Comparing my scopes with new eyepieces

[HollyHound]

In common with everyone else it seems, it's been about a week before the last reasonably clear sky, and as it looks quite good for the next few days too, I thought I'd try spending a couple of hours last night comparing my current bunch of scopes, along with some recent eyepiece purchases, to get a feel for their capabilities against my recent acquisition (the StellaMira 80mm f/10).

On the SkyTee, I had the ST80 and ST120 and on the iOptron AZ Mount Pro, I had the Mak 127 and the StellaMira. I had it all setup before it got dark and then waiting until at least it was reasonably dark before viewing anything. Being the longest day of the year, the length/amount of darkness was probably going to be quite limited anyway.

The iOptron alignment was very rapid as always... ensure it's properly level (easy with the adjustments on the TriPier head) and then quick alignment on Arcturus and that was it. Selected Vega and it was pretty much centred. With the iOptron you can then (re)align quickly to this new star and the accuracy improves further. I then put the TV DeLite 18.2mm in the Mak (82x)  and 13mm in the StellaMira (62x). Straight away it was very apparent that whilst the Mak gave its usual crisp (clinical?) view, the StellaMira just looked gorgeous again. I'm sure I will get used to refractors, but it still seems so "vivid" looking at anything with this scope. What was also very apparent, is that panning around, the stars remained very sharp to the edge off the field in both scopes. I'm also finding that 62 to 68 degrees field of view, seems to be the sweet spot for me, having used Nirvana 82 degree eyepieces (16mm, 7mm and 4mm) so far and having a quick switch back to those, I am now finding it an effort to move my eye around so as to see right into each corner of the field of view with those eyepieces. I appreciate the extra sky visible, but the smaller FoV just seems more relaxed to me now.

Moving across to the two Skywatcher refractors, I tried the same range of eyepieces in these too in and around Vega, immediately obvious is that they have a lovely wide field of view, but the stars towards the edge now seem quite blurry by comparison. They provide good context, but it's very noticeable when stars get around 60/70% towards the edge, that the start to distort and blur a bit. The ST120 did (of course) show more and dimmer stars. There is also a little of of (expected) false colour, but that's to be expected and doesn't really bother me too much. I did really enjoy both the 18 and 13mm DeLites in these scopes too, just panning around and enjoying the view🙂

Moving on to Albireo, this time I wanted to fully test the TV 6-3mm Zoom on all scopes, just to see how far they could be pushed. As mentioned previously, I'm starting to find doubles very interesting and whilst I've looked at a few, I'm hoping to standardise on one (possibly two) scopes as the instruments to use for these going forward.

The ST80 and ST120 quite happily took the full range of the zoom to give magnifications of 66x to 133x (ST 80) and 100x to 200x (ST 120). Albireo and it's companion looked fine, but it was a bit tricky trying to differentiate the colours of the two stars, as they both looked (mostly) blue (particularly on the ST120). I should probably repeat this with the Semi Apo filter as a little experiment. However, they both remained reasonably crisp and I wasn't unhappy with the view through these scopes. I have seen quite a few easy doubles through these when I first started, and although these scopes might arguably be viewed as "wide field" only, they do perform quite well indeed.

The Mak 127 went from 250x to 500x(!!), the colours were good, but again the view was "clinical". In addition, the rings around the stars (Airy disks ?) seemed quite obvious, a bit obtrusive and they made the stars look very slightly "false". At 500x the view was quite dim and restrictive, but it was still very possible to see the two stars split widely across the eyepiece. I quite liked this view. What was also very good to see was that the rings are perfectly equal around the stars when central, so I guess the collimation is pretty close to perfect (I have never touched this, it's as delivered!).

The StellaMira gave range of 133x to 266x and again the colours were strong, seemed more vibrant and (even at the higher magnification), there seemed to be a bright focus of light in a central disc with only a faint additional ring this time. I think there were other rings but only the first was very visible). I was most impressed that the central point of light remained solid and vivid right through the range. Yes it got dim, but never seemed to break up in the same way the Mak did. There was an equal ring around each star with no lopsidedness at all, so again, this must well aligned (can you collimate a refractor ?). I recall that FLO check these before they send them out, so this isn't a surprise. 

I had a quick view of the Double Double with the Mak and StellaMira and again very clean and excellent views in both. I guess the Mak and/or StellaMira will make good double star scopes.

I then just spent the rest of the time cruising around, enjoying the view through the StellaMira (after all this is supposed to be fun using these wonderful tools 🤣), before calling it quits. Note to self, it takes a good while to pack down all this kit, so this is very much an occasional thing to do, but was worthwhile to get a feel for the differences.

However, I'm not 100% sure that I need both the ST80 and the ST120 now that I have the StellaMira. I got them both second hand within a few days of each other, when my only (first) scope was a Mak 102. I've seen a good many firsts with these, including a comet (C/19) and good views of some galaxies too. However, having now obtained a C5, Mak 127 and now the StellaMira, I don't want either of them to just sit around unused. The ST80 is mounted in guide rings, which make it very easy to calibrate against a primary scope on either the SkyTee or the second saddle on the iOptron, and as such makes a fantastic "finder" and wide field scope using a PanaView 32 or Nirvana 16mm. I'll keep using all of them for now and see how it goes.

Likewise, I'm going to keep swapping between the 62/68 and 82 degree eyepieces, but I'm leaning towards the reduced, but more comfortable (for me) views of the slightly smaller FoV currently.

In addition, after enjoying the TeleVues so much, I've now ordered a PanOptic 24mm too. I did a good bit of research on here (and elsewhere) and this eyepiece seems to get universally recommended as a very versatile eyepiece which (being 1.25") can be used across my range of scopes. I will of course give it a good test when it arrives...

Ramble over... here's to more clear skies 🤞

Cheers

Gary

Edited June 22, 2020 by HollyHound

[John]

Interesting report, thanks for posting it

Developing a taste for Tele Vue's ? - expensive !!!

 

 

 

[HollyHound]

29 minutes ago, John said:

Interesting report, thanks for posting it

Developing a taste for Tele Vue's ? - expensive !!!

 

 

 

Thanks 🙂

Well, I still absolutely love the Nirvanas too (apart from being quite wide field of view), but in a side by side test, and for me, the Tele Vues seem to work really well. The DeLites felt very relaxed, the Zoom is so very useful and if the Panoptic 24mm performs as well as I've read, then I have pretty much all I need for now 🤞

Edited June 22, 2020 by HollyHound

[JeremyS]

I’m sure you will love the Panoptic 24, @HollyHound!

[Captain Scarlet]

Nice read.
My next two eyepieces, filling in perfect 1.4x gaps in my collection, are going to be 24mm and 13mm. The 24mm is definitely going to be the panoptic. The 13mm I want I’m not sure I’ll be able to afford for a while though.