Baader Morpheus range - General chat

[Voyager 3]

On 24/04/2021 at 13:11, Jiggy 67 said:

Have to agree with everything you’ve said Dave. I was lucky as I used lockdown and the petrol money saved by working from home to buy one a month. I don’t know if I need the full range but after purchasing the 17.5 first followed by the 9mm I had to buy the rest

 

Don't you find the BHZ as redundant Jiggy ? 

[Jiggy 67]

2 hours ago, Voyager 3 said:

Don't you find the BHZ as redundant Jiggy ? 

To some extent yes, but I like to use it with the 6.5mm, where it works really well, giving me extra magnification beyond the 4.5 for those tight doubles and small planetary’s

[F15Rules]

4 hours ago, Jiggy 67 said:

To some extent yes, but I like to use it with the 6.5mm, where it works really well, giving me extra magnification beyond the 4.5 for those tight doubles and small planetary’s

I agree.

I have sold my two  of my 3 excellent Carton Japan  eyepieces (10.5mm and 28mm to a good friend here on SGL) to help fund my latest Axiom LX pair..

However, I'm keeping the Carton 7-21mm zoom, as it's small and light, and optically very good (similar to the BHZ). I can also use it in my small 80mm and 60mm grab and go refractors: along with Baader barlow I can get down to 3.11mm focal length, which delivers 334x in the Tak, and far more than either the 80mm or 60mm achromats can usefully handle. 

Just such a versatile unit👍

Dave

Edited May 8, 2021 by F15Rules

[Jiggy 67]

Sorry @Voyager 3 I got that completely wrong, had a senior moment and for some reason thought you were talking about the barlow 🤥🤣

In answer to the question, no the zoom is still a must have, just for convenience and the fun of zooming in on doubles without the mither of changing ep’s

[Voyager 3]

No problem Jiggy 😁 ,

I thought you used the zoom with the Barlow for powers above your 4.5mm ... I like it that you still use your BHZ , even when you own a set of BMs 👍 .

[Louis D]

I tend to use a pair of zooms in my binoviewers because changing two eyepieces and making sure neither is tipped is a real pain compared to twisting the zoom collars.

[Jiggy 67]

1 hour ago, Voyager 3 said:

No problem Jiggy 😁 ,

I thought you used the zoom with the Barlow for powers above your 4.5mm ... I like it that you still use your BHZ , even when you own a set of BMs 👍 .

I wouldn’t be without one and the BHZ is one of the best. I only have the MarkIII  but don’t really feel the need to change it. If I was to start again with no ep’s but with my current knowledge, the BHZ would be the first eyepiece I would buy 

[Barry-W-Fenner]

Hi all.

Hope you are all keeping well 😃

I haven't had much time with the scope recently.  We have been moving office/warehouse at work so been very busy with that, along with being absolutely full of the lurg at the moment I've felt pretty rotten.

Great to catch up on this thread though and see the excellent input from all, it has made for some interesting reading and is great to see it has taken on a life of its own👍

As mentioned I have missed out on a few rare moonless clear nights recently 😢 however I managed 1 short session where I used the 6.5 in my frac with the eye cup installed. I managed to find a fairly comfy eye placement with it installed, abiet still a little finicky. I was using ot to view doubles in Leo and very much enjoyed it. I will have another go next time out to try and get more used to the extension on this EP.

Baz

 

[Soligor Rob]

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.

[Virtus]

I recently picked up the 12.5 and 17.5 Morphei. I've only been able to use them once briefly but initial impressions are really good! I try not to be too much of a fanboy of any one brand but dang if everything Baader I own doesn't just work really well. 

From what I hear they Barlow really well also. Can anyone else with more extensive experience with them confirm?

[badhex]

17 hours ago, Soligor Rob said:

can I ask how the compare to the Celstron X-Cel LX range of EP's.

Hello @Soligor Rob I can't give you first hand experience as I've not used an X-Cel, but I'm sure someone else here can. I guess the answer would depend on your budget and most likely what scope(s) you are using them in.

From what I've read about the X-Cel range they are pretty well thought of, but one or two have reported occasional minor QC issues (eyecup coming off when removing the dust cap, tiny specks of dust or black plastic inside the EP itself) but nothing major that spoils the optical performance. 

That said, as this is a Morpheus thread, I would hazard a guess that the general advice from here might be to plump for a Morpheus if your circumstances allow and it makes sense for your current scopes, as you are unlikely to be disappointed. Most people seem to rate the X-Cel as mid-range, great upgrades from stock EPs but that they may eventually replace; the Morpheus often seem to fall into mid-range plus rating, and probable keepers. I know I will likely never get rid of my 17.5mm. 

Obviously these are just my thoughts, others will almost certainly be able to give better actual advice based on their experiences! 

Edited May 10, 2021 by badhex
typo

[badhex]

12 hours ago, Virtus said:

From what I hear they Barlow really well also. Can anyone else with more extensive experience with them confirm?

Hi @Virtus I wouldn't say I have extensive experience but I have used my 17.5mm a few times with a GSO 2.5x barlow and it worked pretty well, views were still pretty crisp. I would guess though, that this would depend on the quality of the barlow itself - the GSO is pretty good but not incredible, so I can imagine the experience would be even better with a TeleVue barlow, for example.

[Louis D]

On 09/05/2021 at 09:40, 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.

I haven't done back to back comparisons at night between my Meade HD60s (supposedly similar to the X-Cel LXs) with my two Morpheus, but the shorter focal length versions are quite good.  The Meade units have somewhat blurry field stops, slightly tighter eye relief, smaller AFOV, and possibly poorer stray light control than the Morpheus.  You can look at my eyepiece photographic image comparison thread to see how the HD60s compare to other eyepieces as well as my Morpheus eyepieces.

 

[JeremyS]

35 minutes ago, Louis D said:

, but the shorter focal length versions are quite good.  

“Quite good” is an expression that I’ve come unstuck with a couple of times with US colleagues. In British English it generally (but not universally) implies that something is passable, generally OK, not terrible. But not as good as I was expecting.  That’s how I use it. But I understand in US it (often) means really rather good, certainly better than OK but slightly less than superb 🤔

[jetstream]

3 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

implies that something is passable, generally OK, not terrible. But not as good as I was expecting.  

Yes I think that over here too- kind of left with a ho-hum feeling after hearing "quite good".

[JeremyS]

1 minute ago, jetstream said:

Yes I think that over here too- kind of left with a ho-hum feeling after hearing "quite good".

Shall we table this discussion? 😊

Which means to me “let’s defer it to another time”, but to my US colleagues it means “let’s discuss it now”. 😊

[Seelive]

'That'll do' ...

 

[Soligor Rob]

So if it was between the 14mm or 12.5mm which should I buy? bearing in mind I intend to purchase the 17.5mm & 9mm when they become available.

[John]

10 minutes ago, Soligor Rob said:

So if it was between the 14mm or 12.5mm which should I buy? bearing in mind I intend to purchase the 17.5mm & 9mm when they become available.

If it was me, I would go for the 12.5mm. I think you may well find that the 14mm is a bit too close to the 17.5mm to get a lot of use. As eyepiece focal lengths get shorter, the mm increments can get smaller as well while still being useful so 12.5mm - 9mm will make sense.

 

 

[Soligor Rob]

I sort of expected that, I was thrown off course when a telephone call today revealed they didn't actually have a 12.5mm in stock but they did have the 14mm.

I should stick to my plan and be patient the forecast for the next week or so certainly don't predict any clear sky's.

[Stu]

My Morpheus has finally arrived, held up waiting for another component which was out of stock.

Looks fabulous actually, I really like the look and feel of it. I’ve fitted the eye guard extension as having looked through it I think it will be needed but will confirm later. The exit lens is huge, but you all knew that anyway 🤣🤣

I can see a few more of these coming along if I like it. 17.5 and perhaps a few short ones too.

[F15Rules]

2 hours ago, JeremyS said:

“Quite good” is an expression that I’ve come unstuck with a couple of times with US colleagues. In British English it generally (but not universally) implies that something is passable, generally OK, not terrible. But not as good as I was expecting.  That’s how I use it. But I understand in US it (often) means really rather good, certainly better than OK but slightly less than superb 🤔

Thanks for that very enlightening explanation Jeremy..I really feel that I've got a handle on that expression now!😁

Dave

Edited May 10, 2021 by F15Rules

[F15Rules]

22 minutes ago, Stu said:

My Morpheus has finally arrived, held up waiting for another component which was out of stock.

Looks fabulous actually, I really like the look and feel of it. I’ve fitted the eye guard extension as having looked through it I think it will be needed but will confirm later. The exit lens is huge, but you all knew that anyway 🤣🤣

I can see a few more of these coming along if I like it. 17.5 and perhaps a few short ones too.

Great stuff, Stu! 

That last photo looks more like an Apo scope objective!😂..

A great focal length and should barlow really well too. Look forward to your impressions.

Dave

Edited May 10, 2021 by F15Rules
Additional text info

[Louis D]

2 hours ago, JeremyS said:

“Quite good” is an expression that I’ve come unstuck with a couple of times with US colleagues. In British English it generally (but not universally) implies that something is passable, generally OK, not terrible. But not as good as I was expecting.  That’s how I use it. But I understand in US it (often) means really rather good, certainly better than OK but slightly less than superb 🤔

"Quite good" has the subtle addition of being surprisingly good or exceeding rather lowered expectations.  Your UK meaning would probably expressed as "okay" or "passable" or "good enough" in US English.  Should I say "Really rather good" to mean exceeds lowered expectations.  I didn't want to imply premium level quality when they're not, but that they significantly overachieve given their price.

[Louis D]

1 hour ago, Soligor Rob said:

So if it was between the 14mm or 12.5mm which should I buy? bearing in mind I intend to purchase the 17.5mm & 9mm when they become available.

Definitely the 12.5mm.  It will fit nicely between the other two whereas the 14mm will be too close to the 17.5mm.  That, and the 12.5mm is supposedly better corrected and flatter of field than the 14mm which I do have.  I can confirm minor amounts of field curvature and astigmatism/chromatism in the last 10% or so of the 14mm's field.