Baader Hyperion 8-24 zoom question.

[Starslayer]

Trying to get my novice head around this one. 
This zoom can be used in 2” diagonal or in 1.25 with the 2” adapter removed.  The 2” adapter merely screws in and over the top of the smaller one. What is the point therefore of using it on my 2” diagonal when the only light is coming through the 1.25 central section any way?  Likewise if I add the barlow that is also 1.25.  Surely the only benefit I would get light wise from my 2” xlt diagonal is if I use it with dedicated 2” eyepieces rather than with something like the baader which is only a 1.25 with 2” adapter?

Hope that makes sense.  If I have got this right I may as well use the Baader with my stock 1.25 visual back giving me less weight and an image that is in correct orientation on all planes any way. 

Edited June 20, 2021 by Starslayer

[Pixies]

Hi there. You are correct. 

The benefit, I guess,  would be for someone using a wide-angle 2" EP to start, then swapping to this zoom without having to use another fitting. 

Originally I thought it might help with stability, but certainly in my equipment, the 1.25" fitting is fine. Also, if using the specifically-made barlow, then you have to use the 1.25" fitting.

[Starslayer]

2 minutes ago, Pixies said:

Hi there. You are correct. 

The benefit, I guess,  would be for someone using a wide-angle 2" EP to start, then swapping to this zoom without having to use another fitting. 

Originally I thought it might help with stability, but certainly in my equipment, the 1.25" fitting is fine. Also, if using the specifically-made barlow, then you have to use the 1.25" fitting.

Thanks , I was really questioning the benefit I suppose of using the 2" diagonal.  Not cheap this xlt celestron one andI will admit this was a present from a kind relative who had seen a 'wish list' when I was doing my extensive research etc.  prior to purchase.  I still can only see that the benefits are when using dedicated 2" EPs with it. 

[John]

30 minutes ago, Starslayer said:

Thanks , I was really questioning the benefit I suppose of using the 2" diagonal.  Not cheap this xlt celestron one andI will admit this was a present from a kind relative who had seen a 'wish list' when I was doing my extensive research etc.  prior to purchase.  I still can only see that the benefits are when using dedicated 2" EPs with it. 

A 2 inch diagonal does provide a more stable base for a fairly large eyepiece such as the Hyperion zoom. You are correct though that the principle benefits of having the 2 inch option come when true 2 inch eyepieces are used.

 

[Starslayer]

16 minutes ago, John said:

A 2 inch diagonal does provide a more stable base for a fairly large eyepiece such as the Hyperion zoom. You are correct though that the principle benefits of having the 2 inch option come when true 2 inch eyepieces are used.

 

Thanks John, I think that is what I need to hear and confirm.  😉 I also take the point about stability but that also works the other way, and has done already with a need to slide the tube forward so that the manual gears work properly on the mount with the extra weight the diagonal also adds. Add in a nexyz mount plus phone and things get strained. 

[John]

11 minutes ago, Starslayer said:

Thanks John, I think that is what I need to hear and confirm.  😉 I also take the point about stability but that also works the other way, and has done already with a need to slide the tube forward so that the manual gears work properly on the mount with the extra weight the diagonal also adds. Add in a nexyz mount plus phone and things get strained. 

What scope / mount are you using ?

 

[Starslayer]

1 minute ago, John said:

What scope / mount are you using ?

 

I have the Celestron Starsense Explorer 6” SCT set up. 

[John]

2 minutes ago, Starslayer said:

I have the Celestron Starsense Explorer 6” SCT set up. 

I can see that would struggle with a lot of weight hung on the back end.

 

 

[Starslayer]

2 minutes ago, John said:

I can see that would struggle with a lot of weight hung on the back end.

 

 

It certainly did but resolved by sliding the tube well forward. The phone and nexyz add 500g on their own. 

[Starslayer]

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/baader-planetarium/baader-2-zoom-eyepiece-upgrade-kit.html

Now is this a conversion option? I thought I already had this piece or does  this replace the stock 1.25 barrel that came with my zoom? Confused. 
Edit - not sure why they would sell this if this part is included with the zoom any way. 

Edited June 20, 2021 by Starslayer

[Jiggy 67]

Is that not what you already have, just sold separately?

[Starslayer]

6 minutes ago, Jiggy 67 said:

Is that not what you already have, just sold separately?

Yes, sorry, I edited last post but think you are right. Not sure why they would sell separately. Are people in he habit of losing them? 

[John]

2 minutes ago, Starslayer said:

Yes, sorry, I edited last post but think you are right. Not sure why they would sell separately. Are people in he habit of losing them? 

The older versions (Mk II and early Mk III's I think) of the zoom did not come with a 2 inch barrel option.

 

 

[Jiggy 67]

1 minute ago, Starslayer said:

Yes, sorry, I edited last post but think you are right. Not sure why they would sell separately. Are people in he habit of losing them? 

I think you might be surprised. The BHZ Is a quality zoom and often they can change hands multiple times. I actually can’t think of where my 2” nosepiece is 🤣

[Jiggy 67]

Just now, John said:

The older versions (Mk II and early Mk III's I think) of the zoom did not come with a 2 inch barrel option.

 

 

Maybe that’s why I can’t place mine, I have the markIII 🤥

[Starslayer]

8 minutes ago, John said:

The older versions (Mk II and early Mk III's I think) of the zoom did not come with a 2 inch barrel option.

 

 

Makes perfect sense then. 

[jonathan]

If you have a 2" - 1.25" adaptor that accepts 2" filters then it would be a good way to use said 2" filters with 1.25" eyepieces, and the adaptor can more easily be removed if the filter is not wanted (but you'd then be limited to using 2" eyepieces, unless you had a second adaptor).  The alternative would be to fit the 2" filter to the diagonal.  I think I read somewhere that sometimes the position of a filter in the light path could make a tiny difference so being able to move it around could be a benefit.

Also, 2" diagonals and the Baader 2" adaptor are more likely to have brass compression rings rather than straight thumb screws, so this will be kinder to your eyepieces.

[John]

I'm not sure that I would trust a stock 1.25 inch diagonal with a Baader zoom eyepiece to be honest with you. The stock diagonals are not the best quality optically or mechanically.

 

[Louis D]

I know you specifically asked about diagonal usage, but BHZs are not sold exclusively to diagonal users.  Many are sold to Newtonian users with native 2" focusers.  Using the BHZ in 2" mode avoids have to keep it in a 2" to 1.25" adapter.  This can be beneficial if many of your eyepieces are 2" only.  It simplifies eyepiece swaps if all are 2" fit.

[Starslayer]

11 hours ago, John said:

I'm not sure that I would trust a stock 1.25 inch diagonal with a Baader zoom eyepiece to be honest with you. The stock diagonals are not the best quality optically or mechanically.

 

Certainly not on an Eq mount. Mine is ok on Alt Az

[Spile]

On 20/06/2021 at 19:24, John said:

A 2 inch diagonal does provide a more stable base for a fairly large eyepiece such as the Hyperion zoom. You are correct though that the principle benefits of having the 2 inch option come when true 2 inch eyepieces are used.

 

In addition to the above it means that I do not need to use the 1.25” adapter. My other EP also being 2”.