Jump to content

stargazine_ep45_banner.thumb.jpg.71f13bfceacd5e3df366d82c2b6f5f9b.jpg

Eyepiece Type for 93/1000 refractor?


Recommended Posts

The scope spec is firming up to be d93/f1000.
I'll either use flocking material or create a trillion indentations in the surfaces (with peening machine), and use matt barbeque paint.

A laser calibrator is on the aquisition list.
Consequently, everything should ultimately be at 'best possible'.

I will likely need some guidance on the doublet air gap.
Other than that ... with trembling anticipation...

May I ask for views on suitable eyepieces?

I've read a few of the threads on this forum.
It seems that many eyepieces fall short of expectations.
Also, Ive noted that people have talked about the effect of long focal lengths on specific designs.

Either way, I have an initial list, made up from what seems available at reasonable cost.

I intend to carry out both terrestrial, and extra-terrestrial viewing.
Perhaps these different fields require different eyepieces?

***

TMB/Burgess Planetary II

I've read the 'touchy subject' thread.
I understand the issues, but I'm not in any position to take sides.

The design seems to offer a 'free lunch', with remarkable 58 deg viewing.
However, I've read reviews on this forum, talking of ghosting, and scattered light.

My intention is to blacken the scope internals as much as is possible - perhaps this will be enough?

Kson Super Abbe

4 lenses - apparently popular for over a hundred years.

Celestron 1.25" Omni Plossl

4 lenses - apparently popular for a longer period than the Abbe.

In the same Omni range, Celestron offer a 2x Barlow (2 lens).

***

They all purport to be good lenses.
The Celestron range is cheaper, but hey, they might be just fine.

Are any of them good for both day and night viewing, or should I be looking for specific day and night eyepieces?
... and which eyepieces are better suited to a 93/1000 refractor scope?

:icon_scratch:

 

Edited by Fo_Cuss
Link to post
Share on other sites

Fo_Cuss,

Don't over think these things.....

At f11 any eyepiece will work, and work pretty well.

You probably have to consider the exit pupil and eye relief to suit your needs.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Merlin66 said:

Fo_Cuss,

Don't over think these things.....

At f11 any eyepiece will work, and work pretty well.

You probably have to consider the exit pupil and eye relief to suit your needs.

Thanks for those calming words :)
From what you say ... 'going with the long focal length' was the right move

RE the exit pupil and eye relief (is this AKA back focus?)

When testing the scope in its original format (with kellner lenses)...
I found that digital viewing produced the same image that my eye saw, only that it was a far more relaxing experience.

Further; as light fell, the camera software auto adjusted, and produced viewable images that by eye, could not be seen.

The only problem was that the camera lens had to be too close to the exit pupil, slightly cropping the circle.

For this reason, I was less concerned about the small exit pupils of the Abbe and Possl.
However, I do need to research the back focus distance.

If all eyepieces will work fine ... I can select one with a suitable eye relief distance :)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fo_Cuss, 

The eye relief is the distance from the eyepiece to where the eye should be positioned to accept all the incoming light. This is where the size of the exit pupil should be measured.

Pointed a camera into an eyepiece is always problematic, getting the best position and alignment can be difficult, that's why most imagers work with a lensless camera at the telescope focus without eyepieces.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Merlin66,

Ah!
That explains the SLR adapter contraptions that I fell across, during research.
It is something that I will look into.

My own method was to fabricate an eyepiece diameter tube, permanently fixed to a smart phone spare back; aligned centrally.

I had trialled a 'bought' bracket, but it was useless.
My design was perfect for the job.

It allowed instant changes of the eyepiece - simply push in and mount.
Perfect alignment every time.

Not the most aesthetically pleasing design.
Rather; 'function over form' :)

Great for when with one's son, as both get to see what is going on.
... and of course, images can be recorded by simply clapping one's hands (no vibrations).

My guess is that the moving mirror in an SLR might not be so forgiving.

No doubt this is why there are simple chip based systems.

I saw one, but didn't pursue it.
I need to find it again, and look deeper.

Edited by Fo_Cuss
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a fan of Omni Plossl's, but find the TMB Planetary II to be quite a nice eyepiece. The original Burgess TMB Planetaries were the best if you can find any. The KSON Super Abbe Orthoscopics, though cheap, are excellent in scopes with long F ratio's. They are not so good at F11 unless you use a barlow. They also make great binoviewer pairs in the longer focal lengths.

Personally I'd keep my eye out for second hand Japanese eyepieces such as the Vixen LV, Ultima 5 element super plossl's or volcanoe top orthoscopics. They are relatively cheap and often unappreciated, but they are top notch optically.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

I'm not a fan of Omni Plossl's, but find the TMB Planetary II to be quite a nice eyepiece. The original Burgess TMB Planetaries were the best if you can find any. The KSON Super Abbe Orthoscopics, though cheap, are excellent in scopes with long F ratio's. They are not so good at F11 unless you use a barlow. They also make great binoviewer pairs in the longer focal lengths.

Personally I'd keep my eye out for second hand Japanese eyepieces such as the Vixen LV, Ultima 5 element super plossl's or volcanoe top orthoscopics. They are relatively cheap and often unappreciated, but they are top notch optically.

Thanks for that input Mike :)
BTW I like the sig "Many look, few observe".
To that, I think that I would add "and reflect".

RE the long F ratios

I had thought that F11 was towards the long side, but when I calculate 700/60 I see that = F11.6
So by choosing a larger lens (93mm) ... even though the scope will be extended an additional 300mm, the focal ratio actually drops.

Are you aware of the fundamentals (concerning effect on the eyepiece), or was your statement based upon experience?
I'm guessing that the light angle (from horizontal) is too large for the lens design.
Presumably, a longer focal length would bring the light angle into the spec of the KSON Super Abbe Orthoscopics?

The 'blurb' never discusses such matters.
(In every field, the blurb never does)

... it leaves the new entrant with lots of basic questions; like:

My starter scope has a 60mm lens, rated at f700mm.
Yet 700mm measurement is only achieved with the focus tube fully extended.

Is that because it was primarily designed for use with a 45 deg mirror?

Is the focal length derived from perfectly parallel light?

By that, I mean:
An object at 10km is not producing parallel light.
Neither is the moon.
The sun is said to produce parallel light
... but clearly, distant stars more so.

What isn't definitively clear to me, is the focal length at each of the 4 instances for any given lens.

The lens has an ability to bend light.
Logically therefore, for closer objects (the light spreading outwards), the point of focus must be a greater distance than with parallel light.

I saw this, when testing the scope on an object at 10km.
The kellner type lens had to be extended outwards from the housing (focus wound out to the max).
Yet with the 45 deg mirror in place, the focus tube had to be wound in.

It is obviously simple maths, but you know ... it's only simple when you have grasped the fundamentals 🤪

Why bother with the fundamentals?

Well if you have seen my DIY thread...
You'll know that I am modding the starter scope, and extending it by 300mm.

However; maybe I should extend it 330mm
... but maybe that would be good for inverted viewing, but not with the 45 deg mirror.

... and what about fitting a full horizontal & vertical flipper unit
... how might that effect the extension length choice?

These minefields are prepared for us to walk on ... and usually it goes BOOM (without foreknowledge) ⚠️

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get too bogged down with the technicalities of eyepiece design but leave that to the experts. My comments are based entirely on personal experience. Eyepieces like the Abbe Orthoscopics were designed for use in telescopes having a long focal length, but today most telescopes are relatively short and so the Abbe Ortho design can struggle to give good correction at the edge of the field of view. More modern designs are much better at correcting the edge of the field, but this means more elements and greater expense. F11 is considered long by comparison to many of the refractors on offer today, but its short compared to the F15, F18 instruments and longer that were the general rule half a century ago. Some modern wide angle eyepieces can cost a small fortune, but for general use at F11 you could find some very nice performers in the Sky watcher range at a fraction of the price of many top brands. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Fo_Cuss said:

....Those eyepiece designs were created in a distant era.


 

So was the design of a long focal length achromat refractor like your 93mm f/10.75.

Well executed plossls and orthoscopics will serve very well in such a scope :icon_biggrin:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, John said:

So was the design of a long focal length achromat refractor like your 93mm f/10.75.
Well executed plossls and orthoscopics will serve very well in such a scope .

Thanks John ... yes, that is true.

I think that the point being made by Mike, was that the scopes of that era were much longer than of today.

Having said that, I note your advice that my scope length would fall into the usable category for these type of eyepieces :)
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've used good quality plossls and orthos in my F/5.3 12 inch dobsonian and they have worked very well. Your F/10.75 refractor will pose no challenges to such eyepieces :icon_biggrin:

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Abhishek Pawse
      Hi everyone I am planning to buy the explorer scientific ED140 FPL53 140mm f/6.5 . But can't find enough review or image captured by it. I am planning to use it with the ZWOASI 294MC PRO and the ioptron cem60 mount. Plz can you guys tell me if this is a good setup to go with and if possible plz. Plz send me photos captured using that scope. 
      Thanks in advance.
       
    • By jonathan
      OK, quick question - With a dome that has a push-to revolving top half would it be advisable / safe to open it up on a sunny day, point the dome opening at the sun and just point the scope (with the caps off) North so the sun should never track to it, in order to eliminate any fungus that has formed on surfaces?  I realise the fungus would still be around, perhaps on interior surfaces that don't catch the sunlight, but warmth from the sun shouldn't affect the scope should it?
      How often would you say this should be necessary to keep the fungus factor under control?
      Similarly, should an eyepiece case be left open and exposed to direct sunlight, and should the eyepieces have both caps off in order for scattered UV to contact the glass surfaces?  Will this be sufficient to kill off fungus etc (I read in a post that about 20 minutes should be sufficient)?  Is there any danger from or to eyepieces so long as they are not directly pointing at the sun?
      Thanks.
       
    • By StarGazingSiouxsie
      Hello there  
      My budget for eyepieces is $1,000. 

      I started off thinking I would get a Celestron eyepiece kit for about $200, for example. After trying a few out, I soon realised that I wanted eyepieces of higher quality. My mindset is that I'm investing $2,000 in my telescope, a Celestron 9.25 SCT, and I want to be able to extract from that scope the very best views that I can.

      Wishlist - 
      I'm looking to buy 3 eyepieces maximum (not including a Barlow)
      Ideally - if possible - I would like to get eyepieces that I can use on both my telescopes, but my priority is toward the 9.25" as that is the bigger investment.
      Both my telescopes have 1.25" barrels.
      * Cassie - A Celestron Newtonian. Aperture = 130mm, FL = 650mm, FR = f5  Max useable magnification between 250x and 307x    
      * The Cubble Space Telescope - A Celestron SCT. Aperture = 235mm FL = 2350mm, FR = f10  Max useable magnification between 460x and 550x 
      I don't feel comfortable spending more than about $300 on each eyepiece
      I want these eyepieces to last as long as possible. I try to look after thinbgs if I can.
      Decent eye relief if possible
      I will purchase a Barlow separately
      Field of view - something 60% + 

       
      Usage - 
      My observing will be probably 80% solar system planets & moon, 20% deeper sky objects
      I'm not that in atsrophotogarphy. I have a little Celestron NexImage 10 with which I am hoping to make some videos and stacked images of Jupiter, Saturn and detailed imaging of Pluto (  ) 
      I really just want the WOW factor right now. Enjoying the thrill of Saturn;s rings, tracking Jupiter's 4 main moons, detailed lunar observing etc. 
       
       
      Questions -  
      So what would be your suggestions or advice, please? 
      I have been looking at the Tele Vue Delos & Delite range.  The Nagler range looks nice but I'm note sure if I need 82' field of view. A bit pricey, too. 
      Explore Scientific's offerings are a possibilty.
      What's the deal with zoom eyepieces? Does that mean you can have an eyepiece that will do the job, for example, of a 6mm, 7mm, 8mm and 9mm eyepiece all in one? Is there a trade off?? What's the catch?? 
      Regarding Barlows, I was thinking of just keeping it simple and getting a decent 2x lens without spending crazy money. Something in the $150 range. Or would I need a high end Barlow to complement the better eyepieces I am hoping for??? 
       
      Overall, I'm looking for 2 or 3 eyepieces and 1 Barlow with a $1,000 budget. Any thoughts, ideas, advice or opinions all gratefully received, thank you. 
    • By Harry85
      Hi all, 
      Just a quick question saw a previous post on here for the x-cel eye pieces vs the BST Starguiders was looking at getting a 25 mm and a 10-12mm but would any one reccomend a zoom lens 8-24mm are these any good? If so any particular make I should go for instead of the starguiders or should I just stick to my original plan of getting 2 starguider eyepieces 
      Thanks all
    • By c4llum83
      Got a SkyWatcher Heritage 130p flextube dobsonian recently as my first more serious beginner scope and after some nice early shots of the recent moon as expected it's been cloudy in the UK since so I've been doing more reading up and of course splashing out the rest of my birthday money on some upgraded glass using lots of advice on here and other forums to guide me. So far it's all mostly been 2nd hand ebay finds and I'm reasonably proud of my collection and cant wait to get out and play more...
      5mm TS Planetary HR
      6mm Skywatcher Ultra Wide 66°
      8mm BST Starguider
      10mm Celestron stock
      12mm Celestron Omni Plossl
      15mm Vixen NPL
      20mm Vixen NPL
      25mm Orion Sirius Plossl
      32mm Meade 4000 Super Plossl
      Celestron Ultima SV 2x Barlow
      Celestron Variable Polarising Filter & Moon Filter

      I am however considering saving up or asking Santa for Baader Classic Orthos for the 10mm & 18mm gaps based on recommendations that they're superb. Or maybe the BCO 10mm and the 18mm BST Starguider.

      Thoughts on the EPs so far and what will serve me best in future? Bear in mind i'm more interested at the moment in Lunar and planetary than DSO. Thanks all.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.