It begins, the LVW, Panoptic, Plossl comparison.

[Ricochet]

Taking it back on track, have you had any further sessions to help determine your preference? 

[25585]

56 minutes ago, Alan White said:

What have either of the last posted eyepieces got to do with my 3 eyepiece comparison that I posted about??

I keep finding long eyerelief postings all over the place, which is great, but when only one of those in the mix has it and is the most endangered, I am lost how this links, sorry.

I don’t wear glasses at the eye piece and like mid eye relief personally.

Well 20mm is mid eye relief. Because effective eye relief is normally less than advertised. 

LVWs are effectively less, say 17 at best, and that includes your 22mm Alan. LVs are closer to 20. SLVs are furthest. My experience only. Similar for XW eps, 10 is the best for effective eye relief. But all the above are good for eye comfort needing less critical positioning. 

 

[Alan White]

So far the test of the 25mm TV Plossls, 22mm LVW and 19mm Panoptic have all given similar sharpness on and off axis in my ED80 Evostar and all be enjoyable.

The 19mm has been favoured but that may be the magnification cpvariance and the darker sky it presents in my light polluted garden. 

The LVW was until now my absolute favourite eye piece, sadly over shadowed by the Panoptic, but it’s not replaced as of yet. A 24mm Panoptic might swing the balance, but I don’t have one a won’t have one for sometime. 

The 25mm Plossl is also still in favour and not knocked out, like its simplicity and value as well as the view it presents.

This is all very subjective and unscientific.

The one thing that I have come to a conclusion on is I like my eye snugged up to an eyecup, not above it, this may be a result of the light pollution, but I wear a hood when observing, so think it’s a personal thing.

The other thing I find is my feelings on eye pieces can change depending on if I am sitting or standing.

I was looking to reduce my collection, at this rate it’s growing!!!

Sorry if my earlier posting sounded a bit grumpy, missing my mount which is off for warranty repair so only have binocular this weekend.

[25585]

Sorry your mount needs repairing. Good I suppose it's covered by warranty. 

I can understand and envy you being able to snug an ep to your eye. I like that about binoculars having diallable diopter adjusments. 

[TheLookingGlass]

Well, I have compared the 22mm LVW to the 22mm Ultima LX in a 10" F/4.7 and a 12" F/5 reflector, which are brutal test chambers on eyepieces. Both are very close in quality. As you well know, the 22mm LVW is an excellent eyepiece in pretty much ANY telescope, right down to F/4 without a coma corrector. Not "perfect", but pretty darn close....so I threw in the 22mm Ultima LX into the mix just to let others know how close it is in performance to the 22mm LVW, and it is a 70 degree eyepiece. Once the rubber eyecup has been shaved down, it is very glasses friendly. The 22mm LVW is not, unless someone wants to risk scratching the lenses of their good glasses if they need to wear them while observing, as the only way to use the 22mm LVW while wearing glasses, is to remove the rubber eyecup.

I can see the difference in field size compared to the 22mm LVW, and the 22mm Ultima LX is more "immersive" as well.

Just an FYI for other observers who might be interested in hunting one down.

Cheers and clear skies!

[iPeace]

11 hours ago, Alan White said:

missing my mount which is off for warranty repair

Hope that sorts the rough spot.

[Alan White]

2 hours ago, TheLookingGlass said:

 

 

Ok now I see where you were going.

 

[25585]

LX heavy 2 inch ep. Maybe it's closer to my Orion LER Lanthanum 20mm which advertises 80 deg AFOV

[TheLookingGlass]

1 hour ago, 25585 said:

LX heavy 2 inch ep. Maybe it's closer to my Orion LER Lanthanum 20mm which advertises 80 deg AFOV

The 22mm Ultima LX is only 1 pound now since I removed the outer casing. I'm quite interested in that 20mm Orion LER 80 degree. How do you like it so far?

Would be sweet to see you do a full review of it !!!

Cheers!

[Louis D]

3 hours ago, 25585 said:

LX heavy 2 inch ep. Maybe it's closer to my Orion LER Lanthanum 20mm which advertises 80 deg AFOV

I use the Astro Tech AF70 version of this 22mm eyepiece.  I weighed it on my scale, and it weighs 16.8 ounces with the eyecup screwed off (how I use it with eyeglasses) and 17.4 ounces with it in place for noneyeglass wearers.  There is enough eye relief that I have never come close to contacting the top of the casing with my eyeglasses.

With corrected, flat field optics, it is sharp and flat of field to about 90% of the way to the field stop at f/6.  The last 10% has slight astigmatism similar to my 14mm Morpheus's last 15% for reference, but without its field curvature.

7 hours ago, TheLookingGlass said:

Well, I have compared the 22mm LVW to the 22mm Ultima LX in a 10" F/4.7 and a 12" F/5 reflector, which are brutal test chambers on eyepieces. Both are very close in quality. As you well know, the 22mm LVW is an excellent eyepiece in pretty much ANY telescope, right down to F/4 without a coma corrector. Not "perfect", but pretty darn close....so I threw in the 22mm Ultima LX into the mix just to let others know how close it is in performance to the 22mm LVW, and it is a 70 degree eyepiece. Once the rubber eyecup has been shaved down, it is very glasses friendly. The 22mm LVW is not, unless someone wants to risk scratching the lenses of their good glasses if they need to wear them while observing, as the only way to use the 22mm LVW while wearing glasses, is to remove the rubber eyecup.

I can see the difference in field size compared to the 22mm LVW, and the 22mm Ultima LX is more "immersive" as well.

Just an FYI for other observers who might be interested in hunting one down.

Cheers and clear skies!

Interesting.  I had always heard so much praise for the 22mm LVW that I had thought it to be sharp to the edge like the 24mm Panoptic at those focal ratios.  That, and others imply the LVW blows away the 22mm Celestron Ultima LX (AT AF70 in my case).  What's really mind blowing is that the 17mm ES-92 has slightly more true field of view than the 22mm Ultima LX (AF70) at a higher power and a wider apparent field of view with just 1mm less usable eye relief, and yet it is basically perfectly corrected to the edge at f/6.  I can't detect even the slightest astigmatism or field curvature right at the field stop.  Stars are pinpoints across the entire field.

[Louis D]

18 hours ago, Alan White said:

missing my mount which is off for warranty repair so only have binocular this weekend.

If you don't mind my asking, what mount is it that needs repair while still under warranty?  What went wrong with it?

[Alan White]

1 hour ago, Louis D said:

If you don't mind my asking, what mount is it that needs repair while still under warranty?  What went wrong with it?

Not really in topic, but as I mentioned it myself....

Skywatcher Skytee 2 has a tight spot when in use after a number of uses, but was new in Late Nov 2017.

[TheLookingGlass]

4 hours ago, Louis D said:

I use the Astro Tech AF70 version of this 22mm eyepiece.  I weighed it on my scale, and it weighs 16.8 ounces with the eyecup screwed off (how I use it with eyeglasses) and 17.4 ounces with it in place for noneyeglass wearers.  There is enough eye relief that I have never come close to contacting the top of the casing with my eyeglasses.

With corrected, flat field optics, it is sharp and flat of field to about 90% of the way to the field stop at f/6.  The last 10% has slight astigmatism similar to my 14mm Morpheus's last 15% for reference, but without its field curvature.

Interesting.  I had always heard so much praise for the 22mm LVW that I had thought it to be sharp to the edge like the 24mm Panoptic at those focal ratios.  That, and others imply the LVW blows away the 22mm Celestron Ultima LX (AT AF70 in my case).  What's really mind blowing is that the 17mm ES-92 has slightly more true field of view than the 22mm Ultima LX (AF70) at a higher power and a wider apparent field of view with just 1mm less usable eye relief, and yet it is basically perfectly corrected to the edge at f/6.  I can't detect even the slightest astigmatism or field curvature right at the field stop.  Stars are pinpoints across the entire field.

I would hope so at the price the ES 92 is atm. LOL

[Louis D]

2 hours ago, TheLookingGlass said:

I would hope so at the price the ES 92 is atm. LOL

Well, it speaks volumes to the $99 I paid new for the 22mm AF70 that it competes so well.  On the other hand, the 22mm LVW last went for $269 when you could find it new.  I ended up paying about $360 for my ES-92 once all discounts and price matches were applied, making it under $100 more than the LVW.

[25585]

I have to do a test on the Orion yet 

Interested in the LX now. This is how I come to have a hoard of eps! 

Alan my sympathies on the Skytee 2. They are agricultural in ways. I hope yours gets fixed to last. 

[TheLookingGlass]

21 hours ago, Louis D said:

I use the Astro Tech AF70 version of this 22mm eyepiece.  I weighed it on my scale, and it weighs 16.8 ounces with the eyecup screwed off (how I use it with eyeglasses) and 17.4 ounces with it in place for noneyeglass wearers.  There is enough eye relief that I have never come close to contacting the top of the casing with my eyeglasses.

With corrected, flat field optics, it is sharp and flat of field to about 90% of the way to the field stop at f/6.  The last 10% has slight astigmatism similar to my 14mm Morpheus's last 15% for reference, but without its field curvature.

Interesting.  I had always heard so much praise for the 22mm LVW that I had thought it to be sharp to the edge like the 24mm Panoptic at those focal ratios.  That, and others imply the LVW blows away the 22mm Celestron Ultima LX (AT AF70 in my case).  What's really mind blowing is that the 17mm ES-92 has slightly more true field of view than the 22mm Ultima LX (AF70) at a higher power and a wider apparent field of view with just 1mm less usable eye relief, and yet it is basically perfectly corrected to the edge at f/6.  I can't detect even the slightest astigmatism or field curvature right at the field stop.  Stars are pinpoints across the entire field.

The 22mm LVW is close, but not perfectly "sharp to the edge" from what I saw in a 10 inch reflector at F/4.7 FL. The 22mm Ultima LX is very close in performance, with the nod going to the 22mm LVW for edge sharpness. As far as the 22mmm LVW "blowing the 22mm Ultima LX away", I still own the 22mm Ultima LX and not the 22mm LVW, which should tell you something, lol. The 22mm Ultima LX / 22mm AT AF-70 / 22mm Olivon are all the same optics in different clothing, with slight differences in baffling and possibly edge blackening of some of the lenses. The 22mm FL in those series is the best FL out of them all, with a second going to the 8mm Ultima LX / 8mm AT AF-70 / 8mm Olivon, IIRC.

However, the 22mm Ultima LX with its 70 degree AFOV was the winner for me after having owned both, (4 times for the 22mm LVW and twice I owned the 22mm Ultima LX and I wanted a second one, which I now have and will be keeping).

With glasses the top rubber eyecup of the 22mm Ultima LX was better once I cut the top down with a super sharp box cutter. I then sanded it with smooth sandpaper, so that now the top of the eyecup sits flush with the top lens for when I need to use my reading glasses to sketch, or for when I do not use glasses, I screw the top of the eyecup into the full "up" position as it helps with eye positioning when I apply a filter to the EP. 

[Alan White]

Latest update...

The test of the 25mm TV Plossls, 22mm LVW and 19mm Panoptic continues; all have all given similar sharpness on and off axis in my 150p f5 Skywatcher Explorer and all provided a very enjoyable view.

The 19mm Panoptic has been again favored but that may again be the magnification variance and the darker sky it presents in my light polluted garden. 

The LVW has until now been the favorite eye piece, sadly now over shadowed by the Panoptic, but it’s not replaced as of yet.
A 27mm Panoptic might swing the balance, but I don’t have one and won’t have one for sometime yet, but its on my list.  Anyone want to swap one for a 22mm LVW?

The 25mm Plossl is now knocked out and the LVW is close to joining it.

This sooo very subjective and unscientific.

Added to this I bought a used Nagler 11mm type 6 and I fell into the view at first light, but that's another story.

Oh my this just gets harder and more expensive by the day!

[Mak the Night]

FWIW the 19mm Panoptic is one of my most used eyepieces.

 

It's nigh on perfect lol.

[25585]

1 hour ago, Alan White said:

Latest update...

The test of the 25mm TV Plossls, 22mm LVW and 19mm Panoptic continues; all have all given similar sharpness on and off axis in my 150p f5 Skywatcher Explorer and all provided a very enjoyable view.

The 19mm Panoptic has been again favored but that may again be the magnification variance and the darker sky it presents in my light polluted garden. 

The LVW has until now been the favorite eye piece, sadly now over shadowed by the Panoptic, but it’s not replaced as of yet.
A 27mm Panoptic might swing the balance, but I don’t have one and won’t have one for sometime yet, but its on my list.  Anyone want to swap one for a 22mm LVW?

The 25mm Plossl is now knocked out and the LVW is close to joining it.

This sooo very subjective and unscientific.

Added to this I bought a used Nagler 11mm type 6 and I fell into the view at first light, but that's another story.

Oh my this just gets harder and more expensive by the day!

Given the 22, 25 & 27 are close in FL and FOV, what are you hoping to see in one that makes it best?

The 27 costs £330 - £340. Double the price a new 22 cost.

[Alan White]

On 3/9/2018 at 18:37, 25585 said:

Given the 22, 25 & 27 are close in FL and FOV, what are you hoping to see in one that makes it best?

That's a fair question to ask.

To be honest its not going to be scientific, its going to be how it pleases my eye over a number of sessions.
The magnification changes as does the sky background, which is something conditions dependent as well.

The 19mm Panoptic has earned its place at the table, however it and the 22 LVW are close, the Panoptic is smaller and lighter, the LVW has a place in my heart.

I want something wider as more of a finder without going too light, hence the 27mm Panoptic thought, but a 28mm 68 ES would suffice in the role perhaps?

Let you know where this goes.

[25585]

18 minutes ago, Alan White said:

That's a fair question to ask.

To be honest its not going to be scientific, its going to be how it pleases my eye over a number of sessions.
The magnification changes as does the sky background, which is something conditions dependent as well.

The 19mm Panoptic has earned its place at the table, however it and the 22 LVW are close, the Panoptic is smaller and lighter, the LVW has a place in my heart.

I want something wider as more of a finder without going too light, hence the 27mm Panoptic thought, but a 28mm 68 ES would suffice in the role perhaps?

Let you know where this goes.

Similar kind of...quandry(?) I feel over a Pan 41mm & ES 40mm 68 Ar. Former heavier and lots more expensive.

I guess, @FLO 30 day return would allow a trial of an ES, with refund if the ES is not up to snuff. Then at least the choice might be clearer.....

[Louis D]

3 hours ago, Alan White said:

I want something wider as more of a finder without going too light, hence the 27mm Panoptic thought

I've had a 27mm Panoptic for about 20 years now.  It is pretty close to sharp to the edge at f/5 with very little astigmatism, lateral color, or field curvature.  It's very sharp across most of the FOV.  Eye relief is a bit tight for eyeglass wearers at a measured usable 14mm of eye relief thanks to a relatively small 25mm diameter, deeply concave eye lens.  There's also an exposed metal retaining ring around the eye lens with a relatively sharp edge that does a nice job of scratching polycarbonate lenses when you press in too close.  It is 16.4 ounces in weight, so very comparable to Pentax XWs and TV Delos.  It is perfect as a mid power eyepiece in ~2000mm focal length telescopes.

[25585]

The ES Maxvision 28mm is 68 deg and good price 

https://www.telescopehouse.com/eyepieces/explore-scientific-68a-maxvision-eyepiece-28mm.html

[F15Rules]

 

 

9 hours ago, 25585 said:

The ES Maxvision 28mm is 68 deg and good price 

https://www.telescopehouse.com/eyepieces/explore-scientific-68a-maxvision-eyepiece-28mm.html

It's a great ep but a big heavy unit, much more than the LVW -  and I thought weight was a big deal for you Alan?

Dave

[Alan White]

49 minutes ago, F15Rules said:

 

 

It's a great ep but a big heavy unit, much more than the LVW -  and I thought weight was a big deal for you Alan?

Dave

I had not looked at weight Dave to be honest.

The weight issues lie with the ED80 but I use my 150 Newtonian more and weight is not such an issue with that scope.