Baader Morpheus range - General chat

[F15Rules]

On 09/05/2021 at 15:40, Soligor Rob said:

Right I've taken in that most here rate the Baader Morpheus EP's fairly high, so can I ask how the compare to the Celstron X-Cel LX range of EP's.

Please forgive my innocence if the answer is blindingly obvious.

I agree with Badhex' opinions..I've owned several Celestron Excel eps a few years ago. They are nice, midrange eps. They have a decent 60 degree fov and pretty sharp views.

IMHO, though, the Morpheus range is significantly superior, having much bigger fov, consistent build quality, safety kerfs, much better coatings and light transmission and razor sharp (not pretty sharp) views. They also have sealed bodies, so are dust proof.

They cost about twice the price of the Celestrons when new, so they should be better too!

I would very much place the Morphs optically in the top tier of modern high quality eyepieces and very close behind TV and Pentax in build quality.

They also do barlow very well. I use mainly a Baader Hyperion Zoom barlow 2.25x and see no significant deterioration in the images barlowed versus native.

HTH😊

Dave

[JeremyS]

20 minutes ago, F15Rules said:

 

IMHO, though, the Morpheus range is significantly superior, having much bigger fov, consistent build quality, safety kerfs, much better coatings and light transmission and razor sharp (not pretty sharp) views. They also have sealed bodies, so are dust proof.

And sturdy handles?

[badhex]

3 hours ago, F15Rules said:

They cost about twice the price of the Celestrons when new, so they should be better too!

I would very much place the Morphs optically in the top tier of modern high quality eyepieces and very close behind TV and Pentax in build quality

Thanks for the vote of confidence! TBH with my general limited experience I do agree that they are up there with some of the best - but I didn't want to overstate as I only own one Morpheus, and for comparison only one EP that I can say is definitely better - and that's a Panoptic at 3x the price of the Morph! 

And now all this talk of how good they are is making me want to buy another morph in a shorter FL... Plus just in case this thread means they all go out of stock 😂

Edited May 10, 2021 by badhex

[F15Rules]

49 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

And sturdy handles?

Yes, of course, I forgot...the Morpheus' come with a little pouch which can be slung around the waist when using them in the field..I believe they rest on the average well fed male amateurs' "love handles" 

Dave

Edited May 10, 2021 by F15Rules

[F15Rules]

28 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

And sturdy handles?

Yes, of course, I forgot...the Morpheus' come with a little pouch which can be slung around the waist when in the field..I believe they rest on the average well fed male amateurs' "love handles" 

Dave

[JeremyS]

Looks like you are on a roll, Dave🤣

[Don Pensack]

The Morpheus don't disappoint.

They perform far beyond their price points and equal many much more expensive eyepieces.

In addition, my field test reveal they have superior light transmission as well.

A 40% spread runs 4.5mm, 6.5mm, 9mm, 12.5mm, 17.5mm, so the 14mm is the odd man out, so to speak.

In my 12.5" f/5 scope (f/5.75 with Paracorr II coma corrector), ALL the focal lengths perform superbly.  Even the 14mm.

The 1825mm equivalent focal length is so flat that I don't even see FC in the 14mm, which many people do on shorter focal length scopes.

 

Ernest's lab tests at f/4 show the field edges have star images of:

4.5mm 14'  dominant edge aberration chromatic aberration 78°

6.5mm,  16' dominant edge aberration chromatic aberration  79°

9mm 14' dominant edge aberration astigmatism 78°

12.5mm 16' dominant edge aberration field curvature 78°

14mm 24' dominant edge aberration field curvature 78°

a 10' figure is essentially indistinguishable from a perfect point, so the 3 shortest focal lengths are truly superb, in that this performance is at f/4 and longer f/ratios yield better results.

Distortion figures were average for the apparent fields.

 

At f/5.75 (my scope with Paracorr), the performance is better than this.

 

 

[F15Rules]

19 minutes ago, Don Pensack said:

The Morpheus don't disappoint.

They perform far beyond their price points and equal many much more expensive eyepieces.

In addition, my field test reveal they have superior light transmission as well.

A 40% spread runs 4.5mm, 6.5mm, 9mm, 12.5mm, 17.5mm, so the 14mm is the odd man out, so to speak.

In my 12.5" f/5 scope (f/5.75 with Paracorr II coma corrector), ALL the focal lengths perform superbly.  Even the 14mm.

The 1825mm equivalent focal length is so flat that I don't even see FC in the 14mm, which many people do on shorter focal length scopes.

 

Ernest's lab tests at f/4 show the field edges have star images of:

4.5mm 14'  dominant edge aberration chromatic aberration 78°

6.5mm,  16' dominant edge aberration chromatic aberration  79°

9mm 14' dominant edge aberration astigmatism 78°

12.5mm 16' dominant edge aberration field curvature 78°

14mm 24' dominant edge aberration field curvature 78°

a 10' figure is essentially indistinguishable from a perfect point, so the 3 shortest focal lengths are truly superb, in that this performance is at f/4 and longer f/ratios yield better results.

Distortion figures were average for the apparent fields.

 

At f/5.75 (my scope with Paracorr), the performance is better than this.

 

 

Enough said, I think.

Thanks Don.

Dave

[Barry-W-Fenner]

41 minutes ago, Don Pensack said:

The Morpheus don't disappoint.

They perform far beyond their price points and equal many much more expensive eyepieces.

In addition, my field test reveal they have superior light transmission as well.

A 40% spread runs 4.5mm, 6.5mm, 9mm, 12.5mm, 17.5mm, so the 14mm is the odd man out, so to speak.

In my 12.5" f/5 scope (f/5.75 with Paracorr II coma corrector), ALL the focal lengths perform superbly.  Even the 14mm.

The 1825mm equivalent focal length is so flat that I don't even see FC in the 14mm, which many people do on shorter focal length scopes.

 

Ernest's lab tests at f/4 show the field edges have star images of:

4.5mm 14'  dominant edge aberration chromatic aberration 78°

6.5mm,  16' dominant edge aberration chromatic aberration  79°

9mm 14' dominant edge aberration astigmatism 78°

12.5mm 16' dominant edge aberration field curvature 78°

14mm 24' dominant edge aberration field curvature 78°

a 10' figure is essentially indistinguishable from a perfect point, so the 3 shortest focal lengths are truly superb, in that this performance is at f/4 and longer f/ratios yield better results.

Distortion figures were average for the apparent fields.

 

At f/5.75 (my scope with Paracorr), the performance is better than this.

 

 

Enlightening Read Don. Thanks.

 I have read that you view through a 12.5" scope on a few occasions now. Out of interest what scope do you have?

Cheers

[Don Pensack]

11 minutes ago, Barry-W-Fenner said:

Enlightening Read Don. Thanks.

 I have read that you view through a 12.5" scope on a few occasions now. Out of interest what scope do you have?

Cheers

It's in my signature, but in case you block the signatures, it's a 12.5" Teeter TT Classic dob at f/5 (f/5.75 with Paracorr II), mirror by Carl Zambuto.

My observing site is reasonably dark, averaging 21.45 mpsas over the last 16 years, though it has been brighter than that the last 2 times out (21.35 and 21.40 respectively), and high (2550m altitude).

Seeing is usually good to excellent.  Darkness is usually OK, though not superb.  And transparency ranges from awful to incredibly excellent on a random basis, just like every place I've ever been.

 

[Stu]

Just had my first quick session with my 12.5mm. Not impressed to start with, but then remembered some basics like giving the scope at least a chance to cool down! Much better after quite a short while, nice sharp stars and I’m loving the huge exit lens. I removed the extension and found that it was quite comfortable with the eye guard extended, no issues with eye positioning at all. I only viewed the Nova in Cass, so not exactly an extensive evaluation! Looks promising so far though.

[Barry-W-Fenner]

17 hours ago, Stu said:

Just had my first quick session with my 12.5mm. Not impressed to start with, but then remembered some basics like giving the scope at least a chance to cool down! Much better after quite a short while, nice sharp stars and I’m loving the huge exit lens. I removed the extension and found that it was quite comfortable with the eye guard extended, no issues with eye positioning at all. I only viewed the Nova in Cass, so not exactly an extensive evaluation! Looks promising so far though.

You frightened me for a moment there Stu! 😂

Glad you found it comfortable to use. The huge lens really is a joy to view through. Hopefully you get a bit more  viewing time with it soon to evaluate the views!

[Stu]

43 minutes ago, Barry-W-Fenner said:

You frightened me for a moment there Stu! 😂

It frightened me too Barry! I thought, I can’t be the only one to think these eyepieces are rubbish! 🤣🤣

I don’t often notice cool down requirements for the Tak, but in this instance it was quite a dramatic difference just with 20 mins.

[mikeDnight]

I've currently got the 17.5mm & 12.5mm Morpheus, and more will sneak their way into my eyepiece collection over time. I really like their comfort and sharpness, and their AF is just about perfect. I know its been said the Morpheus aren't as well made as some of the more expensive brands such as Pentax and Televue, but I think they are every bit as well made. It's just that the Morpheus have been designed to be as lightweight as possible, and they don't have those devilish undercuts, so they're even better.

[Virtus]

Well I just agreed to buy a 6.5 and 9 Morphei off someone semi-local to me so will soon own 4 (6.5, 9, 12.5, and 17.5).

That escalated quick for someone that was just going to buy 1 a few weeks ago ha.... 

[Soligor Rob]

Well that's my first Morpheus in my case, next on the list the 17.5 mm & 9mm.

Thanks to you all for the recommendation.

 

[Jiggy 67]

20 hours ago, Soligor Rob said:

next on the list the 17.5 mm & 9mm.

……..Followed by the 4.5 and the 6.5 and  as a finale…the 14mm 😀😀 Shall we open a book on it? 😂

[Barry-W-Fenner]

21 hours ago, Soligor Rob said:

Well that's my first Morpheus in my case, next on the list the 17.5 mm & 9mm.

Thanks to you all for the recommendation.

 

Congrats on the 12.5mm. I would really like to compare the 12.5 to the 14mm. I hear very good things regarding the 12.5

I can't decide which is my favourite in the range out of the 9 & 17.5 they are both extremely good performers and a worthy addition to any EP collection 👍

[Soligor Rob]

1 hour ago, Barry-W-Fenner said:

Congrats on the 12.5mm. I would really like to compare the 12.5 to the 14mm. I hear very good things regarding the 12.5

I can't decide which is my favourite in the range out of the 9 & 17.5 they are both extremely good performers and a worthy addition to any EP collection 👍

For once I'm trying to be sensible (not my strong Point) as I will be buying the 9mm & 17.5mm, theoretically I shouldn't need the 14mm.

Then again Theoretically perhaps I should have bought the 400p Flex Tube instead of the Evostar 150ED. 🤔

[JAC51]

On 15/05/2021 at 18:47, Soligor Rob said:

For once I'm trying to be sensible (not my strong Point) as I will be buying the 9mm & 17.5mm, theoretically I shouldn't need the 14mm.

Then again Theoretically perhaps I should have bought the 400p Flex Tube instead of the Evostar 150ED. 🤔

I have bought the 17.5 mm at the start of 2020 which impressed me so much that within a month I also had the 9mm. The 17.5mm has become my goto low magnification eyepiece with my 1200mm focal length telescope.Then I switch to the 9mm for targets like globular clusters  with still having plenty of space around the target. I also really like the fact that you can use them as 2" or 1.25" which for a long refractor has proved to be a great help with finding a comfortable sitting position.

When I first tried out the 9mm on M5  I thought very nice on axis but at the edge of the field of view I'm star I'm seeing  stars as a double image. The  double image of course turned out to be an actual double star (5 Serpens) which I was amazed look so good almost up to the field stop.

John

 

[Soligor Rob]

Good morning everyone, well I finally managed to get outside last night with the telescope and my new Morpheus 12.5mm.

What can I say Oh wow couldn't believe how clear and sharp the image of the moon was, first views with the Sky Watcher Explorer 150 PDS were amazing, I then switched the EP to the 200P Dobsonian and was surprised that the image didn't appear as clear.

Back in the 150 PDS I added a Celestron X-Cel X2 Barlow and yes as everyone has said the Morpheus does Barlow very well, so it's a big thumbs up from me for the Morpheus and will be looking forward to adding the 9mm & 17.5mm to my collection.

[F15Rules]

3 minutes ago, Soligor Rob said:

What can I say Oh wow couldn't believe how clear and sharp the image of the moon was, first views with the Sky Watcher Explorer 150 PDS were amazing, I then switched the EP to the 200P Dobsonian and was surprised that the image didn't appear as clear.

Could the DOB be slightly out of collimation, Rob? I'd expect the Morpheus to work as well in both scopes.. or perhaps you meant that the image was smaller in the DOB, which was then fixed by doubling the magnification?

Dave

[F15Rules]

On 14/05/2021 at 19:57, Soligor Rob said:

Well that's my first Morpheus in my case, next on the list the 17.5 mm & 9mm.

Thanks to you all for the recommendation.

 

I can foresee your eyepiece selection Morphing soon into, er, more Morphs, Rob... 

Dave

Edited May 17, 2021 by F15Rules

[Soligor Rob]

11 minutes ago, F15Rules said:

Could the DOB be slightly out of collimation, Rob? I'd expect the Morpheus to work as well in both scopes.. or perhaps you meant that the image was smaller in the DOB, which was then fixed by doubling the magnification?

Dave

Hi Dave, Collimation is good so I don't think that made the difference, I was just aware the image was brighter in the 150PDS, would the F5 be that much different to the F6 of the Dob?

[F15Rules]

Hi Rob,

I wouldn't have thought so, although I'm not a reflector user.

Brightness is a function of aperture (light gathering power), and an 8" DOB should gather almost twice the light of a 6". 

Perhaps the mirror on your 150 is better coated, or cleaner than the one on the DOB?

All things being equal I'd certainly expect an image in an 8" to be very noticeably brighter than a 6" at the same magnification.

However, the focal length of your 150 is F5 so multiply that by the aperture of 150mm gives you 750mmfocal length. Divide that by 12.5mm focal length of the Morpheus 12.5, and that gives you a magnification of 60x.

Doing the the same calculation for the DOB gives a magnification of 96x (200mm xF6 = 1200/12.5mm ep focal length = 96x).

So the image will be significantly larger with the DOB, and should really be at least comparably bright to the 150, unless there is a difference in the efficiency of the mirrors and or their coatings?

Perhaps others will chip in if I'm missing something 😉..

Dave

Edited May 17, 2021 by F15Rules
Additional text info