Starbase “Orthoscopics”

[Astro_Dad]

Read a positive review of these eyepieces in the latest Astronomy Now magazine:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/takahashi-eyepieces/starbase-125-orthoscopic-eyepieces.html

 Not classical orthos by design apparently (asymmetrical Plossl) but look good from Takahashi. I was wondering if anyone has any experience using them and could recommend vs others?

Thanks  

AD

 

[John]

I've not used them myself but here is the opinion of an experienced observer / reviewer:

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/700422-starbase-orthos-first-light/?p=10205650

It sounds like it depends on the scope that you intend to use them with.

The older Vixen made Or. "Orthos" were also a symmetrical / plossl type design I found when I took a couple apart for cleaning many years ago.

I don't know exactly how much Takahashi are involved directly in the design and manufacture of the Starbase ones though  

Edited October 2, 2021 by John

[Astro_Dad]

Thanks @John  useful read on CN. Looks like the 14mm may be a good bet but only on my f/12 … 

[Alan64]

The "Starbase" eyepieces are made by an optical-house in Hanamaki, Japan; not Takahashi.  Takahashi has never made lenses, only optical-tubes and mounts.  The fluorite-doublet within my Takahashi FS-102 was made by Canon-Optron, for example.

The only ones I'd be interested in having are the 6mm, and perhaps the 9mm.  These eyepieces excel on small, tight(non-diffuse) objects; the Moon, the planets, and double-stars.

 

 

[Saganite]

They look interesting and they are inexpensive. I have my UOVT Orthos in pairs, 9mm to 18mm but others are very hard to find now.  The 6mm and the 14mm might well be interesting additions.

Thanks for posting.

Edited October 2, 2021 by Saganite

[Astro_Dad]

Worth a look I thought. I’ve ordered the 14mm to try with the Skymax 127 - I like the views through “orthos” -  I have a 365 Astronomy branded 10.5 mm piece that produces good views. 
Thanks for the detail @Alan64, I’m becoming very interested in optical design and the history behind it - a latent physics interest probably. I’m sure the likes of Fujiyama’s and others will impress down the line…

I assume they would Barlow successfully?

Edited October 2, 2021 by Astro_Dad
Typo

[Astro_Dad]

1 hour ago, Saganite said:

They look interesting and they are inexpensive. I have my UOVT Orthos in pairs, 9mm to 18mm but others are very hard to find now.  The 6mm and the 14mm might well be interesting additions.

Thanks for posting.

UOVT?

[Alan64]

15 minutes ago, Astro_Dad said:

Worth a look I thought. I’ve ordered the 14mm to try with the Skymax 127 - I like the views through “orthos” -  I have a 365 Astronomy branded 10.5 mm piece that produces good views. 
Thanks for the detail @Alan64, I’m becoming very interested in optical design and the history behind it - a latent physics interest probably. I’m sure the likes of Fujiama’s and others will impress down the line…

I assume they would Barlow successfully?

Most any eyepiece barlows well, if with a quality barlow.

[Saganite]

8 minutes ago, Astro_Dad said:

UOVT?

University Optics Volcano Tops, my weakness 

[Alan64]

4 minutes ago, Astro_Dad said:

UOVT?

University Optics "Volcano Top"...

Those were made by the Tani optical-house in Japan, by Mr. Tani himself.  He eventually retired, and is no longer with us I'm afraid.  I got my own in the early to mid 1990s.  They are reputedly more comfortable, via their sloped tops.  They're no longer available new, but used ones are offered for sale in the equipmental marketplaces on occasion. 

Then, many of the old and wonderful optical-houses of Japan, some if not many employing only a handful of workers, were swept away by the tsunami of 2011.

Later, I got these Baader Abbe orthoscopics, and the same as the current Fujiyamas...

Those two marques are/were manufactured by Masuyama of Japan.  The Baader examples were sold for only a few years, or less.

[Astro_Dad]

Ah got it. How do they sit vs genuine Circle T volcano tops? I have a 6mm example, rarely used. 

[John]

I've had some fun comparing orthos over the years:

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/184935-astro-hutech-orthoscopics-compared-with-baaders-orthoscopics/

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/175014-baader-classics-the-story-so-far/

They do generally barlow well

Currently, I think the Baader Classic 10mm and 18mm are really superb for their price

 

Edited October 2, 2021 by John

[Alan64]

3 hours ago, Astro_Dad said:

Ah got it. How do they sit vs genuine Circle T volcano tops? I have a 6mm example, rarely used. 

I would think a toss-up between the two.  The UOs are more comfortable(ergonomics), and fully multi-coated possibly, whilst the Baader/Fujiyama are fully broadband-coated(optical-quality).  Still, you can't go wrong with either type.

Edited October 3, 2021 by Alan64

[Saganite]

23 minutes ago, Astro_Dad said:

Ah got it. How do they sit vs genuine Circle T volcano tops? I have a 6mm example, rarely used. 

They are genuine Circle T volcano tops, just made for and badged by University Optics by the Tani Optical house ....

Edited October 2, 2021 by Saganite

[John]

The Circle-T "volcano top" orthos were produced under quite a lot of different brandings. University Optics is one of my favourites because of their colourful engraving but they all perform the same.

Sometimes I wish I'd held onto these:

[Saganite]

3 minutes ago, John said:

The Circle-T "volcano top" orthos were produced under quite a lot of different brandings. University Optics is one of my favourites because of their colourful engraving but they all perform the same.

Sometimes I wish I'd held onto these:

Yes, there is definitely something about green and black, but I'll be darned if I know what it is.....

[Alan64]

18 minutes ago, John said:

The Circle-T "volcano top" orthos were produced under quite a lot of different brandings. University Optics is one of my favourites because of their colourful engraving but they all perform the same.

Sometimes I wish I'd held onto these:

That's an ideal line-up for higher-powered planetary use.

A 9mm is just barely a planetary.  Then, since a 12.5mm is so close to a 9mm, I've always gotten one of those as well.  I never wanted the 18mm or 25mm.

[Saganite]

I use a Denkmeier bino with power switch in refractors of f14 and f15 so the 9mm, 12.5mm and indeed the 18mm give me high powers for planetary.

[Astro_Dad]

How would you rate this one?

https://ensoptical.co.uk/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=10551&search=Circl

[Alan64]

1 hour ago, Alan64 said:

I would think a toss-up between the two.  The UOs are more comfortable(ergonomics), and fully multi-coated possibly, whilst the Baader/Fujiyama are fully broadband-coated(optical-quality).  Still, you can't go wrong with either type.

 

Edited October 2, 2021 by Alan64

[Saganite]

6 minutes ago, Astro_Dad said:

How would you rate this one?

https://ensoptical.co.uk/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=10551&search=Circl

A perfectly good choice.  The circle T Ortho's are around the £50 mark so it would be a good one to get....

[Alan64]

14 minutes ago, Astro_Dad said:

How would you rate this one?

https://ensoptical.co.uk/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=10551&search=Circl

If in very good condition, get it.  It, too, albeit un-branded, has the exact same coatings as my UOs.

Edited October 2, 2021 by Alan64

[Saganite]

I am sure that these were supplied by  Kokusai Kohki, and were considered the equal of UO etc  and are recommended by Bill Paolini, so It is a very good pedigree. I had a full set some years back until I fell for the 'green and black ' livery. You will not regret a set of these I can assure you.

Edited October 2, 2021 by Saganite

[Andrew_B]

8 hours ago, Alan64 said:

The "Starbase" eyepieces are made by an optical-house in Hanamaki, Japan; not Takahashi.  Takahashi has never made lenses, only optical-tubes and mounts.  The fluorite-doublet within my Takahashi FS-102 was made by Canon-Optron, for example.

The only ones I'd be interested in having are the 6mm, and perhaps the 9mm.  These eyepieces excel on small, tight(non-diffuse) objects; the Moon, the planets, and double-stars.

 

 

Tak's lenses have always been made by others (Canon-Optron since the 70s I believe) but they design their objectives and manufacture the lens cells in-house and their collaboration with Canon has been a very close one and not simply that of a buyer of components. They also grind and polish their own mirrors and for a company with fewer than 40 employees they do a surprising amount themselves.

Eyepiece manufacture has I think always been outsourced entirely although it would be interesting to know if Tak had any input into their design (I suspect not) or their specification (more likely).

[Alan64]

4 hours ago, Andrew_B said:

Tak's lenses have always been made by others (Canon-Optron since the 70s I believe) but they design their objectives and manufacture the lens cells in-house and their collaboration with Canon has been a very close one and not simply that of a buyer of components. They also grind and polish their own mirrors and for a company with fewer than 40 employees they do a surprising amount themselves.

Eyepiece manufacture has I think always been outsourced entirely although it would be interesting to know if Tak had any input into their design (I suspect not) or their specification (more likely).

It's not surprising that the mirrors are done in-house, as mirrors are easier to produce.  But then, we all know how superb Takahashi mirrors are, and to where one might wonder as to why not lenses as well, of crown and flint at least.