BST Starguider 12mm vs StellaLyra LER 12.5 - Attempted Comparison.

[Chris]

I might need a bit of feedback from the forums eyepiece gurus on this one! I felt a bit out my depth trying to compare two eyepieces on camera, so any advice for future eyepiece comparison videos would be greatly appreciated. I used to know a thing or two about eyepieces, but that must have been a while ago....I couldn't remember the right name for eyepiece aberrations etc.  

 

[John]

Good job Chris - I enjoyed watching that

I think you took just the right approach - describe what you see and the experience rather than worrying about detailed specific technical diagnosis 

 

 

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

Great vid, watched on the telly. Pete Lawrence watch out! 😉

As John said, the important stuff was covered.

Maybe do a slightly longer video next time demonstrating performance at contrasting telescope focal lengths? 

I can't say there was any noticeable stumbling. If you're worried about that, rehearse a tad beforehand and/or jot down a rudimentary script.

Also remember, a dash of matte powder will take the shine off your face and a hint of eyeliner really makes the eyes pop! 

 

[RobertI]

Hey Chris, great video and interesting comparison of the eyepieces. Very entertaining as always. I know what you mean about the arm - just had my jab too! My only comment on the vid would be that it would be nice to see how the eyepeices would deal with other types of objects, such as large clusters (to see how the distortion affects the views) and faint or close doubles. Also choose a star that’s easier to pronounce! 😂. Do you think the reflection was was from the light on your face or some other source?

[Chris]

11 hours ago, John said:

Good job Chris - I enjoyed watching that

I think you took just the right approach - describe what you see and the experience rather than worrying about detailed specific technical diagnosis 

 

 

Phew! Thanks John  That's re assuring to hear!

[wulfrun]

Minor (constructive) criticism: left-panning your voice sounds odd in headphones. Enjoyed it otherwise:-)

[Chris]

10 hours ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

Great vid, watched on the telly. Pete Lawrence watch out! 😉

As John said, the important stuff was covered.

Maybe do a slightly longer video next time demonstrating performance at contrasting telescope focal lengths? 

I can't say there was any noticeable stumbling. If you're worried about that, rehearse a tad beforehand and/or jot down a rudimentary script.

Also remember, a dash of matte powder will take the shine off your face and a hint of eyeliner really makes the eyes pop! 

 

Thanks  I think Pete is safe hehe...Ah yes, a second scope would be good! The 200p in the obsy crossed my mind but I thought it might be too similar at 1000mm f/5? I'm on the lookout for a mount for my Megrez72. I think that might be a good second test scope at f/6 and nearly half the focal length of the 150p? 

Oh and thanks for the makeup advice lol, I'm looking forward to doing my next eyepiece review in drag 🤣 

   

[Chris]

7 minutes ago, wulfrun said:

Minor (constructive) criticism: left-panning your voice sounds odd in headphones. Enjoyed it otherwise:-)

You're absolutely right! I pinned a comment about this in the video comments on the YouTube page. I didn't notice the mic jack wasn't pushed all the way into the camera, so the whole thing was only recorded in mono 😟  I thought my headphones were broken when I went to edit the footage lol It was a pain to get the sound even passible so that was a lesson learnt Sound is usually much better balanced but I'm still learning

[Chris]

3 hours ago, RobertI said:

Hey Chris, great video and interesting comparison of the eyepieces. Very entertaining as always. I know what you mean about the arm - just had my jab too! My only comment on the vid would be that it would be nice to see how the eyepeices would deal with other types of objects, such as large clusters (to see how the distortion affects the views) and faint or close doubles. Also choose a star that’s easier to pronounce! 😂. Do you think the reflection was was from the light on your face or some other source?

Thanks Rob  Congrats on the jab, I did look at the Polaris binary pair but it didn't make the final edit. I think looking at clusters is a good shout, I'll do that next time I wasn't going to pronounce it 'beetle-juice' Rob 🤪

Reflection wise, I'm baffled because I wasn't wearing a head torch, I didn't take a light out with me. I also shot the whole thing with an Infra red camera so as to not interfere with observations. Maybe the Moon, or one of the many street, security or window lights?

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

Tbh I meant 'slower focal ratio'... Early hours post... 🙄 

Do you have for instance a Mak or f7+ refractor maybe to compare? 

I was being (a little) serious about the slap. Imagine Chris Lintott on TV without a hint. He'd look like a thawed cadaver! *shiver*.

 

[Chris]

39 minutes ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

Tbh I meant 'slower focal ratio'... Early hours post... 🙄 

Do you have for instance a Mak or f7+ refractor maybe to compare? 

I was being (a little) serious about the slap. Imagine Chris Lintott on TV without a hint. He'd look like a thawed cadaver! *shiver*.

 

 

Haha! that was funny but so brutal! Poor Chris 🤣 I'll admit he sometimes looks a bit under the weather like he enjoys a Rum or five... I have worried about his health in the past, but he's looked quite well recently I thought.   

Historically I haven't needed much of an excuse to buy long focal ratio refractors, just that fast focal ratio's are a better test. This is because even cheap eyepieces perform well if your using a really slow scope (one of the many good things about an f12-15 refractor, Mak or SCT). Maybe something around f8 though? 

Seriously regarding the slap. I film in the dark using an IR camera (Canon XA11), so putting make up on would be like trying to deflect an incoming meteorite by urinating at it. No ones going to look good in IR, but It does remove a lot of error by not having powerful lighting which is needed otherwise. 

Again poor Chris Lintott....brutal 😄   

 

 

[Mark at Beaufort]

Chris I really enjoyed the video. I think you made a good outline of the merits of both eyepieces. 

[Chris]

1 hour ago, Mark at Beaufort said:

Chris I really enjoyed the video. I think you made a good outline of the merits of both eyepieces. 

Thanks Mark, appreciated : )

After further thought, I might also include a 'glasses' test for the eye relief next time.

[Roy Challen]

6 hours ago, Lockie said:

 I wasn't going to pronounce it 'beetle-juice'

 

Why not? Everyone else does, don't they?😀

[vlaiv]

3 minutes ago, Roy Challen said:

Why not? Everyone else does, don't they?😀

Although I'm accustomed to totally different pronunciation it seems that something very similar to 'beetle-juice' is accurate English pronunciation.

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betelgeuse

In my language it is pronounced as:

Bɛtlɡɛz (probably closest would be battel - gase )

 

[Louis D]

Yep, beetle-juice is how I've always heard it pronounced in US English.  Don't, don't say it three times in a row.

Edited April 2, 2021 by Louis D

[Chris]

48 minutes ago, Roy Challen said:

Why not? Everyone else does, don't they?😀

Most people might? I'm probably in a minority that like to differentiate it from the film. Whatever you do Roy, don't say beatle-Juice two more times...it's not worth it 😅  

[Chris]

43 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Although I'm accustomed to totally different pronunciation it seems that something very similar to 'beetle-juice' is accurate English pronunciation.

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betelgeuse

In my language it is pronounced as:

Bɛtlɡɛz (probably closest would be battel - gase )

 

I like the pronunciation in your language, vlaiv. I could get onboard with battel-gase.  

[vlaiv]

12 minutes ago, Lockie said:

I'm probably in a minority that like to differentiate it from the film.

Oh, then you must go for Yad al-Jauzā ("Hand of Orion") (again from wiki article, Etymology section)

[Chris]

6 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Oh, then you must go for Yad al-Jauzā ("Hand of Orion") (again from wiki article, Etymology section)

Can I just call it the Hand of Orion instead  

[Don Pensack]

I see it as a shoulder of Orion.  His arm is a series of stars curving upward:

http://www.seasky.org/constellations/constellation-orion.html

And it's either bettle-jooz (bettle rhymes with kettle) or baytle-jooz in English.

I have no idea where beetle-juice came from.

[vlaiv]

7 minutes ago, Don Pensack said:

And it's either bettle-jooz (bettle rhymes with kettle) or baytle-jooz in English.

What would jooz part sound like?

[Louis D]

1 hour ago, vlaiv said:

What would jooz part sound like?

Sort of like Jews.

[Chris]

Update. I've just had a second night out with both the BST's and StellaLyra. There was no Moon this time around which seemed to solve the light reflection issues with the BST. They were a joy to use this time around. The large eye lens of the BST and flat field really is amazing for the price I feel. I did a 'glasses test' and I couldn't see the full field of view with either eyepiece. I could see more apparent field of view with the StellaLyra LER when observing the double cluster because it has a bit more eye relief, but the harder rubber eyecup when folded down felt harsher than the BST with glasses knocking against them.

I don't normally observe with glasses but the glasses tapping against the eyepieces was by far the most distracting thing about observing with glasses, and I felt the BST did a better job of dampening this effect.

[John]

The StellaLyra 12.5mm seems very similar in many ways to the current version of the William Optics 12.5mm SPL. I would not be surprised to find that they are the same under the skin:

The StellaLyra seems to be twenty quid less expensive though

More similarities here as well:

 

 

Edited April 5, 2021 by John