Baader Morpheus range - General chat

[Barry-W-Fenner]

 

Evening @Dantooine

In response to you question in the "show us your ep case thread" I started a reply then realised it was getting quite long winded, I decided to start a thread on the Morpheus range to get other members input on them also. 

I was only telling my wife last night that I am now very content with my EP's Much to her relief! I quite like to the sound of a UFF APM for my lower power viewing. Something like the 30mm but other than that im sorted 🙂

I am using the Baader collection in two scopes, My 300p dob & Bresser ar102 frac.

The 17.5mm is a very fine EP, no doubt you would have read many members comments preaching about it.  It gives a very sharp image up until the field stop. The FOV is also very impressive, Particularly in the Short ar102 - For example I can get the majority of M45 into the AR102 FOV.  It is also interesting to note how much smaller the 17.5mm is compared to the rest of the range, Even the next  in  range (14mm) is much larger.

The 14mm gives a very enjoyable x107 in my 300p -personally I find this a nice low power which is quite versatile for a number of targets. It is not as sharp to the field stop as the 17.5mm  - Roughly the last 10% (at most) starts to get a little fuzzy. But like the 17.5mm it has a very large FOV and is generally nice and sharp, in both scopes. Most people seem to prefer the 12mm which I do not own.

The 9mm is my personal favorite ( I haven't told the others though 😁 ) It is my go to EP for the 300p giving x167, Great views and clear to the field stop. again the fov is excellent. I rate this ep very highly, Just beating out the 17.5mm

With all of the above ep's I have been using the supplied ring extension for the eye cup. I found the eye relief much better with this applied making all of them very comfortable to view through.

Things certainly start to tighten up a bit on the FOV front with the 6.5mm - I have tried using the extension ring for comfortable viewing, However I find it gains a black ring around the outer edge of the field when installed, If i am not mistaken this is vignetting? (SP!) I do find the 6.5mm more difficult to use than the rest of the range (this includes the 4.5mm for some reason?! I would love to know why, I just find the eye relief a bit fussy with this ep, I have to have my eye placed in a specific position to view properly. It gives me x230 in the 300p which doesn't get a huge amount of use in this scope - it does give me x92 in the ar100 though so I use it quite often in this scope. the image is generally very good, conditions permitting. 

The 4.5mm gives me a huge x333 in the 300p and I have only used it on the moon so far in this scope. again no extension ring due to the vignetting? Like the 6.5mm the FOV is tighter than the other focal lengths but but generally the image is good & enjoyable. It is worth noting you do get some edge of field brightening with this EP, If i hadn't have read about it on these forums I may have not noticed it, However I went looking for it after reading about it. Maybe sometimes ignorance is bliss and I would have never noticed with my lack of experience.  The 4.5mm hit that nice power zone in the ar102 of x133 I have used it a couple of times briefly but the weather hasn't been ideal for it.

Regarding contrast, I know this is not strictly down to the EP, however star colours have been wonderful in the frac, I was very surprised at the beautiful Blue of Sirius, Orange of Big B, and white of Procyon. colours and contrast are certainly improved in the little frac with these eps over the dob. The dob does a wonderful job at going for the deep space objects, Horses for courses.

The main reason I moved from the  BST star Guider range up to the Morpheus range was the eye relief comfort and huge 76 degree AFOV - It was like looking through a window when I viewed though my 1st morph, The 14mm. Nothing against the star guiders of course, They are excellent ep's for the money, However I was hooked on the Wide field of view and very comfortable relief.

Sorry for the long drawn out response, I bet you wish you never asked now 🙂 I would certainly like to hear more feedback from more experienced members with the Morpheus range, I know @Louis D @Don Pensack are knowledgeable, And might be able to tell me why I struggle viewing with the extension rings in place on the 6.5 & 4.5mm 

@Jiggy 67 might also be able to give us a comparison of the 12mm & 14mm - I would certainly be interested to know how they both fair. I might have to upset the wife and tell her there is one more Morpheus I would like to buy 🙂

Regards

Baz

Disclaimer - I have not had the pleasure of looking through the other "Black & Green" ep range as this might bring my "contentness"  to an abrupt end 🙂 

 

 

 

Edited April 10, 2021 by Barry-W-Fenner

[KP82]

13 minutes ago, Barry-W-Fenner said:

Things certainly start to tighten up a bit on the FOV front with the 6.5mm - I have tried using the extension ring for comfortable viewing, However I find is starts to gain a black ring around the outer edge of the field, If i am not mistaken this is vignetting? (SP!) I do find the 6.5mm more difficult to use than the rest of the range (this includes the 4.5mm for some reason?! I would love to know why, I just find the eye relief a bit fussy with this ep, I have to have my eye placed in a specific position to view properly. It gives me x230 in the 300p which doesn't get a huge amount of use in the 300p - it does give me x92 in the ar100 though so I use it quite often in this scope. the image is generally very good, conditions permitting. 

Exactly the same here.

I haven't used the other models in the morpheus range, but compared to my ES, Pentax and TV I find the 6.5mm very picky with the position of my eye. While the image quality is very good, it is certainly not as comfortable to view as many have said about the morpheus on the web.

[Barry-W-Fenner]

6 minutes ago, KP82 said:

Exactly the same here.

I haven't used the other models in the morpheus range, but compared to my ES, Pentax and TV I find the 6.5mm very picky with the position of my eye. While the image quality is very good, it is certainly not as comfortable to view as many have said about the morpheus on the web.

Hi KP82 -  Very interesting to read that you feel the same about the 6.5mm, especially  as you also have experience with other high end EP's. I was expecting the 4.5mm to be a bit fussy aswell, However the eye relief seems to be ok. Anyhow at least my thoughts have been backed up, I thought maybe I was going round the bend. 

[mikeDnight]

Barry, have you tried barlowing your longer focal length Morpheus?  I did this some time back with my 17.5mm and was very happy with the result on targets like M27, M13 and M1.  I have both the 17.5mm and the 12.5mm, although as yet I haven't tried the latter with a barlow, but if its as good as the 17.5, it might be an option if you need a 6mm ish eyepiece with good eye relief.

[Louis D]

From what I've read, the 4.5mm and 6.5mm Morpheus have less eye relief than the longer focal length ones.  As a result, you need to get your eye closer to the eye lens to take in the entire field of view as you found out.  Try removing the extension ring and see if the vignetting goes away.

As for the difficulty holding the view in them, it sounds like SAEP (Spherical Aberration of the Exit Pupil) or kidney beaning.  I've experienced the same issue with the 12mm and 17mm Nagler T4s.  It wasn't until I took images through them using a 127 Mak and a slow, extreme wide angle phone camera that I figured out they had SAEP.  The two together seem to really expose undiagnosed SAEP.

Try using those two Morpheus eyepieces to look at the full moon, and see if you get fleeting kidney bean shadows midway to the field stop.  Also, try using them on a bright day terrestrially to expose the issue.  The key thing is, your eye's iris must be significantly stopped down from wide open to see it.

Here's an image I composited of SAEP as seen through various eyepieces using the technique above.  By holding the camera perfectly centered and at the exact exit pupil, SAEP is revealed to be a continuous ring shadow.  It explains why a lot of folks don't get on well with the 12mm ES-92, but do fine with 17mm version.  Notice how within an eyepiece line that SAEP grows worse with decreasing eyepiece focal length.  This might be what's happening within the Morpheus line as well.

I find it interesting that some eyepieces have a shadow in the dead center as well as the ring or in lieu of it.  I have yet to find a good explanation for that phenomenon, though.

The rainbow rings are caused by CAEP (Chromatic Aberration of the Exit Pupil) where different wavelengths of light focus at different distances behind the eye lens.  This leads to the "ring of fire" effect.

Edited April 10, 2021 by Louis D

[Jiggy 67]

@Barry-W-Fenner has given an excellent review of the range. I also use the extension rings but I have fitted them to all the range, I find them more comfortable and they prevent kidney beaning at the shorter focal lengths, the 4.5 and 6.5. I find the 6.5mm to be most useful when used with the Baader 2.25x Barlow which gives me a X346 mag, at the upper end of usability but not over it, with the 8’ newt, the contrast (a particular benefit of the Morpheus range imo) and magnification with this combination makes faint planetary nebula pop out. The 4.5 speaks for itself, sharp with good magnification and a wide fov. The 17.5 is outstanding. It’s wide fov makes it perfect as a finder ep and excellent for clusters in its own right. What can’t be understated with the Morpheus is the high contrast, I don’t know if it’s the particular coatings used but they definitely have an ability to search out fainter objects than that seen by other brands.

The 14 and 12 are probably the least used by me, I don’t doubt their ability, and I find the quality of view to be just as good as the 17.5, a nice sharp view to the field stop, apart from maybe the las 10% (though I would estimate 5%) as you mentioned Baz, where stars begin to stretch, but that doesn’t bother me as I move targets to the centre, I just don’t really have a need to use them that much, for me it’s the 17.5, 9, 6.5 and 4.5, they are the work horses and I wouldn’t swap them for anything, even Televue 

As a rider I have to say that I’m a massive fan of all things Baader, whether it be the click lock system which I’ve recently installed to my frac or their excellent filters such as the contrast booster, meaning I need nothing else for planets. The build quality is exceptional and the same is true of the Morpheus eyepiece 

 

Edited April 11, 2021 by Jiggy 67

[Barry-W-Fenner]

17 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

Barry, have you tried barlowing your longer focal length Morpheus?  I did this some time back with my 17.5mm and was very happy with the result on targets like M27, M13 and M1.  I have both the 17.5mm and the 12.5mm, although as yet I haven't tried the latter with a barlow, but if its as good as the 17.5, it might be an option if you need a 6mm ish eyepiece with good eye relief.

Hi Mike.

I have recently picked up the Baader X2.25 short barlow. I haven't had much chance to use it yet but will give it a go with my 14mm this will give me a similar power to the 6.5 with the more comfortable eye relief.

Cheers

Baz

 

[Barry-W-Fenner]

14 hours ago, Jiggy 67 said:

@Barry-W-Fenner has given an excellent review of the range. I also use the extension rings but I have fitted them to all the range, I find them more comfortable and they prevent kidney beaning at the shorter focal lengths, the 4.5 and 6.5. I find the 6.5mm to be most useful when used with the Baader 2.25x Barlow which gives me a X346 mag, at the upper end of usability but not over it, with the 8’ newt, the contrast (a particular benefit of the Morpheus range imo) and magnification with this combination makes faint planetary nebula pop out. The 4.5 speaks for itself, sharp with good magnification and a wide fov. The 17.5 is outstanding. It’s wide fov makes it perfect as a finder ep and excellent for clusters in its own right. What can’t be understated with the Morpheus is the high contrast, I don’t know if it’s the particular coatings used but they definitely have an ability to search out fainter objects than that seen by other brands.

The 14 and 12 are probably the least used by me, I don’t doubt their ability, and I find the quality of view to be just as good as the 17.5, a nice sharp view to the field stop, apart from maybe the las 10% (though I would estimate 5%) as you mentioned Baz, where stars begin to stretch, but that doesn’t bother me as I move targets to the centre, I just don’t really have a need to use them that much, for me it’s the 17.5, 9, 6.5 and 4.5, they are the work horses and I wouldn’t swap them for anything, even Televue 

As a rider I have to say that I’m a massive fan of all things Baader, whether it be the click lock system which I’ve recently installed to my frac or their excellent filters such as the contrast booster, meaning I need nothing else for planets. The build quality is exceptional and the same is true of the Morpheus eyepiece 

 

Maybe I will try the 4.5 & 6.5 again with the extension ring to see if I can get a more comfortable viewing position. To be fair to the 4.5mm, I don't seem to have any issues with this. It's just the 6.5 I find a bit awkward.

I was probably being over harsh in the 14mm not being clear to the field stop. It is only really close to the edge it becomes apparent, so more like the last 5% as you said Jiggy.

I am also a big fan of all things Baader. I've been waiting for my 47mm 2" click lock extension since last Wednesday. Blooming royal snail... 😂😁

[Don Pensack]

Even then, the issue with the 14mm seems to be scope-specific.

In my 12.5" dob with Paracorr II, (1826mm effective focal length) the 14mm seems to only deteriorate right at the field stop.

And who looks at anything right at the field stop?

[Louis D]

7 minutes ago, Don Pensack said:

Even then, the issue with the 14mm seems to be scope-specific.

In my 12.5" dob with Paracorr II, (1826mm effective focal length) the 14mm seems to only deteriorate right at the field stop.

And who looks at anything right at the field stop?

With slight refocusing near the field stop (last 10% of field, let's say) in all of my scopes, I see a bit of astigmatism in my 14mm Morpheus that is utterly absent from the 9mm Morpheus, 10mm Delos, and 14mm Pentax XL (which has loads of field curvature, but no astigmatism).

I look at planets near the field stop as I let them drift across the field to maximize dwell time looking for details.  There's no degradation in the 9mm Morpheus or 10mm Delos across the field that I can detect using this technique.

[JTEC]

I’ve actually been very impressed with the 6.5 Morpheus in the TEC 140. During the recent Mars opposition, I spent a lot of time cycling through various eyepieces in that sort of range, including the 5 and 7mm Pentax XW, the 6mm Tak ortho and 9mm Tak orthos x1.5 in the binoviewer. The Morpheus gave a distinctive, sharply etched view that separated it from the others. I’m not, of course, saying it was ‘better’ - but it certainly, imv, belonged in that company. All of the eyepieces and combos gave excellent views and each differed a bit in character and feel from the others. Together they built a picture fuller than anything just one of them could supply. I suppose my point is that, within reason, slight inconvenience in use and things like whether the edge is super sharp when you’re looking at the middle are well down the list of criteria to select eyepieces by. There are several things I don’t like about the 13mm Ethos in actual use, for example, but I’ll put up with those.  I prefer the comfort, form factor and handling of the XWs to the Delos but I prefer the freedom from colour of the Delos to the XWs - both are terrific eyepieces. When we have so many eyepieces that deliver the ‘core business’ so astoundingly well, we can get very nitty-picky about peripherals. 🙂

[Barry-W-Fenner]

3 hours ago, Don Pensack said:

Even then, the issue with the 14mm seems to be scope-specific.

In my 12.5" dob with Paracorr II, (1826mm effective focal length) the 14mm seems to only deteriorate right at the field stop.

And who looks at anything right at the field stop?

Hi Don

I wasn't being critical of the 14mm Morpheus, I very much enjoy viewing through it and I use it often. I was just pointing out that I do notice the stars elongate as they get close to the field stop. As you pointed out it's not really an issue as we view in the centre of the EP. The only exception to this is as @Louis D
Has mentioned, I enjoy watching the planets drift to the field stop. For the planets I wouldnt be using the 14mm anyway.

What I was really interested to know is why I find the 6.5mm a bit fussy for eye placement. I don't have this issue with the other Morpheus EP's, that includes the 4.5 oddly.  After reading some of the advise above I might put the extension ring back on and see how I get on.

Cheers

 

Edited April 12, 2021 by Barry-W-Fenner

[Barry-W-Fenner]

1 hour ago, JTEC said:

I’ve actually been very impressed with the 6.5 Morpheus in the TEC 140. During the recent Mars opposition, I spent a lot of time cycling through various eyepieces in that sort of range, including the 5 and 7mm Pentax XW, the 6mm Tak ortho and 9mm Tak orthos x1.5 in the binoviewer. The Morpheus gave a distinctive, sharply etched view that separated it from the others. I’m not, of course, saying it was ‘better’ - but it certainly, imv, belonged in that company. All of the eyepieces and combos gave excellent views and each differed a bit in character and feel from the others. Together they built a picture fuller than anything just one of them could supply. I suppose my point is that, within reason, slight inconvenience in use and things like whether the edge is super sharp when you’re looking at the middle are well down the list of criteria to select eyepieces by. There are several things I don’t like about the 13mm Ethos in actual use, for example, but I’ll put up with those.  I prefer the comfort, form factor and handling of the XWs to the Delos but I prefer the freedom from colour of the Delos to the XWs - both are terrific eyepieces. When we have so many eyepieces that deliver the ‘core business’ so astoundingly well, we can get very nitty-picky about peripherals. 🙂

Very encouraging to read that the 6.5mm sits in good company. Optically I also enjoy the views it gives and I feel the Morpheus range in general give great to exceptional views for a reasonable outlay.

 

[Barry-W-Fenner]

Out of interest, has anyone got any experience with the winged eyecup supplied with the morph? I understand they are for bino viewing.  I did hold one to my observing eye and it felt quite comfortable. Are they any good for normal observation?

[IB20]

I’m thinking of getting the 17.5mm Morpheus for my 8” dob. Does anyone have any experience with this eyepiece in similar equipment?  What’s the contrast like, as the 25mm BST which it would compete against seems to present fairly bright background skies. Does anyone know how the Morpheus range barlow, particularly the 17.5mm?

👍

[JOC]

16 minutes ago, IB20 said:

Does anyone know how the Morpheus range barlow, particularly the 17.5mm?

LOL, I get the impression that most people fall in love with the Morpheus range so much that they end up buying them all and stuff the Barlowing, ha, ha.  They are very bad for wallets and it's a slippery slope.  I wish I had more time to use mine.   

[Barry-W-Fenner]

1 hour ago, IB20 said:

I’m thinking of getting the 17.5mm Morpheus for my 8” dob. Does anyone have any experience with this eyepiece in similar equipment?  What’s the contrast like, as the 25mm BST which it would compete against seems to present fairly bright background skies. Does anyone know how the Morpheus range barlow, particularly the 17.5mm?

👍

The 17.5mm Is highly regarded by most, and is a stand out performer in the range. The image is superb. I owned the 25mm StarGuider and found it a good ep for spotting and clusters. The contrast was quite bright though and stars seemed to have an elongated shape to them across the field.  You wont get any of this with the 17.5mm morph. The background is dark, stars are sharp to the field stop and the eye relief is very generous. obviously you wil also find the wider 76 degree FOV a bonus also.

I do have the Baader 2.25 Barlow but havent actually used it much yet. If you was to barlow the 17.5mm in a 200p you would yield around x154 magnification combined with the amazing eye relief. This would give a great medium power combination. I might try my  barlow and 17.5mm combo myself tonight if the sky remains clear.

The Baader 2.25 barlow is quite cheap to be honest and worth adding to your Arsenal for the outlay.

 

Regards

Baz

Edited April 13, 2021 by Barry-W-Fenner

[IB20]

5 minutes ago, Barry-W-Fenner said:

The 17.5mm Is highly regarded by most and is a stand out performer in the range. The image is superb. I owned the 25mm StarGuider and found it a good ep for dpotting and clusters. The contrast was quite bright though and stars seemed to have an elongated shape to them across the field.  You wont get any of this with the 17.5mm morph. The background is dark, stars are sharp to the field stop and the eye relief is very generous. obviously you wil also find the wider 76 degree FOV a bonus also.

I do have the Baader 2.25 Barlow but havent actually used it much yet. If you was to barlow the 17.5mm in a 200p you would yield around x154 magnification combined with the amazing eye relief. This would give a great medium power combination. I might try my  barlow and 17.5mm combo myself tonight if the sky remains clear.

The Baader 2.25 barlow is quite cheap to be honest and worth adding to your Arsenal for the outlay.

 

Regards

Baz

Thanks Barry, that’s everything I wanted to read (or not 💸!). Now just the case of trying to locate one. 

[Barry-W-Fenner]

20 minutes ago, IB20 said:

Thanks Barry, that’s everything I wanted to read (or not 💸!). Now just the case of trying to locate one. 

Hopefully some other members can back up my thoughts on the 17.5mm - It is a great ep.

Apologies for assuming you was using a 200p - I misread JOC'S signature as yours.

 

Regards

Barry

[IB20]

3 minutes ago, Barry-W-Fenner said:

Hopefully some other members can back up my thoughts on the 17.5mm - It is a great ep.

Apologies for assuming you was using a 200p - I misread JOC'S signature as yours.

 

Regards

Barry

I am using the 200p as it happens! 

[Don Pensack]

On 13/04/2021 at 02:05, IB20 said:

I’m thinking of getting the 17.5mm Morpheus for my 8” dob. Does anyone have any experience with this eyepiece in similar equipment?  What’s the contrast like, as the 25mm BST which it would compete against seems to present fairly bright background skies. Does anyone know how the Morpheus range barlow, particularly the 17.5mm?

👍

Any 17.5mm, from any manufacturer, will have a darker background than any 25mm, simply because of the magnification (i.e. smaller exit pupil).

All the Morpheus line will barlow well. (use a 1.25", not 2", Barlow).

The Morpheus line performs well at f/4, so f/6 is a cinch.

Bear in mind that though the eye relief on the line is fairly constant, the eye relief does decrease with focal length.  I view the 4.5mm and 6.5mm as "marginal" for glasses (some won't find them compatible, some will),

though the longer focal lengths are fine.

Those viewing without glasses will find all focal lengths fine.

[Barry-W-Fenner]

On 13/04/2021 at 10:58, IB20 said:

Thanks Barry, that’s everything I wanted to read (or not 💸!). Now just the case of trying to locate one. 

Any joy locating one? 😁

[IB20]

 

47 minutes ago, Barry-W-Fenner said:

Any joy locating one? 😁

Not yet! I’m on two stock notification lists though. I’ve been told end of this month might be a goer.

[Stu]

I have a 12.5mm on its way to me, seemed to have good reviews and is very well priced compared with others. If I get on with it, I may try the 17.5mm too. It will be interesting to compare with the Leica Zoom and see whether I stick with the convenience of the Zoom start using fixed focal length eyepieces more.

[dweller25]

2 minutes ago, Stu said:

I have a 12.5mm on its way to me, seemed to have good reviews and is very well priced compared with others. If I get on with it, I may try the 17.5mm too. It will be interesting to compare with the Leica Zoom and see whether I stick with the convenience of the Zoom start using fixed focal length eyepieces more.

Looking forward to how the Morpheus compares to the Leica Zoom.....