More comparisons TOE 4mm - HR 2.4mm - NZ 3-6mm

[jetstream]

16 hours ago, John said:

I've often found that TV eyepieces are really good for viewing Jupiter. I think perhaps that target suits their coatings very well ?

I find this as well.

[Pig]

After Mars disappeared from my rear garden view last night I spent quite a few hours  comparing my three high powered eyepieces (3.6 NZ, 2.4 HR and  TOE 4mm) on  many double stars and after switching between the three eyepieces throughout I came to the conclusion the TOE 4mm performs best in my scope for splitting and viewing doubles. I eventually slewed to Albireo Beta1 as I knew the blue and orange contrast would be a great target to see how the eyepices compared, and the TOE was outstanding ? on this occasion besting the NZ on light scatter.and the HR on contrast. 

I also spent around 15 minutes trying to split Epsilon Aquila’s - Deneb al Okab without any success so I eventually looked it up again !!! only to discover they had a separation of zero ?

Well that is a bout three fairly long sessions now comparing these three eyepieces now and it simply does not get tedious, let’s hope I get some lovely skies like last night sometime soon.

[John]

I got a clear split of Mu Cygni last night with my 130mm triplet and my odd zoom/barlow combo for 375x. Not a "top tier" high res eyepiece of course but it's a good performer none the less.

It was a night of steady seeing for doubles last night. Not quite so good for fainter DSO's from here but still one of the best for a good month or so.