Apo Barlow and Ortho Eyepiece

[JPAG]

 

 

Hello, I'm new in this forum.

I bought this barlow https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/language/en/info/p1892_TS-Optics-TSShorty-2x-Apo-Barlow--1-25-inch--3-element---for-observing-and-astroph.html  which is the same as that (only the brand name changes) https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bst-starguider-eyepieces/bst-starguider-2x-short-barlow-lens.html 

and this ortho eyepiece https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p8857_Kokusai-Kohki-Fujiyama-HD-OR-9mm---a-classical-Abbe-ortho.html.

What do you think of these items? Does anyone use them or have used them? Are they good?

[John]

I've used the Fujiyama ortho eyepieces and they are excellent. Short eye relief and a narrow field of view like all of this design but optically really good.

I've not used that particular barlow lens so I can't comment on that.

What scope will you be using them in ?

 

[Doc]

Totally agree with John the orthos from Fujiyama are awesome. I never use barlows so cannot comment on them.

[JPAG]

2 minutes ago, John said:

I've used the Fujiyama ortho eyepieces and they are excellent. Short eye relief and a narrow field of view like all of this design but optically really good.

I've not used that particular barlow lens so I can't comment on that.

What scope will you be using them in ?

Thanks for your reply.

My scope is a GSO 150mm f6 Newtonian, like the one on my profile photo.

2 minutes ago, John said:

 

 

[Charic]

It takes time to find and acquire eyepieces that you, as the end user, will find comfortable to use and behold, and sometimes, its only after you have had an item,  and possibly sold it on, that you then realise how good ( or not ) that eyepiece was? 
I have not used either of the  brand items you mention, But I own a Meade and a Skywatcher Barlow, handy to increase your  eyepiece focal range, ( though I remove the lens cell, and attach it directly to my eyepieces for a slightly lower power factor) and have tried orthoscopic eyepieces, but  decided they were not what I required, but at least I have tried them to make that decision.

I'm sure the items you mention  will work in your scope, but after comparison with other eyepieces, only then will you know how good!
 

[John]

The ortho will give you 100x on it's own and 200x with the barlow lens so both will be very useful I think.

Let us know what you think of them

[RT65CB-SWL]

Hi JPAG and welcome to SGL.

Ortho's (or Orthoscopic's) are excellent planetary eyepieces. I have and use 12.5mm & 6mm.

[JPAG]

5 minutes ago, Philip R said:

Hi JPAG and welcome to SGL.

Thanks.

[Timebandit]

 

Hello and welcome to SGL

 

With regards to the Fujiyama Ortho . I own the Fujiyama Ortho and have found it a very capable eyepiece optically. A top rate Ortho  in my opinion and very good for the price and made in Japan which I always find  gives me that extra bit of confidence in an eyepiece. I would say the Fujiyama Ortho quality is in the same ballpark as the late great Badder Genuine Ortho. The only way you are going to get better optically is step up  to the likes of ZAO territory, but these are seriously expensive and you will need to have excellent seeing conditions to benefit. I think your choice of the Fujiyama is very good for pure optics quality . The only holdback with all Ortho is the narrow fov , usually around the 40d ish fov. And with the shorter focal lengths the eye relief does seem to get tight. But optically a good Ortho is hard to beat and great bang for buck ?

 

 

 

[JPAG]

3 hours ago, Timebandit said:

 

Hello and welcome to SGL

 

With regards to the Fujiyama Ortho . I own the Fujiyama Ortho and have found it a very capable eyepiece optically. A top rate Ortho  in my opinion and very good for the price and made in Japan which I always find  gives me that extra bit of confidence in an eyepiece. I would say the Fujiyama Ortho quality is in the same ballpark as the late great Badder Genuine Ortho. The only way you are going to get better optically is step up  to the likes of ZAO territory, but these are seriously expensive and you will need to have excellent seeing conditions to benefit. I think your choice of the Fujiyama is very good for pure optics quality . The only holdback with all Ortho is the narrow fov , usually around the 40d ish fov. And with the shorter focal lengths the eye relief does seem to get tight. But optically a good Ortho is hard to beat and great bang for buck ?

Thanks.

Joining the ortho and the barlow is to try to minimize the small eye relief of ortho eyepieces.

The ortho eyepiece, by itself gives me an 100x magnification, which is insufficient for detailed planetary observations, at least for me . The Ortho plus the barlow gives me a 200x magnification, which is more than enough for me (in reality, it's in the maximum limit for my 6-inch Newtonian) for the same observations. Now I have to see if the barlow does not degrade the image, at least significantly.

Quote

 

 

 

 

[John]

2 hours ago, JPAG said:

Thanks.

Joining the ortho and the barlow is to try to minimize the small eye relief of ortho eyepieces....

 

 

Thats a great reason to use a barlow with an ortho

The eye relief will actually be extended a little by the barlow.

[JPAG]

24 minutes ago, John said:

Thats a great reason to use a barlow with an ortho

The eye relief will actually be extended a little by the barlow.

Really? Very cool! When I said "to minimize the small eye relief ", I wanted to say "to minimize the effect of the small eye relief", that is, without barlow, the ortho eyepiece would have to have 4.5mm of focal length to give a magnification of 200x, which for me would be very uncomfortable (besides there isn't orthos of 4.5mm of focal distance).

[John]

If there was a 4.5mm ortho it would have around 3.5mm of eye relief. I reckon your 9mm ortho + barlow combination will be giving you more than twice that

[davyludo]

I have the BST version of that Barlow. Personally I think it's pretty good for the price. I've had a couple of cheap skywatcher and celestron barlows before and it's noticeably better. More "invisible" optically.

I'm not experienced enough to give you a technical review of it - but when I used the skywatcher and celestron ones, I was always browsing for something better. Since I got this one, I've stopped looking.

I'm not saying it'll be on par with a Televue powermate or anything, but for the price I'm very happy and don't think I'll replace it any time soon. 

I use it with celestron x-cel lx and vixen slv eye pieces.

[JPAG]

19 hours ago, davyludo said:

I have the BST version of that Barlow. Personally I think it's pretty good for the price. I've had a couple of cheap skywatcher and celestron barlows before and it's noticeably better. More "invisible" optically.

I'm not experienced enough to give you a technical review of it - but when I used the skywatcher and celestron ones, I was always browsing for something better. Since I got this one, I've stopped looking.

I'm not saying it'll be on par with a Televue powermate or anything, but for the price I'm very happy and don't think I'll replace it any time soon. 

I use it with celestron x-cel lx and vixen slv eye pieces.

Thank you very much for the reply.  I'm very happy to know that.

[Mak the Night]

The Barlow is manufactured  by Barsta, I have the (overpriced) Omegon version of it. It works well in my 150mm, f/6 Newtonian. It is apochromatic, has a filter thread and the build quality isn't bad. It does have a compression ring however, which is its only drawback IMO. I can't detect any false colour or distortions when using it and it's worth obtaining.

http://www.barsta.com/show_hdr.php?xname=MDA8V11&dname=OPFOR71&xpos=6

I have a set of Kokusai orthoscopics (although the 9mm is a Circle T) and for overall contrast they're difficult to beat. Bear in mind they only have 42° FOV though. I'm pretty sure whatever name they're sold under, and there are several, they're all made in the same factory.

http://www.sciencecenter.net/hutech/vis-acc/ep/index.htm

[JPAG]

On 12/19/2017 at 18:44, Mak the Night said:

The Barlow is manufactured  by Barsta, I have the (overpriced) Omegon version of it. It works well in my 150mm, f/6 Newtonian. It is apochromatic, has a filter thread and the build quality isn't bad. It does have a compression ring however, which is its only drawback IMO. I can't detect any false colour or distortions when using it and it's worth obtaining.

http://www.barsta.com/show_hdr.php?xname=MDA8V11&dname=OPFOR71&xpos=6

I have a set of Kokusai orthoscopics (although the 9mm is a Circle T) and for overall contrast they're difficult to beat. Bear in mind they only have 42° FOV though. I'm pretty sure whatever name they're sold under, and there are several, they're all made in the same factory.

http://www.sciencecenter.net/hutech/vis-acc/ep/index.htm

Thanks for your reply.

[JPAG]

I received, two days ago, the Kokusai orthoscopic 9mm eyepiece and the TS Shorty 2x apo Barlow lens I purchased. I have not yet had the chance to test the set at night (on the moon), but, in my free time, I have already tested it in the daylight (birds, trees, electricity poles, etc.). I was very satisfied. I compared the new ortho eyepiece + the new apo Barlow (200x magnification, together) with my "old" Omegon LE 5mm eyepiece (180x magnification, a very good eyepiece) and, with great surprise, I noticed that ortho eyepiece + apo Barlow set, despite giving a bigger magnification, is sharper and more contrasted than the Omegon LE 5mm (the difference is subtle, but it does exist). Of course, the real proof will be made on planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Mars). Let's wait until then.

P. S. - I regained my confidence in Barlow lenses. My old SkyWatcher Barlow, despite the seller telling me it was achromatic, is actually made up of just one lens, of course the images it gives are horrible! My new apo Barlow seems to be invisible, giving awesome images!

[Timebandit]

 

I am happy you are happy with your purchase? ?

It's always great to take a step up in kit level and actually see a Noticeable difference. That way it has been money well spent. A Barlow in theory should be invisible(just adding magnification), so it sounds if it is doing its job.

So welcome to the Ortho club. Not everyone is a fan of Ortho. But I am a great fan of Orthos  , best optics money can buy IMO for there price point ?    

 

 

[Mak the Night]

I'm not sure about the Omegon LE series, although I'm fairly sure they're made by Long Perng.

 

I wouldn't have considered them as high magnification eyepieces myself. 

 

I think we have the same telescope. Mine is a TS Optics 150mm, f/6 Newtonian although it's actually manufactured by GSO. 

I have no problems achieving focus with the 150mm Newtonian and any of the orthoscopics I have. They all work well with a short Barlow, the Barsta 2x Barlow is very good quality.

I often use mine combined with a 9mm Circle T orthoscopic for the Moon. I can also get 250x and 300x with different Barlows. All give sharp images.

[JPAG]

58 minutes ago, Timebandit said:

 

I am happy you are happy with your purchase? ?

It's always great to take a step up in kit level and actually see a Noticeable difference. That way it has been money well spent. A Barlow in theory should be invisible(just adding magnification), so it sounds if it is doing its job.

So welcome to the Ortho club. Not everyone is a fan of Ortho. But I am a great fan of Orthos  , best optics money can buy IMO for there price point ?    

 

 

Ortho forever!

[JPAG]

56 minutes ago, Mak the Night said:

I'm not sure about the Omegon LE series, although I'm fairly sure they're made by Long Perng.

 

I wouldn't have considered them as high magnification eyepieces myself. 

 

I think we have the same telescope. Mine is a TS Optics 150mm, f/6 Newtonian although it's actually manufactured by GSO. 

I have no problems achieving focus with the 150mm Newtonian and any of the orthoscopics I have. They all work well with a short Barlow, the Barsta 2x Barlow is very good quality.

I often use mine combined with a 9mm Circle T orthoscopic for the Moon. I can also get 250x and 300x with different Barlows. All give sharp images.

Yes, it's exactly the same scope. A very good scope.

Even taking into account that the Moon supports very large magnifications, 250x and 300x isn't too much for a 6-inch newtonian, despite the good quality of the scope?

[Mak the Night]

Technically, you should be able to get 360x on a 150mm aperture for the Moon (60x per inch). I've done this, but it needs very good conditions. I live in a Bortle 4 region in the greenbelt in a village at over 180 metres above sea level. Light pollution isn't a big issue for me and I can get these magnifications fairly often. 250x is my lunar default magnification with the 150mm Newtonian. In fact, I regularly start off with a 4mm orthoscopic (225x) just to see what conditions are like. More than a few times I've got to 337x.

Although I usually get around 225x, 250x and 281x with the 150mm TS Optics Newtonian/Sky-Watcher EQ5 combination. A 3.2mm BST (Barsta) StarGuider gives me 281x on its own. Of course, I don't get these magnifications on the planets. Although I can often get 225x on Saturn and 200x on Jupiter. I've had a very sharp 167x on Jupiter with an Orion ST80 and 171x on the Moon (2" Celestron Luminos Barlow and 7mm Fujiyama orthoscopic). In decent conditions I don't see why a 150mm scope shouldn't get between 250x and 300x on the Moon.

[Stu]

On 15/12/2017 at 23:25, JPAG said:

Really? Very cool! When I said "to minimize the small eye relief ", I wanted to say "to minimize the effect of the small eye relief", that is, without barlow, the ortho eyepiece would have to have 4.5mm of focal length to give a magnification of 200x, which for me would be very uncomfortable (besides there isn't orthos of 4.5mm of focal distance).

I use orthos a lot (I have a full set of Baader Genuine Orthos) and often choose to barlow the 12.5 or 9mm rather than use the short focal length ones for just that reason, the eye relief is longer and the exit lens a little bigger. So long as the barlow is good quality then the views do not suffer.

High power is not related to light pollution, but to seeing conditions. Best planetary results will be when the seeing conditions are steadiest, the planet is at its highest altitude, and when your scope is cooled and collimated well.

x180 is often a good magnification to use on Jupiter due to its low contrast features. Saturn takes a bit more as the rings and shadows are higher contrast. Surface features are still subtle though.

Let us know how you get on  

[JPAG]

2 hours ago, Stu said:

I use orthos a lot (I have a full set of Baader Genuine Orthos) and often choose to barlow the 12.5 or 9mm rather than use the short focal length ones for just that reason, the eye relief is longer and the exit lens a little bigger. So long as the barlow is good quality then the views do not suffer.

High power is not related to light pollution, but to seeing conditions. Best planetary results will be when the seeing conditions are steadiest, the planet is at its highest altitude, and when your scope is cooled and collimated well.

x180 is often a good magnification to use on Jupiter due to its low contrast features. Saturn takes a bit more as the rings and shadows are higher contrast. Surface features are still subtle though.

Let us know how you get on  

Unfortunately there are still some months left to test the set ortho + apo barlow on the planets. I can't wait until then.