Baader Morpheus range - General chat

[Zermelo]

I've yet to pin down specifically why I find my two Morphs so comfortable. It's certainly not down to any tolerance with regard to eye placement, as I do experience a bit of kidney beaning, especially when Barlowed.

A question: the outward face of the eye lens on the Morpheus appears to be completely flat. No other eyepiece I've seen has this feature, all the others have been obviously convex. Is this unique to that range? Does the feature have a particular purpose? Could it be contributing to the perceived comfort in use?

[Stu]

18 minutes ago, Zermelo said:

I've yet to pin down specifically why I find my two Morphs so comfortable. It's certainly not down to any tolerance with regard to eye placement, as I do experience a bit of kidney beaning, especially when Barlowed.

A question: the outward face of the eye lens on the Morpheus appears to be completely flat. No other eyepiece I've seen has this feature, all the others have been obviously convex. Is this unique to that range? Does the feature have a particular purpose? Could it be contributing to the perceived comfort in use?

That is certainly something that makes them very useable, many wide field eyepieces have quite concave exit lenses and, assuming the eye relief is measured from the centre, this makes the actual useable eye relief less than the quoted figure.

I can’t recall what the Delos are like, nice big exit lenses, perhaps not quite as flat as the Morpheus.

The Docter 12.5mm UWA also has a pretty flat exit lens but that’s on another financial plane altogether, particularly for the new production run 😱

[Louis D]

22 minutes ago, Zermelo said:

A question: the outward face of the eye lens on the Morpheus appears to be completely flat. No other eyepiece I've seen has this feature, all the others have been obviously convex.

The 1.25" Pentax XWs and XLs appear completely flat to my eye as well:

I don't have it handy, or any diagrams for it to confirm; but from recollections, my 10mm Delos also appears to also have a (mostly) flat eye lens.  I think my 9mm Vixen LV does as well.

[Alan White]

7 hours ago, Stu said:

See, I knew I would get drummed out of the Brownies for criticising the Morpheus 🤣🤣🤣

Your secret is safe with us @Stu,
clearly to be drummed out you had to join the Brownies in the first place 😉
 

 

[Stu]

2 hours ago, Alan White said:

Your secret is safe with us @Stu,
clearly to be drummed out you had to join the Brownies in the first place 😉
 

 

Rumbled!!! 🤣

[TheLookingGlass]

8 hours ago, Zermelo said:

I've yet to pin down specifically why I find my two Morphs so comfortable. It's certainly not down to any tolerance with regard to eye placement, as I do experience a bit of kidney beaning, especially when Barlowed.

A question: the outward face of the eye lens on the Morpheus appears to be completely flat. No other eyepiece I've seen has this feature, all the others have been obviously convex. Is this unique to that range? Does the feature have a particular purpose? Could it be contributing to the perceived comfort in use?

The Baader Morphs do not "kidney bean" like Type 4 Naglers do. You will experience "blackout" however, by getting too close to the lens. You just need to train your eye where to sit if "hovering", or if lacking in experience hovering, you can simply use the M-43 extender with the rubber eye guard up.  I'm one who "hovers" above the lens and in that regard, the Morpheus are the most comfortable eyepieces I have ever used and owned.

[Zermelo]

Yes, probably blackouts rather than kidney beaning.

[Louis D]

1 hour ago, TheLookingGlass said:

The Baader Morphs do not "kidney bean" like Type 4 Naglers do.

Yes, there is literally no way to avoid kidney beaning once you are close enough to see the field stop.  It's so bad, though, that it is hard to recognize as such.  Most folks write it off as a fussy exit pupil instead.  You can see how bad they are in my comparison image below:

The 14mm Morpheus basically has none.

[TheLookingGlass]

13 hours ago, Louis D said:

Yes, there is literally no way to avoid kidney beaning once you are close enough to see the field stop.  It's so bad, though, that it is hard to recognize as such.  Most folks write it off as a fussy exit pupil instead.  You can see how bad they are in my comparison image below:

The 14mm Morpheus basically has none.

That's a really good reference to have. I downloaded the pic for future reference. Excellent work. Thanks for posting this !!!

[Don Pensack]

16 hours ago, Louis D said:

Yes, there is literally no way to avoid kidney beaning once you are close enough to see the field stop.  It's so bad, though, that it is hard to recognize as such.  Most folks write it off as a fussy exit pupil instead.  You can see how bad they are in my comparison image below:

The 14mm Morpheus basically has none.

And what the above images don't show is the edge of field brightening.  The 4th eyepiece in the top row has the worst EOFB I've ever seen in an eyepiece, where 50% of the field is brightened compared to the center.

What the images don't reveal, as well, is the individual sensitivity to CAEP and SAEP.

[cajen2]

17 hours ago, TheLookingGlass said:

The Baader Morphs do not "kidney bean" like Type 4 Naglers do. You will experience "blackout" however, by getting too close to the lens. You just need to train your eye where to sit if "hovering", or if lacking in experience hovering, you can simply use the M-43 extender with the rubber eye guard up.  I'm one who "hovers" above the lens and in that regard, the Morpheus are the most comfortable eyepieces I have ever used and owned.

I'd be seriously annoyed if I paid £450 or £530 for an EP which went all kidney bean on me! That would be going straight back to the shop....

[TheLookingGlass]

53 minutes ago, cajen2 said:

I'd be seriously annoyed if I paid £450 or £530 for an EP which went all kidney bean on me! That would be going straight back to the shop....

All of the Type 4 Naglers do this really bad. The 22mm is the least offender though. You can read anywhere of people saying to "set the eye guard at the correct height and it will not happen", but this is teetering at the expense of cutting off the FOV. Not "ALL" Televue eyepieces are a god send as most will attest to, lol.

[Louis D]

57 minutes ago, Don Pensack said:

The 4th eyepiece in the top row has the worst EOFB I've ever seen in an eyepiece, where 50% of the field is brightened compared to the center.

I'll have to check for that.  What I do recall is that stars in the outer 50% of the field turn into beautiful rainbow comets pointing to the center.  It's not subtle at all.  I always figured it would be a great outreach eyepiece for the under-8 crowd that like rainbows and unicorns. 🌈🦄

One night, I noticed the 12mm NT4 had EOFB all the way to the center.  I swapped eyepieces (12mm ES-92, 14mm Morpheus, etc.) to make sure it wasn't just the seeing conditions, but it  was real, and it was severe.  It isn't noticeable every time I use it, but the potential is definitely there.  Only the very central 5% of the FOV was close to normal background gray.  The graduation of increasing brightness to the edge was very linear in perceived brightness.  It always surprises me that no one else has reported seeing this effect with it.  It was not subtle.  The outer edge looked a bit like having the full moon nearby.

44 minutes ago, TheLookingGlass said:

The 22mm is the least offender though.

I can tolerate its SAEP mostly because with eyeglasses I can't get in close enough for it to manifest itself very much.  Yes, it's presenting more of a Delos to Morpheus sized AFOV, but that's still rewarding.  My grown kids and their SOs thought the views through it were terrific during an impromptu star party a couple of years ago after a holiday dinner.

[TheLookingGlass]

18 minutes ago, Louis D said:

I can tolerate its SAEP mostly because with eyeglasses I can't get in close enough for it to manifest itself very much.  Yes, it's presenting more of a Delos to Morpheus sized AFOV, but that's still rewarding.  My grown kids and their SOs thought the views through it were terrific during an impromptu star party a couple of years ago after a holiday dinner.

I could never understand why people buy eyepieces and use them knowing they can't take in the entire FOV. If that's the case for me, off it goes for sale.  LOL. Newbs don't notice the things us astronomy veterans notice, which is probably a good thing. I remember back in 1985 when I used Criterion eyepieces on my 6" Criterion Dynascope and all I ever cared about was seeing things, lol.  Sometimes ignorance can be bliss, lol. (for all of us.)

The 22mm Nagler Type 4 isn't nearly as bad as the 12mm or the 17mm Type 4's. I've owned the 12mm 3 times and the third time owning it, I realized how much of a PITA it is. I'd never buy one again! lol. However, for me, the 22mm Nagler still showed field curvature even when I used a GSO coma corrector with it. I had it set up the right way with the distance at the right spot too. I changed it dozens of times to make sure it was and the FC just bothered me too much, so I sold that too.

If I don't like a certain eyepiece, I never keep them. If I kept all of the ones I bought over the years, I'd probably own over 400 easy. LOL

I now own 4 of them.  25mm X-Cel LX, 12.5mm Morpheus, 9mm Morpheus, and the 6.5mm Morpheus + two 2" barlows.

Edited October 13, 2022 by TheLookingGlass

[Louis D]

36 minutes ago, TheLookingGlass said:

I could never understand why people buy eyepieces and use them knowing they can't take in the entire FOV.

I suppose I could put a restrictive field stop in it so I could see the entire (restricted) FOV.  If there was a Morpheus, APM UFF, Delos or ES-92 in that range with 70+ degrees, I might try it.  The various 20mm 80 degree Long Perng LHD/LER variations out there might be a workable alternative.  However, it would be so close to the the 17mm ES-92 in TFOV, that I'm not sure what the point would be.  I also have the 22mm AT AF70, and I can see the entire FOV without issues, but it isn't quite as sharp over those 70 degrees as the 22mm NT4.  I swapped back and forth and decided that I preferred the sharper view even if I couldn't see all the way to the field stop.

Selling off an eyepiece that comes very close to meeting your needs without a viable replacement seems silly to me.  For me, I'd have to go back to using the 22mm AT AF70 knowing it isn't quite as sharp as a former eyepiece I used to own every time I use it.  I really want ES to release a 22mm to 25mm ES-92 for this reason.

[TheLookingGlass]

2 hours ago, Louis D said:

I suppose I could put a restrictive field stop in it so I could see the entire (restricted) FOV.  If there was a Morpheus, APM UFF, Delos or ES-92 in that range with 70+ degrees, I might try it.  The various 20mm 80 degree Long Perng LHD/LER variations out there might be a workable alternative.  However, it would be so close to the the 17mm ES-92 in TFOV, that I'm not sure what the point would be.  I also have the 22mm AT AF70, and I can see the entire FOV without issues, but it isn't quite as sharp over those 70 degrees as the 22mm NT4.  I swapped back and forth and decided that I preferred the sharper view even if I couldn't see all the way to the field stop.

Selling off an eyepiece that comes very close to meeting your needs without a viable replacement seems silly to me.  For me, I'd have to go back to using the 22mm AT AF70 knowing it isn't quite as sharp as a former eyepiece I used to own every time I use it.  I really want ES to release a 22mm to 25mm ES-92 for this reason.

For me, the 22mm AT AF-70, (Mine was a Celestron Ultima LX after I sold my 22mm Astromania), was sharper across the 70 degree field over the 22mm Nag T4 even at the 70 degree mark. Without a CC, the 22mm Nag is very aberrated. Selling off any EP even if I don't have the FL at hand for a short period of time is no big deal to me.
I'm really not that concerned about it because I only observe during new moon or close to it anyways. It looks like you have enough eyepiece to cover what you need even if you DID sell some off, lol. Most eyepieces I ever own at one given time is 5. The least is 3. I don't relish the thought of owning too many eyepieces at one given time. I can't see going out in the field with 20+ eyepieces at a time. LOL.

[LDW1]

56 minutes ago, TheLookingGlass said:

For me, the 22mm AT AF-70, (Mine was a Celestron Ultima LX after I sold my 22mm Astromania), was sharper across the 70 degree field over the 22mm Nag T4 even at the 70 degree mark. Without a CC, the 22mm Nag is very aberrated. Selling off any EP even if I don't have the FL at hand for a short period of time is no big deal to me.
I'm really not that concerned about it because I only observe during new moon or close to it anyways. It looks like you have enough eyepiece to cover what you need even if you DID sell some off, lol. Most eyepieces I ever own at one given time is 5. The least is 3. I don't relish the thought of owning too many eyepieces at one given time. I can't see going out in the field with 20+ eyepieces at a time. LOL.

With more eps you can mix and match them on any given nite, its not always the same old ....... ! It offers a great change of pace, a challenge and can make it more interesting incl. views that you / we didn't know is / was possible. There are advantages, knowledgeable expansions of expertise.

[TheLookingGlass]

2 minutes ago, LDW1 said:

With more eps you can mix and match them on any given nite, its not always the same old ....... ! It offers a great change of pace, a challenge and can make it more interesting incl. views that you / we didn't know is / was possible. There are advantages, knowledgeable expansions of expertise.

That's entirely up to the observer. If you want to own 100 eyepieces, that's your choice. If you want to own 5, same thing. I choose not to. Nothing wrong with either one. I get more observing time in by owning less.

[LDW1]

11 minutes ago, TheLookingGlass said:

That's entirely up to the observer. If you want to own 100 eyepieces, that's your choice. If you want to own 5, same thing. I choose not to. Nothing wrong with either one. I get more observing time in by owning less.

You are correct but I didn't imply that you / anyone had to use a large number of eps on any one observing session, just a great option if you own say a couple of dozen. But as always to each his own.

[badhex]

Drifting back to the topic, the M43 extensions have been super helpful for me with eye placement on the Morpheus. The 4.5mm in particular has been tricky to get right, but I eventually solved it using a combination of extension plus rubber eyecup plus 2x rubber hairbands. I need to replace them with proper o-rings when I can but they work well enough for now. 

[Louis D]

You may want to stick with the hair bands.  Rubber O-rings have a rather strong chemical odor that never seems to go away.

[TheLookingGlass]

15 hours ago, LDW1 said:

You are correct but I didn't imply that you / anyone had to use a large number of eps on any one observing session, just a great option if you own say a couple of dozen. But as always to each his own.

My apologies. I should have generalized what I said as I did not mean to say "you".

PS: Which Baader Morpheus do you own? And how are you liking yours? Also, that pic you have for your avatar, is that your skies? If so, you seem to have a great sky to view, which is really nice!!!

Here's my Morpheus and my 25mm I just got the other day. Only reason I have adapters on mine is because I own about five 2 inch filters. Really liking the Morpheus !!! Hope your skies are good this weekend !!!!

Cheerz!

 

Edited October 14, 2022 by TheLookingGlass

[TheLookingGlass]

1 hour ago, Louis D said:

You may want to stick with the hair bands.  Rubber O-rings have a rather strong chemical odor that never seems to go away.

I've got dozens of O-rings. No smell from mine. I've been using O-rings to parfocalize my eyepieces for many years without any odours or problems.

[Louis D]

Lucky you.  The ones I got from ebay for my 12mm NT4 smell a bit like inner tubes or car tires.  I don't know how to predict the smell or lack of it with a particular O-ring supplier.

[LDW1]

On 14/10/2022 at 09:00, TheLookingGlass said:

My apologies. I should have generalized what I said as I did not mean to say "you".

PS: Which Baader Morpheus do you own? And how are you liking yours? Also, that pic you have for your avatar, is that your skies? If so, you seem to have a great sky to view, which is really nice!!!

Here's my Morpheus and my 25mm I just got the other day. Only reason I have adapters on mine is because I own about five 2 inch filters. Really liking the Morpheus !!! Hope your skies are good this weekend !!!!

Cheerz!

 

I have the 17.5, 12.5, 9, 6.5mm Morpheus eps they are probably the best eps that I personally have ever owned. They are excellent performers in every respect, I wish they would make one in a 25 & 30mm range but I use the 31, 21mm Hyperions which are no slouch as well. That photo was taken at my remote camp in northern Quebec, Bortle 1, SQM-L 22.0 / 22.05 on clear nites right out the camp door. It is a single 13 second shot taken with my DSLR. We sold it after 50 yrs last Sept. and miss it every night. Now I view in my Bortle 4/5 backyard but Bortle 1-2 skies are less than 20-30 minutes away for my use.

Edited October 19, 2022 by LDW1