NEW StellaLyra SuperView eyepieces

[MrFreeze]

13 hours ago, FLO said:

‘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 

I think £69 is quite a reasonable price for these.

The ones at RVO do not appear to be in stock (they say low stock and to email them - which always seems to mean they have none left). I had been looking at getting a 2" eyepiece in the Aliexpress 11/11 sale, and the GSO Superviews are available at £59 + £7.50 postage (+ VAT + post office extortion fee no doubt). 

Being a long time customer of theirs I ended up purchasing a Svbony SV136 34mm 72 degree eyepiece which was cheaper and looks like one of these - does anyone know if it actually is the same eyepiece? I guess I could ask Rita or Ida, but I'm not convinced they would know the answer.

David

[FLO]

It is a different eyepiece, not one of those discussed here. 

HTH

[John]

4 hours ago, MrFreeze said:

I think £69 is quite a reasonable price for these.

The ones at RVO do not appear to be in stock (they say low stock and to email them - which always seems to mean they have none left). I had been looking at getting a 2" eyepiece in the Aliexpress 11/11 sale, and the GSO Superviews are available at £59 + £7.50 postage (+ VAT + post office extortion fee no doubt). 

Being a long time customer of theirs I ended up purchasing a Svbony SV136 34mm 72 degree eyepiece which was cheaper and looks like one of these - does anyone know if it actually is the same eyepiece? I guess I could ask Rita or Ida, but I'm not convinced they would know the answer.

David

I agree with FLO. My bet would be very similar to a William Optics SWAN 33mm. Apart from the slight FL difference, the AFoV, appearance and the element count / grouping match the SWAN.

Not a GSO Superview, the topic of this thread.

 

 

Edited November 15, 2020 by John

[popeye85]

How do these compare to the 30m es82's?

[John]

29 minutes ago, popeye85 said:

How do these compare to the 30m es82's?

It's a bit of an unfair comparison with the ES 30 being an 82 degree eyepiece @ £276 and the Stellalyra Superview 30mm a 68 degree eyepiece @ £69.

There was some discussion on these on another forum. The Zhumell 30mm referred to is another branding of the Superview 30mm:

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/562728-zhumell-30mm-vs-es-82-30mm/

 

 

Edited November 18, 2020 by John

[cloudsweeper]

1 hour ago, popeye85 said:

How do these compare to the 30m es82's?

The ES 30/82 is a beast at almost 1kg, and is a superior eyepiece to the Superviews.  I can only speak about the Revelation - a mere 277g, with the same eye relief (22mm), but poorer correction.  But for a low cost, light 2" EP, giving nice views over the central range, it is well worth having.

Doug.

[popeye85]

2 hours ago, John said:

It's a bit of an unfair comparison with the ES 30 being an 82 degree eyepiece @ £276 and the Stellalyra Superview 30mm a 68 degree eyepiece @ £69.

There was some discussion on these on another forum. The Zhumell 30mm referred to is another branding of the Superview 30mm:

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/562728-zhumell-30mm-vs-es-82-30mm/

 

 

Apologies I should have been clearer-i was referring to the field of view rather than quality of optics.

[vlaiv]

2 hours ago, popeye85 said:

How do these compare to the 30m es82's?

According to data available online - Superview 50mm having 50° AFOV, Superview 42mm having 58° AFOV, all three eyepieces deliver very similar looking field of view.

In reality - ES30mm 82° will probably show a bit more sky as it has 43mm of field stop diameter, vs about 41.5mm of field stop with other two eyepieces.

[johnturley]

On 13/11/2020 at 09:26, FLO said:

@vlaiv @John  As you know, these GSO manufactured eyepieces have been on the market for many years in one form or another. But they are new to FLO. We added them to our website only yesterday so if either of you notice any specifications that need correcting please let me know 🙂 

Steve 

Ordered the 50mm from FLO on Wednesday, and it arrived this morning.

It is a nicely constructed eyepiece and quite lightweight, but the stated apparent field of view appears to be MUCH smaller than the quoted value of 60 degrees, probably about only about 45 degrees, and similar to what you get with most 40mm Plossl eyepieces in 1.25 in barrel diameter. I will therefore probably be returning this eyepiece, but may try it out in one of my telescopes first to make sure. 

I was originally attracted to the 50mm Super View eyepiece, as on paper it would have provided an wider actual field of view than my Meade Series 4000 (original 5 element smoothside made in Japan) 56mm Super Plossl, which has a stated APFOV of 52 degrees.  However holding up the 2 eyepieces side by side, the APFOV of the 56mm Meade eyepiece is significantly wider, despite the longer focal length. 

Its very disappointing when the APFOV turns out to be much smaller than the quoted value, if it had turned about to be just slightly smaller, say around 55 degrees, I would probably have kept the eyepiece. I can remember  back in the 1970's buying a 47 mm RAS fitting (threaded 1.25 in) Charles Frank Ultra Wide Angle eyepiece, which had a stated apparent field of 57 degrees, but in reality it turned out to be less than 30 degrees! I did not realise at the time that it was not possible to produce a 47 mm eyepiece with a 57 degree APFOV in a 1.25 in fitting, I don't know why some manufacturers quote these over optimistic figures, as it inevitably leads to disappointment. 

John    

Edited November 20, 2020 by johnturley

[HollyHound]

53 minutes ago, johnturley said:

It is a nicely constructed eyepiece and quite lightweight, but the stated apparent field of view appears to be MUCH smaller than the quoted value of 60 degrees, probably about only about 45 degrees, and similar to what you get with most 40mm Plossl eyepieces in 1.25 in barrel diameter. I will therefore probably be returning this eyepiece, but may try it out in one of my telescopes first to make sure. 

Oh, that's disappointing... I haven't had a chance to try mine yet (still back in it's box for now, as had others arrive), but if it is that much smaller then regrettably I might have to do the same. Will give it a quick go in the StellaMira on the next clear night and see. Would be interested in any feedback if you do get to try it too.

[vlaiv]

3 minutes ago, HollyHound said:

Oh, that's disappointing... I haven't had a chance to try mine yet (still back in it's box for now, as had others arrive), but if it is that much smaller then regrettably I might have to do the same. Will give it a quick go in the StellaMira on the next clear night and see. Would be interested in any feedback if you do get to try it too.

You can easily check AFOV of the eyepiece compared to another by looking thru it without a telescope - just hand held against white wall / ceiling.

That way whole FOV will be white while field stop will be black - swapping between two eyepieces ( even holding against different eyes and swapping eye that is open) will give you idea of size of FOV compared to another eyepiece. Magnification will not play a part there as there is no object to be magnified. Take any plossl and compare the FOV size - if it's less than that - it is less than about 50-52 degrees.

[HollyHound]

1 minute ago, vlaiv said:

You can easily check AFOV of the eyepiece compared to another by looking thru it without a telescope - just hand held against white wall / ceiling.

That way whole FOV will be white while field stop will be black - swapping between two eyepieces ( even holding against different eyes and swapping eye that is open) will give you idea of size of FOV compared to another eyepiece. Magnification will not play a part there as there is no object to be magnified. Take any plossl and compare the FOV size - if it's less than that - it is less than about 50-52 degrees.

I wasn't aware of this test, thanks to you both👍 I'll give it a go. I'm still interested to see how it performs on the refractor though (which is what I bought it for), but got caught up testing the new dob with the limited clear skies we've had.

[vlaiv]

1 minute ago, HollyHound said:

I wasn't aware of this test, thanks to you both👍 I'll give it a go. I'm still interested to see how it performs on the refractor though (which is what I bought it for), but got caught up testing the new dob with the limited clear skies we've had.

Of course - this is just AFOV test - to see if it is as stated, but it has noting to do with how the eyepiece performs except to tell you how much of the sky you will see.

[FLO]

1 hour ago, johnturley said:

Ordered the 50mm from FLO on Wednesday, and it arrived this morning.

It is a nicely constructed eyepiece and quite lightweight, but the stated apparent field of view appears to be MUCH smaller than the quoted value of 60 degrees, probably about only about 45 degrees, and similar to what you get with most 40mm Plossl eyepieces in 1.25 in barrel diameter. I will therefore probably be returning this eyepiece 

Sorry to hear that but no problem, when you are ready please email to arrange return 🙂 

When we added these eyepieces to our website we knew they were long established so didn't think to check specifications. We were not expecting them to attract so much discussion and debate. 

We will over time properly assess the AFOV of each eyepiece and update our specifications. I.e. currently we believe the 20mm has 67º AFOV and the 50mm 48º so have already updated their product pages. The 30mm appears to have a wider AFOV than expected so we'll delay updating that one until we are sure. 

Quote

... but may try it out in one of my telescopes first to make sure. 

No hurry. Please take your time. I will be interested to hear your feedback. 

HTH, 

Steve 

[johnturley]

24 minutes ago, HollyHound said:

Oh, that's disappointing... I haven't had a chance to try mine yet (still back in it's box for now, as had others arrive), but if it is that much smaller then regrettably I might have to do the same. Will give it a quick go in the StellaMira on the next clear night and see. Would be interested in any feedback if you do get to try it too.

Yes, ideally I will compare it on the Pleiades and the Andromeda Nebula with my Meade 56mm Plossl, through my Esprit 150, Sunday appears to be the first chance of a clear night,

John  

[cloudsweeper]

5 hours ago, vlaiv said:

You can easily check AFOV of the eyepiece compared to another by looking thru it without a telescope - just hand held against white wall / ceiling.

That way whole FOV will be white while field stop will be black - swapping between two eyepieces ( even holding against different eyes and swapping eye that is open) will give you idea of size of FOV compared to another eyepiece. Magnification will not play a part there as there is no object to be magnified. Take any plossl and compare the FOV size - if it's less than that - it is less than about 50-52 degrees.

Another method is to aim at a roof a few hundred yards away and count the ridge tiles, again comparing what you know a Plossl or XCel will give compared with what you get from an EP with dubious AFOV.  Quite easy - the ridge tiles don't drift!

I used this to see what happened to the FOV when the nosepiece was removed from a Hyperion.

Doug.

[johnturley]

On 13/11/2020 at 11:23, vlaiv said:

 

https://eyepieceplanner.com/#/

which gives:

Red asterisk means that values are calculated and not measured - apparently, measured value here is field of view - probably by some sort of timing method (star drift for example). It says that 50mm has only 48° AFOV and 42mm has 58° AFOV. This makes 50mm one show less sky than 42mm.

50mm offers longer focal length and larger exit pupil. In slow scope that can sometimes be beneficial. In fast scope - you'll soon have larger exit pupil than is recommended and there is really no point in using 50mm vs 42mm as result will be virtually the same.

If you are after max true field of view - then you should really look for eyepieces with 46-47mm of field stop. There are few models that deliver that, but they are not cheap. Probably most affordable one is this:

 

 

Interesting chart, according to which the Stella Lyra 50mm eyepiece Super View Wide Field eyepiece has a smaller APFOV than standard 2 in barrel Plossls such as the Meade 56 mm, and the Teleview 55 mm (both of which have 46mm field stops), despite being described as 'Wide Field' , and as you say will show less sky than the 42 mm.  The only 2 in eyepieces which would give a marginally larger true field of view than the Possls would be the Masuyama 50 and 60 mm eyepieces, which are very expensive. I think that my Meade (5 element made in Japan) 56 mm Plossl is of similar design to the Masuyama eyepieces, and not a true Plossl. 

I am waiting for the next clear night to compare the Stella Lyra 50 mm with my Meade 56 mm Plossl.

John  

Edited November 21, 2020 by johnturley

[John]

The 1.25 inch or 2 inch barrel internal diameter restricts the max AFoV regardless of what the specs state. There used to be a 1.25 inch format 32mm Erfle eyepiece under various brandings that claimed a 60 degree AFoV. Once I got my eager hands on one I soon realised that the AFoV was no larger than a 32mm plossl because the field stop could not be any larger. I'd been a little naive to believe the specs

If a manufacturer is using a smaller field stop it's likely that is because the optical design would show unacceptable distortion if a wider field stop / AFoV was used. There are examples around where a manufacturer has "pushed" an optical design beyond it's capabilities eg: the Meade 5000 super plossls where they pushed the AFoV out to 60 degrees and the results were not pretty.

 

 

[FLO]

Our product descriptions for StellaLyra SuperView eyepieces were recently updated so AFOVs quoted are: 

15, 20 & 30mm 68 degrees. 
42mm 58 degrees. 
50mm 48 degrees. 

We will update spec’s in Astronomy Tools soon. 

HTH, 

Steve 

[johnturley]

Got the chance last night to try out the 50 mm StellaLyra SuperView eyepiece on the Pleiades last night, both through my 150 mm Esprit and my 14 in Newtonian, I was pleasantly surprised that there was only a slight falling off of image quality towards the edge of the field of view, even through my 14in Newtonian. 

However as anticipated the actual field of view was significantly smaller than through not only my Meade 56 mm Plossl, but also my 36 mm Baader Hyperion Aspheric. I would estimate the actual field was at least 10% smaller than through the 56 mm Plossl, and assuming the stated APFOV of 52 degrees for the latter is correct, this would make even the revised (by FLO) APFOV for the StellaLyra of 48 degrees to be a bit on the optimistic size, and I would estimate the actual figure to be between 45 and 47 degrees. According to the information given in Eyepiece Planner (beta) the field stop diameter is 41.88 mm (slightly smaller than for the 42 mm SuperView), when it could have been up to 46 or 47 mm, which would have given an APFOV of around 53 degrees (which the Masuyama 50 mm has), presumably the manufactures have reduced the field stop to reduce edge of field aberrations. 

Since I purchased this eyepiece based on the manufacturers stated APFOV of 60 degrees (which would have given a wider actual FOV than both my Meade 56 mm and Badder 36 mm), I will therefore, sorry FLO, be returning this eyepiece, its really annoying when the manufacturers quote a very inaccurate APFOV, and they must know when this is the case. 

John 

 

Edited November 23, 2020 by johnturley

[FLO]

11 minutes ago, johnturley said:

I was pleasantly surprised that there was only a slight falling off of image quality towards the edge of the field of view, even through my 14in Newtonian. 

That is good to hear. Your experience matches mine when using the 30mm in a 10" Dobsonian 🙂 

12 minutes ago, johnturley said:

Since I purchased this eyepiece based on the manufacturers stated APFOV of 60 degrees (which would have given a wider actual FOV than both my Meade 56 mm and Badder 36 mm), I will therefore, sorry FLO, be returning this eyepiece

No problem. Totally understand. Please email to arrange return. 

Thank-you for sharing your experience, 

Steve 

[vlaiv]

17 minutes ago, johnturley said:

but also my 36 mm Baader Hyperion Aspheric

Out of interest, how do you compare edge performance of the two in fast telescope (Aspheric vs SuperView)?

[johnturley]

1 hour ago, vlaiv said:

Out of interest, how do you compare edge performance of the two in fast telescope (Aspheric vs SuperView)?

Hi Vlaiv

I would say that through my f7 Esprit, there wasn't a great deal of difference in edge performance between the 36 mm Aspheric and the 50 mm StellaLyra, but through my 14in f5 Newtonian, the edge performance of the StellaLyra was noticeably better, but you have to bear in mind that you are comparing a 72 degree APFOV to only about 48 degrees. 

Incidentally the view through the 36 mm Aspheric with my 14in Newtonian, can be improved by using a Coma Corrector, but the problem is not so much that the edge of field displays a lot of coma, but that the centre and the edge focus at different points, i.e. if you focus on the edge, the centre is out of focus, and vice versa.

Although it is really too low a power to use in a f5 Newtonian, the 56mm Meade Plossl gives a surprisingly good edge performance in this instrument, although it is one of the original 5 element, made in Japan Plossls, similar I understand to the Masuyama, and not a true Plossl. 

Was thinking of staring a separate thread on the best 2 in wide field eyepieces.

John 

Edited November 23, 2020 by johnturley

[vlaiv]

26 minutes ago, johnturley said:

I would say that through my f7 Esprit, there wasn't a great deal of difference in edge performance between the 36 mm Aspheric and the 50 mm StellaLyra, but through my 14in f5 Newtonian, the edge performance of the StellaLyra was noticeably better, but you have to bear in mind that you are comparing a 72 degree APFOV to only about 48 degrees. 

This was what I was really after. I currently have 4" F/10 and looking for eyepiece that will give me good performance and wide field of view. This eyepiece will eventually be used with F/7 4" ED scope that I'm planning as replacement for F/10 model - and that is why I'm looking at somewhat faster performance - but not as fast as F/4 - F/5 range.

If 36mm Aspheric has larger FOV - and it does since field stop is 45mm - it might tick the right boxes - at least vs 50 mm / 42 mm SuperView. On the other hand, if I wasn't planning on upgrading F/10 scope - then sure, 42mm Superview would be cost effective wide field to use.

[johnturley]

12 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

 

If 36mm Aspheric has larger FOV - and it does since field stop is 45mm - it might tick the right boxes - at least vs 50 mm / 42 mm SuperView. On the other hand, if I wasn't planning on upgrading F/10 scope - then sure, 42mm Superview would be cost effective wide field to use.

The 36 mm Aspheric will give a slightly wider actual field of view, I'm pretty sure that the quoted APFOV of 72 degrees is more or less correct, and this figure is also confirmed on Eyepiece Planner (beta) . Another nice thing about the Baader Aspheric is that when looking through it, the field stop is quite sharp and well defined against the night sky compared to the 50 mm StellaLyra (I haven't seen a 42 mm to compare it with), and you don't have to place your eye several centimetres away to see the full field, plus you can also get (if required) an extension ring for the Aspheric, although I don't think that you will need it. At £139 it is however  twice the price of the 42 mm StellaLyra, definitely don't bother with the 50 mm, which according to Eyepiece Planner (beta) has a slightly smaller actual field of view. 

John