Planning your ideal eyepiece collection

[Stu]

Original Lumicon. Yummy  

[scarp15]

Selecting one filter an OIII would perhaps be more selective for opening up finer detailing within the Cygnus Loop among other stand out nebulae. An NPB filter would equally be advantageous for nebulae observing and could be considered for inclusion at some other time. 

[Littleguy80]

Just now, scarp15 said:

Selecting one filter an OIII would perhaps be more selective for opening up finer detailing within the Cygnus Loop among other stand out nebulae. An NPB filter would equally be advantageous for nebulae observing and could be considered for inclusion at some other time. 

The 2” Astronomik OIII is right behind the 20mm Lunt in terms of priority. They’ll be a key pairing for dark site trips. 

I found myself pondering the NPB as an alternative to the Astronomik UHC in a 2” format. I have the Astronomik UHC in 1.25” format so everything other than the 20mm could be covered with that. I was trying to think of what targets I’d use the UHC on with the 20mm. M8 and the flame nebula spring to mind   

[Littleguy80]

11 minutes ago, Stu said:

Original Lumicon. Yummy  

Very nice! Have you ever had a chance to compare them to the Astronomiks? I always got the impression that the Lumicons had a slight edge from they were talked about 

[scarp15]

The transmittance figures look really good Stu, here is mine recorded last year, just about faded out since.

 

[Piero]

9 hours ago, alanjgreen said:

Piero, I am not saying you are wrong. But at £200 for 2" filters then I would play safe and get Astronomik. I would find plenty of folks who already trod this path and are still smiling  

Are these smiles enough?

[Paz]

As implausible as it may seem I have completed my eyepiece set ups and I am no longer thinking about any improvements. I settled on SLVs and Delos for long eye relief and good quality, and the field of view is more than enough for me.

[Littleguy80]

7 hours ago, Paz said:

As implausible as it may seem I have completed my eyepiece set ups and I am no longer thinking about any improvements. I settled on SLVs and Delos for long eye relief and good quality, and the field of view is more than enough for me.

Good stuff! I was happy with my setup for my old scope. Then I bought a new scope and it all started again  

I know both the SLVs and Delos have a great reputation!

[Piero]

You might find useful the comparison between nebula filters by Dave Knisely:

http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org/filter-performance-comparisons-for-some-common-nebulae/

He really knows what he's talking about.

Personally, I'd go for the Lumicon UHC and (old) OIII. The NPB is close to the Lumicon UHC as far as the central region concerns. 

The Baader OIII is too tight and cuts off 1 OIII line. Because of this, I would not buy one for visual work, although it might be suitable for imaging.

The astronomik UHC and OIII until 2 years ago at least pass some nm more than necessary compared to the lumicons. Of course, they would still work, but the Lumicon can show some more contrast. 

The worst filter is light pollution. Unfortunately, this is very effective at ruining nebulae details!

[25585]

8 hours ago, Paz said:

As implausible as it may seem I have completed my eyepiece set ups and I am no longer thinking about any improvements. I settled on SLVs and Delos for long eye relief and good quality, and the field of view is more than enough for me.

Fine choices. Anything from Vixen with LV in its designation is ????

I tried Radians, which also advertised 20mm er, but found Vixens more comfortable viewing, then Pentax XW as well. 

Vixen score highest because their LV and LVW ranges ran from 50mm to 2.5mm and 42mm to 3.5mm respectively, something no higher eye relief TV range did.

[Saganite]

8 hours ago, Paz said:

As implausible as it may seem I have completed my eyepiece set ups and I am no longer thinking about any improvements. I settled on SLVs and Delos for long eye relief and good quality, and the field of view is more than enough for me.

Fair play to you !

I wish I could, but I just love buying and trying, though I do have a number of oculars that have been with me a long time and will never be sold.

[25585]

18 hours ago, Stu said:

Original Lumicon. Yummy  

Irreplaceable now.

(You have a cat? ? )

[mapstar]

Interesting thread with a lot of opinions cast and probably more confused than ever.

I have quite a few ethos eyepieces (21, 17, 13, 8 and 4.7) and the full set of the more modern Lumicon filters.

What most say about eyepieces above is true but settle on what suits your budget and keep what you find effective and comfortable as what works for one person doesn't mean it'll work for another.

Filters are much the same. I've only really tested the UHC and O111 against Astronomik ones and the O111 seemed better but there was no difference in the UHC.

I asked Gerry about the 20mm lunt eyepiece and if he's impressed with it then good enough endorsement for me. He has the skies to push these to their limits. 

The 13E spends 90% of the time in my focuser so I could actually do without all the others although it is a case of horses for courses. The crescent in the 17E is perfectly framed for example. 

If you could meet up with others and try their eyepieces it could help you a lot in deciding what works best in your setup.

[Charic]

On 14/03/2018 at 22:52, Littleguy80 said:

It’s going to take a long time to assemble the team, especially when I consider needing/wanting 2” filters too. Still it’s fun to plan ahead.

Anyone else playing fantasy eyepiece collection or have thoughts on my planned line up?

I had aspirations of owning the larger 10" and opted for some Delos Eps to line my  eyepiece case. 

As  you can see from my signature, some 'good' eyepieces have all gone to better homes, but they were no better (present scope f/6 )  than what remains, which is all down to personal choice, conditions, and patience as an observer.

You wont know whats best for your needs until you have tried them, and that can be expensive, and as you mention, could take some time. If funds are good, don't wait, just spend, spend, spend, but will the goods provide any better than what you have already, go spend and find out.

If I change my mind again and went for a 10" or larger and the images were inferior using my present eyepieces, which I doubt they would be, as many other folk  have used similar eyepieces to good effect on their 10" scope, then possibly my next eyepiece of choice would be to try the DeLite EP's from TeleView, if I needed to fantasize.

[Littleguy80]

28 minutes ago, mapstar said:

Interesting thread with a lot of opinions cast and probably more confused than ever.

I have quite a few ethos eyepieces (21, 17, 13, 8 and 4.7) and the full set of the more modern Lumicon filters.

What most say about eyepieces above is true but settle on what suits your budget and keep what you find effective and comfortable as what works for one person doesn't mean it'll work for another.

Filters are much the same. I've only really tested the UHC and O111 against Astronomik ones and the O111 seemed better but there was no difference in the UHC.

I asked Gerry about the 20mm lunt eyepiece and if he's impressed with it then good enough endorsement for me. He has the skies to push these to their limits. 

The 13E spends 90% of the time in my focuser so I could actually do without all the others although it is a case of horses for courses. The crescent in the 17E is perfectly framed for example. 

If you could meet up with others and try their eyepieces it could help you a lot in deciding what works best in your setup.

Thank you. It’s definitely helped me settle on starting with the Lunt HDC 20mm. I have to admit that Gerry’s use of the Lunt was what brought it to my attention. Although it’s a bit like buying the same pair of football boots that Lionel Messi uses. You’ve got the boots but you’re missing all the talent  

Interesting points on filters too. I suspect there’s a point where the differences are so small among the top brands that you’d be hard pressed to discern any real difference at the eyepiece.  

[Littleguy80]

12 minutes ago, Charic said:

I had aspirations of owning the larger 10" and opted for some Delos Eps to line my  eyepiece case. 

As  you can see from my signature, some 'good' eyepieces have all gone to better homes, but they were no better than what remains, which is all down to personal choice, conditions, and your patience as an observer.

You wont know whats best for your needs until you have tried them, and that can be expensive, and as you mention, could take some time. If funds are good, don't wait, just spend, spend, spend, but will the goods provide any better than what you have already, go spend and find out.

If I change my mind again and went for a 10" or larger and the images were inferior using my present eyepieces, which I doubt they would be, as many other folk  have used similar eyepieces to good effect on their 10" scope, then possibly my next eyepiece of choice would be to try the DeLite EP's from TeleView, if I needed to fantasize.

Thanks Charic. There’s definitely an element of personal taste which I guess is why opinions can be so varied. I know you’re a fan of the BSTs. They’ve certainly served me well to date!

I’m very much looking forward to getting the first Lunt and seeing how it performs. I have a feel I won’t be disappointed  

[25585]

A semi-apo 2" filter and 1.25" Mars filter are what I want. A Takahashi eyepiece turret maybe.

Though I have a F5 dob, a F6 appeals to me as well. 10" max for relatively easy one man handling.

Building a new collection using eps now, with those scopes in mind, I would from SGL opinions & my optical requirements, choose a Pentax XW 10mm, TV Delos 17mm and an ES 34mm 68 deg ep. Barlow would be an Antares 1.6x. I would probably get a 2 inch & 1.25 inch OIII filter. Definitely a Telrad finder and right angle finder scope. All good stuff. 

 

[Louis D]

Instead of blowing all your windfall on eyepieces, how about adding a nice short focal length ED refractor to complement your 10" Dob.  I did this a few years back (for an 8" Dob in my case), and have really enjoyed the wide, unobstructed views.  I picked up everything used for less than $600 total (scope, diagonal, mount, and tripod).

[tuckstar]

So this the line up I'm working on for my 250px.

This is the progress so far, filter is o111 and planning a H beta at some point as well. The es do show some coma, but you have to look for it and it doesn't really bother me. Well, not enough to shell out for a paracor. I do have a 1kg magnet I use for balancing out the extra weight.

I also have a set of clavè plossls for planetary work.

 

[Littleguy80]

55 minutes ago, tuckstar said:

So this the line up I'm working on for my 250px.

This is the progress so far, filter is o111 and planning a H beta at some point as well. The es do show some coma, but you have to look for it and it doesn't really bother me. Well, not enough to shell out for a paracor. I do have a 1kg magnet I use for balancing out the extra weight.

I also have a set of clavè plossls for planetary work.

 

Very nice collection. The ES100s were certainly one of the ranges I looked at. Which eyepieces do you find are getting the most use and which eyepiece do you want to get next? 

[Littleguy80]

8 hours ago, Louis D said:

Instead of blowing all your windfall on eyepieces, how about adding a nice short focal length ED refractor to complement your 10" Dob.  I did this a few years back (for an 8" Dob in my case), and have really enjoyed the wide, unobstructed views.  I picked up everything used for less than $600 total (scope, diagonal, mount, and tripod).

Thinking outside the box. I like it  What targets did you like to use the refractor on rather than the dob? 

[Stu]

14 hours ago, 25585 said:

Irreplaceable now.

(You have a cat? ? )

No, a knife. It was a chopping board  

[Stu]

6 minutes ago, Littleguy80 said:

Thinking outside the box. I like it  What targets did you like to use the refractor on rather than the dob? 

A frac of say 650mm focal length will give you fabulous widefield views, particularly under a dark sky. It gives you a very different perspective to the dob, less fine detail but lovely framing of large objects. Some examples. In a large dob you can see parts of M31 at a time, with detail showing in the dust lanes and perhaps in a large 18” plus you might view one or more of the globular clusters around it. In a widefield frac you can frame the whole object beautifully, along with M32 and 110, and with dark enough skies trace out the fuller extent of the spiral arms.

Similarly with the Veil, in a large scope it is about viewing up close and in detail, the beautiful fine nebulosity, the twisting tendrils, the ‘claws’ in the Eastern Veil and the fine ‘branches’ in the broom. In a widefield frac you can fit the whole complex in at once, a very different experience, much more subtle but amazing in its own way.

One of my favourite summer views in a frac is the Lagoon and Tripod Nebulae with their embedded clusters, framed with M21 too.

These images are showing the ES30mm 82 degree and Lunt 20mm 100 in your dob and then in a 650mm focal length frac. The ES gives 3.8 degrees fov in the frac, enough to fit the largest objects in.

So, it’s horse for courses, both giving something different.

[scarp15]

When it first became habitual to plan to go on dark sky outings, for a number of seasons, I took one scope. Often this would be accompanied with a pair of binoculars, such as 10.5x70's. The scopes alternated over time, an 8" SCT, 12" dob, currently 14" or 8" dob. In recent seasons, I have forged a habit to take along a small wide field refractor to accompany the dob. Stu's explanation and rational clarifies this perfectly and subjects can be shared in terms of the view through both instruments. The image scale is appreciated through the dob, the wide field containment of large expansive objects or the positioning of a globular embedded in the local geography of the sky in appreciated in a refractor, filters when used, alternate between each scope. This is very much a journey or process though, for which complete focus on getting the best eyepieces you can for your dobsonian take precedence and there is a lot to be gained with a dobsonian coupled to high quality / applicable eyepieces (and filters) at a dark site. A wide field refractor is a complementary and can become a primary optical tool, perhaps to include for another time and then you can share those wide or ultra wide field eyepieces.  

 

[Littleguy80]

4 hours ago, Stu said:

A frac of say 650mm focal length will give you fabulous widefield views, particularly under a dark sky. It gives you a very different perspective to the dob, less fine detail but lovely framing of large objects. Some examples. In a large dob you can see parts of M31 at a time, with detail showing in the dust lanes and perhaps in a large 18” plus you might view one or more of the globular clusters around it. In a widefield frac you can frame the whole object beautifully, along with M32 and 110, and with dark enough skies trace out the fuller extent of the spiral arms.

Similarly with the Veil, in a large scope it is about viewing up close and in detail, the beautiful fine nebulosity, the twisting tendrils, the ‘claws’ in the Eastern Veil and the fine ‘branches’ in the broom. In a widefield frac you can fit the whole complex in at once, a very different experience, much more subtle but amazing in its own way.

One of my favourite summer views in a frac is the Lagoon and Tripod Nebulae with their embedded clusters, framed with M21 too.

These images are showing the ES30mm 82 degree and Lunt 20mm 100 in your dob and then in a 650mm focal length frac. The ES gives 3.8 degrees fov in the frac, enough to fit the largest objects in.

So, it’s horse for courses, both giving something different.

Cheers Stu. I definitely see the appeal of the frac. The Lagoon was one of my absolute favourites last summer. I think this starts to answer the question on the need for the ES82 30mm. I was worried about having an eyepiece with a large(ish) TFOV. Perhaps the answer is the frac for those targets. As you said, the dob gives the detail while the frac gives the overview. Right tool for the job!