Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Yesterday evening the Moon was framed well through my eastern-facing window, it would remain in the right spot for an hour and a half, not too low, not too high, to let me do a marathon of eyepieces changes, my most complete comparo of eyepieces ever. The challenge was to test my three new Sky-Watcher Myriads through five telescopes, first was an 80mm f/7.5 achromat, not the widespread f/5 doublet with thick chromatic fringing.

Thanks to a homemade sliding counterweight, the 670-gram 3.5mm didn't send the little scope (on an AZ-4 mount) slewing wildly on its own. Results will be written briefly to save your time and mine.

80mm f/7.5 achro:

3.5mm 110°: lateral color is negligible, on par with 4mm TS 82° and Explore 4.7mm 82° eyepieces. Curvature of field is less than in any other eyepiece I own, the amount of refocusing between center and edge is less than with any of my other eyepieces, Aero, Nagler clones, Hyperion, Explore 68°, or Explore 82°, or equal to the best of them. Sharpness and brightness are better than 4mm TS and equal to the 4.7mm Explore. Astigmatism is negligible, especially compared to Hyperions. Comfort is good after getting used to the eye relief, which is not long but adequate for me (no glasses). Overall impression and feel are very good, machining is clean, coatings reflect the laser weakly, and glass diffuses it very little. Tolerance to eye decentering is very good, only a very thin pale orange fringe near the field stop, almost vanishes with good eye placement. Scope shows less chromatic aberration than through regular eyepieces, especially the 4.7mm.

5mm 110°: same in all respects except full image is a bit less accessible, reduced chromatic aberration makes me rethink my opinion of achromats.

9mm 100°: same in all respects, lesser magnification makes everything brighter and slightly whiter, reduces the doublet's chromatism more than the other Myriads, so much it almost vanishes when turbulence is low, and eye placement is spot on. A bit shorter and lighter than its cousins, my favorite when handling is the criteria. The somewhat narrower field makes it easier to view.

300mm f/5 dob:

3.5mm 110°: same as with achro save for whiter image, superfine bright lines and thin shadows promise great viewing when air is calmer. A bit shocked to see so much detail over such a large area. No coma or aberrations near the edge, reduction in sharpness at the edge is so small it made me smile. Comparo with other optics gave identical results (see achro).

5mm 110°: same, no coma, magnification still too high for current conditions but great brightness and sharpness show through

9mm 100°: magnification not too high, no coma, 10mm Hyperion has a tough time competing in all respects despite the 68° field. Almost 2mm exit pupil with strongish magnification makes fine features blatant.

80mm f/6 apo:

3.5mm 110°: same whiteness as with dob, no loss of image quality at the edge to speak of. Short lightweight scope benefits immensely from homemade sliding counterweight, or observation would be very difficult (EQ-3 mount).

5mm 110°: same, 5mm and 3.5mm are twins in all categories but the somewhat better eye comfort in the 3.5mm.

9m 100°: no difference to comment about

127mm f/10 catadioptric:

3.5mm 110°: extra counterweight on short scope saves the day, defocus between center and periphery is laughably small. The reputation of strong field curvature that Schmidt-Cassegrains have seems to be negated by this design (thanks to the folks at Tele Vue for the Ethos concept!). Magnification supposed to be too high but the freshly collimated scope does very well despite turbulence and obstruction. Seems that collimation is super-critical in Schmidt-Cass, f/10 beam does not make them that forgiving.

5mm 110°: no optical difference to comment about. Lesser power does not reduce the annoyance of turbulence blurring that much, the 357x of the 3.5mm were not that overblown on a quasi full Moon. Good omen for future planet viewing.

9mm 100°: immediately brighter, whiter and sharper than an old Meade 9mm ortho which always disappointed me for its dullness. I sold it years ago because it had to be a poorly polished unit, orthos are supposed to be clearer than that. The memory was good enough to compare mentally with the Myriad, which wins easily despite the enormous extra amount of glass.

130mm f/7 newtonian:

3.5mm 110°: air agitation suddenly becomes more disturbing (less than an hour later clouds would hide the whole sky). 0.5mm pupil is the theoretical limit but Moon is still white through a thin haze. Plastic focuser holds heavy eyepiece well but the focus difference between center spot and field stop is hard to to judge. None was seen, no worry about this, if the f/5 newtonian has no issue, the f/7 brother has none either.

5mm 110°: problem with boiling stars but luminosity and star color are strong, coma seems absent, focus shift between center and edge seems absent, none shows in these poor conditions, anyway. Very white Moon.

9mm 100°: air movement is too strong even at that lower power (100x), but judgement has been so positive at f/5 and f/6, there is no need for that final test. I returned eyepieces to their boxes, and telescopes to their landing spots. Good thing I exploited the viewing window timely, because it was over less than an hour later.

There you have it, nothing but positive review. I wish I could try out the 15mm and 20mm but they cost too much for my budget, I decided I would not give more than 150€ for an 82°, or more than 200€ for a 100°. When these went for 180€ thanks to the pound/euro exchange rate, and a 10% discount at 365astronomy, I ordered them after not much thinking. Their service was effecient and courteous, by the way.

I used to assume more glass would necessarily mean less brightness and contrast, but these Ethos-inspired Myriad prove that wrong. Polish, design and glass quality matter much more. I also assumed an immense field would make edge aberrations mandatory, that prejudice was killed, too. Some lateral color shows when viewing hard white lights on the ground, but realistic targets in the sky show very little or none at all. The almost full Moon does not cause this effect in a meaningful manner, and the extra field makes the optical feat more admirable!

I obviously recommend them, just be sure your scope can keep its balance.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ben 

A very thorough and interesting test on our celestial neighbour, which can be most demanding on eyepieces.

Food for thought, these reasonable priced wide fields are all becoming far more attainable than other more exotic options, I know I finally bought some explore Scientific 68 degree ones and I was most impressed, hmmm.

I would love to see a picture of your counterweight system as I am looking at something along these lines myself.

Interesting comments on achromatic too, I have a little ST80 that surprised me with the image quality for the price, it was a transitional scope, but is now a keeper.

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Ben the Ignorant said:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-eyepieces/myriad-mwa-100110-eyepieces.html

Yes, FLO carries it but TS does not, seems that it's not retailed everywhere.

Interesting. FLO loaned me the ones that I tried but the 15mm was not available back then. It fills out the range nicely.

Incidently, FLO also sent me the William Optics XWA 101 degree 9mm, the only one in that range available in 2015. As you might guess, it turned out to be exactly the same unit as the Myriad 9mm. I guess WO would say, "but these go to 101 ?" :smiley:

Spinal_Tap_-_Up_to_Eleven.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Alan White said:

I would love to see a picture of your counterweight system as I am looking at something along these lines myself.

My Bluetooth used to not work but it's fixed now, I can post pics.

20171103_101434.thumb.jpg.cd7df777bffeb37d4fcb98b8fd7d6bac.jpg

The weight is made up of steel plates, the ring is the old-fashioned stand for rain tubes, not pretty but once deburred and polished it slides well. Note that the weight is under the tube to make it more efficient. The wingnut sets the friction.

 20171103_101848.thumb.jpg.e79aaa57ae150d5fc634d3b31cbdf3e8.jpg

I'll show the other sliding counterweights later, I have to leave the house to do some paperwork, now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Hi . Interesting reading with a variety of scopes.

I would be interested if a test was done with the myraids against the ethos, this would obviously show if the extra £ is really worth spending.

From a personal point of interest a test around f/ 4.5 dob would really test these myraids against an ethos to see in a fast scope if the ethos is still the king of the castle of the 100d eyepiece. As there are getting more quality 100d eyepiece on the market that must really be getting close to ethos standard without the price tag. I am sure there must be a eyepiece around that will or can match the ethos, but can they match the quality of optical performance of the fast ratio scopes to which really ultimately test the quality of contruction/optics of the eyepiece.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the 9mm and 20mm Myraid and they are great in my 12" Dob, Orion VX8 Newt and the Heritage 130P. I had previously owned the 8mm, 13mm and 21mm Ethos and regretted selling them. However, I find that the Myriad provides an excellent alternative and IMHO matches the quality  of the TeleVue.

I did purchase a 13mm  Ethos because there was not an alternative. I have seen that @FLO advertises the 15mm Myriad but I have never seen one in the flesh or advertised elsewhere.

Finally, the other night I unscrewed the 2" barrel of the 9mm Myriad to use in the Heritage 130P. I added a 2.25x Baader barlow and compared it to the 4.7mm ES82 and again IMHO the Myriad had better contrast and sharpness.

So Ben I totally agree with your conclusion over the Myriad and I am still thinking I might buy the 5mm to replace the 4.7mm ES82.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the sliding counterweight I made for my C5:

20171103_142311.thumb.jpg.32c219eec2fb8ae26d41f22f79ed67f0.jpg

This is not off-topic because those modern heavyweight oculars require counterbalance, scopes like the C5 were designed when 700 grams eyepieces were unthinkable. The rubberized knobs are homemade, and so are the ergonomic finder knobs. Sadly not all telescopes are fitted with a handle and/or a camera rail like this old Celestron is. The paint is so ancient it turned ivory, and it's scratched by rubbing against trees when I carelessly used it as a telephoto. How could I do that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Timebandit said:

 

Hi . Interesting reading with a variety of scopes.

I would be interested if a test was done with the myraids against the ethos, this would obviously show if the extra £ is really worth spending.

From a personal point of interest a test around f/ 4.5 dob would really test these myraids against an ethos to see in a fast scope if the ethos is still the king of the castle of the 100d eyepiece. As there are getting more quality 100d eyepiece on the market that must really be getting close to ethos standard without the price tag. I am sure there must be a eyepiece around that will or can match the ethos, but can they match the quality of optical performance of the fast ratio scopes to which really ultimately test the quality of contruction/optics of the eyepiece.

I did that in the report that I linked to here. F/5.3 was the fastest scope that I had to use them in though:

If you can do without 100 degrees the Delos and XW's (at least the shorter XW's) are very slightly better than the Ethos IMHO. I believe that the Ethos is still king of the 100's though allbeit not by much, especially if your scope is slightly slower.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and the counterweight I made three days before today; I had to wait till I found a presentable system. Lucky me, my last visit at the tool store bagged some new-model drain pipe stand in quite an elegant molding and finish.

20171103_151020.thumb.jpg.62cfecfb60447c1a7b84253c7f9b50a3.jpg

The ugly tape around the steel plates protects clothes against those acute metal angles nicely but it has to be replaced with some rubber covering when I find the adequate junk to do it. Note the weight is not symmetrical, and the heavier part is up front where it works more. The pile of steel plates sits under the scope, another ploy to make the weight more efficient.

20171103_151502.thumb.jpg.e402dd2d9e686d63d09c2bcecf03ef1e.jpg

That ring is far more aesthetic than the other, a must on a classier instrument. Adhesive felt makes motion smooth and silent while preventing marring the paint, something that happened to the achromat. Will have to polish the paint and insert thin transparent film. But no scratches here.

I had planned to loosen the screw, move the weight, and tighten again, but if the tension is set right, touching the wingnut is never needed. The ring tilts because of its asymetrical weight, and that's enough to keep in place. I let the tube vertical for one hour with the weight on top, and it didn't move one millimeter. 

So adjusting the weight is simply untilt it, move it, release it, it will tilt again and lock itself in place. Same for the achromat's ring. Eight 40mm x 120mm plates constitute about 700 grams, and balance the Myriads well.

20171103_151932.thumb.jpg.5c4d07bde0fc2a867d3c1d57d526271b.jpg

The plastic ring's extensions don't make the scope look too strange or do-it-yourselfish. Note the two extra baffles right behind the lenses. Their felt pen blackening is shiny but the whole inside of the scope will be treated with matte blackboard paint now that I can source it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Mark at Beaufort said:

I had previously owned the 8mm, 13mm and 21mm Ethos and regretted selling them. However, I find that the Myriad provides an excellent alternative and IMHO matches the quality  of the TeleVue.@FLO

 

 

I can hear the sharpening of disemboweling cutlasses this very moment:icon_biggrin:.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 03/11/2017 at 13:55, John said:

I did that in the report that I linked to here. F/5.3 was the fastest scope that I had to use them in though:

If you can do without 100 degrees the Delos and XW's (at least the shorter XW's) are very slightly better than the Ethos IMHO. I believe that the Ethos is still king of the 100's though allbeit not by much, especially if your scope is slightly slower.

 

 

Yes I did read your report John and very good it was too.?

As I have a gap for a wide or ultra wide eyepiece which I may be looking to fill,  to fit between my Pentax 10 XW and my TV Nagler 20mm( in my opinion great quality eyepieces). I was considering maybe trying a myriad 15mm. Unfortunately Ben and yourself do not see to of put this particular focal range eyepiece through its paces , to see if optically it is as good as a Nagler or Ethos around the 13mm mark. As Televue even though I love there quality are getting hard to justify so much money for these eyepieces. And there are getting some serious quality eyepieces on the market that are getting in the same ballpark in quality now to TV. But an independent test by members on SGL do sometime unlock the key if these contender's are really as good as the Nagler/Ethos quality. 

I was impressed with my 28mm 2" William optics uwan in the Dob around the f/ 4.5 mark . And optically fast scopes really do test eyepieces. And I think Dude with tube also raised the point would the myriad keep pace optically at scopes between f/4 ,and  f/4.5 where a lot of dobs are at. But as I said my uwan is a really good eyepiece in such a fast scope as mine. And I think there seems to be a train of thought the myriad may even come from the same factory as the likes of the uwan and nirvana are made. 

So if Flo want to lend John a 15mm to complete his test of this line up would be great. I suppose a f/ 4.5  scope would also be needed to push it's limits in fast scopes such as mine?.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, John said:

How about these then ?

Clearly a re-branding of something but what ?

If the same as the Myriad or Lunt XWA's, quite interesting perhaps ?

http://www.astroshop.eu/telescope-accessories/eyepieces/15_10/m,Omegon/a,Zubehoer.Allgemein.Serie=Panorama+II

 

 

9 hours ago, jetstream said:

Anybody know who actually makes these eyepieces?

 

Interesting. But the trouble with me and eyepieces I just don't like being the guinea pig. I would much rather know the background of an eyepiece and if it has a reputation for quality glass from a tried and tested group of owners/testers.

That's probably why I have the likes of Pentax, Televue, Badder in the case and very little else. And I do have a tendency to buy second hand , that way even though the glass may come from tried and tested members praising an eyepiece and therefore has a reputation of a quality eyepiece. As I think we all know all are eyes and likes and dislikes are different. That way if I cannot get comfortable with a quality piece of glass, I can easily resell to someone who can get on with an eyepiece.

That's probably why I was possible looking at a myriad, as if it is quality to which seems to be the verdict and has the same sort of background of the nirvana/uwan then the 15mm could be of interest. Some more digging required me think's☺

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, jetstream said:

Anybody know who actually makes these eyepieces?

If you're talking about the Myriads then given the similarity of the design to the Nirvanas I suspect Barsta. The Myriads aren't shown on their website though, but that could be more to do with the frequency with which it is updated, the footer says ©2011.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/4/2017 at 16:08, John said:

How about these then ?

Clearly a re-branding of something but what ?

If the same as the Myriad or Lunt XWA's, quite interesting perhaps ?

http://www.astroshop.eu/telescope-accessories/eyepieces/15_10/m,Omegon/a,Zubehoer.Allgemein.Serie=Panorama+II

 

Most likely another rebranding of the Meade 5000 MWA series.  Everything matches up including the mostly overstated eye relief and probably overstated AFOV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/4/2017 at 15:59, Timebandit said:

I was considering maybe trying a myriad 15mm. Unfortunately Ben and yourself do not see to of put this particular focal range eyepiece through its paces , to see if optically it is as good as a Nagler or Ethos around the 13mm mark.

Reread the above discussion quoted below that the 15mm only just showed up on a few vendor websites as available and that no one has seen one in the flesh yet:

On 11/3/2017 at 04:20, John said:

I didn't know that there was a 15mm ?

 

On 11/3/2017 at 04:27, Ben the Ignorant said:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-eyepieces/myriad-mwa-100110-eyepieces.html

Yes, FLO carries it but TS does not, seems that it's not retailed everywhere.

 

On 11/3/2017 at 04:38, John said:

Interesting. FLO loaned me the ones that I tried but the 15mm was not available back then. It fills out the range nicely.

 

On 11/3/2017 at 05:54, Mark at Beaufort said:

I have seen that @FLO advertises the 15mm Myriad but I have never seen one in the flesh or advertised elsewhere.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.