TV Plossl 11mm - opinions

[Piero 4,487]

I am considering this eyepiece for my refractors. It would be used with and without Baader barlow 2.25x.

Has anybody tried this combo?

In the past I tried the BCO 10mm, but I let it go.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Piero

[alan potts 5,446]

I personally Piero find mine a bit tight on eye/relief as used on its own. It is an eyepiece I bought a few yrs ago and have not used very often at all, I recall saying once, I am glad I didn't go for the 8mm.

Alan

[Philip R 2,295]

I have the 8mm & 15mm, (plus a 13mm smoothside - no longer available). Eye-relief is tight, more so with the 8mm as @alan potts says.

Optically and overall it is a good e/p, but the eye-relief lets it down.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Philip R

[Alan White 5,277]

Tight on eye-relief, but was very good.
Would I have another, no, not unless I had to sell off kit.

[Piero 4,487]

Thank you all.

From your comments, it reminds me of the Orion super Plossl Sirius 10mm I bought back in the nineties. Good eyepiece, but tight on eye relief.

[alan potts 5,446]

More expensive Piero but would a De-lite not fit the bill or even an older Radian if you can find one, i use to like Radians, still a 4mm, never believed all this colour caste talk.

Alan

[jetstream 6,772]

Is the TV plossl really a plossl? or is it a symmetric?

I ask because there might be a difference in spot size and technical performance.

Piero, have you considered the Zeiss ZAOII 10mm? for the level of performance you like this might be a needed step IMHO.

[jetstream 6,772]

[John 31,911]

37 minutes ago, jetstream said:

Is the TV plossl really a plossl? or is it a symmetric?

I ask because there might be a difference in spot size and technical performance.

Piero, have you considered the Zeiss ZAOII 10mm? for the level of performance you like this might be a needed step IMHO.

I'm pretty sure that the TV plossl is a symmetric. I've seen the optical diagram on the TV patent and it sure looks like a symmetric. I've taken a few plossls apart over the years (not TV ones) and those have had what looked like 2 indentical doublet elements in them as well. Some of the older Vixen orthos also use the same design I was surprised to find, rather than the 1+3 abbe type ortho design that I had expected.

I believe the feature that enabled Al Nagler to get a patent on his plossl was the curvature applied to the outer two lens surfaces which improved edge correction as I understand it. There is a rumour that Vixen NPL's use a similar design.

On the 11mm TV plossl, I've owned a few over the years and found them sharp and contrasty. The eye relief is limited to around 75% of the focal length as it is with all plossls. The stiff rubber eyecup that TV use on the 11mm plossl can make accessing the full field of view a little tricky.

 

[Piero 4,487]

59 minutes ago, alan potts said:

More expensive Piero but would a De-lite not fit the bill or even an older Radian if you can find one, i use to like Radians, still a 4mm, never believed all this colour caste talk.

Alan

I currently have a Nikon MC1 zoom 21-9mm which works well although I had to re-do its barrel as it is a spotting scope eyepiece. 

In terms of optical quality it matched my Vixen SLVs.

[Piero 4,487]

55 minutes ago, jetstream said:

Piero, have you considered the Zeiss ZAOII 10mm? for the level of performance you like this might be a needed step IMHO.

In an ideal world, I would love a Vixen HR 5mm, but it seems this cannot be made due to the inherent design of the HR line. 

So, options are:

- 11mm +/- 2.25x barlow

- 5mm and use the 24 Pan +/- 2.25x Barlow

Yeah.. a Pentax XO 5mm would be great! ... So would be the XO plus the 10mm ZAOII... Tough to find them and on the wallet though..

[Paul73 3,856]

The 11mm is terrific value second hand. I have a set of TV Plossls and the 11mm gets the most use.

Paul

[Stu 29,822]

I used to use an 11mm TV plossl for solar observing and always found it to be very sharp, not dissimilar to a BGO as I recall. It did get ousted by a Leica ASPH Zoom which was sharper on axis.

[jetstream 6,772]

1 hour ago, Stu said:

I used to use an 11mm TV plossl for solar observing and always found it to be very sharp, not dissimilar to a BGO as I recall. It did get ousted by a Leica ASPH Zoom which was sharper on axis.

The Leica Asph is very sharp for sure, its too bad that the zooms (my 3 anyway) fall short in the transmission dept IMHO.

[jetstream 6,772]

2 hours ago, Piero said:

In an ideal world, I would love a Vixen HR 5mm, but it seems this cannot be made due to the inherent design of the HR line. 

So, options are:

- 11mm +/- 2.25x barlow

- 5mm and use the 24 Pan +/- 2.25x Barlow

Yeah.. a Pentax XO 5mm would be great! ... So would be the XO plus the 10mm ZAOII... Tough to find them and on the wallet though..

Yes, I'm in the same boat, but my copy of the 10mm BCO is VG, however I'd buy a 5mm Vixen HR immediately too. I use my scopes a lot and would have a hard time using a classic ZAOII so much and under my conditions. Can't imagine dropping one in the snow lol!

I wish someone would make ZAOII level orthos again.

[John 31,911]

13 minutes ago, jetstream said:

The Leica Asph is very sharp for sure, its too bad that the zooms (my 3 anyway) fall short in the transmission dept IMHO.

The TV plossls have really good transmission IMHO. I saw some data a while back resulting from throughput tests and the TV plossls were a bit better even than orthos (both classic and top tier HDs).

 

 

[Philip R 2,295]

4 hours ago, alan potts said:

More expensive Piero but would a De-lite not fit the bill or even an older Radian if you can find one, i use to like Radians, still a 4mm, never believed all this colour caste talk.

Alan

Same here!  ...and I got Radian 6mm within the first six months of release. 

[jetstream 6,772]

1 hour ago, John said:

The TV plossls have really good transmission IMHO. I saw some data a while back resulting from throughput tests and the TV plossls were a bit better even than orthos (both classic and top tier HDs).

 

 

I have 4 TV plossls-32's and 25's and are excellent. The 25mm is my goto HH eyepiece and holds a special place in the case showing me this object first. These sets of eyepieces are all I use in the binoviewers really, giving super lunar/planetary views in all my scopes.

Maybe I should try a short fl TV plossl on DSO...

[Piero 4,487]

Mm.. some interesting feedback from this conversation. Thank you all.

Food for thought!

Edited September 25, 2019 by Piero

[JTEC 265]

11mm TV Plossl is an excellent eyepiece, as is the 8mm, if you’re not bothered about eye relief.  Observing Mars and Saturn with a 140mm apo and Baader MkV binoviewer from 8,000ft an experienced observing friend and I tested pairs of 11mm TV Plossls against 10mm Tak LEs and 9mm Tak orthos - OK some mag difference to be sure - and both of us gave the nod to the Plossls. Make of that what you will

[Rob Sellent 852]

Can't add to what others have already said but just to add voice to the discussion. If field of view and eye relief isn't a big concern, then for good quality planetary eyepieces, I've found Baader Genuine Orthos a good move. Indeed, the quality of image is as good as something like a Delos.

I have also used Tele Vue's Plossls and have found the quality of image as good as Tele Vue's more expensive glass. However, I find eye-relief with them more uncomfortable than with the Orthos and personally wouldn't recommend going less than 11mm. Like @alan potts, I have a couple of TV plossls in a box but haven't used them a great deal.

[jetstream 6,772]

1 hour ago, JTEC said:

11mm TV Plossl is an excellent eyepiece, as is the 8mm, if you’re not bothered about eye relief.  Observing Mars and Saturn with a 140mm apo and Baader MkV binoviewer from 8,000ft an experienced observing friend and I tested pairs of 11mm TV Plossls against 10mm Tak LEs and 9mm Tak orthos - OK some mag difference to be sure - and both of us gave the nod to the Plossls. Make of that what you will

The Tak LE I have, 12.5mm stays in the drawer all the time...no place in the cases for this one lol!

 

[jetstream 6,772]

48 minutes ago, Rob Sellent said:

Can't add to what others have already said but just to add voice to the discussion. If field of view and eye relief isn't a big concern, then for good quality planetary eyepieces, I've found Baader Genuine Orthos a good move. Indeed, the quality of image is as good as something like a Delos.

I have also used Tele Vue's Plossls and have found the quality of image as good as Tele Vue's more expensive glass. However, I find eye-relief with them more uncomfortable than with the Orthos and personally wouldn't recommend going less than 11mm. Like @alan potts, I have a couple of TV plossls in a box but haven't used them a great deal.

The Delos is the deepest, most contrasting widefield series out there IMHO- I stupidly sold mine...

[alan potts 5,446]

3 hours ago, Rob Sellent said:

Can't add to what others have already said but just to add voice to the discussion. If field of view and eye relief isn't a big concern, then for good quality planetary eyepieces, I've found Baader Genuine Orthos a good move. Indeed, the quality of image is as good as something like a Delos.

I have also used Tele Vue's Plossls and have found the quality of image as good as Tele Vue's more expensive glass. However, I find eye-relief with them more uncomfortable than with the Orthos and personally wouldn't recommend going less than 11mm. Like @alan potts, I have a couple of TV plossls in a box but haven't used them a great deal.

Feel that puts it rather well, I too have a set of BGO's and Hutech making up the missing 12.5mm and I find them easier on the eye, all except the 5mm maybe.

Alan

[JTEC 265]

8 hours ago, jetstream said:

The Tak LE I have, 12.5mm stays in the drawer all the time...no place in the cases for this one lol!

 

I know what you mean ... I had a pair of the 10mm LEs, sold one kept the other.  Good but not exceptional ... not cheap either!  I do find that the 18mms are great for binoviewing though, probably my most used pair (with Powermate or GPC up front) - sharp, not too wide, comfortable but not excessive eye relief.