Needing eyepiece advice - PLEASE.

[azrabella]

I am looking for some help from you good folk regarding a choice of a mid price 12mm (ish) UWA (82 degrees + or -) eyepiece to be used with an f/8 Dob. I have a maximum budget of around £100. Am I asking for too much for so little? Currently using a BST 60 degree ocular, but would like a larger fov. Any suggestions much appreciated.

[Ruud]

If you don't mind (too) short eye relief you could go for this. I tried one and wasn't satisfied: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/explore-scientific-eyepieces/explore-scientific-82-degree-series-eyepieces.html

If 16 mm is also good, get the Nirvana: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/ovl-eyepieces/ovl-nirvana-es-uwa-82-ultrawide-eyepieces.html

Celestron is cheap but needs a slow scope (f/10) to shine. Yours is f/8. You may want to talk to people who have experience with the Celestron on f/8. Anyway, it's here and the choice is 10 or 15 mm:
https://www.firstlightoptics.com/celestron-eyepieces/celestron-luminos-eyepieces.html

Please note, with 82° eyepieces you may see some coma in a Newtonian telescope. 

Edited July 6, 2020 by Ruud

[azrabella]

I don't much care for short eye relief oculars and have tried an ES 11mm, but didn't much like jamming my eyeball up close. I also have a 16mm Nirvana which barlows well to the equivalent of 8mm, so maybe I have the answer already. I have just purchased an old Fullerscopes 20mm 82 degree eyepiece. Perhaps the best, and cheapest, option might be so see how that barlows before splashing the cash... I'm always open to ideas though.

[rl]

There is not a lot that's any good at 82 degrees for under a ton new.

Having just bought a secondhand 14mm Delos to replace a 15mm Celestron 82 degree, you would be welcome to try the 15mm on a sale or return basis if that helps. I use f/4 or f/4.5 scopes and it's not the best but it should work a lot better at f/8. 

Beware weight and balance issues; your f/8 dob might be more suceptible due to its extra length.

RL

[Louis D]

The Luminos is supposed to be fairly comfortable without eyeglasses thanks to it's large eye lens being mounted close to the top:

[Louis D]

1 minute ago, rl said:

Having just bought a secondhand 14mm Delos to replace a 15mm Celestron 82 degree, you would be welcome to try the 15mm on a sale or return basis if that helps. I use f/4 or f/4.5 scopes and it's not the best but it should work a lot better at f/8. 

Can you confirm the Luminos's viewing comfort without eyeglasses?

[bomberbaz]

I tried a luminous an returned it. I wear glasses or did at the time for viewing and didn't get on with the luminous. Buying a good quality 2 barlow or tele-extender might be a better option. FYI that iis exactly what I do and why I only own 3 main eyepieces for my F4.7 dob. 

[rl]

Quote

Can you confirm the Luminos's viewing comfort without eyeglasses?

 

Louis, Azrabella

That's the puppy. The eye relief is not enough to use with glasses, but without glasses I find it rather comfortable. I can see the whole field easily without my eyelashes going anywhere the glass. The eye relief will be whatever Celestron say it is....

 

[John]

Trouble is, 82 degrees AFoV and long eye relief don't generally go together unless the lenses within the eyepiece are massive and it then becomes a 2 inch eyepiece simply to get the support it needs in the focuser.

If you can settle for 76 degrees the eye relief moves out into more comfortable territory without the eyepiece needing to be too large and heavy.

These Orion LHD 80's apparently have long eye relief but as you can see, 9mm is the longest focal length in the 1.25" fitting:

https://uk.telescope.com/Orion-LHD-80-Degree-Lanthanum-Ultra-Wide-1252-Eyepieces/e/274.uts

The other option might be the discontinued Tele Vue Type 4 12mm Nagler which has 17mm of eye relief in a hybrid 2 inch / 1.25 inch format body.

 

 

[azrabella]

Well thanks for all your sage advice. I think I am now a wiser person - I think?

[azrabella]

I finally had the opportunity to test the newly arrived Fullerscopes 20mm 82 Degree eyepiece barlowed using an ES 2x tele extender which gave me an effective wide angled 10mm. I compared it directly with a Baader MkIV at 12mm - only difference was the markedly larger fov with the Fullerscopes eyepiece.  I then tried the same thing with the Nirvana 16mm, again reducing down to an effective 8mm. No discernible difference. It seems that I now have a redundant Baader zoom eyepiece, plus I've saved money by not having to purchase a 12mm UWA.

[bomberbaz]

So you like the tele extender from ES then. Good for you.  
 

I think it’s an ok excellent choice that is overlooked far to often by many people. 
 

ps keep the Zoom, its a great tool for viewing double stars and will come in handy if you ever take up solar viewing.   

Edited July 8, 2020 by bomberbaz

[DeathWarpedUp]

A Baader Morpheus  12/76 Isnt far off.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/baader-planetarium/baader-morpheus-76-degree-wide-field-eyepieces.html#about_this_product

Edited July 8, 2020 by DeathWarpedUp

[John]

2 hours ago, azrabella said:

I finally had the opportunity to test the newly arrived Fullerscopes 20mm 82 Degree eyepiece barlowed using an ES 2x tele extender which gave me an effective wide angled 10mm. I compared it directly with a Baader MkIV at 12mm - only difference was the markedly larger fov with the Fullerscopes eyepiece.  I then tried the same thing with the Nirvana 16mm, again reducing down to an effective 8mm. No discernible difference. It seems that I now have a redundant Baader zoom eyepiece, plus I've saved money by not having to purchase a 12mm UWA.

I had the Fullerscopes 20mm 82 degree for a while recently (maybe the same one ?).

I don't know the scope that you were using it with but I found the edge of field astigmatism really distracting in scopes of F/8 and faster. It would be OK in an SCT or F/10 or slower scope I think.

I would have thought that the Baader zoom would have been a betrer corrected eyepiece even if the AFoV was nowhere near as wide ?

 

[azrabella]

Hi John,

It probably is the same eyepiece, but reasonably seems to suit my eyes for it's intended purpose as a wide field finder with a little more magnification and slightly more contrast than my 30mm Aero. As said in another post, it's down to the individual's own eye/scope combo. I must stop chasing the ever diminishing return vs ever increasing cost of eyepieces.