Next step up in eyepeices?

[wibblefish]

Looking for advice on what I should consider next in terms of eyepieces.

I upgraded my stock eyepieces in my old telescope to BST Starguiders due to the recommendations from members on here and the low cost vs performance they seem to achieve.

I ended up getting the 25mm, 18mm, 12mm, 8mm and their short barlow, of them I prefer the 18 / 12 most of the time with the 8mm reserved for anything high magnification (this was in my old 90mm short tube archomat) though I do usually start with the 25mm to sweep towards a target.

As I have now upgraded my telescope to a Starwave Ascent 100ED f7 which I am hoping to keep for the foreseeable future (best laid plans!) and with the weather being so cloudy preventing me for testing it yet my mind is already pondering eyepeice upgrades for the future

I am unlikely to upgrade the diagonal beyond its current Altair 1.25" di-electric I have any time soon so the only upgrade path might be wider fields? Looking at something like the OVL Nirvana or ES 82 range potentially but I am unsure what sizes to maybe start with.

Ideally would like to not break the bank (I'd not want to spend more than £150 on a single unit for example) but potentially if they are more expensive than that I can fish about on the used front and / or get them gradually to replace the ones I have. I wear glasses but not very often at the telescope, however, I do find the eye relief on the BST when it is extended to be quite nice and comfortable so I wouldn't want to dip much below that if possible.

Does anyone have any recommended eyepeices which would be a good "step up" from the BST range and if so what sizes would be most useful in your opinion?

Edited November 15, 2021 by wibblefish

[Mr Spock]

If you want widefield then you can't go far wrong with the ES 82° range. Excellent quality and compact sizes. The 14mm is the longest focal length in 1.25" though. That would give you x50 and 1.64° - just enough to fit the main part of the Pleiades.

If you want planetary eyepieces then the Vixen SLV range takes some beating.

[Ags]

The SLVs also have 20mm eye relief, not to mention deep twist up eyecups that help shield out local light sources.

[John]

Pity that the Baader Morpheus range have experienced a price rise recently. If I was in your place I would be looking hard at that range - they seem to offer really top end performance (ie: Tele Vue / Pentax level) for lower cost than those brands. Maybe pre-owned they would be within your budget ?

The ES 82's that I have used were pretty good as well although their eye relief is variable across the range. I liked the 4mm Nirvana very much but the 16mm does not quite seem so good - perhaps not much of a step up from the BST 18mm ?

The SLV's are excellent but their AFoV is smaller than the BST's of course:

 

 

Edited November 15, 2021 by John

[Zermelo]

One good point about the Starguiders is that they are decent all-rounders, so as @Mr Spock says, there are different paths you could take from there. But sticking to 1.25" and under £150 will narrow your options quite a bit, and in particular the Morpheus, which would be a noticeable improvement, is out of scope.
Have you had chance to try any EPs with a wider field than the 60° of the BSTs? Not everyone thinks that the extra spend is worth it. I use the 6.7mm ES 82° a lot and it often performs better than my BSTs. The quoted eye relief is in the same range, but in practice I find the BSTs more comfortable to use. I suspect this is down to it being easier to see right out to the field stop with the BST than the ES. I also have the Nirvana ES-UWA 82° 16mm, which I find to be comparable with the ES, though it seems to be a bit more prone to kidney beaning. If you're sticking with 1.25" then you might want to consider the ES 68° 24mm, which is well regarded, is just within your price range, and will max out the TFOV.
In another direction, the planetary EPs with narrower FOV might include the BCOs. In my scopes I've found the 10mm to be slightly sharper than my Starguiders, though I sometimes need the higher magnification of the 6mm. But if you value the eye relief of the BSTs then I think you'll not get on so well with the BCOs, and the SLVs will be better for you (though over twice the price).

If you've not seen it already, this recent thread discusses BSTs and possible improvements on them.

 

[wibblefish]

Hmmm much to think about and read thanks, I will look at the Morpheus and the ES series and maybe have a look around the used stuff 

I was having a nose about and maybe something like these two might work:

- Vixen SLV 4mm for a really high power EP (instead of say getting a 5mm BST) 

- Celestron Luminos 15mm for the 82 degree wide field try out 

 

Edited November 15, 2021 by wibblefish

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

The Nirvana 16mm is excellent paired with the 102ED. Better than the 15mm BST it replaced. The Double Cluster just fits into the fov nicely.

The Vixen SLV 4mm is my high power ep (178.5x). A revelation. It kicks the BST 5mm into touch. A minor issue is a degree of brightening around the edge. However double stars and planets are great. 

The 24mm Altair (APM clone) UFF is superb although a massive lump tbh.

Another Altair ep I like with the the ED102 is the Lightwave flat field LER 9mm 55°. Super clarity for the price.

https://www.altairastro.com/altair-lightwave-9mm-ler-125-inch-planetary-eyepiece-256-p.asp

I may try more of the Lightwave eps. Not much more than the BST. 5° less fov but I enjoy using the 9mm that much.

Edited November 15, 2021 by ScouseSpaceCadet

[Franklin]

The usual advice for upgrading stock eyepieces with BSTs is sound advice. But if you want to take it further and invest more into the hobby, rather than go out and buy a set of TeleVues, I would recommend picking up a few from different brands/designs off the used market and trying them out. That way you will begin to see for yourself, not only what works for YOU with YOUR telescope/s, but also the subtle differences that exist between the more exotic and premier eyepiece designs. You can always sell them on if you do not like them.

This is what I have been doing. It was only a couple of years ago that I bought my first BSTs and compared to the cheapy Plossls I had at the time, they were a revelation. Then I started using Orthoscopics, BCOs, at first I wondered what all the fuss was about, I had to learn how to look through these. But when I did learn, I realised that the image they gave was much improved in contrast, all be it with a narrower FOV. Next I tried a Pentax XF, wow, a superb eyepiece. High contrast, wide field and sharp to the edge. SLVs next, these seemed very much like the orthoscopics but with much better eye-relief, they are just easier to look through. My quest to find the perfect eyepieces for me continues, as I await the delivery of my first high end example, a TeleVue Panoptic.

[Zermelo]

1 hour ago, wibblefish said:

maybe have a look around the used stuff 

Used SLVs come up on here quite regularly, one of those would certainly be worth a go.

If you wanted a second-hand Nirvana, I think you will need a fast trigger finger.

[MetroiD]

Second-hand Nirvanas are indeed a rarity - I've had luck there but it depends on what FL you'd be looking for. 4mm? Doable. Anything other than that? "All signs point to Nope," as Nopestradamus once famously said.

The 16mm was one of the very few EPs I bought brand new, and I never regretted it for a second. The fact that I sold it on within a day of listing it for about 90% of the purchasing price I had paid speaks volumes about just how sought after these are - and how well they work with all kinds of different scopes.

Edited November 15, 2021 by MetroiD

[John]

One thing that I'd be interested in regarding the Nirvana's is whether there were any optical changes made from the original "flat top" UWAN / Nivana shaped versions to the latest ones :

Original:

Latest:

 

 

 

[Mr Spock]

They do look very different 

[Ags]

According to Teleskop-Service they are optically identical.

[MetroiD]

Optically, they're the same eyepiece. Ergonomically, the eye guard makes quite a bit of difference. The "new" soft guard is rather annoying and falls off (yes, off the actual eyepiece) way too easily. The "old" variation might look cumbersome, but it works quite well. I've used Nirvanas with both and, as far as I'm concerned, I definitely preferred the twist-up eyeguard.

[wibblefish]

Instead of the Celestron I found I ended up finding someone with a stock of Nirvana 16mm which is slightly cheaper so I had a little left for a 4mm over so took a leap and bought a SW UWA Planetary to try out.

Of course all of these things require actual gaps in the cloud which seems to be lacking here for the last few weeks.....

Edited November 17, 2021 by wibblefish

[Zermelo]

22 hours ago, wibblefish said:

finding someone with a stock of Nirvana 16mm

Go on then, where did you find them?

[wibblefish]

15 minutes ago, Zermelo said:

Go on then, where did you find them?

I asked Rother Valley Optics for a stock check on them as per their site and they had them in stock, considering what everyone had said I figured I'd best snap one up (I only asked about the 16mm though!)  

https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/ovl-nirvana-es-uwa-82-high-performance-eyepieces.html

Edited November 18, 2021 by wibblefish

[Guest]

I have found that Orions eyepieces, the edge on and Q70 series work quite well and are within your (and my) budget range.