ADVICE on Eyepiece Brand / model

[Sreesha74]

Hello

 

I am looking to buy eyepieces.  Price range - can spend upto 500$ if its worth the performance.

 

My need is both for Deepsky as well Planetary viewing.  Forget the FL , FoV etc I understand the technical specs.  I need help on choosing brands / models. 

If 2" is available for the suggestion made, I would prefer that over 1.25".

 

Please suggest best brands/models that I can look for in this price range.  PLEASE MENTION SPECIFIC MODEL of the brand, so it helps to narrow down.

 

Thanks.

[Louis D]

I would choose Pentax XW, Baader Morpheus, Tele Vue Delos, Delite, and Panoptic, Nikon NAV-SW, Vixen HR, and Takahashi TOE eyepieces.  If you want 100 degrees, probably the APM XWA HDC.

[Stardaze]

16 hours ago, Louis D said:

I would choose Pentax XW, Baader Morpheus, Tele Vue Delos, Delite, and Panoptic, Nikon NAV-SW, Vixen HR, and Takahashi TOE eyepieces.  If you want 100 degrees, probably the APM XWA HDC.

Sorry to gatecrash the OP's thread. How do the ES 92 stack up against the APM HDC's? 

[Louis D]

1 hour ago, Stardaze said:

Sorry to gatecrash the OP's thread. How do the ES 92 stack up against the APM HDC's? 

I don't have the APM HDCs, but I do have both ES-92s.  The biggest difference aside from the 8° AFOV and size difference, the ES-92s are completely usable with eyeglasses while the HDCs would be somewhere around 70° to 75° AFOV with eyeglasses due to their relatively small eye lenses for their AFOV.  Edge correction is also better in the ES-92s than the HDCs by all accounts.  Only the Ethos and Nikon NAV-HW have better edge correction in that AFOV range.

[John]

It terms of correction and image quality I find that the ES 92 17mm compares well with my Ethos eyepieces. I've found the eye positioning harder to get used to with the ES but optical performance in my 12 inch F/5.3 dobsonian is very good. I think the ES 92's are the best performing eyepieces that ES has produced to date.

They are very large and heavy though.

 

 

[Stardaze]

31 minutes ago, Louis D said:

I don't have the APM HDCs, but I do have both ES-92s.  The biggest difference aside from the 8° AFOV and size difference, the ES-92s are completely usable with eyeglasses while the HDCs would be somewhere around 70° to 75° AFOV with eyeglasses due to their relatively small eye lenses for their AFOV.  Edge correction is also better in the ES-92s than the HDCs by all accounts.  Only the Ethos and Nikon NAV-HW have better edge correction in that AFOV range.

 

13 minutes ago, John said:

It terms of correction and image quality I find that the ES 92 17mm compares well with my Ethos eyepieces. I've found the eye positioning harder to get used to with the ES but optical performance in my 12 inch F/5.3 dobsonian is very good. I think the ES 92's are the best performing eyepieces that ES has produced to date.

They are very large and heavy though.

 

 

I do see my logical upgrade path to the ES 12 and 17. I couldn't justify Ethos prices, but these are not silly money imo. I like the eye relief on my ES 82's, I'm not a fan of the less flexible eye relief. Fortunate that I'm not a glasses wearer too (yet). The Pentax look a similar relief to say a Starguider, solid rubber, which I didn't like with the latter. The ES 100's never seem to get a mention, so assume they're underwhelming then?

Edited June 8, 2020 by Stardaze

[John]

Personally I'm a big fan of the Ethos range but they are very expensive I agree.

I had the ES 20mm / 100 and thought it pretty good. The 21mm Ethos proved a touch better still but at a lot more £'s of course.

I think I would go for an APM / Lunt 100 over an ES 100 because of their ergonomics as much as anything else.

Don't underestimate the weight impact of the ES 92's - they are even heavier than my Ethos 21 and Nagler 31 and I thought those very hefty when I acquired them.

Eyepieces in this class will require some form of counterbalancing and need well engineered focusers.

I have a set of 4 Pentax XW's as part of my 1.25 inch case and think very highly of those. Their eye relief is a bit longer than the Starguiders - 20mm.

All this, and more ought to be the subject of another thread I think although it might help the original poster a bit.

 

[Stardaze]

1 hour ago, John said:

Personally I'm a big fan of the Ethos range but they are very expensive I agree.

I had the ES 20mm / 100 and thought it pretty good. The 21mm Ethos proved a touch better still but at a lot more £'s of course.

I think I would go for an APM / Lunt 100 over an ES 100 because of their ergonomics as much as anything else.

Don't underestimate the weight impact of the ES 92's - they are even heavier than my Ethos 21 and Nagler 31 and I thought those very hefty when I acquired them.

Eyepieces in this class will require some form of counterbalancing and need well engineered focusers.

I have a set of 4 Pentax XW's as part of my 1.25 inch case and think very highly of those. Their eye relief is a bit longer than the Starguiders - 20mm.

All this, and more ought to be the subject of another thread I think although it might help the original poster a bit.

 

I'll start a new thread here

...

Edited June 8, 2020 by Stardaze