NEW StellaLyra SuperView eyepieces

[Deadlake]

Any idea of what the f stop is on these?

[FLO]

@vlaiv Asked the same question earlier in this thread. We will measure the field stops then update our product descriptions where necessary. 

[FLO]

9 hours ago, vlaiv said:

It suggests that these eyepieces are fine to be used with F/6 8" Newtonian, but in reality you might want to emphasize that they are best used with slower scopes at F/10 or slower - very suitable for StellaLyra range of telescopes and StellaMira 80mm F/10  model (but not other two). 

Your comment started quite a debate between myself and some colleagues 🙃

You see, in our earlier days three of us at FLO have owned and used a number of these eyepieces with f5 & f6 Newtonians and liked them a lot. Speaking personally, I used the 30mm in a GSO 10" Dobsonian (both badged Revelation) then later in a Skyliner 300p. The views were wonderful. I remember Pleiades fitted the FOV beautifully when used with the 10" and only the outer 25% of the FOV softened. It was tack sharp where it mattered.

It is true the edge sharpened when used with a slower focal-ratio telescope, like a SCT, but that is true for pretty-much any eyepiece. 

So with this in mind we are saying: 

"Suitable for telescopes with focal-ratios f/5 or slower (optimum performance achieved around f10)." 

All the eyepieces are covered by our 30-day return policy so if someone doesn't agree, they can easily return it for refund 😇

Steve

[vlaiv]

11 minutes ago, FLO said:

Your comment started quite a debate between myself and some colleagues 🙃

You see, in our earlier days three of us at FLO have owned and used a number of these eyepieces with f5 & f6 Newtonians and liked them a lot. Speaking personally, I used the 30mm in a GSO 10" Dobsonian (both badged Revelation) then later in a Skyliner 300p. The views were wonderful. I remember Pleiades fitted the FOV beautifully when used with the 10" and only the outer 25% of the FOV softened. It was tack sharp where it mattered.

It is true the edge sharpened when used with a slower focal-ratio telescope, like a SCT, but that is true for pretty-much any eyepiece. 

So with this in mind we are saying: 

"Suitable for telescopes with focal-ratios f/5 or slower (optimum performance achieved around f10)." 

All the eyepieces are covered by our 30-day return policy so if someone doesn't agree, they can easily return it for refund 😇

Steve

I think that is very sensible.

We often speak of good / bad performance, but really, to some people these are just nuances. I remember when I first noticed outer field astigmatism in 32mm plossl in F/5 scope. I used that eyepiece for very long time and never noticed it until I actually actively searched for it.

Problem is that once you see such thing - it is very hard to "unsee" it .

Best course of action is to try for oneself.

[John]

I have used wide angle eyepieces which were nice to observe with in an F/10 scope but, in my opinion, were not nice at all at F/6.5 and awful at F/5. By "not nice at all" and "awful" I mean that I might as well be using a narrower field of view eyepiece and have saved some £'s and weight.

I don't expect lower cost wide angles to present pinpoint stars in the outer half of the field of view when the scope focal ratio is F/7 (ish) or faster but I would like them to be at least roughly looking like stars rather than the elongated "seagulls". Some manage this, some don't

I'll be blunt (sorry FLO !) and say that for £70 a throw, the GSO Superwides are over-priced IMHO.

Just my views though and others will undoubtedly vary

 

 

[FLO]

That is interesting because I liked mine and am struggling to think of another similarly priced 2” eyepiece series with better performance. 

Steve 

[FLO]

11 hours ago, FLO said:

Measuring field stops and updating the FOV charts will take longer but will be done. 

@vlaiv The FOV charts now show the 8” f12 Classical Cassegrain. 

🙂

[Adam J]

2 hours ago, John said:

I have used wide angle eyepieces which were nice to observe with in an F/10 scope but, in my opinion, were not nice at all at F/6.5 and awful at F/5. By "not nice at all" and "awful" I mean that I might as well be using a narrower field of view eyepiece and have saved some £'s and weight.

I don't expect lower cost wide angles to present pinpoint stars in the outer half of the field of view when the scope focal ratio is F/7 (ish) or faster but I would like them to be at least roughly looking like stars rather than the elongated "seagulls". Some manage this, some don't

I'll be blunt (sorry FLO !) and say that for £70 a throw, the GSO Superwides are over-priced IMHO.

Just my views though and others will undoubtedly vary

 

 

What would you suggest as an alternative that you feel is better for that price? As from the perspective of someone who dosnt do visual it seems like a bit of a throw away comment.

I accept that these are not something that I would chuck into my Esprit at F5.5 and expect good performance, but if i got my wife a StellaLyra 6'' F12 to look at the moon would one of these not be a good bet?

Adam

Edited November 13, 2020 by Adam J

[Chris]

10 minutes ago, Adam J said:

but if i got my wife a StellaLyra 6'' F12 to look at the moon would one of these not be a good bet?

I think a boiled egg would make a great eyepiece at f12, no seriously, even super cheap EP's work well at f12

[vlaiv]

22 hours ago, Adam J said:

What would you suggest as an alternative that you feel is better for that price? As from the perspective of someone who dosnt do visual it seems like a bit of a throw away comment.

I think that point in above comment is as follows:

You pay "premium" price of £69 since you are hoping to get wide field eyepiece. It is still entry level price, I'm aware of that, but let's look at what you get if you opt for 42mm version.

Instead of getting advertised 65° of AFOV, you get closer to 58° AFOV. If you happen to have faster scope, you also get usable only, let's say 80% of the field. That is ~46° of usable field.

If I told you that you have 42mm with 46° AFOV for £69 or perhaps 40mm with 42° but for less than half that price at £30, which one would sound like a better deal?

Alternative would be to consider following offer:

42mm with 58° and poor outer field performance in F/5-F/6 scopes for £69 or 35mm with 68° (true field effectively the same) and very good performance in F/5-F/6 for £89.

In the end, everyone can decide for themselves if asking price is something that suits them - as long as they are properly informed of performance of the eyepiece. Interestingly enough - £69 is exact amount local dealer here is asking for those eyepieces, branded as GSO and if I were in the market for one of them - it would make more sense to get them locally thus skipping import fees and having lower postage.

On a separate note, 6" F/12 CC for low power moon - you want 30-32mm plossl - again around £30-£40, but spare on no expense on good diagonal though.

Edited November 14, 2020 by vlaiv
order matters :D

[HollyHound]

Well the 50mm has arrived, thank you @FLO... unfortunately, might be a few days or so before I can test it as the weather is not playing ball at the moment 🤞

Looks well made and also (importantly for me) it's nice and lightweight 👍

[cloudsweeper]

Very nice @HollyHound !  I sold my 50mm Revelation Superview on, but have the 42 and 30mm versions (below).  I like them a lot - 2", light, low power.  I use them with focal ratios between 5 and 10, and although there is some deterioration off-axis, it doesn't bother me much.  (I concentrate on the centre, or for large objects just scan across.)  

And I only paid £37 for them.  They went up to about £64, and now are at £49.  

Enjoy!

Doug.

[F15Rules]

 

  23 hours ago, John said:

I have used wide angle eyepieces which were nice to observe with in an F/10 scope but, in my opinion, were not nice at all at F/6.5 and awful at F/5. By "not nice at all" and "awful" I mean that I might as well be using a narrower field of view eyepiece and have saved some £'s and weight.

I don't expect lower cost wide angles to present pinpoint stars in the outer half of the field of view when the scope focal ratio is F/7 (ish) or faster but I would like them to be at least roughly looking like stars rather than the elongated "seagulls". Some manage this, some don't 

I'll be blunt (sorry FLO !) and say that for £70 a throw, the GSO Superwides are over-priced IMHO.

Just my views though and others will undoubtedly vary 

 

 

21 hours ago, Adam J said:

What would you suggest as an alternative that you feel is better for that price? As from the perspective of someone who dosnt do visual it seems like a bit of a throw away comment.

I accept that these are not something that I would chuck into my Esprit at F5.5 and expect good performance, but if i got my wife a StellaLyra 6'' F12 to look at the moon would one of these not be a good bet?

Adam

I think your comment is a bit disingenuous, especially when you say you don't do visual yourself.

John is an extremely experienced visual observer, and has on many occasions conducted detailed reviews (on behalf of our Sponsor, FLO), on the basis that he will always give honest, impartial feedback from his field testing (and FLO wouldn't want it any other way).

As such, he has used or tested the vast majority of eyepiece types on the UK market in the past 10 years, and doesn't post "throwaway comments". He simply reports what he sees, in a range of scope's of differing focal lengths.

As I read John's remarks, I didn't see him claiming anything other than that this particular variant of the long established GSO Superview range is in his honest opinion, "over-priced"...and, given that the competing GSO Superview range are currently available from at least 3 UK retailers (Telescope House, Harrison's Optical and Rother Valley Optics) for £49 each, then the new Stellalyra range at £69 each, does indeed look overpriced🙂.

Dave

 

Edited November 14, 2020 by F15Rules

[Mr Spock]

I think they look well made, and at a reasonable cost.

When I look at the 42mm compared to my 42mm LVW which cost many times more, yes, there will be a difference in image quality and FOV; I don't know what people are expecting for this price though. I'm sure many will be very happy with them.

[FLO]

57 minutes ago, F15Rules said:

 the competing GSO Superview range are currently available from at least 3 UK retailers (Telescope House, Harrison's Optical and Rother Valley Optics) for £49 each, then the new Stellalyra range at £69 each, does indeed look overpriced🙂.

Dave

‘Revelation’ was/is a Telescope House brand. Bresser-Germany purchased Telescope House some time ago. I no longer see Revelation Superview eyepieces at the TH website and those still listed at other websites (TH distributed them) are out of stock and/or offered at what appear to be clearance prices. 

I believe £69 is a good price for a 2” GSO SuperView eyepiece. 

Steve 

[Adam J]

1 hour ago, F15Rules said:

 

I think your comment is a bit disingenuous, especially when you say you don't do visual yourself.

John is an extremely experienced visual observer, and has on many occasions conducted detailed reviews (on behalf of our Sponsor, FLO), on the basis that he will always give honest, impartial feedback from his field testing (and FLO wouldn't want it any other way).

As such, he has used or tested the vast majority of eyepiece types on the UK market in the past 10 years, and doesn't post "throwaway comments". He simply reports what he sees, in a range of scope's of differing focal lengths.

As I read John's remarks, I didn't see him claiming anything other than that this particular variant of the long established GSO Superview range is in his honest opinion, "over-priced"...and, given that the competing GSO Superview range are currently available from at least 3 UK retailers (Telescope House, Harrison's Optical and Rother Valley Optics) for £49 each, then the new Stellalyra range at £69 each, does indeed look overpriced🙂.

Dave

 

I asked a simple genuine question would one of these be a good bet in a F12 scope or should I consider something else, what makes them not stand up against similar at this price. I considered it a throw away comment as I did not think he gave sufficient detail for me to understand his opinion as a none expert in eye peices especially in relative performance terms. I think Vlaiv expanded quite well on what John said for me.  I am not the type to just take what someone tells me as a given I need to know exactly why they have that opinion so I can decide if I should follow it. One way or another I was just asking for more detail.

Adam

Edited November 14, 2020 by Adam J

[FLO]

It is all good. People are only sharing thier thoughts 🙂

Steve 

[F15Rules]

On 12/11/2020 at 19:20, John said:

I've owned the 50mm and 42mm GSO branded versions of these eyepieces and can confirm what vlaiv has said above regarding performance and specs. The Stellalyra ones do look extremely like the GSO Superviews.

I enjoyed them in an F/10 refractor and SCT.

I strongly suspect that the Revelation Superview's are the same eyepieces ?

John had already covered your question in the above post. If it was good at F10 then it would be even better at F12..

Dave

[Adam J]

6 minutes ago, F15Rules said:

John had already covered your question in the above post. If it was good at F10 then it would be even better at F12..

Dave

Sounds good for my proposed application then.

Edited November 14, 2020 by Adam J

[F15Rules]

3 minutes ago, FLO said:

It is all good. People are only sharing thier thoughts 🙂

Steve 

That's right Steve.

None of my comments were criticisms of FLO and your products.. I have bought more products from yourselves over the years than from other retailers combined.

I did actually buy a Revelation Superview 42mm from Telescope House about 2.5 years ago for £49 (plus shipping), so I do know they had been selling those at that price for some time. And I did check those sites this evening before posting, and Harrison's were claiming "in stock" on those items.

I also know that FLO normally offer a price matching service so I don't doubt that if it turned out that the FLO price was not competitive in the longer term, then you would be aiming to review your prices🙂.

Dave

[F15Rules]

6 minutes ago, Adam J said:

Sounds good for my proposed application then.

Yes, I think they would be a good match for excellent low power views in that scope: I'm a fan of long focus scopes  (hence my F15rules handle)..I'm sure your wife will like the scope if you go ahead with the purchase👍😊

Dave

[John]

1 hour ago, Adam J said:

I asked a simple genuine question would one of these be a good bet in a F12 scope or should I consider something else, what makes them not stand up against similar at this price. I considered it a throw away comment as I did not think he gave sufficient detail for me to understand his opinion as a none expert in eye peices especially in relative performance terms. I think Vlaiv expanded quite well on what John said for me.  I am not the type to just take what someone tells me as a given I need to know exactly why they have that opinion so I can decide if I should follow it. One way or another I was just asking for more detail.

Adam

After I read your view that my comment was a "sort of throw away comment" I lost interest in your post, hence no direct answer to your question.

Dave / F15Rules has now addressed that - thanks Dave

If stocks were available I would also suggest looking at a Panaview, 2 focal lengths of which are just £1 more than the Superviews. Again stocks allowing, the Aero ED's, particularly the 35mm and 40mm are much better eyepieces than the Superviews, in my humble opinion, and only slightly more expensive than the FLO pricing of the Stellalyra branded ones.

By better I am referring to the sharpness of the star image in the outer part of the field of view. Even at F/12 you may see some distortion with the Superviews,  but again that is only in my humble opinion.

Yours and others "mileage may vary".

Hope that is a more comprehensive answer to your question

 

Edited November 14, 2020 by John

[nfotis]

By the way, I noticed that it's unusual to see 2" eyepieces lower than 32mm or so.

If I want higher magnification, I am forced to go the 1.25" route. It's not practical to make a high magnification 2" eyepiece?

 

N.F.

 

[cloudsweeper]

5 hours ago, nfotis said:

By the way, I noticed that it's unusual to see 2" eyepieces lower than 32mm or so.

If I want higher magnification, I am forced to go the 1.25" route. It's not practical to make a high magnification 2" eyepiece?

 

N.F.

 

If you hunt round you'll find 2" EPs with FL < 32mm.  For example, I have Meade UWAs at 24 and 20mm, a Morpheus dual-fit 17.5mm, and dual-fit Hyperions at 10 and 8mm.  Explore Scientific do a 2" 18mm/82deg eyepiece.

In general, smaller FLs in 2" format would be heavy and expensive, I believe.  

Dual-fit ones may or may not need a 2 / 1.25 adaptor to reach focus, depending on the set-up - extension tubes, etc..

Where only 1.25" barrels are available, you can just keep an adaptor in the diagonal - or even have adaptors on each individual EP for convenience.  (That's what I do.)

Doug.

 

Edited November 15, 2020 by cloudsweeper

[Stu]

5 hours ago, nfotis said:

By the way, I noticed that it's unusual to see 2" eyepieces lower than 32mm or so.

If I want higher magnification, I am forced to go the 1.25" route. It's not practical to make a high magnification 2" eyepiece?

 

N.F.

 

Alot depends on the apparent field of view and the required field stop, but there are 2” eyepieces down to 17mm (Televue Ethos and Type 4 Nagler) that I know of. Below this the field stop can fit within the barrel of a 1.25” eyepiece, so it makes more sense to save the cost and weight for the shorter focal length eyepieces. There are some, like 3.7 and 4.7mm Ethos SX which are dual fit (using a screw on adaptor) which is purely for mechanical reasons; they are big heavy eyepieces and feel more secure with a 2” fitting.