Brandon eye pieces

[25585]

Looking at these and wonder if any SGL folks have some. 

I came upon them from reading a CN topic. 

They are fairly expensive but have good eye relief, as does my Nikon. 

All are available as flat top or eye cup versions. Low 40s AFOV so maybe not much publicity these days. 

[wookie1965]

Have a look at this thread.

[ronin]

Brandons are simial to plossl's but they are sort of more optimisted for the centre of the field - bit ortho like. So good on planets, however that would imply the edges suffer a bit.

Lots of arguements over them, and so it may be a little fortunate that they are somewhat rare over here. On CN the result is nearly always an arguement, and the same arguement. Usually the thread gets locked eventually.

Think they came from the military background so had a slightly different requirements set from straight astronomy.

Believe they are still made just unsure who by, however not a common item. In effect Al's plossl's took over as they were a more astro related eyepiece offering similar performance.

[Louis D]

The Brandon is similar to a Plossl, but uses 3 or 4 different types of glass and two completely different achromats.  All this makes for an expensive, yet simple, design.  They are made in the US from US sourced glass.  The US military is their biggest customer because it's the only 100% American made eyepiece (excepting uber-expensive purpose built periscope eyepieces for subs and tanks from the likes of Perkin-Elmer or similar military contractor).  To this day, they use single coating lenses to reduce the possibility of scatter, I believe.  I don't own any and have never looked through any, nor do I have any desire to do either.

[wookie1965]

https://www.astronomics.com/vernonscope-eyepieces_c94.aspx

[John]

There was a set of Brandons for sale at the IAS show on Saturday. Something like £1,200 for the set of 6 I recall.

 

[Ruud]

Brandon eyepieces

[Floater]

1 hour ago, Ruud said:

Brandon eyepieces

Ooh! That’s cryptic! ?

[John]

I've never looked through a Brandon eyepiece so I can't comment on their performance myself but I've read lots of contrasting views on them over the years. Nobody seems to say that they are poor eyepieces though, the opinions seem to vary between good performance to exceptional performance. They do seem to suit certain scope designs better than others perhaps and the amount of useable eye relief gets mixed reactions.

I found this description of the design on the Black Oak Observatory website authored by Bruce MacEvoy:

"Brandon – Chester Brandon designed military optics during World War II and subsequently established his own optical manufacturing company. The Brandon eyepiece resembles a modified Plössl, but is made as two biconvex lenses of dense barium crown capped by medium and high dispersion flints. Brandons are widely esteemed by binary, planetary and lunar astronomers for their central sharpness, high contrast, color correction and lack of astigmatism and ghosting. As currently manufactured by VernonScope, the lenses are fully coated but not multicoated. The design has a 45° apparent field of view (not the advertised 50°) and eye relief of about 11mm (at ƒ_e = 28mm)."

[Dave In Vermont]

I forget where and by whom, but a website over here offers a set of these in a very nicely polished wooden case with a velvet-liner. And costing well over $1,000. But there's no description. It's like your supposed to know what they are as if it were implanted in all of our G-Nomes through our DNA.

Very odd indeed! Needless to say - I'm not inspired to buy any of these which, in my opinion, really shouldn't cost more than either a Plössl or orthoscopic. Perhaps the added cost is for the nice wooden-box. Maybe it's made by Pandora? Hmmm...

Dave

[Louis D]

16 minutes ago, Dave In Vermont said:

really shouldn't cost more than either a Plössl or orthoscopic

Except that they're made in the US from US sourced glass, and that there are more the just crown and flint glasses involved.  People tend to forget just how much Chinese suppliers have driven down the cost of many items.  Quality, Chinese multicoated Plossls cost less today in inflation adjusted dollars than singly coated Japanese made Kellners did 40 years ago.  Also take a look at the cost differential in inflation adjust dollars for a Chinese made ED scope versus a Unitron achromat of the 1960s of similar aperture as another example.  Let's not get started on 8" Newtonians and how much cheaper they are today in inflation adjusted dollars.

[John]

5 hours ago, Louis D said:

Except that they're made in the US from US sourced glass, and that there are more the just crown and flint glasses involved.  People tend to forget just how much Chinese suppliers have driven down the cost of many items.  Quality, Chinese multicoated Plossls cost less today in inflation adjusted dollars than singly coated Japanese made Kellners did 40 years ago.  Also take a look at the cost differential in inflation adjust dollars for a Chinese made ED scope versus a Unitron achromat of the 1960s of similar aperture as another example.  Let's not get started on 8" Newtonians and how much cheaper they are today in inflation adjusted dollars.

"We have never had it so good"

Looking back at the prices in my old 1980's catalogues and astro magazines I feel this is very true

[25585]

The Widescreen Centre sells Brandon/Vernonscope eps singly or in boxed sets. Also the bino viewer & Barlows etc. 

On the site it says the eps coating is magnesium flouride, which probably partially explains their cost. Eye relief is always "about" Z mm, which is either very honest or unconcerned. 

[25585]

16 hours ago, Ruud said:

Brandon eyepieces

Neeh what's up doc?

[Louis D]

22 minutes ago, 25585 said:

On the site it says the eps coating is magnesium flouride

That's just your typical blue/violet colored single layer coating that was used for years before multicoatings were introduced in the mid/late 70s as I recall.

[N3ptune]

I wonder how they would compete against a  62d degrees svbony for instance. Brandon are expensive for 40d AFOV that's kind of a sad deal.. thinking of it.

https://www.amazon.com/SVBONY-Telescope-Aspheric-Astronomic-Telescopes/dp/B01JRVT738

(Oh my the Svbony is on sale also.)

[Ruud]

Hi Guys, here's what I meant: Brandon eyepieces are a joke.

They were well respected seventy years ago, when they were competing with Kellners,  but apart from being seriously overpriced they are nothing special by today's standard. Single coated lenses with an outdated coating means poor transmission and the field of view is narrow by necessity due to poor off axis performance of the design, even in slow telescopes.

Today we have better glass, better coatings and better designs.

[Louis D]

3 hours ago, Ruud said:

Hi Guys, here's what I meant: Brandon eyepieces are a joke.

They were well respected seventy years ago, when they were competing with Kellners,  but apart from being seriously overpriced they are nothing special by today's standard. Single coated lenses with an outdated coating means poor transmission and the field of view is narrow by necessity due to poor off axis performance of the design, even in slow telescopes.

Today we have better glass, better coatings and better designs.

By those standards, the Zeiss observatory class monocentrics must be a joke as well.  I'd still gladly accept a set of them.

[N3ptune]

Without Prejudice

I ask myself if the design could be considered obsolete.. like Brandon or Orthoscopic (Zeiss monocentric I don't know). I know the orthoscopic can provide great sharpness.. But at the same time it's possible to get 60d AFOV (or more), more comfort, and about the same results for much less money with some Chinese EPs. Unless the sales for orthoscopic, Brandon or Zeiss monocentrics are rising, for me, this would be a great indicator of how actual the design is.  (maybe they are selling very well, I don't know)

I don't think that's a wise choice for the average Joe. I have one orthoscopic right now, it's very nice and providing sharper images but honestly it's struggling against the ES 82d... competitor. After some time I prefer to go back to 82d long eye relief, it's instinctive. (Even if the quality of the image is a bit superior with the ortho. )

Unfortunately, I could be trapped in a mainstream trend.. some people will even say that's an illness to always aim for larger AFOV, longer eye relief.  

I don't have an opinion if Brandon's eyepieces are a joke but with all the evidences suggesting the design is obsolete and the price very high.

hemmmmm

 

[dweller25]

Wheres LORON when you need him

[N3ptune]

But that's a very relevant and important discussion. With a good tea and the right words it's definitively interesting for me. (With a bit of suspense has a bonus, I know I will not cross the line)

 

[John]

15 minutes ago, dweller25 said:

Wheres LORON when you need him

Be afraid, be very afaid !

 

[John]

57 minutes ago, Louis D said:

By those standards, the Zeiss observatory class monocentrics must be a joke as well.  I'd still gladly accept a set of them.

Good to see that Brandon threads still have some "spice" to them

[jabeoo1]

 

I am getting comfortable for this one.....That 48mm Brandon though is tempting. 

[25585]

My only interest is eye relief & comfort, so 24 & 32. Do Brandons Barlow well with non V-scope Barlows?. I have a TV 2.5x & am considering a 4x for higher mags. For DSO viewing I have a couple of WA eps, but a want good ER to split double stars & see Saturn's rings, if we ever get a clear night again.