High power eyepiece for TAK100DL

[festoon]

Thank you everyone again, I've learned a lot from this thread

I think I will look out for a XW or Delite as a comformatble option and hightly rated, and maybe give a Fujiyama a go also...as these seem relatively good value

Maybe I could go for a 4mm delite, 5mm XW, and a 6mm HD or Fujiyama ortho....how would that sound?

[mikeDnight]

17 hours ago, Stu said:

I have no doubt you are correct Mike, but it's worth acknowledging that binoviewers don't work for everyone. I've done comparisons between binoviewers and cyclops views on planets and I definitely see far more detail with a single eyepiece.

For solar and lunar observing I much prefer binoviewers, but for planetary, definitely not. It is all down to your eyes I think and you won't know until you've tried!

You are right of course Stu. Binoviewers aren't for everyone! The 5mm super mono was truly remarkable in the FC100 and I almost offered to buy it - not that it was for sale - until I put the bv back in the scope. The annoying thing is that I used to have a few of the super mono's, but after I bought an NP101 I sold them on for a pittance. Just one of my seemingly endless stupid decisions! One eyepiece that did deliver a superior view to the SM was a AP planetary eyepiece.  If you can get your hands on one of those you'll be in astro heaven.

Just a comment about the cheap super Abbe ortho's. Its not that they are in any way superior to more modern designs, they are not. They are real cheapies at around £39 and the 16.8mm in its native form isn't that sparkling in the FC100 F7.4 due to edge distortion. But in the BV with a X2 barlow, giving around a X4 amplification, it really becomes a terrific eyepiece. If Tak ever make an FC100 at F29 these little Abbes will be just the ticket! 

[mikeDnight]

17 hours ago, Timebandit said:

 

 

 

 

Shame that you did not have a pair of TMB supermono to go up against the cheap pair of Abbe Ortho. As if the cheap pair of Abbe Ortho in the binoviewers bested a single TMB supermono. Just think what a pair of TMB supermono would possibly be like in the binoviewers. Find another TMB supermono chaps and let us know ?

 

 

 

If only i could get my hands on a pair of 5mm TMB Super mono's, the view would be droolworthy! Unfortunately the 5mm belonged to a friend and i doubt he'll part with it anytime soon. Then I'd need another, and then I'd want a pair of 4mm's and possibly a pair of 6mm's. I suspect there are some people out there with the entire set of super mono's paired for bino use, but I doubt theyed want to sell them on to me for the price I'd want to pay. 

[Timebandit]

4 hours ago, festoon said:

             .  

Maybe I could go for a 4mm delite, 5mm XW, and a 6mm HD or Fujiyama ortho....how would that sound?

 

That sounds a lot of quality eyepieces?

But when in your eyepiece case this lot would look a right mixed bag . Smart soldiers lined up on parade in will not be ? ?

 

3 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

If only i could get my hands on a pair of 5mm TMB Super mono's, the view would be droolworthy! Unfortunately the 5mm belonged to a friend and i doubt he'll part with it anytime soon. Then I'd need another, and then I'd want a pair of 4mm's and possibly a pair of 6mm's. I suspect there are some people out there with the entire set of super mono's paired for bino use, but I doubt theyed want to sell them on to me for the price I'd want to pay. 

 

 

Time to organise a East Lancs star party by the looks of it Mike. But only persons with paired TMB supermono are allowed to attend?. Job Done ?

 

 

[John]

5 hours ago, festoon said:

I think I will look out for a XW or Delite as a comformatble option and hightly rated, and maybe give a Fujiyama a go also...as these seem relatively good value

Maybe I could go for a 4mm delite, 5mm XW, and a 6mm HD or Fujiyama ortho....how would that sound?

The only slight disadvantage that I can see with your final line above is that the 4mm Delite reaches focus around 8mm further out than the others listed which, while not exactly par-focal, are quite close in that respect. If you are viewing at high power the need to re-focus significantly (ie: more than just a quarter turn of the focuser) for the Delite might prove annoying.

[Timebandit]

7 hours ago, festoon said:

Thank you everyone again, I've learned a lot from this thread

I think I will look out for a XW or Delite as a comformatble option and hightly rated, and maybe give a Fujiyama a go also...as these seem relatively good value

Maybe I could go for a 4mm delite, 5mm XW, and a 6mm HD or Fujiyama ortho....how would that sound?

 

1 hour ago, John said:

The only slight disadvantage that I can see with your final line above is that the 4mm Delite reaches focus around 8mm further out than the others listed which, while not exactly par-focal, are quite close in that respect. If you are viewing at high power the need to re-focus significantly (ie: more than just a quarter turn of the focuser) for the Delite might prove annoying.

 

 

If  your budget allows go for the Pentax XW in 3.5mm, 5 mm and maybe 7mm

Or the Delite 4mm 5mm and maybe 7mm

If your budget does not allow then go for the Fujiyama Ortho in 5mm 6mm and maybe 7 mm (I don't think they do a 4mm which is a shame) . Good eyepieces these for the money(very like the  late great, but not available new now Badder Genuine Ortho). I have a Fujiyama and they are good, as long as you can live with tight eye relief and narrow fov

 

I don't think IMO you will be disappointed with the optical quality of any of the above eyepiece, I hope that helps☺

   

 

[mikeDnight]

7 hours ago, festoon said:

Thank you everyone again, I've learned a lot from this thread

I think I will look out for a XW or Delite as a comformatble option and hightly rated, and maybe give a Fujiyama a go also...as these seem relatively good value

Maybe I could go for a 4mm delite, 5mm XW, and a 6mm HD or Fujiyama ortho....how would that sound?

XW's are a great choice. Even the amazing 3.5mm  at X257 will find plenty of use in your DL, which will take in excess of X100 per inch on a good night on some targets.

[Highburymark]

Another consideration with these telescopes - eyepiece size and weight. Many owners have robust mounts and tripods to handle the extra load that often comes with wider field EPs, but one of the reasons I bought an FC was its remarkable lightness - and subsequently I've sold most of my heavy eyepieces (not an easy process - they deliver lovely views) to keep the whole set up balanced and portable. And the biggies tend to get bigger at these short focal lengths. An Ethos weighs more than a Delos, which itself is more than twice the weight of a Delite. I think XWs may be slightly lighter than Delos, while orthoscopics are tiny. Just worth being aware of - if you're going to swap between very light and medium/heavy EPs during sessions, you need a reasonably sturdy mount.

[John]

7 minutes ago, Highburymark said:

Another consideration with these telescopes - eyepiece size and weight. Many owners have robust mounts and tripods to handle the extra load that often comes with wider field EPs, but one of the reasons I bought an FC was its remarkable lightness - and subsequently I've sold most of my heavy eyepieces (not an easy process - they deliver lovely views) to keep the whole set up balanced and portable. And the biggies tend to get bigger at these short focal lengths. An Ethos weighs more than a Delos, which itself is more than twice the weight of a Delite. I think XWs may be slightly lighter than Delos, while orthoscopics are tiny. Just worth being aware of - if you're going to swap between very light and medium/heavy EPs during sessions, you need a reasonably sturdy mount.

Good points Mark

I don't use my Ethos eyepieces with my Tak 100. Interestingly though the 8mm and 6mm Ethos are actually a touch lighter than the Delos equivilents. Otherwise your points are spot on and weight is a consideration

 

[Timebandit]

16 minutes ago, Highburymark said:

Another consideration with these telescopes - eyepiece size and weight. Many owners have robust mounts and tripods to handle the extra load that often comes with wider field EPs, but one of the reasons I bought an FC was its remarkable lightness - and subsequently I've sold most of my heavy eyepieces (not an easy process - they deliver lovely views) to keep the whole set up balanced and portable. And the biggies tend to get bigger at these short focal lengths. An Ethos weighs more than a Delos, which itself is more than twice the weight of a Delite. I think XWs may be slightly lighter than Delos, while orthoscopics are tiny. Just worth being aware of - if you're going to swap between very light and medium/heavy EPs during sessions, you need a reasonably sturdy mount.

 

 

 

You mean like that.

 

Both are 5mm. The Pentax XW on the left. And the Ortho on the right. A lot of size and weight difference. A picture is worth a thousand words. I think this one clearly shows the considerable difference between two 5mm eyepieces 

 

 

  

 

[Highburymark]

10 minutes ago, John said:

Good points Mark

I don't use my Ethos eyepieces with my Tak 100. Interestingly though the 8mm and 6mm Ethos are actually a touch lighter than the Delos equivilents. Otherwise your points are spot on and weight is a consideration

 

Very interesting John - didn't know that. 

[Highburymark]

5 minutes ago, Timebandit said:

 

 

 

You mean like that.

 

Both are 5mm. The Pentax XW on the left. And the Ortho on the right. A lot of size and weight difference. A picture is worth a thousand words. I think this one clearly shows the considerable difference between two 5mm eyepieces 

 

 

  

 

Perfect. A picture is worth a hundred* words. 

( * or whatever the wordcount was in my above post.)

[John]

Agreed about the picture telling a story.

Having owned a used both I know which eyepiece I'd prefer to use over a prolonged session observing, say, Mars though and the Pentax XW would win that. When my eye is comfortable I'm a better oberserver I think, especially as I get older it seems

At the furthest end of the scale from a LER wide angle are these "ball" eyepieces which seem to be reputed to outperform even the best orthos and monos. Just a single spherical lens element with everything sacrificed for on-axis sharpness:

http://www.siebertoptics.com/Planesphere.html

 

 

[Timebandit]

48 minutes ago, John said:

Agreed about the picture telling a story.

Having owned a used both I know which eyepiece I'd prefer to use over a prolonged session observing, say, Mars though and the Pentax XW would win that. When my eye is comfortable I'm a better oberserver I think, especially as I get older it seem                 

 

 

 

 

Agreed John , especially with the short focal lengths. I have a Meade Research Grade Ortho at 4mm and it is OK for very short use. But it does not compare in comfort to the Pentax XW 3.5,mm . This eyepiece can be used so easy for extended viewing periods, providing comfort, great FOV and with super sharp Optics. As I have said before about the Pentax XW 3.5mm to the 10mm just a complete quality eyepiece IMO ?

 

 

[Louis D]

9 hours ago, John said:

The only slight disadvantage that I can see with your final line above is that the 4mm Delite reaches focus around 8mm further out than the others listed which, while not exactly par-focal, are quite close in that respect. If you are viewing at high power the need to re-focus significantly (ie: more than just a quarter turn of the focuser) for the Delite might prove annoying.

That should be easy enough to parfocalize with an 8mm stack of 1.25" inner diameter (~31mm for a snug fit) O-rings.  Four of these would probably work great.

[jetstream]

On 12/4/2017 at 12:08, Piero said:

The Zeiss Zoom Diascope 20-75x + Baader VIP do an excellent job. 

This would be good.

[festoon]

10 hours ago, John said:

At the furthest end of the scale from a LER wide angle are these "ball" eyepieces which seem to be reputed to outperform even the best orthos and monos. Just a single spherical lens element with everything sacrificed for on-axis sharpness:

http://www.siebertoptics.com/Planesphere.html

These sound really interesting....just been reading a long (and almost painful) thread on them on CN....I think just to act as a compliment to the other eyepieces it could be good to own one. Maybe even though the view would be unfomfortable, if you had centred the object in a LER wide angle eyepiece, and using a tracking mount, you might get a nice quick view with exceptional contrast

Or possibly I will buy one, find completly impossible to use, then have to sell on

[festoon]

Also really like the point about the size/weight differences...This is also something to take into consideration...as if I was to buy a AZ GTi mount with upgraded tripod, maybe I'd be pushing the limits of the mount with my FC100DL combined with my ~1kg 10x60 RACI finder, and a big heavy eyepiece

[Stu]

2 minutes ago, festoon said:

Also really like the point about the size/weight differences...This is also something to take into consideration...as if I was to buy a AZ GTi mount with upgraded tripod, maybe I'd be pushing the limits of the mount with my FC100DL combined with my ~1kg 10x60 RACI finder, and a big heavy eyepiece

I think that is a good point. With the FC-100 I currently use either orthos or lightweight eyepieces such as a 24mm Pan or Nag Zoom. My heaviest currently is a 2" 40mm TMB which is much lighter than the big beasts I used to own.

Having said that, I've just remembered that I use my Baader CoolWedge and binoviewers which are probably the same as one of the bigger eyepieces and the AZGTi copes with that combination.

A DL is obviously just that bit longer which gives more turning moment to the mass at the end. You would probably want to do without the 10x60 Finder, there should be no need for it with the mount aligned properly and you can use a lightweight RDF or Rigel for that.

[marcus_z]

Takahashi Abbe 6mm

[25585]

Vixen HR and Nikon NAV HW series are very worth considering. 

[25585]

On 06/12/2017 at 19:55, John said:

Good points Mark

I don't use my Ethos eyepieces with my Tak 100. Interestingly though the 8mm and 6mm Ethos are actually a touch lighter than the Delos equivilents. Otherwise your points are spot on and weight is a consideration

 

Worth remembering what type of scope each ep was originally designed for. TV eps are mainly for dobs and TV's own robust shortish  fracs. XW eps were designed for spotting scopes. Ditto many others.

Vixen SLV eps are not too heavy and while not having a big FOV like XWs, have similar easy viewing comfort and ergonomics. They have 5, 4 and 2.5 as the shortest. https://www.firstlightoptics.com/vixen-eyepieces/vixen-slv-eyepieces.html

[Stu]

14 minutes ago, 25585 said:

Vixen HR

At lowest you would be at x375 which might be pushing it on most nights even with a DL!

[Pig]

It’s been a while now since the last post in this thread..... does anyone have any updates on the TOE  eyepiece performance ? In particular the 4mm as this sounds like the ideal Jupiter eyepiece in my scope ? I think the Vixen 3.4HR may be pushing a little too much in my DF at 217 X.

[25585]

1 hour ago, Pig said:

It’s been a while now since the last post in this thread..... does anyone have any updates on the TOE  eyepiece performance ? In particular the 4mm as this sounds like the ideal Jupiter eyepiece in my scope ? I think the Vixen 3.4HR may be pushing a little too much in my DF at 217 X.

What about the Fujiyama 4mm Ortho? Harrisons sell them, only £75.

A Vixen 4mm LV is on ebay. 

More money but the Pentax XW 5mm is very good.