Beginner advice: Set or individual?

[Stephen_M]

Hi,

Apologies if this is in the wrong section. Mods, please move to relevant section if needed.

So, I have splashed my cash on a f/5 10" lukehurst dobsonian. My dilemma is that as a beginner, I have no eyepieces and the scope won't come with any.

I am wondering, should I get a set, or maybe start with some better quality individual eyepieces and build my own set slowly? I would be happy with just starting with wide field of view. I am super excited to start looking at stars in general and star clusters! No need to go hunting for anything difficult to begin with. Any links to useful articles would be very much appreciated.

Sorry again for being lazy and not doing my own research here. I am hoping the hive knowledge can save me some time! I have no idea about price, but could probably stretch to get a set at around £300-400 if it was a more cost effective way to do it. I am wary of 'beginner sets' that might just prove to be a waste of money in the long run.

Thank you. Stephen

[John]

Judging by this thread, you could do a lot worse than investing in some of the Baader Morpheus eyepieces:

 

[Don Pensack]

If you are a beginner, you don't know what you like in eyepieces yet.

If you wear glasses, you are obviously looking for longer eye relief eyepieces (say, 18.5mm or longer eye relief), but you don't know yet whether you prefer 60° fields or 80° fields or 100° fields.

So here is a rational way to approach it:

But some inexpensive 60° apparent field eyepieces that yield multiples of 60x (OK in a 10"), so 60x, 120x, 180x, 240x, 300x

[divide the focal length of the scope by the desired magnification to discover what focal length eyepiece yields that power]

That should cost you £300-350 total if you shop.

Now you have something for every object size and brightness, from a large faint nebula to a small planet.

Then, as you observing experience grows, replace one of the eyepieces with, for example, an 82° apparent field eyepiece (say, the 120x one).  See if you like it.  If you do, then maybe try the same apparent field for the next higher magnification

or even go larger to 100° and see if you like that.  If you really like the wider fields, then you know where to go and you can ask advice here about brands and models.

But at least start with something you can use.  You may never go to larger fields or more expensive eyepieces.  Or, you might try a wide eyepiece and decide you need to change them all.

You don't know that yet.  Only experience in the field will tell.

But first, you have to become familiar with the scope and how different magnifications work on different objects.  So, eyepieces first, then upgrades later.

On the other hand, if your budget is unlimited, then your "starter set" might be the aforementioned Morpheus eyepieces or even something more expensive.

 

Edited May 10, 2021 by Don Pensack

[Jiggy 67]

I echo the recommendation for the Morpheus, excellent quality with a wide field of view but If you want to cover a wide range of focal lengths quickly and at a reasonable price, you may want to consider a zoom such as the Baader Hyperion zoom. It won’t give you the wide field views but will give you multiple magnification options from 8mm to 24mm whilst you look and research the ideal eyepiece for you. Even when you purchase fixed focal lengths, you will keep and use the zoom for years to come 

[Second Time Around]

I'd very much recommend a zoom eyepiece as your workhorse.  One zoom eyepiece will cover multiple focal lengths and so is really excellent value for money.

Despite having high quality fixed focal length eyepieces,  I use my zooms a lot more often.  The zoom plus a Barlow lens and a low power, wide field eyepiece is often all I use the whole evening.  

Fixed focal length eyepieces may be slightly better corrected when compared with a zoom at the same magnification.   But that's not always a fair comparison as that magnification may not be the optimum for a given object.  This is because one of the many advantages of a zoom is to be able to dial in precisely the best focal length.  For instance, this may be 13mm or even 13.1mm, which may actually show more detail than shorter or longer fixed focal length eyepieces - even better quality ones.

I particularly like the ability to increase the magnification to make use of brief moments of good seeing (a steady atmosphere).  It takes more time to swap out an eyepiece, and the opportunity may then be missed.  You can't see anything if you haven't got an eyepiece in the focusser!

Zooms also enable the field of view to be varied to frame an object to get the prettiest view.  For this reason I particularly like them for clusters.. 

Another advantage is that you don't have to change a filter when you change magnification.

Many of those who post here and advocate fixed focal lengths are experienced observers.  It's so easy to forget what it was like as a beginner!  A zoom eyepiece enables beginners to easily learn what difference a change of magnification makes on all the various classes of object.  It also shows them what focal lengths would be most useful to their eyes, their telescope, and their observing conditions.  They then have the option of buying/not buying the most appropriate fixed focal length eyepieces for them.  For these reasons I'd always recommend that beginners buy a zoom as their first eyepiece.

Eyepieces vary greatly in price and zooms are no exception.  You could for instance get an inexpensive zoom like the excellent value Svbony 7-21mm (about £37) to start off.   Go to  https://www.svbony.com/SV135-1-25inch-Zoom-Eyepiece-/ and click GBP at the top right. 

However, because your scope is a relatively fast f/5 I'd recommend the Baader 8-24mm zoom at £185.  Go to https://www.firstlightoptics.com/baader-planetarium/baader-hyperion-zoom-eyepiece.html.   I use both the Svbony and the Baader with my own 10 inch f/4.8 Dobsonian.  The Baader costs about 5x as much as the Svbony, but isn't 5x better. However, it's both sharper and more contrasty, especially at f/5, and has a wider field of view.  

To keep the cost down you could buy a used Baader zoom.  These come up frequently and you'd probably find one quickly, especially if you put out a wanted ad.  I'd add that astronomers almost always take good care of eyepieces and so the risk is minimal.

To cut the length of this post down I'll cut it into two and continue below.

Edited May 14, 2021 by Second Time Around

[Second Time Around]

The downside of zooms is the small field of view at the low power end.  You're therefore going to need an additional wide angle, long focal length eyepiece.  The best focal length would depend on how dark your skies go - the darker the skies, the longer the focal length you could make use of.  If the focal length is too long you'll waste some of your 10 inches of aperture.  However, the field of view is likely to be bigger.

I haven't been to Ilkley for a great many years.  However, looking at the light pollution map at  https://www.lightpollutionmap.info/#zoom=4.00&lat=45.8720&lon=14.5470&layers=B0FFFFFFTFFFFFFFFFF  I see that your skies aren't as dark as mine.  I'd therefore suggest something around 22-24mm to start with. 

Whether you wear glasses will make a big difference to the choice of eyepieces as you'd then need a lot of eye relief to see the full field of view.  Until recently I used the 22mm Olivon Redline.  I only sold it as it's a 2 inch eyepiece and all mine are now 1.25 ins.  This is considered by many to be one of the best bargains in eyepieces.  I found it equal to the 22mm Televue Nagler but more comfortable.  The field of view is only 70 degrees though compared with the Nagler's 82 degrees.  However, it's only a third of the price at only £129.  Go to https://www.omegon.eu/eyepieces/omegon-eyepiece-redline-sw-22mm-okular-2-/p,33239  It's out of stock until July but the TS Expanse is the same eyepiece and in stock.  However, when VAT is added it's slightly more expensive.  This is at https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/language/en/info/p4922_TS-Optics-Eyepiece-Expanse-22-mm-Wide-Angle---2-inch-telescope-connection.html

I'd supplement the zoom with a Barlow lens.  Just in case you're not aware, a Barlow lens multiplies the magnification of any eyepiece it's used with.  It goes in the focuser before the eyepiece.  The multiplication factor varies but 2x is most common.  Some of these 2x Barlows can also be used at 1.5x, although it's not always mentioned in the blurb, and it's one of these I'd recommend.  These dual 1.5x/2x Barlows allow the black lens cell to be unscrewed from the body of the Barlow and then screwed into the filter thread at the bottom of an eyepiece to give approx 1.5x.   First Light Optics do one in their Astro Essentials range that even has a standard T thread at the top for attaching a camera.  It's just £25.  Go to https://www.firstlightoptics.com/barlow-eyepieces/astro-essentials-125-2x-barlow-with-t-thread.html

The exact amplification varies from eyepiece to eyepiece depending on where the field stop is located.  At 2x amplification with the Baader zoom this will give you magnifications of approx 104-312x.  Most nights the seeing (atmospheric turbulence) in the UK won't be good enough to go as high as 312x and you'd get more use from the approx 78-234x that 1.5x amplification will give you. 

Additionally, at a given magnification the field of view will be bigger with 1.5x amplification.  This is because the vast majority of zooms have a wider field of view at the high power end.

Eventually, you may want to use even higher magnification on certain objects such as very close double stars.  However, this is likely to be useful only very occasionally, and so I'd suggest you leave this until later.  

So the Baader zoom + a low power, wide angle eyepiece + a 1.5x/2x Barlow will give you all you need for a long time, and will fit into the lower end of your budget.

Edited May 14, 2021 by Second Time Around

[Spile]

I would echo @Second Time Around 's recommendation and seriously consider the Baader Hyperion IV Zoom and Barlow combination. It is not a cheap option but apart from a low power, wide angle eyepiece, I am not looking to spend any more on eyepieces so on balance it is a cost effective one for me.  https://astro.catshill.com/the-zoom-eyepiece/

[Tiny Clanger]

A word of caution :

not everyone gets on with zoom eyepieces, they have their fans. but  it is a personal thing, beware of jumping in and spending all of your budget too soon.

Don Pensack really knows his stuff, he is a retailer of eyepieces etc   in the US.

[Stephen_M]

Thanks everyone. I think you have persuaded me to stay away from a set for now, and consider buying one or two eps as per your suggestions.

The time taken for people to post is very much appreciated 

[Jiggy 67]

9 hours ago, Tiny Clanger said:

A word of caution :

not everyone gets on with zoom eyepieces, they have their fans. but  it is a personal thing, beware of jumping in and spending all of your budget too soon.

Don Pensack really knows his stuff, he is a retailer of eyepieces etc   in the US.

Apologies Heather, but how does anyone know if they get on with something unless they “jump in”……let’s remember our youth!!!!…..😀

[Spile]

22 hours ago, Tiny Clanger said:

not everyone gets on with zoom eyepieces

I am not sure why you are issuing a "warning" as that could be said of any eyepiece. No one has suggested that the Zoom is a panacea but at least two of us believe an alternative to a fixed eyepiece is worthy of consideration. Balance please. 

Edited May 15, 2021 by Spile

[Tiny Clanger]

16 minutes ago, Spile said:

I am not sure why you are issuing a "warning" as that could be said of any eyepiece. No one has suggested that the Zoom is a panacea but at least two of us believe an alternative to a fixed eyepiece is worthy of consideration. Balance please. 

Is "a word of caution "  'issuing a "warning" '? That is rather emotive language,  and precisely illustrates my point.

[Tiny Clanger]

13 hours ago, Jiggy 67 said:

Apologies Heather, but how does anyone know if they get on with something unless they “jump in”……let’s remember our youth!!!!…..😀

Well , how about buying a cheaper zoom (as I did ) to try the concept out ?

[Tiny Clanger]

27 minutes ago, Spile said:

I am not sure why you are issuing a "warning" as that could be said of any eyepiece. No one has suggested that the Zoom is a panacea but at least two of us believe an alternative to a fixed eyepiece is worthy of consideration. Balance please. 

Balance ?

before mine, 2 posts suggesting individual focal length eps, 4 suggesting a zoom.

[wulfrun]

If you're a complete newbie, I'd say a long FL, widefield eyepiece for low-power use plus a budget zoom wouldn't be a bad place to start. OK, you aren't getting premium gear but if it turns out you don't get on with one it's not a big outlay. It'll do a reasonable job and teach you what FLs work for you whilst keeping things simple.

Once you've got the initial experience, you can upgrade to fixed EPs that you know you'll use OR upgrade to a premium zoom if you're sold on the zoom idea. Even a budget zoom as a starter could be re-sold or indeed kept for when you don't want to risk premium gear (e.g. letting kids loose with it).

[Don Pensack]

One "NOT" reason for zooms can be found here:

http://astro-talks.ru/forum/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=1483#p41976

Look at the Baader results at f/4.  The results will be better at f/10, but this maps to my experience too.

Look at the results for the Pentax XF zoom for comparison.

Zooms have narrow fields and poor star images and reduced contrast compared to fixed focal length eyepieces, IMO.

Well, some fixed focal length eyepieces.  Look at the Meade QX results and GSO Superview results.  Equally as bad.

 

So a conclusion can be made.  In long focal length (>f/8) scopes, zooms are perhaps passable.

Below that, not as good.  At f/5 and below, to be avoided.  The original poster is getting an f/5 scope.

I'm another vote for avoiding zooms.

Edited May 15, 2021 by Don Pensack

[vlaiv]

10 minutes ago, Don Pensack said:

One "NOT" reason for zooms can be found here:

http://astro-talks.ru/forum/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=1483#p41976

Look at the Baader results at f/4.  The results will be better at f/10, but this maps to my experience too.

I'm a bit confused by results presented in the table.

Quote

in columns F4 and F10 - sizes of evaluated/measured aberration sport in angular minute; F4 - in condition of "fast" 1:4 optics; F10 - in conditions of "slow" 1:10 optics. My experience shows that if aberration spot is less then 10 angular minutes - quality of image could be evaluated as perfect.

Off the bat - people with average visual acuity can resolve down to 1 arc minute. Moon is 30 arc minutes in diameter. 10 arc minutes is 1/3 of the full moon.

If I saw a star in the eyepiece being as large as 1/3 of the full moon by naked eye - I would be very upset with such eyepiece - and I certainly would not consider it as perfect.

Similarly, Baader Zoom Mark IV has >60 arc minutes spot size at the edge of the field at F/4??? That is more than one degree! That is twice the size of full moon with naked eye - or width of your fingertip when you extend your arm in front of you.

I'm certain that people seeing this in their eyepiece would say something online:

This is what 1 degree "spot" looks versus ~50° AFOV

[Second Time Around]

I can't open Don's link but I assume it's to very useful tests done by Ernest Maratovich in Russia.  The table shows the results of a test on a second-hand Baader Mk III zoom that was sent in by a member of Ernest's forum, that Ernest described as "battered".  He's since done a test on a later Baader MK IV zoom that came out very much better!

This is how Ernest described the image quality: "Based on the results of star observations under conditions of a 1: 5 apochromat.  At all focal lengths, the main field aberration is the curvature of the field of view. Curvature is more pronounced at long focus - reduces image contrast from about 60% of the field of view. At a short focus, the curvature is noticeable only in a relatively narrow (20%) band adjacent to the edge of the field of view. In the center of the field of view, image quality is limited only by defects in the observer's eyes. There is no glare. Light scattering is negligible. Distortion is not striking. When changing the focal length (the effort is quite adequate, there is a soft lock at 5 values), the focusing goes away quite a bit, but you still need to refocus."

Here's a quote from the review of the Baader zoom from a comprehensive review by Bill Paolini (author of the book "Choosing and Using Astronomical Eyepieces"):

"Over the course of testing the Baader Hyperion Mark IV Zoom, the eyepiece showed itself to be a capable and potent observing tool. Optically it provided a bright, high contrast, and controlled view that allowed it to keep up with even premium wide-field eyepieces like the Pentax XWs. Although its Abbe Orthoscopic-like AFOV at the longer focal lengths may be too restrictive for some observing situations, its wide field performance at the shorter focal lengths and its flexibility to perform the function of several eyepieces make it a powerful accessory for any telescope. Its smaller form factor, lighter weight, and zooming function also demonstrated it to be an ideal binoviewing eyepiece, especially when used for lunar observing as it can replace multiple sets of fixed-focal-length eyepieces. The Mark IV also demonstrated that it can be part of a minimalist set of eyepieces for any telescope — especially if accompanied by a 2" 25-35mm wide field for scanning and finding and a 2x or 3x Barlow. Finally, the very smooth action of the Mark IV's mechanics, its quality build, and its range of optional adapters for photography and spotting scopes, and its excellent off-axis performance even in a fast f/4.7 Dobsonian makes it a truly unique and effective astronomical eyepiece."

[Pitch Black Skies]

On 10/05/2021 at 21:05, Stephen_M said:

Hi,

Apologies if this is in the wrong section. Mods, please move to relevant section if needed.

So, I have splashed my cash on a f/5 10" lukehurst dobsonian. My dilemma is that as a beginner, I have no eyepieces and the scope won't come with any.

I am wondering, should I get a set, or maybe start with some better quality individual eyepieces and build my own set slowly? I would be happy with just starting with wide field of view. I am super excited to start looking at stars in general and star clusters! No need to go hunting for anything difficult to begin with. Any links to useful articles would be very much appreciated.

Sorry again for being lazy and not doing my own research here. I am hoping the hive knowledge can save me some time! I have no idea about price, but could probably stretch to get a set at around £300-400 if it was a more cost effective way to do it. I am wary of 'beginner sets' that might just prove to be a waste of money in the long run.

Thank you. Stephen

4 individual eyepieces.

1 for low power

1 for medium power

1 for high power

 & 1 for v.high power

Simples.

[Spile]

On 15/05/2021 at 14:04, Tiny Clanger said:

Is "a word of caution "  'issuing a "warning" '? That is rather emotive language,  and precisely illustrates my point.

Yes I agree. "Warning" is stronger than "word of caution".  But it is still a point against something that for something which I believe illustrates my point.

I don't think the number of posts necessarily indicates bias (unless the same user is repeating the same thing) but is a reflection that happy owners of X tend to be recommenders of X.

Edited May 16, 2021 by Spile

[teoria_del_big_bang]

I got this starter set when I got my first scope.

baader-hyperion-starter-set-4-eyepieces-with-hard-case

Now I am no expert as only a casual observer as I got into imaging fairly early on but these did me well and a art from the Baader zoom I got later on never bought any other EP's.
Like I say just what I got and not an expert in this do take my advice with caution (or a warning maybe more like it 🙂 )

Steve 

[badhex]

Hello @Stephen_M

Lots of great advice above, and you might find the below post helpful as a good rule of thumb to get you started in terms of what focal lengths to select when building up your kit. I found it extremely useful when starting out and having very little money to spare.
RE fixed EPs vs zooms, as @Tiny Clanger and other mentioned it's often personal preference. Some people love them, some people don't. I have one but find I don't use it much at all. So, if you're planning on looking into getting one you might not want to splash £350+ on a top-of-the-line zoom only to find you don't really like it. If it works well for you, you can always upgrade later. Of course, this is true of all astronomical equipment to some extent!
 

 

Edited May 19, 2021 by badhex

[Stephen_M]

7 hours ago, badhex said:

Hello @Stephen_M

Lots of great advice above, and you might find the below post helpful as a good rule of thumb to get you started in terms of what focal lengths to select when building up your kit. I found it extremely useful when starting out and having very little money to spare.
RE fixed EPs vs zooms, as @Tiny Clanger and other mentioned it's often personal preference. Some people love them, some people don't. I have one but find I don't use it much at all. So, if you're planning on looking into getting one you might not want to splash £350+ on a top-of-the-line zoom only to find you don't really like it. If it works well for you, you can always upgrade later. Of course, this is true of all astronomical equipment to some extent!
 

 

Thank you. I think I'm going to get a Morpheus 17.5mm as my first EP. That way I can at least use my scope to look at the moon, locate/track stars, etc. and generally learn the basics over the summer. Then in Autumn/Winter I'll consider getting some higher magnification EPs, and probably keep an eye (pun intended) on the FS forum too.

[badhex]

1 hour ago, Stephen_M said:

Thank you. I think I'm going to get a Morpheus 17.5mm as my first EP. That way I can at least use my scope to look at the moon, locate/track stars, etc. and generally learn the basics over the summer. Then in Autumn/Winter I'll consider getting some higher magnification EPs, and probably keep an eye (pun intended) on the FS forum too.

The Morpheus 17.5mm is a great eyepiece - I have the same and it does not disappoint! 

As it happens, the first expensive EP I bought was a Meade 18mm UWA, quite similar to the Morpheus (but not as good I might add!). I did the same as you, and built up from there. 

[Stephenstargazer]

David Lukehurst makes very nice scopes,  I had years of pleasure from mine. As an f/5 mirror it wil be more demanding of eyepiece quality so starting with one or two makes sense. No one has mentioned coma!

You will notice it in your very enjoyable widefield eyepiece so I suggest some of the budget  goes on a coma corrector. One with a small Barlow effect (1.05) may help to get an eyepiece to focus as the corrector takes some optical length up. Ask David how much back focus will be  available.