Hyperflex Vs Baader Hyperion Mark IV

[Pitch Black Skies]

Has anyone got any experience with both of these? Is there a substantial difference in the viewing quality?

My scope is a Skywatcher Skyliner Classic 200p.

Cheers!

[IB20]

I have the Hyperflex 21.5-7.2mm and use it in the 200P. It was exceptional on the 78% illuminated moon recently, couldn’t fault it at all. It also provided great views with a 2x barlow on the recent opposition of Mars too. 

I haven’t used the Baader Mark IV but I can’t believe that it performs £100 better than the Hyperflex, it think the Baader has a wider FOV than the Hyperflex so perhaps that explains the price difference?

 

 

[johninderby]

I had the earlier version of the Baader zoom as well as a few other zooms such as the Hyperflex and while the Baader had a slight edge in performance it was just that, a slight edge, and not much of a difference. 

Interested in seeing what the new APM Super zoom turns out like when it is released very soon.. Now that looks like it will be worth the difference.

Edited April 28, 2021 by johninderby

[Zermelo]

Some previous thoughts here:

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/370733-baader-hyperion-8-24-zoom-eyepieceshould-i-or-shouldnt-i/

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/369111-zoom-eyepieces/?tab=comments#comment-4011003

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/365885-pricey-zooms-worth-the-money/

 

[Pitch Black Skies]

2 hours ago, johninderby said:

I had the earlier version of the Baader zoom as well as a few other zooms such as the Hyperflex and while the Baader had a slight edge in performance it was just that, a slight edge, and not much of a difference. 

Interested in seeing what the new APM Super zoom turns out like when it is released very soon.. Now that looks like it will be worth the difference.

I see FLO have a Stellalyra Zoom, wonder how that performs. Still no reviews on it.

[Pitch Black Skies]

2 hours ago, IB20 said:

I have the Hyperflex 21.5-7.2mm and use it in the 200P. It was exceptional on the 78% illuminated moon recently, couldn’t fault it at all. It also provided great views with a 2x barlow on the recent opposition of Mars too. 

I haven’t used the Baader Mark IV but I can’t believe that it performs £100 better than the Hyperflex, it think the Baader has a wider FOV than the Hyperflex so perhaps that explains the price difference?

 

 

Thanks, have you ever compared it to any fixed focal lengths?

I'm torn between getting a zoom or a couple of BSTs instead maybe.

[IB20]

34 minutes ago, Pitch Black Skies said:

Thanks, have you ever compared it to any fixed focal lengths?

I'm torn between getting a zoom or a couple of BSTs instead maybe.

The only problem with the zoom I have found is the field of view is a bit smaller than the BSTs. The BSTs really are nice EPs for the money, but plenty do appear on the for sale section of this forum as they tend to be a stepping stone to premium EPs!

Personally, I'd recommend fixed length EPs over a zoom in the first instance, the zoom works brilliantly on the moon but I use my fixed length EPs a lot more.

 

[Zermelo]

37 minutes ago, Pitch Black Skies said:

I'm torn between getting a zoom or a couple of BSTs instead maybe.

Here's another thread that discusses fixed vs zoom EPs:

 

[johninderby]

Don’t think of a zoom as a replacement for fixed focal length eyepieces but rather a very useful addition to them. I start out with a zoom then when I’ve found the ideal magnification for that evenings seeing conditions switch to a fixed length eyepiece. 

Edited April 28, 2021 by johninderby

[AstroNebulee]

3 hours ago, IB20 said:

I have the Hyperflex 21.5-7.2mm

Plus 1, On my experience of only owning this zoom ep, I can't fault it for my set up of Skymax 127 and evostar 72ed, lovely to zoom in and out of a target to save changing ep constantly. 

[KP82]

I've got the mark iv zoom. I bought it off someone here. It feels hefty and very well built. However I only use it in the 72EDF for terrestrial or when I'm travelling. Otherwise I stick to my fixed focal eyepieces.

Most of my observations are done in the lower to medium range of mag and I can't stand the narrow fov of the zoom now that I'm used to 68deg or more fov from my other eyepieces.

[Spile]

The BHZ IV and matching Barlow is my default eyepiece and I am very happy with its performance. The convenience factor is a major plus for me . It was a hefty cost that approached the cost of my 200P but I decided it meant I would not be purchasing any other EPs other than a moderately priced 42mm wide angle Revelation/GSO. 
More details on my site below.

[Pixies]

I have the Mk IV and matching zoom. Got them secondhand for the price of the zoom only. I use it a lot - for the reasons already mentioned above. I have a good finder setup with a 10x60 RACI finder, which means I can usually get the target in the 26mm field of view (which is narrow compared to most modern fixed focal-length EPs). If I'm having to start-hop through the eyepiece though, I'll swap in a 30mm one.

It's a good alternative for basic+ fixed EPs and there are plenty of nights it'll be the only EP I use. However, if I am pushing the gear with a trickier target, like a really close double-star or something very faint, I might have to swap to a good fixed EP.

But for starting out, it's a good option. Then after a while, you will have a better idea of what fixed focal-lengths you might want.

[SuburbanMak]

I havent used a Hyperflex so can’t give a comparative opinion but I have the Baader Mk iv & compatible VIP 2.25 Barlow and am a huge fan. 

I’ll quite often stick with the zoom all night, especially good for finding the right mag to split double stars and find optimal magnification for seeing conditions.  Stunning clarity on the moon. Optical quality seems very crisp & the only places I’d note any slight difference in performance is at each extreme end of its range for different reasons. At the 8mm end it’s a bit prone to mushiness unless seeing is exceptional and at 24mm the field is a little narrower than higher up the magnification range, not necessarily an issue depending on what you’re observing. 

Build quality, zoom action, soft click stops and twist up eye cup are all superb & the dedicated Barlow gives a really usable higher mag range to the equivalent of 3.5mm. 

I use a Skymax 127 Mak and an ST80.

Most nights the only other EP I use is a Hyperion 24mm 68 degree to derive maximum TFOV & contrast in the Mak for galaxy hunting. 

 If I go out for a quick grab & go with the ST 80 on a photo tripod then the Zoom in one pocket & Barlow in the other is perfect fro 17x widefield up to 112x - which I reckon is about as far as you can squeeze from an ST80. 
 

In conclusion if you are going at all for portability I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend the Baader Zoom. Either zoom will give so much more observing vs. faffing with cold fingers out under the stars. 
 

Clear skies! 

Edited April 28, 2021 by SuburbanMak