are so minute, I don't bother with them when observing. I looked for them when testing the new gear, but now completely ignore them in real observing time. All of them keep double stars split at the extreme limit of the field, and Airy disks remain tight and round. Lunar craters beraly lose detail in the same test (there is also some slight  change of performance between night and day, but it appears to vanish when my eyes get used to the new items).

Seems that all these optics which are derived from Tele Vue ideas work great, no matter what the interpretation by competitors is.

Thank you very much! And as well to everyone else for all the replies - I don't have much of a chance to test various EPs prior to buying so given the money I wanted to be sure there wasn't any lemons on the faster end to completely avoid.

I think I'd almost hoped there'd be only one series to choose from to save me some effort ;)

That also reminds me I need to do a proper introduction post!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Lockie said:

Any 82/100* eyepiece will be fine at f/5 unless you're super critical? in which case get the ES which are great at f/5 or the Televue's that work down to f/4!

One of my favorite 82* EP's is the Celestron Luminos. these have relatively good eye relief unlike many other 82* EP's, and the 7mm & 15mm are great for just £95 a pop.   

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/celestron-eyepieces/celestron-luminos-eyepieces.html

These look pretty interesting, the 15mm and 7mm are tempting me although the 23mm does seem to be a bit on the hand grenade side of things

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Luminos series is optimized for Celestron's own line of Schmidt-Cassegrain Edge telescopes, f/10 with a certain very small amount of field curvature. They don't have excellent sharpness near the diaphragm with faster optics, which is a shame because the Luminos have always been quite affordable. There was a very complete comparative test in Ciel&Espace displaying (with pictures of target charts) the edge resolution of various widefield eyepieces, the Luminos was the worst among a dozen. 

The test is no longer online, but Teleskop Service warns buyers that the Luminos line is not for faster optics, but optimized for Celestron's Edge series, or other flat-field intruments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many observe DSO with 100 deg eyepieces with VG results and many also view the planets with 70 deg eyepieces with excellent performance. I use a Lunt 20mm HDC 100 ( Myriad) that works extremely well for DSO and think that a Pentax XW for lunar/planetary would be super.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Ben the Ignorant said:

The Luminos series is optimized for Celestron's own line of Schmidt-Cassegrain Edge telescopes, f/10

Don't the Luminos pre-date the Edge HD's launch? Also the Luminos are just the replacement for the Axioms, so not sure about them being optimised for the Edge scopes?

 My Luminos were sharp at f/7 and I have a soft spot for them at least :)   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure, I have not tried the Luminos myself, and I don't know if there are two generations of them. But the Ciel&Espace comparo did show a bit less edge resolution in the Luminos eyepiece, and Teleskop Service does advise people that they are preferably meant for flat-field instruments, and would not perform quite as good in scopes with field curvature. The advice is in the german description of the eyepiece, not in its english version.

But no modern eyepiece is disappointing, and some reviewers (like myself) become so experienced in seeking imperfections, they tend to see them much bigger than they really are. When I observe for enjoyment instead of hardcore testing, the differences are negligible, really. I remember a friend saying that such and such imperfection in a scope was "enormous", then I realized I had myself become too sensitive to these.

He's an imager who does not tolerate other than perfectly round stars up to the corners, and I'm a visualist who trained hard to interpret the minutest features in star tests (with success after much training), so we both forgot to take the long view (pun intended), and just observe the celestial stuff instead of judging optics harshly all the time.

  • Like 1

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 J47
      Hello stargazers, welcome. I had posted a picture yesterday of Uranus that had appeared to show its rings. I am using a Nexstar 4se, a 2x Barlow, and my Neximage Burst Color and capturing hundreds of photos and stacking them for my results. But still had me and others curious to if I were actually seeing the rings of Uranus or maybe just a glare of some sort.
      So I got back out there this morning, might I note I live in FL where the weather tends to stay hot so clear imaging during this time of year can be difficult, but not impossible as this image that I stacked 150 out of 300 images taken may show that statement holds true..............or I could just be mistaken the object in the image, but all in all I am feeling pretty confident that I have a decently clear image(stacked 150 images) of Uranus, its rings, and one of it's distant moons. It may be necessary to zoom in on my photo in order to see the moon it should be down and to the right of the planet a good distance in relation to the size of planet, I noticed that looking at Uranus in the photo helped bring the moon out just like stargazing in real-time. 
      If anyone can better distinguish what I might have done right or wrong here any help would be appreciated (also forgot to change format save for my images so I am stuck with .bmp and setting it as a download, sorry for any inconvenience.) - - - J47(JAY)
      uranusringmoon.bmp
    • By confusedstargazer
      Hi I'm new here.
      Briefly looking through this site, it would seem this site is geared towards discussion regarding instruments. So in advance, I apologize if this is not the appropriate forum/website for my question. And. If at all possible, might anyone link me to a website that might be better suited for me. I looked on youtube, and a few other websites and nothing concrete came up as to where the appropriate place to post might be or what it was I was observing regarding moon activity on this early morning of 11/28/2017. So here I am and once again I apologize if this is the wrong forum for my question.
       
      I'll be brief. My knowledge of astronomy is very limited. Though I've always had a passion for astronomy.
      My question. What exactly was I observing in regard to the moon's orbit/position/speed in which it changed?
      Now, allow me to set the stage. It was roughly 12:30AM here in North East Texas on this day of 11/28/2017. On my way to the store I stopped to take a look at the night sky as I always do. The moon was roughly at a 50 degree angle above the southern tree line. Forgive my ignorance but this is the best way I can describe what I was observing. In less than one hour the moon had radically relocated to just above the western treeline. Once I got home the moon was obviously no longer visible from this viewing point. 
       I am very curious as to why the moons position changed so quickly. I've never seen this before.
      Is this a common occurrence  within the moon's cycles and or time of year?
      I look forward to hearing your responses. To hopefully shed light on what is seemingly a strange phenomenon to me.
      Thank you in advance!
    • By Stroller
      Hi All,
      About to buy my first real scope and mount.  I'm wondering if I can put upon you good folks to ask for your recommendations for the items in the title that will match up with and compliment the equipment I'm about to buy.
      Top of my list at this moment is the SW EQ6 Pro with either the Explorer 250PDS or 200PDS (depending on the all the other items that need to get to at least make it usable fairly usable to start with and how that affect the overall budget).
      If I have to (for cost at this time), I will drop to a SW HEQ5 Pro with the 200PDS.
      Fortunately, my girlfriend/partner loves the night sky but I know she will want to see 'results' in the EP straight away and will want to mainly look at our Solar system and the Moon (not that I don't) but she hates the cold and has limited patience for waiting to see anything deeper than those for now.
      Myself, apart from the above of course, would like to go deeper but also include astrophotography once I have got myself up to a decent level of familiarity with the kit.  I have a humble Pentax K20D DSLR and my very old Pentax Spotmatic F (Wet film) camera (It's been with me for a long time and still gets used once in a while).
      I would very much appreciate your collective wisdom regarding the title items and fitting my DSLR (primarily) to either of the two OTA's above.  What is the minimum I need to get, make/models that will get me going and that will complement each other and the system without having to take out a second mortgage just yet ;-)  and get me off to a fairly good start.
      I'm sure you have all had these questions before and I apologise if your first thought is "not again" :-) ... It's just that I have been lurking in the background of the site for a few weeks now reading up as much as I can and trying to pull a list together but my brain seems to have turned to fog now and after reading something earlier to day of EP's and Barlow's and that the optics in them (for want of a better word) should be in 'harmony with each other and the system, I've completely lost where I thought I was going and then also the subjects and threads that I had been using to 'guide' me elsewhere on SGL.
      Many thanks in anticipation.
      Kind regards,
      Chris. 
    • By THL22
      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:.)

       
    • By jschusterman
      Hey all, I was hanging with the in-laws out on the Olympic Peninsula in Washington state last night and managed to stumble onto this cluster. I was just using a $100 4" reflector, no tracking, no guiding, no eq mount, just a camera tripod (quite the challenge!), which is the reason I'm not sure what I captured here. Definitely in the Sagittarius region though, which is another reason I'm not sure (so many DSOs there!). My best guess is that it's M71. Can anyone confirm or tell me what it is? Thanks!
       
      - Josh
       
      P.S. It's just a single 5 second exposure with a Nikon D3100.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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