Max eyepiece for under £90??

[djdurance]

Hi fellow stargazers,

I recently picked up a Skywatcher 130DPS and have been impressed with the visual capabilities for such a modest sized telescope. I picked up a 2" Revelation astro ED 2x Barlow and have been using a 9mm eyepiece with this and getting some decent details on planets. I also have a 5mm BST starguider which works well (but obviously without the barlow as this pushing things too far). I'm debating on either getting the 3.2mm BST starguider or Celestron X-Cel LX 7mm. I would use the Celestron with my 2x barlow to get a similar "reach". Any thoughts on this? Looking to spend £90 or less.

[djdurance]

I should add... Most of this from a very light polluted backyard!

[bingevader]

Just to stir things up a bit!

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/ovl-eyepieces/ovl-nirvana-es-uwa-82-ultrawide-eyepieces.html

Very good indeed in my 8" 'scope.

I have the 4mm and the 7mm.

[Tiny Clanger]

28 minutes ago, bingevader said:

Just to stir things up a bit!

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/ovl-eyepieces/ovl-nirvana-es-uwa-82-ultrawide-eyepieces.html

Very good indeed in my 8" 'scope.

I have the 4mm and the 7mm.

I only have the Nirvana 16mm ,  but if the 7mm is anything like as good it would be well worth considering .

For roughly the same money you could get a BST 3.2mm and a BST 8mm though ...

[djdurance]

Thanks! This does raise the question in my mind about the performance of a 7mm with my Barlow lens (seems to be decent) compared to a 3.2 mm without a Barlow...

[russ]

21 minutes ago, Tiny Clanger said:

I only have the Nirvana 16mm ,  but if the 7mm is anything like as good it would be well worth considering .

For roughly the same money you could get a BST 3.2mm and a BST 8mm though ...

7mm is superb, miles better than the Hyperion 8mm. Holds up really well in my F5 scope. Only got the 7mm in the last week and been fortunate to use it on 3 nights already. Wanted to make sure it was good before selling the Hyperion and TMB Planetary.

[russ]

18 minutes ago, djdurance said:

Thanks! This does raise the question in my mind about the performance of a 7mm with my Barlow lens (seems to be decent) compared to a 3.2 mm without a Barlow...

I ditched my 3.2mm and 4mm eyepieces as I thought my 7mm and 8mm eyepieces performed just as well in the barlow. My barlow is only a lowly Celestron Omni 2x. Money saved bought an ES 24mm.

[Tiny Clanger]

2 minutes ago, russ said:

7mm is superb, miles better than the Hyperion 8mm. Holds up really well in my F5 scope. Only got the 7mm in the last week and been fortunate to use it on 3 nights already. Wanted to make sure it was good before selling the Hyperion and TMB Planetary.

Wise course of action. My 16mm Nirvana came with over 30 days of nocturnal cloud  in the box, so it wasn't until I was outside the FLO return window that I was able to give it a proper go against my BSTs, but I really needn't have worried, it's an obvious step up. When funds (and stocks) allow I suspect I'll be looking for a 7mm Nirvana too 🙂

[Stu]

The 3.2mm would give x203 vs x185 for the barlowed 7mm. I suspect the 3.2mm would get less use, and of course x92 is also useful for the 7mm alone.

[russ]

7 minutes ago, Tiny Clanger said:

Wise course of action. My 16mm Nirvana came with over 30 days of nocturnal cloud  in the box, so it wasn't until I was outside the FLO return window that I was able to give it a proper go against my BSTs, but I really needn't have worried, it's an obvious step up. When funds (and stocks) allow I suspect I'll be looking for a 7mm Nirvana too 🙂

I think you will be equally pleased with the 7mm   I just need to stop myself buying the Helios Myriad 20mm whenever it comes back into stock.

[russ]

3 minutes ago, Stu said:

The 3.2mm would give x203 vs x185 for the barlowed 7mm. I suspect the 3.2mm would get less use, and of course x92 is also useful for the 7mm alone.

That was part of my reasoning for losing the 3.2mm. I used it so rarely, just better off barlowing the 7mm when the sky will take it.

[Mr Spock]

I would suggest the Nirvana 7mm at £85 is your best bet.

At 7mm it will give you x93 and a 0.9° field of view - perfect for deep sky.

With the Barlow it will give x186, just about right for planets with a 130mm.

[Louis D]

I would skip the 3.2mm BST Starguider in favor of Barlowing a longer focal length eyepiece based on reports from Jon Isaacs on CN about the 3.2mm being not that sharp past 60% of the inner field in f/7 scopes.  I have all the Paradigms/Starguiders except for the 3.2mm for this reason.

[djdurance]

Brilliant. I'm going to pickup a Nirvana 7mm... Looks like they are out of stock everywhere!!

[John]

I had the 4mm Nirvana for a while and it turned out to be an excellent high power eyepiece

 

[johninderby]

A bit more than the Nirvanas but Opticstar sells their versions of the ES 82 degree eyepieces. Their  6.7mm is £115.00 and they ae in stock.

http://www.opticstar.com/Run/Astronomy/Astro-Accessories-Telescopes-Opticstar.asp?p=0_10_5_1_8_322

Edited September 25, 2021 by johninderby

[russ]

13 minutes ago, djdurance said:

Brilliant. I'm going to pickup a Nirvana 7mm... Looks like they are out of stock everywhere!!

Only the 16mm Nirvana is showing stock anywhere. Trying to get the 4mm or 7mm is a nightmare. Same with most of the Explore Scientific ranges. The secondhand market is the best bet at the moment. Perhaps a wanted ad here or on UK Astro Buy'n'sell.

[Don Pensack]

The 7mm Nirvana, which lab tests have shown to have a focal length of 7.5mm+ and an apparent field of 84°, and made by United Optics,

is available under other labels:

Meade Series 5000 PWA 7

Stellarvue UWA 82° 8

and used under

William Optics UWA 7

Other companies are marketing re-badged versions of the Celestron Luminos 82° line, e.g. Omegon, Astrotech

 

[Andrew_B]

On 25/09/2021 at 17:21, John said:

I had the 4mm Nirvana for a while and it turned out to be an excellent high power eyepiece

 

I've got that and it works well. The Double Double was a surprisingly easy split with the Nirvana in my little FS-60CB at 89x.

The only negative point is that I sometimes find it harder to get my eye in the right position to get the best sharpness than I do with my 8mm BST Starguider. I don't know whether that difference is a function of the focal length difference or whether it has more to do with the fundamental design of each eyepiece.

[bingevader]

FOV too probably. 60º to 82º can take a bit of getting used to.

[RT65CB-SWL]

10 minutes ago, bingevader said:

FOV too probably. 60º to 82º can take a bit of getting used to.

From a 60º to 82º e/p... or in my e/p case 50º to 82º... the view is priceless... 
and slightly more expensive than the OP's budget.

left: 13mm Plossl             centre: 13mm Nagler Type1             right: 13mm Nagler Type 6

[bingevader]

20 hours ago, Philip R said:

and slightly more expensive than the OP's budget.

Nagler! Yes slightly more expensive.

That's why the Nirvana is such a steal, when available. 🙄

[PeterW]

… I have a second 7mm nirvana I’d anyone is interested, trading it in for a morpeus which is better suited to bino use.

Peter