Jump to content

Any experience with the Takahashi LE 30mm (1.25")?


Piero

Recommended Posts

Does anyone have experience with this eyepiece in medium fast telescopes (e.g. f5+)? 

I'm considering the replacement of my 24 Pan with a ~30mm eyepiece as this focal length would be more distant from my Nikon zoom at low power (which has a f.l. of 21mm). On the other hand, there is a chance that I get a Quark at some point, and ~30mm could be handy.

I know that there is the 32 TV Plossl, but this requires the additional extender. Personally, I like the eyecup design of the LE 30mm and 20mm e.r.. In the past I tried the 30 NLV, but this showed too much aberration in the outer ~15% of the FOV in my TV60 F6. 

Any comment or thought is appreciated! :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that one, but I have a Takahashi 32mm Abbe Ortho which is superb & which I have had in the classifieds. It has a smaller AFOV of 42 deg. 

There are CN threads on the LE Tak eps. I believe the 30 is a pseudo-Masuyama. @BillPmight know. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought a 30 LE a couple of years ago and hated it in every way. The eye lens is set way down inside the eyepiece body, which forces the observer to force his eye right upto the eyepiece to obtain a full field. The rubber eye cup is just a generic Tak cup that actually obstructs the eye lens unless you push your eye right upto the cup. The edge of field is poor compared to an old volcanos top 30mm erfle I used as a comparison, or a 28mm RKE. Both were better at the edge than the Tak, and both were more comfortable by far. The Tak 30 LE is way too expensive and is greatly out classed by such eyepieces as the 30 or 35mm Ultima / Ultrascopic / Eudiascopic.

First Light currently have 35mm Eudiascopics on sale and they'll knock the socks off the Tak 30 LE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

I bought a 30 LE a couple of years ago and hated it in every way. The eye lens is set way down inside the eyepiece body, which forces the observer to force his eye right upto the eyepiece to obtain a full field. The rubber eye cup is just a generic Tak cup that actually obstructs the eye lens unless you push your eye right upto the cup. The edge of field is poor compared to an old volcanos top 30mm erfle I used as a comparison, or a 28mm RKE. Both were better at the edge than the Tak, and both were more comfortable by far. The Tak 30 LE is way too expensive and is greatly out classed by such eyepieces as the 30 or 35mm Ultima / Ultrascopic / Eudiascopic.

First Light currently have 35mm Eudiascopics on sale and they'll knock the socks off the Tak 30 LE.

I bought the LE30 (for a very reasonably price) from Mike and didn't like it much either. I have owned 32mm TV plossl and the 30mm and 35mm Celestron Ultima's and preferred them although the positioning of the 35mm Ultima's field stop does mean that it requires quite a bit more inward focuser movement than practically any other eyepiece that I've used.

I find 30mm and longer FL eyepieces don't cut through the LP here too well so apart from the 31mm Nagler, which I keep for the largest DSO's under dark skies, I tend to use the 24mm Pan or the 21mm Ethos.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

No experience of the Tak LE30mm. But in my opinion the Televue 32mm plossl really is first class. Great optics ,sharp and will work in the faster scopes well also. Used ones come up at sensible money also. Great eyepiece the TV 32mm plossl IMO

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I expect the LE range is Takahashi's general own-brand range, much as other manfacturers have their standard Plossls, TV included. All others are specialist, geared to what Tak think their refractor buyers want, optics for great detail on Moon & planets mainly. And at brand prices.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Timebandit said:

 

 

No experience of the Tak LE30mm. But in my opinion the Televue 32mm plossl really is first class. Great optics ,sharp and will work in the faster scopes well also. Used ones come up at sensible money also. Great eyepiece the TV 32mm plossl IMO

 

 

 

Ditto for the TV 40 Plossl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, 25585 said:

Ditto for the TV 40 Plossl.

Designed especially with glasses wearers in mind I believe. Al Nagler sacrificed par-focality with the rest of the 1.25" TV plossl range for this focal length for this reason I believe.

Sticking to the topic of the 30mm Tak LE, I felt it was OK but I guess I'd hoped for something a little better than than OK from something with the "T" name to it :dontknow:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really interesting comments that I did not expect! thanks! 

It seems I will skip this eyepiece then and keep the 24 Pan for now, at least! For that cost, an eyepiece should be almost perfect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 9 May 2018 at 21:04, John said:

Designed especially with glasses wearers in mind I believe. Al Nagler sacrificed par-focality with the rest of the 1.25" TV plossl range for this focal length for this reason I believe.

Sticking to the topic of the 30mm Tak LE, I felt it was OK but I guess I'd hoped for something a little better than than OK from something with the "T" name to it :dontknow:

 

I have a Takahashi 28mm Erfle now. It is a great eyepiece. 1.25 inch fit & 60 deg AFOV. Not so sharp at the edge as my 32mm TAO but fine for proportional TFOV by comparison. 

Eye relief is better due to the eye lens being close to the top of its cylinder, equivalent to the TV 32 Plossl and better than Baader Eudiascopic 30mm, though not the 35, both of those having less AFOV. 

Recommend the 28 Er above the 30 LE (which is a pseudo-Masuyama similar to the Eudiascopic). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Louis D said:

@Piero You might want to keep on the lookout for a used 28mm Pentax XL.  They had excellent optics and eye relief, but with only a 55 degree AFOV.

Thank you Louis. :) 

I'm sure it's a great eyepiece, but I'm looking for something lighter. As far as I can see, the 28mm XL weighs 307g (http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/entry/pentax-smc-xl-28mm-22-60.html?PHPSESSID=27ab0cc8166d43c7369c85fce877e7a0), whereas I'd like to stay <200g, for better balancing the TV60 on my new giro mount. The other reason why I prefer lighter eyepieces for this scope is that the focuser is not very sturdy in my opinion. All my other eyepieces weight less than 150g. 

It would be great to have an Vixen SLV 30-32mm! :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Piero said:

Thank you Louis. :) 

I'm sure it's a great eyepiece, but I'm looking for something lighter. As far as I can see, the 28mm XL weighs 307g (http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/entry/pentax-smc-xl-28mm-22-60.html?PHPSESSID=27ab0cc8166d43c7369c85fce877e7a0), whereas I'd like to stay <200g, for better balancing the TV60 on my new giro mount. The other reason why I prefer lighter eyepieces for this scope is that the focuser is not very sturdy in my opinion. All my other eyepieces weight less than 150g. 

It would be great to have an Vixen SLV 30-32mm! :) 

The Vixen NLVW is lighter & better than a LV 30mm, I have both. They are 2 inch eps. I am selling a Baader Eudiascopic 30mm, 1.25 inch in the Classifieds already, if you want a lower cost equivalent to a TV Plossl. The former may have Japanese optics is near enough to a 30mm LE & matches with Parks Gold, Celestron Ultima etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.