Explore Scientific 12mm 92° has arrived

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I have just received an Explore Scientific 12 mm 92° eyepiece, and it looks amazing. The Nagler 12T4 it replaces isn't exactly small, but this dwarfs it. 

First light will have to wait until next week, most likely. In the meantime I might use it with the APM 80 mm F/6 triplet as a 40x80mm birding scope. 

[rl]

You will probably need to keep the Nagler just for a counterweight....

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Just had a look with the APM 80 mm F/6 triplet, in daylight, and the view is brilliant. Very sharp, very comfortable views, with pincushion distortion, but no worse than the Nagler 12T4. Very pleased indeed

[Louis D]

It's a pretty sweet eyepiece, isn't it?  I'm just hoping for a 22mm to 24mm version to replace my 22mm NT4 someday.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Just now, Louis D said:

It's a pretty sweet eyepiece, isn't it?  I'm just hoping for a 22mm to 24mm version to replace my 22mm NT4 someday.

Absolutely, My Nagler 17T4 might be the next to go

[Fozzie]

Nice.. the 17mm shows similar to a 24/68.. is your pan (if you've got one!) feeling the heat I wonder!?  i was looking at it over the week end along with the 12mm, i thought i'd read some where shorter lengths in the range in the future..   

[John]

I've owned both the 17mm and 12mm ES 92's. I still have the 17mm. They are superb optical performers - the best ES eyepieces that I've used (that includes the 20mm 100 ES) and my 17mm fits nicely between the 21mm and 13mm Ethos without giving anything away in performance.

I found the 12mm eye placement just didn't suit me as a non-glasses wearer though so I let that one go to a new home. The 17mm is better for me although that took some getting used to.

The weight and bulk is the main challenge with these - you do need a good solid focuser / diagonal setup.

I'm sure you will enjoy your 12mm 92 Michael

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

8 minutes ago, John said:

I've owned both the 17mm and 12mm ES 92's. I still have the 17mm. They are superb optical performers - the best ES eyepieces that I've used (that includes the 20mm 100 ES) and my 17mm fits nicely between the 21mm and 13mm Ethos without giving anything away in performance.

I found the 12mm eye placement just didn't suit me as a non-glasses wearer though so I let that one go to a new home. The 17mm is better for me although that took some getting used to.

The weight and bulk is the main challenge with these - you do need a good solid focuser / diagonal setup.

I'm sure you will enjoy your 12mm 92 Michael

The weight is considerable, but all my focusers handle the Nagler 31T5 well, so this one shouldn't be a problem (it is a whole 2 g heavier than the 31T5 "Panzerfaust")

[John]

15 minutes ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

The weight is considerable, but all my focusers handle the Nagler 31T5 well, so this one shouldn't be a problem (it is a whole 2 g heavier than the 31T5 "Panzerfaust")

The 17mm is a bit heavier than the 31N at 1160 grams. The 31N seems to be 200 grams lighter. I've just weighed them both

I reckon the 12mm ES is a little lighter than the 17mm.

 

Edited November 17, 2020 by John

[Louis D]

I don't have the 31mm NT5, but I do have the 30mm ES-82.  By my scale, I get the following weights:

30mm ES-82 (original mushroom top) : 973g (decloaked), 1369g (with cloaking eye cup)

17mm ES-92 : 1153g

12mm ES-92 : 1011g

Tele Vue eyepiece specifications page lists the 31mm NT5 at 998g

So, the 12mm ES-92 is just about identical in weight to the 31mm NT5 and 142g lighter than the 17mm ES-92.

The 31mm NT5 is just about the same weight as the decloaked 30mm ES-82.

The only other eyepiece that I use which weighs over 900g is the 35mm Baader Scopos Extreme at 1072g.  I have a feeling its weight and bulk doomed it despite really excellent performance for its price.

I ended up buying an alt-az mount with axis locks (DSV-2B) to facilitate heavy eyepieces changes.  At a star party I attended, even the DM-6 struggled during heavy eyepiece changes without axis locks.  The owner had to keep a finger on the diagonal during changes to keep it from nosediving.

[John]

The Ethos 21 is 1020g so the ES 17 / 92 is the heaviest that I own.

 

[Louis D]

2 hours ago, Fozzie said:

i thought i'd read some where shorter lengths in the range in the future..

@Don Pensack reported on CN that ES told him in 2016, and I quote:

"Learned today there will be an 8.8mm , a 6.5mm, and an, as of yet, unspecified focal length in the series appearing in 2017."

So don't hold your breath waiting for them. 😆

[Louis D]

3 hours ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

Absolutely, My Nagler 17T4 might be the next to go

The 17mm ES-92 is, if anything, even nicer than the 12mm in that it is slightly sharper to the edge and slighter flatter of field.  It also has a slightly easier exit pupil to hold as @John reports above.  It is definitely one of my favorite eyepieces to use every time I observe mid-sized objects.

[globular]

15 minutes ago, Louis D said:

So don't hold your breath waiting for them. 😆

I've been holding my breath waiting for a 17mm ES-92 - it's been out ages but they don't seem to be making them as no one has one in stock.

If anyone here is finding theirs too heavy then I can give it a new home 😍

Edited November 17, 2020 by globular

[Don Pensack]

If ES in Europe is out of the 17mm, ES in the US is not.

Because of the issues with Covid-19 and the effects on sales (4x last year's level) and production (interruptions have reduced output),

I now don't expect to see any more focal lengths in this series, especially any focal lengths longer than 17mm.

ES in the US is out of a lot of focal lengths of eyepieces, and it may take months just to fill up the pipeline with current product.

Anything new has been pushed back to "Indefinite".

[rkelley8493]

On 17/11/2020 at 11:40, John said:

The Ethos 21 is 1020g so the ES 17 / 92 is the heaviest that I own.

 

The 17/92° is the heaviest eyepiece I own as well, though our eyepiece collection is similar. From most massive to least, mine goes something like this:

ES 17mm 92° - 1159g

TV 21 Ethos - 1021g

ES 12mm 92° - 1017g

TV 31T5 Nagler - 1000g

TV 17T4 Nagler - 726g

TV 22T4 Nagler - 681g

TV 4.7 Ethos - 590g

TV 3.5 Delos - 499g

TV 6 Delos - 454g

Pentax XW 10 - 390g

Edited November 18, 2020 by rkelley8493

[rkelley8493]

18 hours ago, Don Pensack said:

If ES in Europe is out of the 17mm, ES in the US is not.

Because of the issues with Covid-19 and the effects on sales (4x last year's level) and production (interruptions have reduced output),

I now don't expect to see any more focal lengths in this series, especially any focal lengths longer than 17mm.

ES in the US is out of a lot of focal lengths of eyepieces, and it may take months just to fill up the pipeline with current product.

Anything new has been pushed back to "Indefinite".

Aw man 😧  That's crappy news.. I was hoping they'd release an 8mm 92° to fill a void I have with this focal length. I'd be more likely to purchase a new ES 8mm 92 than I would an 8mm Ethos, but it looks like I may not have the luxury 😕

[Louis D]

1 hour ago, rkelley8493 said:

Aw man 😧  That's crappy news.. I was hoping they'd release an 8mm 92° to fill a void I have with this focal length. I'd be more likely to purchase a new ES 8mm 92 than I would an 8mm Ethos, but it looks like I may not have the luxury 😕

The APM XWA is available in 9mm and most recently, 7mm, focal lengths.  Yes, not exactly 8mm.

Have you tried the 17mm ES-92 in a telecentric magnifier?  I have with my 2" GSO ED 2x Barlow and TV PBI, and it works really well, as does the 12mm ES-92.  It does make for a very long and heavy optical stack, though.  I'd recommend it only for Dobs with stout focusers.

[John]

47 minutes ago, Louis D said:

The APM XWA is available in 9mm and most recently, 7mm, focal lengths.  Yes, not exactly 8mm.

Have you tried the 17mm ES-92 in a telecentric magnifier?  I have with my 2" GSO ED 2x Barlow and TV PBI, and it works really well, as does the 12mm ES-92.  It does make for a very long and heavy optical stack, though.  I'd recommend it only for Dobs with stout focusers.

The Antares 2 inch 1.6x barlow works well with the Ethos's - perhaps it would well with the ES 92's as well ?

 

Edited November 18, 2020 by John

[Louis D]

3 hours ago, John said:

The Antares 2 inch 1.6x barlow works well with the Ethos's - perhaps it would well with the ES 92's as well ?

 

If you've got both, give it a try sometime and let us know.

I'll try the GSO ED alone sometime with the ES-92s to see what happens.  I also have an Orion Deluxe 2" 2x (Japan) that's 6" long I could try.  I could even thread the GSO ED optical nose piece onto the end of the ES-92s for grins.

[globular]

38 minutes ago, Louis D said:

If you've got both, give it a try sometime and let us know.

I'll try the GSO ED alone sometime with the ES-92s to see what happens.  I also have an Orion Deluxe 2" 2x (Japan) that's 6" long I could try.  I could even thread the GSO ED optical nose piece onto the end of the ES-92s for grins.

I’d be interested to hear how they perform.
I’m still new to astronomy and have lots of gaps in my EP line-up.
I’m wondering if a 2” 1.6x or 1.5x would help fill some gaps while EP stocks are so low.
I’ve tried a 22T4 with a powermate 2x and it works really well. Would the Antares 1.6x and / or the nosepiece of the GSO ED (giving 1.5x) work as seamlessly? Or with some aberrations? They are a lot cheaper than the TV after all.
 

Edited November 19, 2020 by globular

[John]

The Antares 1.6x 2 inch barlow gained an excellent reputation for working pretty much seamlessly with the Ethos eyepieces. The newer designs of this barlow do have some issues if you have restricted focuser travel range though. Optically they have not changed. The older design of the Antares Barlow is worth looking out for - no compression ring or filter threads but it does reach focus in a wider range of scopes. The steel set screws can be swapped for nylon ones to protect eyepiece barrels.

The other thing to watch for with all barlows is that they push the eye relief out a bit. With some eyepieces this can be an advantage but the ES 92's already have long eye relief so a barlow may cause some eye positioning challenges.

With the ES 92's being such tall, heavy eyepieces, a lightweight, short barlow, as long as it performs well, is preferred I think.

Sounds like using a barlow or focal extender is likely to be the only way to get a wider range of ES 92 degree eyepieces in the foreseeable future.

 

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I don't think I will be using a Barlow of any kind with this eyepiece, especially not with the Meade SN6 Schmidt-Newton. I need a 2" extension tube for EPs to come to focus, so it sticks out quite a bit already

sticking in a Barlow will matters a lot worse 

[John]

Long stacks do have their uses

 

Edited November 19, 2020 by John

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Regarding the weight of the EP, I just weighed my main EP case, and it is 12.7 kg, or about 28 lbs. That's well over twice the weight of my heaviest OTA