Eyepiece recommendations

[Cyclops]

I know my scope is only small (70mm/400mm) but I want to up the mag a bit more than the 44x I get with the supplied 9mm ep. 

With my old Tasco 50mm/600mm scope I would be able to use the 6mm ep to get 100x (200x with the barlow) and I want to be able to observe the planets and such. I don't have the room or money for a big scope, albeit I'd love a big refractor...

Should I get a sub 6mm ep or a barlow?

There are quite a few on Amazon but are there any brands to look out for/avoid?

[Prador]

What type of eyepiece is your 9mm? Huygens, Kellner maybe a Plossl?

If it's one of the first two types, a reasonably cheap 6mm Plossl from Skywatcher or Celestron would give a better viewing experience.

[Cyclops]

7 minutes ago, Prador said:

What type of eyepiece is your 9mm? Huygens, Kellner maybe a Plossl?

If it's one of the first two types, a reasonably cheap 6mm Plossl from Skywatcher or Celestron would give a better viewing experience.

9mm Kellner eyepiece,1.25"

My little scope:

 

https://uk.telescope.com/mobileProduct/Telescopes/Beginner-Telescopes/Orion-GoScope-III-70mm-Refractor-Travel-Telescope/pc/1306/c/1326/117907.uts?sortByColumnName=SortByPriceAscending

[vlaiv]

What sort of budget is available.

Small fast refractors are not best for planetary observing. With 50/600mm scope you said you went to x200 with barlow. With such scope theoretical maximum is around x100 - after that you will get larger/dimmer image but no additional detail.

With 70mm you should be able to go up to x140. Again, this is with good scope and anything above that will not provide additional detail - image will just become larger (this can help if your eye sight is not the sharpest) and dimmer (this is part that actually hurt - dimmer image means less contrast - harder to see detail because of this).

Anyways, if we are talking about achromatic refractors - you will hit point where chromatic aberration does more damage before maximum theoretical magnification.

If your intended targets are Moon and planets, and you have funds, why not get another scope (it really does not need to be expensive one to perform better on planets/Moon), something like this:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/skywatcher-skymax-90-ota.html

It will optically outperform the one you now have. It is also small sized scope, so storage and transportation should not be problem, and depending on what sort of mount you are using for your scope at the moment - this small Mak should be able to fit on it as well. With supplied eyepieces you will have about x125 out of the box, and with this sort of scope you don't need short focal length eyepieces to get to high magnifications.

[Cyclops]

How about this?

 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Celestron-93316-1-1-Omni-Eyepiece/dp/B00008Y0S5/ref=mp_s_a_1_28?ie=UTF8&qid=1549027962&sr=8-28&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&keywords=plossl+1.25

[Cyclops]

25 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

What sort of budget is available.

Small fast refractors are not best for planetary observing. With 50/600mm scope you said you went to x200 with barlow. With such scope theoretical maximum is around x100 - after that you will get larger/dimmer image but no additional detail.

With 70mm you should be able to go up to x140. Again, this is with good scope and anything above that will not provide additional detail - image will just become larger (this can help if your eye sight is not the sharpest) and dimmer (this is part that actually hurt - dimmer image means less contrast - harder to see detail because of this).

Anyways, if we are talking about achromatic refractors - you will hit point where chromatic aberration does more damage before maximum theoretical magnification.

If your intended targets are Moon and planets, and you have funds, why not get another scope (it really does not need to be expensive one to perform better on planets/Moon), something like this:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/skywatcher-skymax-90-ota.html

It will optically outperform the one you now have. It is also small sized scope, so storage and transportation should not be problem, and depending on what sort of mount you are using for your scope at the moment - this small Mak should be able to fit on it as well. With supplied eyepieces you will have about x125 out of the box, and with this sort of scope you don't need short focal length eyepieces to get to high magnifications.

Got no money for another scope, and I'd have to sell the current one first.

[Prador]

A personal question - do you wear eyeglasses? If you do, a short focal length plossl may not be the best choice as they tend to have very little eye relief. If you don't then the Celestron Omni is a solid budget eyepiece.

[rwilkey]

Hi Cyclops, the brand to avoid is Amazon, always buy any astronomy equipment from a dedicated supplier such as the forum sponsors.  I would recommend the StarGuider series found here: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bst-starguider-eyepieces.html

[Cyclops]

2 minutes ago, Prador said:

A personal question - do you wear eyeglasses? If you do, a short focal length plossl may not be the best choice as they tend to have very little eye relief. If you don't then the Celestron Omni is a solid budget eyepiece.

Yes I do unfortunately. With my old scope I would be taking my glasses off a lot. That was a very basic Tasco scope tho.

[Cyclops]

1 minute ago, rwilkey said:

Hi Cyclops, the brand to avoid is Amazon, always buy any astronomy equipment from a dedicated supplier such as the forum sponsors.  I would recommend the StarGuider series found here: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bst-starguider-eyepieces.html

Oh we use Amazon a lot. Not having a car and with all the shops closing its the best way for us. Especially with free delivery with Prime.

[vlaiv]

6 minutes ago, Cyclops said:

Got no money for another scope, and I'd have to sell the current one first.

Fair enough, still you did not mention budget, but let's assume it is minimal, this would mean that longer eye relief / wider fov eye pieces are out of the question.

Then standard plossl is going to be pretty much only option. You need to be aware that standard plossls have very tight eye relief in short focal lengths - very uncomfortable viewing. 4mm is going to feel like peeping thru the tiniest keyhole out there - you will need to "glue" your eye ball to it

It can be done, but it is very uncomfortable until you get used to it (it still is uncomfortable after, but one stops complaining and accepts the facts of life )

If money is the issue - have a look at these, slightly cheaper the one you liked to, and not available at 4mm (if that is important to you than these are no option since they start at around 6mm):

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-eyepieces/skywatcher-sp-plossl-eyepieces.html

If ergonomics of observing is something that you value and can stretch a bit more, then look at these:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-eyepieces/skywatcher-uwa-planetary-eyepieces.html

If you want best sharpness for the money, then this one:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/baader-planetarium/baader-classic-ortho-bco-eyepiece.html

 

[Prador]

If you were fine with your glasses off then you must have a correction for near or long sightedness. If this is the case then Plossl eyepieces will be fine. However, as before, you may have to remove them to get closer to the eyepiece. If you need to keep your glasses on to correct astigmatism then long eye relief eyepieces are a much better choice.

[rwilkey]

25 minutes ago, Cyclops said:

How about this?

 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Celestron-93316-1-1-Omni-Eyepiece/dp/B00008Y0S5/ref=mp_s_a_1_28?ie=UTF8&qid=1549027962&sr=8-28&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&keywords=plossl+1.25

That eyepiece is reasonable but look at the tiny viewing lense, as a glasses wearer the BST StarGuiders will be much better for you.

[Prador]

3 minutes ago, rwilkey said:

That eyepiece is reasonable but look at the tiny viewing lense, as a glasses wearer the BST StarGuiders will be much better for you.

I've got a full set of the BST's and love them. A decent choice if your budget can stretch.

Another possible alternative is a TMB Planetary II. Same eye relief, slightly smaller field of view but available for around £37.

Only caveat is I've not viewed through the TMB so not best informed on how they perform. 

[Cyclops]

Oh man what a pain... I'm unemployed so can't afford a decent scope and I'm short sighted so need to keep my glasses on. 

[Prador]

'Decent scope' is all relative. As long as you enjoy using it and the views it provides then IT IS a decent scope ?

Before, were you able to focus and get a clear image without your glasses on?

[vlaiv]

3 minutes ago, Prador said:

I've got a full set of the BST's and love them. A decent choice if your budget can stretch.

Another possible alternative is a TMB Planetary II. Same eye relief, slightly smaller field of view but available for around £37.

Only caveat is I've not viewed through the TMB so not best informed on how they perform. 

I have 7mm TMB clone - one liked above, by Skywatcher. Don't know how it compares to other clones, but it performed ok. Scatter was present, not too problematic in terms of eye positioning (I remember some kidney beaning on occasions) and it was not as sharp as Baader BCO in similar fl (6mm).

4 minutes ago, Cyclops said:

Oh man what a pain... I'm unemployed so can't afford a decent scope and I'm short sighted so need to keep my glasses on. 

Do you have astigmatism or other eye aberrations? If you are just short sighted you can observe without glasses - focus will compensate for any diopters. Even with astigmatism, some people can observe without glasses if exit pupil is small - and it's small at high power.

[Cyclops]

1 minute ago, Prador said:

'Decent scope' is all relative. As long as you enjoy using it and the views it provides then IT IS a decent scope ?

Before, were you able to focus and get a clear image without your glasses on?

Probably can but I'd rather just keep them on. I could also do with a camera adaptor so I can get pics with my phone

[Cyclops]

BST, TMB, I have no idea what they are lol

[Prador]

Here:

https://www.365astronomy.com/5mm-the-planetary-uwa-eyepiece-58-degrees-1.25.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bst-starguider-eyepieces/bst-starguider-60-5mm-ed-eyepiece.html

[Cyclops]

10 minutes ago, Prador said:

Here:

https://www.365astronomy.com/5mm-the-planetary-uwa-eyepiece-58-degrees-1.25.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bst-starguider-eyepieces/bst-starguider-60-5mm-ed-eyepiece.html

They look alright. See I have no trouble using my binos while wearing glasses, except maybe sometimes it seems that the exit pupil is too big. But those eps look good. Wish I hadnt blown all my Christmas money elsewhere now.. 

[Cyclops]

Wouldn't a barlow be ok with my current 9mm Kellner ep?

[Prador]

Yes it would probably be ok but no match for a dedicated eyepiece at the desired focal length.

[Cyclops]

I'll have to save my pennies

[John]

Actually a barlow might be a good idea to see how the higher power actually works for you and your scope. The other advantage with the barlow is that it actually moves the eye relief (how close your eye is to the top of the eyepiece) out a bit so your 9mm kellner should be a little easier to view though.

You can get the Skywatcher type 2x barlows for around £20 used which would at least let you dabble with higher magnifications without investing much. If it does not work out, you can probably sell it for what you paid for it.

Not a perfect solution but better than nothing I reckon

I'm thinking of this sort of deal:

https://ensoptical.co.uk/index.php?_route_=2x-barlow-lenswith-box&sort=p.price&order=ASC&limit=100