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.

  • Announcements

    sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_widefield.jpg.36065d79cb2625eb299137a5b4432c96.jpg

AbeSapien

Explore Scientific 68° Maxvision 40mm

Recommended Posts

AbeSapien    18

Hello fellow watchers :)

 

Thanks to a few members on here I purchased a Skyliner 200P with BST Starguider eyepieces a while back. I absolutely love tanking the stuff out and sit in my spot all night long and enjoy gazing around.
As a member in my previous threat about the BST Starguiders suggested, I also bought myself a Explore Scientific 68° Maxvision 40mm to sweep around the night sky.

 

It was delivered last night and oh boy, this thing is huge! I mean I knew it had to be bigger... but that big? :D NICE!

Now here's the thing... As I took it out of the bag I noticed that the plastic shroud doesn't stay flat on the EP... It kind of makes a small wave... I attached a picture. Is this normal? Is this "expected behavior"? Or did I just manage to get a plum?

I saw that many people are taking apart the entire shroud to save weight and etc. but I don't think this is the thing I really want to do to a brand new EP.

 

What are your thoughts and experiences on this?

 

And another thing I just noticed... FLO and Explore Scientific are out of stock of Maxvision EP's... Did the pull the plug on producing them? I really wanted to get the whole set after holding one of them in my hands :)

IMG_9165.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stu    15,217

That looks like it could be quite annoying when you are observing with it. Unless the plastic shroud is somehow not seated correctly I would look at returning it. Speak to your retailer first though.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
happy-kat    3,167

The Maxvisions aren't in production it was a one off none fulfilled order so when they are gone they are gone. They are near identical to Meade 5000s (apparently).

Edited by happy-kat
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul73    2,562

Must have been a massive production run! We’ve been saying that for 3 or 4 years now.

It is unlikely that you will notice the wavey rubber.

Great eyepieces for the money. Enjoy.

Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lockie    3,888

If it bothers you I'm sure you can just return it with no problem. However, it looks like it might help cut out stray light if you have the raised bit of rubber to the out side of your eye, kind of like a slightly winged eyepiece.

Just turning a negative into a positive :)  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John    18,083

It's not normal - the rubber should be flat around the eye lens. If it is bothersome to you then I'm sure FLO will replace it.

The Maxvisions were, I believe, originally intended to be branded as Meade 5000 SWA's and UWA's but Meade switched supplier so the production run was re-branded "Maxvision" and distributed through the Explore Scientific dealer network.

I don't think they will be making any more though.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AbeSapien    18
2 hours ago, Stu said:

That looks like it could be quite annoying when you are observing with it. Unless the plastic shroud is somehow not seated correctly I would look at returning it. Speak to your retailer first though.

That's what I fear too... It bothers me already just seeing this wave...

 

Thanks for all the other replies. I contacted the seller and they are out of stock unfortunately... so no way to exchange it...

 

After scrolling over the site I also noticed that they carry the Explore Scientific 68 Series Eyepieces. Are they recommendable? If so I could see myself exchanging the Maxvision for the 68 SE 40mm... What do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John    18,083

Is there anything underneath the rubber causing it to be pushed up ?

If not, maybe keeping the eyepiece standing on it's top for a while will press the rubber back into a flat profile ?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
YKSE    2,094
1 hour ago, AbeSapien said:

After scrolling over the site I also noticed that they carry the Explore Scientific 68 Series Eyepieces. Are they recommendable? If so I could see myself exchanging the Maxvision for the 68 SE 40mm... What do you think?

The ES 68° are essentially the same (except the 28mm) design as the Maxvision, with soft eyecup, ES has reduced the weight compare to MV.

28mm are different where Maxvision 28mm has noticeable better image quality.

Of the other focal lengths, 16mm and 20mm are best, work well even in f4 scopes, the others are more suitable for f5 or slower as recommended by ES.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AbeSapien    18
1 hour ago, John said:

Is there anything underneath the rubber causing it to be pushed up ?

If not, maybe keeping the eyepiece standing on it's top for a while will press the rubber back into a flat profile ?

I think I'll try this before jumping to anything at the moment... :) THX

 

34 minutes ago, YKSE said:

The ES 68° are essentially the same (except the 28mm) design as the Maxvision, with soft eyecup, ES has reduced the weight compare to MV.

28mm are different where Maxvision 28mm has noticeable better image quality.

Of the other focal lengths, 16mm and 20mm are best, work well even in f4 scopes, the others are more suitable for f5 or slower as recommended by ES.

Hm okay I see... just talking about the 40mm, which one do you think has better eye relief and is sharper on the edges? What about correction?

Has anyone tried both perhaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul73    2,562

Interesting re the 28mm. I’ve tried both and found them noticeably different. Agreed re the 16 & 20mm MaxVisions, absolute gems! The 24mm 28mm are also good for the money (haven’t tried the 34&40mm monsters).

Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
YKSE    2,094
1 hour ago, AbeSapien said:

Hm okay I see... just talking about the 40mm, which one do you think has better eye relief and is sharper on the edges? What about correction?

Has anyone tried both perhaps?

These eyepeices are scale design, meaning eye relief(ER) is proportional to focal length, about 0.7, so 40mm has 28mm ER, enough for glass-wearer.

You may even feel too long with 40mm Maxvision if you don't twist up the eye guide, you can find out youself. Please be careful when twisting up the eye guide, you may unscrew the 2" barrel (since you're holding it) that lenses fall out of the housing.

edge correction should be very good for your f6 200P (noticeable better than BST e.g.).

 

1 hour ago, Paul73 said:

Interesting re the 28mm. I’ve tried both and found them noticeably different. Agreed re the 16 & 20mm MaxVisions, absolute gems! The 24mm 28mm are also good for the money (haven’t tried the 34&40mm monsters).

Paul

Did you do the comparion head-to-head or to memory?

This is the test done by Ernest in optical bench with his standarized methods and his comments on 28mm MV and ES:

mv28_vs_es28.thumb.jpg.abf7a0745f083e62e5ea9b9b2308d8a7.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AbeSapien    18
7 hours ago, John said:

Is there anything underneath the rubber causing it to be pushed up ?

If not, maybe keeping the eyepiece standing on it's top for a while will press the rubber back into a flat profile ?

Oh my god, you were absolutely right with your suggestion... There was a rolled up foamy sticky tape underneath the shroud! :o 

I removed the both of them but I'm asking myself what their purpose is? Perhaps to prevent that area from getting moist and getting moldy? Should I try to stick them back?

FullSizeRender 2.jpg

FullSizeRender.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stu    15,217

If they are still sticky then maybe get the back under there to hold the rubber in place? Just make sure they are flat!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John    18,083

I think Stu is right - they are probably there to keep the eye cup stuck to the top of the eyepiece body. They should be flat though, not rolled up !

Some folks remove the whole rubber eyecup and the assembly that it's attached to and use the eyepiece in a slimmed down "naked" form so I don't think those little foam sticky pads are in any way vital to it's operation.

Here is a "naked" 34mm Meade SWA (avert your eyes if easily shocked ! :grin:):

 

post-18869-14073059772499_thumb.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AbeSapien    18

Thanks everybody :)

 

I'll cut them in four little pieces and try to get them back under there.

 

Yes, I was recommended to do that as soon as I'd get the EP, but I have to say that I quit like it as it is at this moment. Perhaps one day I'll strip it ;)

 

What are you guys using to clean the glas by the way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John    18,083
3 hours ago, AbeSapien said:

....What are you guys using to clean the glas by the way?

I'm a big fan of the Baader Wonder fluid and their micro fibre cloth. A modest investment up front but the kit provides for many cleanings and it seems really effective. The fluid is sprayed onto the cloth, not the lenses and used in moderation.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tuckstar    38

+1 for wonder fluid. Might seem a bit expensive but you use so little it will last ages.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Louis D    888

I took the shroud off my 40mm Meade 5000 SWA (identical to yours), and there were no little bits of sticky foam under there.  I can't imagine why they would be under there.  There's no reason for them to be there, so don't put them back.

If you ever want remove the shroud, it's quite simple.  Just work a butter knife gently under the edge of the rubber where it meets the shiny steel ring that says Maxvision.  Go around the entire lower edge working the glue loose by gently prying the rubber upward.  Once the rubber comes loose, lift it off and locate the little screw in the spiral slot and unscrew it.  Remove it and the bushing surrounding it.  Put it away in the original box in a baggie for safe storage.  Now lift off the metal portion of the shroud and put it away in the box for storage.  Next, clean off the greasy lube on the eyepiece barrel with your favorite cleanser on a clean paper towel.  There you go!  You've saved about a pound in weight and an inch in diameter and gained about 3mm of eye relief.  This eyepiece is my favorite for scanning the heavens with eyeglasses because it's so comfortable and wide-field with 29mm of usable eye relief and 71 degrees of AFOV (both measured).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AbeSapien    18

Okay, thank you for the Magic Fluid tip. Buying myself right into it! :)

 

Thank you @Louis D for the detailed description of taking it appart. At the given moment I won't strip it, but who knows what the future holds! Some valuable input here :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F15Rules    1,809
On 08/12/2017 at 00:22, John said:

I think Stu is right - they are probably there to keep the eye cup stuck to the top of the eyepiece body. They should be flat though, not rolled up !

Some folks remove the whole rubber eyecup and the assembly that it's attached to and use the eyepiece in a slimmed down "naked" form so I don't think those little foam sticky pads are in any way vital to it's operation.

Here is a "naked" 34mm Meade SWA (avert your eyes if easily shocked ! :grin:):

 

post-18869-14073059772499_thumb.jpg

Am I the only one who thinks these EPs look so much better decloaked?😁

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John    18,083
36 minutes ago, F15Rules said:

Am I the only one who thinks these EPs look so much better decloaked?😁

Dave

They might look better but I can think of a couple of practical disadvantages for me at least:

- the shiny exposed top of the eyepiece is likely to cause unwanted reflections from light sources nearby which can reflect off the eyeball and onto the eye lens. It should be blackened IMHO.

- the eye relief will place the eye position for the non-glasses wearer well off the top of the eyepiece which personally I find uncomfortable to hold for some time and allows stray light into the ware etween the eye and the eyelens which, again IMHO, should be as dark and shielded as possible.

If a nice tall flexible soft rubber eyecup could be added and the top of the eyepiece body blackened then I'd be more enthusiastic :icon_biggrin:

Without their bodywork these eyepieces look like the old "smooth side" Meade 4000 and TV ranges so they do have an appeal, I can see that.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ruud    1,355

I hope you'll be really happy with the new eyepiece! I love low magnifications myself, and the Maxvisions happen to be top class eyepieces.

About their history: JOC (Kunming, China) made Meade's eyepieces. Meade broke up with JOC after JOC set up Explore Scientific to compete with them. When this happened JOC was in the middle of the production of a large batch of Meade series 5000 SWA eyepieces. Meade no longer wanted them and JOC dumped them on the European market branded as Maxvision, a brand they had used before.

This cost Meade a fine, which was settled by Sunny who now is the owner of Meade. Meade uses a new manufacturer, United Optics, also in China.

The Maxvisions are identical to the Meades, except for the name on the barrel, and where the Meades had a coloured ring, the Maxvisions don't. But there was a huge difference in price! 

post-38669-0-48168800-1413471549_thumb.gif

I never bought the 40mm because I was intimidated by its size, and eye relief of the 16mm is too short for me (I suffer from long eye lashes).

Optically, the ES 68° appear identical to the Meade SWA and Maxvision 68°. All three or on a par with Televue's Panoptics.

The rubber eye cup is truly big, but I really like it because it is so effective. It creates a pitch black cavity with the view at he bottom. I do agree though, that these eyepieces look better uncloaked. Don, Starman over at cloudy nights, suggests a home-made eyecup made from a piece of bicycle inner tube as an alternative. See there for pictures.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Louis D    888
3 hours ago, John said:

They might look better but I can think of a couple of practical disadvantages for me at least:

- the shiny exposed top of the eyepiece is likely to cause unwanted reflections from light sources nearby which can reflect off the eyeball and onto the eye lens. It should be blackened IMHO.

- the eye relief will place the eye position for the non-glasses wearer well off the top of the eyepiece which personally I find uncomfortable to hold for some time and allows stray light into the ware etween the eye and the eyelens which, again IMHO, should be as dark and shielded as possible.

If a nice tall flexible soft rubber eyecup could be added and the top of the eyepiece body blackened then I'd be more enthusiastic :icon_biggrin:

Without their bodywork these eyepieces look like the old "smooth side" Meade 4000 and TV ranges so they do have an appeal, I can see that.

 

Been using my 40mm Meade 5000 SWA decloaked since the big blowout sale when I picked it up for $125 shipped several years back, and I've never had an issue with reflections off the shiny top.  Where I get reflections is off of the backside of my eyeglass lenses.  Someone needs to make winged guards to slip onto the side of glasses like horse blinders to block stray light.  While seated, I've never had issues holding the view with it while wearing eyeglasses.  It's much easier than with, let's say, a 12mm or 17mm Nagler T4.

3 hours ago, Ruud said:

The rubber eye cup is truly big, but I really like it because it is so effective. It creates a pitch black cavity with the view at he bottom.

I do agree that a well shielded view is nice, but eyeglass wearers can't get close enough to make that happen, so a light blocking hood is probably our best option unless it's really hot and sticky out at night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F15Rules    1,809
12 hours ago, John said:

Without their bodywork these eyepieces look like the old "smooth side" Meade 4000 and TV ranges so they do have an appeal, I can see that.

Agreed John, that's really what I meant, that they look better decloaked IMO.

I've never looked through a decloaked version. I have owned MVs in 16, 20 and 28mm versions and ES equivalents in 20, 24, 28 and 34mm.. with the exception of the ES28 which I found disappointing (and not as good as the MV28), I much prefer viewing with the ES range, much better build and I really am not keen on that flat black slab of rubber on the bigger MVs..others will think the opposite I guess. But both ranges offer exceptional value. 

My own personal favourites were the ES 24 and 34, just wonderful low power views through both 😋.

Dave

Edited by F15Rules

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Susaron
      Dear all,
      Recently I purchased one of these dobsons from ES following the good critics I read in several forums.
      The Gen II includes some improved features with respect to Gen I, 2 Nylon pad brakes, Virgin Nylon alt and azimuth support bearings (instead of plastic), counterweight bar included with a couple of 1kg counterweights, a classical ES dovetail for the finder.
      Some of these improvements were demanded by Gen I users, and are highly appreciated, but there is still some minor improvements that the final user has to apply. I will describe them lately.
      The set up is very fast, less than 15 minutes, though the assembly of the upper cage needs some patience the first times is done.  Regarding the optics, It is superb, though in my opinion the 75mm minor axis secondary is too big (other similar modes in that range use a 63mm one), it provides full illuminated views on my ES 100 degree eyepieces, the stars in the background seen in clusters like the NGC457 are astonishing.
      The main mirror cell support is a mix of support concepts, a nine point mirror cell support with a couple of rubber wheels at 90 degrees, and 3 glued slings to the mirror laterals screwed to the back of the mirror cell support, provide lateral support for the mirror. The collimation as in Gen I is done from above in less than 5 minutes.
      In the first light in semirural skies the views confirmed the good optics, as I said specially in star clusters the amount of stars which could be seen in the background increased with respect to my 200PDS, the globular clusters were literally smashed, and small planetary nebulae like M76 showed internal details.
      Coming back to the cons, as in any Chinese made product there are quality problems not solved in this Gen II, the paint coatings from the secondary cage just jumped when I changed the position of the truss brackets.
      When I tried to open the main mirror box for the first time, the scratched the yellow paint from the altitude bearings, a tolerances problem which I solved adding 2mm nylon washers between the altitude bearings and the mirror box.
      More improvements to make on your own are to make a plywood cover to prevent moisture on the main mirror while waiting for the night, to put foam pipe covers around all the tubes, they make the winter usage of the scope more comfortable and at the same time help with the vibrations damping (which even with a heavy ES 20mm 100d EP where almost insignificant).
      One more thing to add is a PWM motor controller, the fan only work at full speed, and there are so many nights when the temperature gradient does not fall fast and the fan speed can be left at a lower regime to save batteries.
      In brief, the ES12'' Gen II, it is the Dobson truss scope with the lowest price in that aperture range, the optics is damn good, the mechanical improvement done in the GEN II, improve a lot the vibrations, and the movements of the scope, though a better control on the tolerances and the paint process should be done.
      I attach some pictures taken at home and while the first light.
      Cheers.
      Mario.



    • By 25585
      Any recommendations or caveats for the Explore Scientific achromatic air spaced doublet? I am amazed at its seemingly low price for such an instrument! 
      What will and won't it do compared to other 150s?
    • By Red Dwarfer
      Hi all , 
      The visitor from outer space was Seth the nephew , 5 and I got a shot of him beside the 200P ...
      The second shot is from a new lens that arrived today ES 8.8mm 82 degree beside 3 kit lenses of similar focal length for scale . 


    • By Stu
      Having downsized to exclusively 1.25" eyepieces for financial reasons, I found myself missing widefield views. Recent price hikes mean the Ethos range are well out of reach, so I looked into alternatives.
      First up on my budget list was Burgess Optical TMB 40mm 68 degree afov. I purchased this used last year and it is a very nice, relatively compact and lightweight eyepiece. In comparison with the grenade that is a 41mm Panoptic it is positively slender!
      I've yet to use this under a dark sky where it would excel, but so far have used it to get a decent fov in my C925 from home and have been pleased with the results. I found this comparison with a 41mm Panoptic on line which makes interesting reading. I would be surprised if the differences were as marked as is described here. The description of a flat field also puzzles me, I understand it to be related to field curvature i.e. Where the focus point is consistent across the field, rather than related to increased magnification towards the edge. Any thoughts?
      http://ejamison.net/equipment_reviews6.html
      Next up on my list was a used 20mm Explore Scientific 100 degree. Last night was the first time that I had a good chance to use it, and I was pleasantly surprised. Looking at a variety of old favourites such as M45, the Double Cluster and other OCs such as M36, M44 etc, the contrast was impressive, sky background dark and star shapes consistent across the field. I guess the Tak at f7.4 is not a tough test, but these objects certainly looked great even under skies that were at best mag 19.35 on the trusty SQM.
      Finally, I could not resist a new 30mm ES 82 degree. This has yet to have much of a run out except from the back garden, but I have every expectation that it will deliver good results. Hopefully I will get away camping to Dorset or Devon camping for a week or two this summer.
      Effectively the 20, 30 and 40 go head to head with the 21mm Ethos, 31mm Nagler and 41mm Panoptic. It is curious why There is a 1mm difference in focal length across all of these eyepieces, given that the ES at least are pretty much direct copies I don't understand why they would differ? I'm sure that ultimately the Ethos range will have an edge under good conditions and in faster scopes, but for the moment I am content with what I have. I need to sort some foam for a case to put them in to add to the Show Us Your Eyepiece Case thread .
    • By PeterWar
      For my 16" Meade ACF F8, I'll be buying a Moravian G4-9000 camera with KAF-9000 chip.
      The KAF-9000 chip is 36.7mm square, a big chip! on paper the Explore Scientific 3" 0.7 reducer/field flattener could work well right to the edge, but has anyone tried it with Meade ACF telescopes? Also, I'm wandering what is the light cone of the Meade 16" ACF F8, will I get a lot of vignetting with that chip? I have a friend who has tried a KAF-9000 with his Meade 12" ACF F8 with very acceptable results.

      Thank you for your time.
       
×