12mm planetary eyepiece...?

[John]

When I tested the Vixen SLV's I was pretty impressed - I could not separate the 6mm SLV from a 6mm Baader Genuine Ortho in performance terms:

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/217971-vixen-slv-eyepiece-report-6mm-12mm-and-20mm/

I have a set of the Circle-T (AKA "volcano tops" ) orthos which I have mostly for nostalgic reasons but they do work very well optically considering their cost of around £25-£30 each on the used market. Note sophisticated cigar box eyepiece case !

 

[Ags]

Ok, just read John's review..... Forget ortho's. SLV! SLV! SLV!

[JTEC]

Orthos, as others have said, do seem like the clear choice. I have the Takahashi 12.5mm and that is excellent, as is the 9mm, though that’s a bit outside your range. Some of the ‘best ever’ views I’ve had of Jupiter and Saturn were with my TEC 140 under excellent skies in the Canaries with a pair of 11mm Televue Plossls in the binoviewer, albeit, on that occasion, with a compensator in the bino that increased the effective mag. My observing companion and I, both experienced observers, were clear that the Plossls outperformed a pair of 10mm Tak LEs (note, the LEs, not the ‘ordinary’ Tak ortho referred to above). Slight difference in fl, to be sure, but we knew that. As Stu, I think, mentioned, if you can find a way to get into binoviewing for planets, lunar and the brighter DSOs, you’ll see more and maybe never look back. Mono or bino, the TV plossls are very sharp but a touch warmer in tone than the ortho, which is pretty colour neutral. I’ve seen it suggested that this is advantageous in bringing out detail on Jupiter. We were aware of this suggestion at the time and tended to agree. Personally, I’d prefer the cooler/truer tones of the ortho for the Moon and more general observing. So, my first suggestion, if you can run to it, would be the Tak 12.5, followed, if the eye relief isn’t an issue for you, by the 11mm TV Plossl. The 12mm Edmund RKE that I have in a box somewhere is also sharp and contrasty, but  I’d choose it third behind the other two.  

John

[Ags]

Lots of interesting thoughts on this thread. I had not been aware of the Vixen SLVs and they sound ideal, although it's a shame they do not have an 8mm.

Pentax XFs come in 12 and 8.5mm focal length, which suits my master plan, but I have read mixed reviews of them.

Televue plossls come in 11 and 8mm which is also good, but they are overpriced given their historical pricing. Eye relief is also not great.

Ortho's have the same comfort issue and I think they won't be popular with my family and friends.

So it comes down to SLV vs XF... Or maybe SLV 12mm and XF 8.5mm?

Edited September 12, 2018 by Ags

[Moonshane]

I think the SLVs are pretty good for mono viewing but not for BVs unless you get a matched pair. Even then I found the build quality a bit suspect. I find this more or less every time I try TV alternatives.

If you can find one, I think you'd be hard pressed to beat a used TV Radian 12mm taking into account the price, the comfort and the clarity. The Delites are a step up though although they only do 11mm and 13mm in your desired range.

[JTEC]

Hmm, just looked and the TV plossls have jumped a bit in price haven’t they ... and, if comfort is key, then, as you say, not the right answer for you. It does rather depend on what you mean by ‘best planetary’ though. And that’s not a debate to be re-re-re-opened lightly ?.  To my eye, the ‘best’ planetary eyepieces have typically been those with few elements, small eye lenses and relatively short eye-relief. Which is not to suggest that there aren’t some excellent general purpose examples out there that will do a great job and be comfortable for all-comers to use. To try and square the circle of your requirements, I like Moonshane’s suggestion of the Delites - the ones I’ve used have been sharp and contrasty as well as undemanding to look through. Bit more expensive though, but they do appear on the s/h market from time to time. If you do go for the Vixen, it would be interesting to know what you make of them - the binoviewer needs regular feeding and it has expensive tastes ?

John

[John]

1 hour ago, JTEC said:

....the binoviewer needs regular feeding and it has expensive tastes ?

 

Thats an interesting comment John.

I don't binoview myself (tried them several times but don't get on with them) but another experienced observer on SGL uses them extensively and to great effect for planetary observing but uses relatively low cost Super Abbe eyepieces in them. He reckons the "bino effect" means that the overall peformance is better than using a top flight premium eyepiece in mono mode

 

 

 

[Ags]

I'm definitely not going down the binoviewer route as I am completely unsuccessful in looking simultaneously down both sides of a binocular. I always have double vision however hard I try, and I always end up closing or ignoring one eye. In fact I've been looking for a good monocular for a while. It is possible that binoviewing might work better than binoculars because of the more stable and comfortable viewing position, but I think I will wait and try it before spending any money!

I think opinions, personal preferences and standards will always differ, but what I have taken away from this thread is that the SLVs hit the target focal length for me and seem to have sufficient optical fidelity. I can't find a bad word about them optically. Eye relief and comfort are good, and that is important as I often share the view with casual observers. And the field of view is Plossl-like, so not too narrow. OK, build quality may not be quite at Televue standards, but the same goes for my other eyepieces too! It is just a shame there is no SLV 7 or 8 mm... why the crazy gap between 6 and 9 mm? 

Other eyepieces may be better, and in all likelihood I will never know one way or the other, but I'm pretty confident that the 12 mm SLV would be good enough for me, especially if I can pick one up second hand. If I like it, I might get the 10 and 6 too! But what to do about that gap at 8??? ?

Edited September 12, 2018 by Ags

[vlaiv]

57 minutes ago, Ags said:

But what to do about that gap at 8???

Feeling adventurous?

I can't find any reviews of these, so maybe you can give it a test drive? Specs will not blow one's mind - 60 degrees AFOV, 12mm eye relief, but it is cheaper league, and description states: "...with an outstanding sharpness" (if one is inclined to believe those commercial descriptions )

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p3828_TS-Optics-Flatfield-Eyepiece-FF-8-mm-with-60--apparent-field-of-view.html

 

[Fozzie]

4 hours ago, Ags said:

 It is just a shame there is no SLV 7 or 8 mm... why the crazy gap between 6 and 9 mm? 

 But what to do about that gap at 8??? ?

You could get the 15mm and 12mm SLV and use a 2x telextender that would cover a range of 15mm, 12mm, 7.5mm and 6mm... 

Oh and if you add the 20mm and 25mm (with 2x telextender) then you would also have 25mm, 20mm, 15mm, 12.5mm, 12mm, 10mm, 7.5mm and a 6mm.. that's what happened to me you see.., and then I added the 9mm and the 5mm for laughs..  I believe this is quite a common affliction.

16 hours ago, Moonshane said:

Even then I found the build quality a bit suspect. I find this more or less every time I try TV alternatives.

That's because the green and black world spoils us something rotten.. (and you pay for it) in all honest I have 1 SLV that has a slight looseness to the twist up EP, the others are all fine..

Good luck with you r decision..

Ta

Fozzie

Edited September 12, 2018 by Fozzie

[Louis D]

4 hours ago, Ags said:

If I like it, I might get the 10 and 6 too! But what to do about that gap at 8???

The original Vixen LV line had a 7mm that got dropped with the NLV line.  Their LVW line had an 8mm.

[Ags]

I might just get a BST 8 mm to fill the gap. They seem to be likable and competent eyepieces. Maybe that will tide me over until Vixen release an SLV 8 mm!

[Ags]

7 hours ago, Fozzie said:

You could get the 15mm and 12mm SLV

I definitely need the full football team!

[JTEC]

John, somewhat away from the main strand of this thread, but just to reply to your point about the binoviewers. It’s interesting that some people, regardless of experience, don’t seem to take to them. There must be a reason, I suppose. The Baader MkVs that I have have easy adjustment for interpupillary distance and independent focusing for each eye. Maybe that makes a difference. They also seem to be perfectly collimated and perhaps not all binos are. If you can comfortably use binoculars, I think you would be able to use these - that is pretty much how they feel in use. Different eyepieces produce some differences in best eye placement, but nothing dramatic. I’ve had one eyepiece pair that didn't feel well matched. The statement your friend/colleague made doesn’t surprise me that much! The bino adds a dimension that no single eyepiece can provide. Impressions of depth are, of course, illusory. There’s absolutely no question though that they allow you to see more planetary and lunar detail and they can be pretty astonishing on brighter DSOs as well. Reportedly this is because the brain combines information from both eyes. Couldn’t comment on that. I will always use the bino if the object allows. You just see more.

As for which eyepieces, yes. I don’t have any fancy ones for the bino - it’s expensive because it’s two of everything! - and you don’t need the wide ones. I did once try a pair of 13mm Ethos’s (it’s that plural again...) in the TEC on the Moon and that was, well, utterly bonkers really.  (The other one belonged to a friend)  I use pairs of: 9mm Tak orthos, 11mm TV Plossls, 18mm Tak LEs, 20mm Smart Astronomy Sterling plossls and 28mm Edmund RKEs. The last two pairs, like the ones you mentioned, are pretty inexpensive.

John E

 

 

 

[Stub Mandrel]

As a spectacle wearer, I can say that changing pairs, even two made to the same prescription by the same company, requires you to go through a period of 'adaptation' to change. Any change in things like interpupillary distance or relative focus between the two sides of a binocular/binoviewer is going to have a similar effect.

I'm as guilty as anyone of 'binocular fiddling' but I suspect the best policy is to get the focus and spacing as close to spot on as you can get it in brief time, then leave it alone. The eyes should accomodate to compensate for any small focus errors of differences between the sides and even slightly out interpupillary distances - but my experience with glasses suggests this could take a few minutes viewing.  All my best views through binoculars have been when I force myself to stop fiddling!

[Charic]

1 hour ago, Ags said:

I might just get a BST 8 mm to fill the gap. They seem to be likable and competent eyepieces. Maybe that will tide me over until Vixen release an SLV 8 mm!

A  12mm Starguider was your  very first selection at the beginning of this thread!
Just because their cheap, doesn't mean their a bad choice, far from it, but that choice/decision will always be personal and can only be made by the end user, no-one else!

Since owning my first Starguider the 8mm ( I also have the  12mm )  I've tried/tested for myself, 'better reported' eyepieces,  thinking that  my observing would get better, having better eyepieces, Right!...........wrong?........... I've sold them all, check the signature.

Doesn't mean they were bad ( those that I sold )  it just meant they were no better for me  at the time of testing ( on my old/er eyes and my f/6 scope ) but believe me, those £300+ eyepieces were not 300 times better than one of my £49 eyepieces. To be honest, the only difference was the field of view, and again down to my  own preference, I prefer somewhere around the 60°  afov, and as for the images they provided, why do  I need to spend so much on a quality branded eyepiece, whereas the eyepieces I kept  proved  just as capable?

Even my Revelation  Plössl's are at the cheap end of the spectrum, allegedly GSO designed (not that I need them now?)  and  again, down to personal preferences, preferred them over the  other premium Plössl's and Orthoscopic's. 

Even the good  EP Guru's here have said positive things about the Starguider's, and I know these guys have tested many if not hundreds of eyepieces, but whether their better or worse than x,y,z, only you can  decide.

Whatever you get, just enjoy the process, and if your still undecided, keep going at it. 

 

Edited September 12, 2018 by Charic

[Ags]

I had a couple of TS HR Planetary EPs for many years, these are apparently comparable to BSTs although they are of a different design. The HR Planetary EPs were great little eyepieces (wonderfully relaxing) and I was very happy with them, so I imagine an 8mm BST would work well. I might get a HR Planetary for nostalgia's sake, but it would have to have the old TS blue branding!

[Stub Mandrel]

4 minutes ago, Ags said:

(wonderfully relaxing)

Interesting comment!

All my eps are at the 'economy' end of the market and I find some much more comfortable to use than others. I wonder if it's because some have a wider 'in focus' zone, putting less demand on eye position and eye focus?

[vlaiv]

10 minutes ago, Ags said:

I had a couple of TS HR Planetary EPs for many years, these are apparently comparable to BSTs although they are of a different design. The HR Planetary EPs were great little eyepieces (wonderfully relaxing) and I was very happy with them, so I imagine an 8mm BST would work well. I might get a HR Planetary for nostalgia's sake, but it would have to have the old TS blue branding!

I do have one eyepiece of that type (not TS brand, I think it is SkyWatcher variant) and while it can be used for planetary observation, in my view they are poor performers. Mine has a lot of scatter and it is not sharp on axis (as it should be, or as other designs are). From what I've read, BSTs should have a slight edge in sharpness over it. This was in F/6 scope. In comparison ES82 11 with barlow, although yielding higher magnification, simply gives much better view, especially sharpness wise.

[Ags]

I think comfort comes from good eye relief + 60 degrees AFOV. I find wider angle eyepieces generally less comfortable and harder to use, but I favor them for DSOs as I simply need to to use a higher magnification to tame light pollution, so need wider fields to compensate for the greater magnification.

@vlaiv, I found the HR Planetaries good enough and nice to use in an F13 scope but quickly sold them on when I switched to F5 scopes. I also noticed a loss of sharpness. Yes I have also heard that the BSTs edge out these TMB Planetary clones.

Even at F13, my Myperion 17mm (adjusted to 9mm with fine tuning rings) easily outperformed the Planetary HR 9mm. I expect a similar (maybe bigger) gap between the SLVs and the BSTs in all seriousness.

Edited September 13, 2018 by Ags

[Louis D]

Comparing the Meade HD-60 9mm and 6.5mm to the 10mm Delos, 9mm Morpheus, 7mm Pentax XW, and 5.2mm Pentax XL, sharpness, edge correction at f/6 and stray light control were all pretty similar.  The main edge the more premium eyepieces had was a slight improvement in contrast likely due to better polish leading to slightly less scatter.  Today's step-up 60 degree eyepieces are very good in the sub-10mm range.

[RT65CB-SWL]

Hi @Ags. Have you considered a TeleVue 12mm Radian? 

They were discontinued a few years ago, but they do come up for sale from time to time.

I have the 6mm one.

[Ags]

I think a Radian is a bit too much money and it looks like other options go for less new and at least equal them optically. If one came along at the right price I would snap it up though!

[Louis D]

2 hours ago, Ags said:

I think a Radian is a bit too much money and it looks like other options go for less new and at least equal them optically. If one came along at the right price I would snap it up though!

I passed on the Radians 20 years ago after trying them out and discovering they had massive SAEP (kidneybeaning).  I haven't discovered any in the Meade HD-60 line.

[NGC 1502]

On 14/09/2018 at 02:13, Louis D said:

I passed on the Radians 20 years ago after trying them out and discovering they had massive SAEP (kidneybeaning).  I haven't discovered any in the Meade HD-60 line.

Just a comment on the Radians, and very definitely not to argue, just for balance for anyone considering used Radians.

I’m a Radian fan. If the eyecup is set too low, that means your eye is inside the 20mm eye relief, and kidney beaning is certain, same as any other long eye relief eyepieces. So setting the adjustable eye guard to suit you is crucial. Get that right and I find they are excellent. Others may possibly find different.   And if you find the eye guard action too slack or too tight, it’s a DIY fix.

Ed.