Show me your eyepiece/accessories case, please.

[HollyHound]

On 04/02/2021 at 04:44, Voyager 3 said:

Arch rivals.... Who came out victorious ? 

Still both in use with no clear winner... Morpheus has the edge in FoV, but DeLite is very close (slightly longer focal length) with excellent ergonomics 👍

With more clear skies it is possible one will emerge, but maybe they both end up staying... I will update when a decision (or not) has been taken 😬😬

[stubeeef]

Got my EP case finished. Pelican V500 with Kaizen Foam. Chose a bright color underneath so I can easily see whats not there in the dark.

 

Edited February 11, 2021 by stubeeef

[Stardaze]

11 hours ago, stubeeef said:

Got my EP case finished. Pelican V500 with Kaizen Foam. Chose a bright color underneath so I can easily see whats not there in the dark.

 

Which APM is that one and how do you find it? Looks about the perfect case to me too. 

Edited February 11, 2021 by Stardaze

[Neil H]

On 04/02/2020 at 20:18, elliot said:

I can't find replacement foam for this disaster! I haven't slept in weeks.

E bay does it and I think I saw it on Amazon called cubed foam

[Stardaze]

On 04/02/2021 at 15:19, Dantooine said:

The 8 ethos is a cracker. It gives me 89x on my 4 inch and 125x on my 8 inch. Putting the barrel on makes it much closer to parfocal with the others. I’m less likely to drop it too. I don’t know how long your telescope is but if I wasn’t extravagant with my buying I could have probably gone straight from the 8E to the 4.7E. Something to think about. Wonder what the APM 5 is like comparison to the 4.7E?

Was out last night using both the APM 13 and 20 only again whilst thinking about these comments. I can't help wonder how the E13 betters the APM. It clearly does from reports but the APM is no slouch. The APM 20 is definitely a goldfish bowl and a good 30% from the edge doesn't render that well, all stars suffer with astigmatism. So if you are someone overly concerned with that, then probably not for you, But it does provide quite a deep viewing experience which I like. The 13 starts to suffer around 15% of the way Ito the edge but certainly has a flatter field - it's a very good EP. One day I will probably buy the E13 to make that comparison no doubt.

[stubeeef]

5 hours ago, Stardaze said:

Which APM is that one and how do you find it? Looks about the perfect case to me too. 

I got the5mm  APM about a month ago, while simultaneously packing my house up while its getting 100% new paint and flooring. I got the EP case done because I had to be off my floors while they are being sanded. Long story short, I haven't used my APM yet. I have a 20" f3.4 dob, so the mag on that 5mm is going to be used seldomly. Just wanted it for one of those "just in case" nights.

I'm stoked about my 2 cases, especially the little Collimation tool one I posted a 2 pages back. The EP case is big so I could stand up the back row of EPs-they are tall, but the bright background will allow me to notice whats missing, especially if 2 are not there.

Edited February 11, 2021 by stubeeef

[Stardaze]

8 minutes ago, stubeeef said:

I got the5mm  APM about a month ago, while simultaneously packing my house up while its getting 100% new paint and flooring. I got the EP case done because I had to be off my floors while they are being sanded. Long story short, I haven't used my APM yet. I have a 20" f3.4 dob, so the mag on that 5mm is going to be used seldomly. Just wanted it for one of those "just in case" nights.

I'm stoked about my 2 cases, especially the little Collimation tool one I posted a 2 pages back. The EP case is big so I could stand up the back row of EPs-they are tall, but the bright background will allow me to notice whats missing, especially if 2 are not there.

Please do post your thoughts on the APM when you do get to use. I have a dob half your size but bought an XW5 for now to plug the gap. The OCD in me kind of wonders about that one being the oddity in my mix of APM and TV. 

[Dantooine]

24 minutes ago, Stardaze said:

Was out last night using both the APM 13 and 20 only again whilst thinking about these comments. I can't help wonder how the E13 betters the APM. It clearly does from reports but the APM is no slouch. The APM 20 is definitely a goldfish bowl and a good 30% from the edge doesn't render that well, all stars suffer with astigmatism. So if you are someone overly concerned with that, then probably not for you, But it does provide quite a deep viewing experience which I like. The 13 starts to suffer around 15% of the way Ito the edge but certainly has a flatter field - it's a very good EP. One day I will probably buy the E13 to make that comparison no doubt.

I think sometimes we just go looking for faults in views to justify the next purchase/fix. I used to keep trying to find fault at the edges etc when in reality and normal observation I wouldn’t be concentrating on that part of the fov. Now I find I’m only really looking at about 60/70 degrees and that portion is surrounded by a massive field of stars. 

[Stardaze]

6 minutes ago, Dantooine said:

I think sometimes we just go looking for faults in views to justify the next purchase/fix. I used to keep trying to find fault at the edges etc when in reality and normal observation I wouldn’t be concentrating on that part of the fov. Now I find I’m only really looking at about 60/70 degrees and that portion is surrounded by a massive field of stars. 

You're right, on both counts. The extra field just adds to the oft used 'immersive' experience it seems. The outer edges are always going to suffer at those extremities. I have become less impulsive with kit over the years, it can certainly help you get out there, which is no bad thing, but equally it shouldn't be just about the kit, for me anyway. Stangely, I also want to 'earn it' too these days. Don't really want the accolade of all the gear...😀

[Stephenstargazer]

My eyes are very comfortable with a view of around 65 degrees and a sharp field stop. I have a Delos, but am just as happy with Panoptics and especially older Vixen LVW or even a Delite. Lucky us as good wide fields are not cheap. It's probaby age but I prefer comfort to fireworks and an eyepiece I can relax into for 15 to 20 mins is all I need....................ZZZzzzz😴

 

[Dantooine]

12 minutes ago, Stephenstargazer said:

My eyes are very comfortable with a view of around 65 degrees and a sharp field stop. I have a Delos, but am just as happy with Panoptics and especially older Vixen LVW or even a Delite. Lucky us as good wide fields are not cheap. It's probaby age but I prefer comfort to fireworks and an eyepiece I can relax into for 15 to 20 mins is all I need....................ZZZzzzz😴

 

They are all very good glass. I couldn’t real say I could tell of a field difference between Delos and panoptics if I’m honest. They must be some of the easiest to use. At the moment I’m liking my ethos but I could surely enjoy the Delos without any worries. I definitely found them better than most of the 82 degrees I’ve tried. 

[HollyHound]

1 hour ago, Dantooine said:

I think sometimes we just go looking for faults in views to justify the next purchase/fix. I used to keep trying to find fault at the edges etc when in reality and normal observation I wouldn’t be concentrating on that part of the fov. Now I find I’m only really looking at about 60/70 degrees and that portion is surrounded by a massive field of stars. 

I agree with Dale here, especially after finally having used the APM 20mm XWA last night, that I bought from him recently 👍

I've been very happy and comfortable with FoV around the 70 degree point, hence going XW and Delos. I'd previously tried various eyepieces at 82 degrees (Nagler, Nirvana, ES) but couldn't quite make it work for me... I think I'm subconsciously trying to take in the whole FoV and can't, whereas at 70 degrees, I see the edge and am content, but 82 is just tantalisingly close 🤔

However, comparing the XW 20 and APM 20 last night, I finally "got" this immersive experience that many have been talking about. With 100 degrees FoV it's impossible (for me anyway) to see the whole field, without moving my head around slightly and when I did, it was extremely useful to be able to see "context" stars at the edges of view to help move the dob around. When just observing however, then I am also only really concentrating on an inner 60/70 degrees too, but as the edges are no longer visible (and I'm not even trying to see them), voila... the view feels more immersive 😀

It felt strangely "constrained" returning to the XW20 for comparison, however these still remain excellent eyepieces and will still be used extensively, particularly on my refractor and for lunar/planetary.

I have to say the APM 20mm is also very sharp, contrasty and showed stars as well as any of the XWs or Delos. I did notice a tad of astigmatism at the edges (I was using all of these with the Paracorr, so no coma!) but not really obtrusive. It helped that it was so cold and clear last night... I was able to see the Trapezium E and F stars again with ease using XW14, XW10 & XW7 and "just" make them out in the APM 20... that was a revelation!

It's been discussed elsewhere and in fact I think @Johneven has a little bet on with himself, but I have to finally admit that I am convinced of the merits of 100 degree eyepieces, for the dob at least... the APM 20mm works beautifully at that focal length, but I have today succumbed and an Ethos 13mm will be winging it's way to me from FLO very soon 😮 I resisted, I really did... but the immersive nature of that view last night was just too much...

Edited February 11, 2021 by HollyHound

[Stardaze]

42 minutes ago, HollyHound said:

I agree with Dale here, especially after finally having used the APM 20mm XWA last night, that I bought from him recently 👍

I've been very happy and comfortable with FoV around the 70 degree point, hence going XW and Delos. I'd previously tried various eyepieces at 82 degrees (Nagler, Nirvana, ES) but couldn't quite make it work for me... I think I'm subconsciously trying to take in the whole FoV and can't, whereas at 70 degrees, I see the edge and am content, but 82 is just tantalisingly close 🤔

However, comparing the XW 20 and APM 20 last night, I finally "got" this immersive experience that many have been talking about. With 100 degrees FoV it's impossible (for me anyway) to see the whole field, without moving my head around slightly and when I did, it was extremely useful to be able to see "context" stars at the edges of view to help move the dob around. When just observing however, then I am also only really concentrating on an inner 60/70 degrees too, but as the edges are no longer visible (and I'm not even trying to see them), voila... the view feels more immersive 😀

It felt strangely "constrained" returning to the XW20 for comparison, however these still remain excellent eyepieces and will still be used extensively, particularly on my refractor and for lunar/planetary.

I have to say the APM 20mm is also very sharp, contrasty and showed stars as well as any of the XWs or Delos. I did notice a tad of astigmatism at the edges (I was using all of these with the Paracorr, so no coma!) but not really obtrusive. It helped that it was so cold and clear last night... I was able to see the Trapezium E and F stars again with ease using XW14, XW10 & XW7 and "just" make them out in the APM 20... that was a revelation!

It's been discussed elsewhere and in fact I think @Johneven has a little bet on with himself, but I have to finally admit that I am convinced of the merits of 100 degree eyepieces, for the dob at least... the APM 20mm works beautifully at that focal length, but I have today succumbed and an Ethos 13mm will be winging it's way to me from FLO very soon 😮 I resisted, I really did... but the immersive nature of that view last night was just too much...

Please don't tell me how great the E13 is! You have the same setup there as me, what skies are you working with? The trapezium is clear as a whistle for me (bottle 5), though spectacular with the APM 13. 

[HollyHound]

Just now, Stardaze said:

Please don't tell me how great the E13 is! You have the same setup there as me, what skies are you working with? The trapezium is clear as a whistle for me (bottle 5), though spectacular with the APM 13. 

I won't... I guarantee it will be a horrible eyepiece, I'm only buying it out of spite really 🤣

Same here, Bortle 5 and the Trapezium E/F were easily seen last night again (they haven't always). I am finding that for my 10" dob, a focal length around 14mm to be ideal for an awful lot of my observing too. If the APM 13 is like it's brother the 20, then that will be a fine eyepiece 👍

[HollyHound]

3 hours ago, Stardaze said:

Was out last night using both the APM 13 and 20 only again whilst thinking about these comments. I can't help wonder how the E13 betters the APM. It clearly does from reports but the APM is no slouch. The APM 20 is definitely a goldfish bowl and a good 30% from the edge doesn't render that well, all stars suffer with astigmatism. So if you are someone overly concerned with that, then probably not for you, But it does provide quite a deep viewing experience which I like. The 13 starts to suffer around 15% of the way Ito the edge but certainly has a flatter field - it's a very good EP. One day I will probably buy the E13 to make that comparison no doubt.

Not sure if you're using a coma corrector, but although I did find astigmatism with the APM 20, it wasn't as bad as I thought it might be and (to me) it seemed like only the outer 15% at most was suffering. It is possible you're also seeing coma too. I will say with coma corrected, I'm amazed how well the stars remain in shape given that this is a 100 degree FoV 😮👍

[Stardaze]

42 minutes ago, HollyHound said:

Not sure if you're using a coma corrector, but although I did find astigmatism with the APM 20, it wasn't as bad as I thought it might be and (to me) it seemed like only the outer 15% at most was suffering. It is possible you're also seeing coma too. I will say with coma corrected, I'm amazed how well the stars remain in shape given that this is a 100 degree FoV 😮👍

No, I haven't really considered it but it is a good valid point. Which one are you using?

Just for the record, whilst I am sitting on the GAS at the moment, rest assured, I will have an EP collection like Dale's some time in the not-so-distant-future.. 🤣

[Stardaze]

PS. Just noted a Paracorr 2 in your signature..😂

It's a great comparison for me, given you have the same setup. Another big investment, so how much of an effect does it have? Is it all very bulky top end?

Edited February 11, 2021 by Stardaze

[HollyHound]

21 minutes ago, Stardaze said:

Just for the record, whilst I am sitting on the GAS at the moment, rest assured, I will have an EP collection like Dale's some time in the not-so-distant-future.. 🤣

He's already trodden the path and settled on a lovely set of Ethos 👍I resisted, have a great set of XWs and some others, but now that I have the dob, it seems the lure of the Ethos is also proving too great 🤣

Looking at all the varied collections of eyepieces in this thread, one thing is for sure, it can get very expensive very quickly so if you can buy used do so. I've picked up half of my stuff on here, but the rest from new. Unfortunately, a lot of the desired eyepieces (not necessarily better, but desired) don't often come up used and go quickly when they do. 

20 minutes ago, Stardaze said:

It's a great comparison for me, given you have the same setup. Another big investment, so how much of an effect does it have? Is it all very bulky top end?

I was initially unsure, as quite a few report it not being needed for an f/5 dob, but I found (that with a decent set of eyepieces), I was seeing distortion in quite a significant portion of the outer field. Initially I though that was astigmatism from my eyes, but then learnt that I was actually looking at coma (they are quite different but can be confusing at first).

The Paracorr (when adjusted correctly) removes pretty much all the coma and then you're left with usually just field curvature (e.g. XW14) or astigmatism (e.g. APM 20). The Delos 14 is essentially perfect in my coma corrected dob, and I'm anticipating that the Ethos 13 will possibly be close to that too.

Does it matter... not necessarily as most of the central FoV is fine, but if I can correct the whole field (or most of it) then I will, as it just makes discerning detail near the edge a little easier. It is quite an expenditure though, but then it benefits every eyepiece 👍Other coma correctors are available, and likely just as effective, but the Paracorr wins on ergonomics for me. There are various threads discussing the benefits (or not), but feel free to start one if you'd like some fresh feedback 😀

Edited February 11, 2021 by HollyHound

[Stephenstargazer]

When I want a larger field of view, I put in a longer eyepiece and get my fill of immersion and setting. After a while I change to something shorter and go for detail, as far as murky sky allows. I am not as keen, or capable?, on high powers as I used to be. I am not knocking widefield eyepieces just giving a view from the sixpenny seats! 🙂

[HollyHound]

23 minutes ago, Stephenstargazer said:

When I want a larger field of view, I put in a longer eyepiece and get my fill of immersion and setting. After a while I change to something shorter and go for detail, as far as murky sky allows. I am not as keen, or capable?, on high powers as I used to be. I am not knocking widefield eyepieces just giving a view from the sixpenny seats! 🙂

Fair comment and it's totally true to say that any of the eyepieces we choose are likely worlds better than were used years ago to make all the major discoveries we take for granted today 😀👍

[Stephenstargazer]

2 minutes ago, HollyHound said:

likely worlds better than were used years ago to make all the major discoveries

We would be shocked to look through Gallileo's tube or Newton's speculum mirror or even the Herschel's scopes. Humbling that they saw so much!

[Stephenstargazer]

Mind you they did have the best of it when everyone put the candles out...................................🙂

 

[Dantooine]

3 hours ago, HollyHound said:

I agree with Dale here, especially after finally having used the APM 20mm XWA last night, that I bought from him recently 👍

I've been very happy and comfortable with FoV around the 70 degree point, hence going XW and Delos. I'd previously tried various eyepieces at 82 degrees (Nagler, Nirvana, ES) but couldn't quite make it work for me... I think I'm subconsciously trying to take in the whole FoV and can't, whereas at 70 degrees, I see the edge and am content, but 82 is just tantalisingly close 🤔

However, comparing the XW 20 and APM 20 last night, I finally "got" this immersive experience that many have been talking about. With 100 degrees FoV it's impossible (for me anyway) to see the whole field, without moving my head around slightly and when I did, it was extremely useful to be able to see "context" stars at the edges of view to help move the dob around. When just observing however, then I am also only really concentrating on an inner 60/70 degrees too, but as the edges are no longer visible (and I'm not even trying to see them), voila... the view feels more immersive 😀

It felt strangely "constrained" returning to the XW20 for comparison, however these still remain excellent eyepieces and will still be used extensively, particularly on my refractor and for lunar/planetary.

I have to say the APM 20mm is also very sharp, contrasty and showed stars as well as any of the XWs or Delos. I did notice a tad of astigmatism at the edges (I was using all of these with the Paracorr, so no coma!) but not really obtrusive. It helped that it was so cold and clear last night... I was able to see the Trapezium E and F stars again with ease using XW14, XW10 & XW7 and "just" make them out in the APM 20... that was a revelation!

It's been discussed elsewhere and in fact I think @Johneven has a little bet on with himself, but I have to finally admit that I am convinced of the merits of 100 degree eyepieces, for the dob at least... the APM 20mm works beautifully at that focal length, but I have today succumbed and an Ethos 13mm will be winging it's way to me from FLO very soon 😮 I resisted, I really did... but the immersive nature of that view last night was just too much...

John’s won his bet 👍

he just knew.. a manual reflector and 100 degrees.. no contest. 

[John]

18 minutes ago, Dantooine said:

John’s won his bet 👍

he just knew.. a manual reflector and 100 degrees.. no contest. 

Nope - I lost it

 

[HollyHound]

12 minutes ago, John said:

Nope - I lost it

 

Ha... I knew it, I was right... you'd seen my form for favouring eyepieces around the 70 degrees mark and selling on the 82 degree ones and figured that I'd not manage with the 100 degree. As I said in one of my posts from a few weeks back, I hoped that you'd win your bet because I didn't want to go down that slippery Ethos slope either 🤣

However and much to my great surprise, whilst I found 82 degrees (at the time) not too great, I was really blown away by the 100 degree view. I think as mentioned, it's because I wasn't even trying to see everything (too wide), just relaxing and letting the view surround me, so that the edge disappears and it's just a "view".  Possibly I had the wrong technique or the wrong scope when I first had those Nirvanas but interestingly I didn't find the ES 4.7 82 as compelling last night, but that could have just been the high magnification 🤔

All I can say is that I get the reason and desire now for the ultra wide view in these dobs and it was most odd to swap back to an XW20 and see the edge of field again 😬

I'm very happy to be in the ultra wide camp now... I'm sorry you lost your bet and my wallet is certainly sorry you lost your bet too 🤣

Edited February 11, 2021 by HollyHound