APM UFF 30mm instead of Lacerta/ OVL Aero ED 30mm- should I replace?

[Marian M]

Hi folks!

I am trying to improve my eyepiece set and have read here a lot of good reviews about APM UFF 30mm. Currently i do have a Lacerta ED 30mm and was thinking to sell it and replace with APM UFF 30mm, within a budget of 200- 300 EUR- would be an improvement, does it worth? Didn't succeed to find a head to head comparison between the 2

My current eyepieces are APM XWA 20mm (in back order), APM XWA 13mm, Pentax XW 10mm (just ordered); aside this, 2 Vixen SLV 25mm for bino, plus Lacerta UWAN 7mm and 16mm 

Current scopes are 120/600 SW achro and Mak 127 but planning to buy in the future APO or/and C8 or/ and Mak 180

Current mount is manual EQ5 and AZEQ6

Thank you!

[StarryEyed]

I have a APM UFF 30mm and it is a very good eyepiece. But I would keep on track for the scope you want that will deliver potentially better views with the eyepieces you already have. 300euros is useful bit of money. If you sold your scopes and one of your mounts how far off would you be from a second hand apo or C8 that your after. Good scopes show the difference between eyepieces more easily than scopes that are built more economically. 

But no harm in upgrading if thats your choice. 

Edited June 11, 2022 by StarryEyed

[Piero]

The 30mm APM UFF is a great eyepiece optically and a joy to use in terms of ergonomics.

Having said that, eyepieces work as a set not alone. You have a 20mm 100 deg eyepiece which shows slightly less FOV than the 30mm APM UFF, meaning that the major difference between the two, apart from the experience, is the exit pupil.

Exploring eyepieces when you don't know what your telescopes are going to be can be an expensive exercise..

My suggestion is to spend more time figuring out what telescope you really want based on your lifestyle, targets of interest, finances etc. Then it's the time to build a set around it.

[Marian M]

@StarryEyed / @Piero, thanks a lot for your advice!

Have to acknowledge that I am in a bit hurry and no patience to wait a little more for additional budget/ a larger aperture/ better quality

After plenty of reading on the 3 choices, better so stay a little on hold:

C8/ C8 Edge- easy to handle, good all around, maybe a little soft because of the CO, maybe too restricted FOV for bino, Edge pricey, maybe out of collimation 

180 Mak- great for visual, almost APO-like, difficult to handle (no handle/ additional weight for it- was thinking to do something like I already did for the 127 Mak but the weight may increase too much), maybe too restricted FOV for bino

SW ED 120- gain in quality only over 120ST

TS 152 F5.9 (this is haunting my mind as well 🤔) have to figure out if I can accommodate bino, a little big

Mount/ acclimatization should not be a problem

 Probably what I am not figuring yet out is which one is closest to my life style..

[Piero]

1 hour ago, Marian M said:

@StarryEyed / @Piero, thanks a lot for your advice!

Have to acknowledge that I am in a bit hurry and no patience to wait a little more for additional budget/ a larger aperture/ better quality

After plenty of reading on the 3 choices, better so stay a little on hold:

C8/ C8 Edge- easy to handle, good all around, maybe a little soft because of the CO, maybe too restricted FOV for bino, Edge pricey, maybe out of collimation 

180 Mak- great for visual, almost APO-like, difficult to handle (no handle/ additional weight for it- was thinking to do something like I already did for the 127 Mak but the weight may increase too much), maybe too restricted FOV for bino

SW ED 120- gain in quality only over 120ST

TS 152 F5.9 (this is haunting my mind as well 🤔) have to figure out if I can accommodate bino, a little big

Mount/ acclimatization should not be a problem

 Probably what I am not figuring yet out is which one is closest to my life style..

 

Mine is just a thought based on what you wrote.

I see a substantial overlap between C8 and 180 Mak in terms of capability. Both require a decent mount and have a rather small FOV due to the long focal length. I would not see these two as "good all around", but actually quite specific-purpose instruments. What is your main interest: visual or imaging? Visual and imaging have very different requirements.

I also see a substantial overlap between your 120 ST and a TS 152 F5.9. They are both wide field refractors, the latter a bit more powerful and bulkier than the other.

The wide field refractors have very different eyepiece requirements than the C8 / 180 Mak. The SW ED 120 is in between.

Therefore, it seems to me that your plan will be quite expensive in terms of telescopes and eyepieces, but it will also have redundancy, meaning that you will end up not using some instruments, I feel.

 

Assuming that you are interested in visual astronomy, my recommendation would be an 8" or 10" dobson with about 1200mm focal length (e.g. skywatcher or bresser (the latter is slightly more expensive, but much better mechanically)), possibly coupled with a 100 ED refractor. Then, some money should be invested in a decent adjustable chair (e.g. Berlebach), Bob's collimation knobs if you get the Skywatcher dobson, and a decent collimation tool. Mastering collimation with a dobsonian telescope is feasible. It's just a matter of practice. The dobson will cover dso, planets and moon. The 100ED refractor will enable you to observe for short sessions, larger targets, planets, solar / lunar, etc.

Following that you take care of the eyepieces. You might just need one set of eyepieces for both telescopes as the focal ratio is not too dissimilar, particularly if you decide to opt for an 8" dobson (generally f6) and you choose a 100ED ~F7.5.

[Mr Spock]

2 hours ago, Marian M said:

Probably what I am not figuring yet out is which one is closest to my life style..

More information would help. I see you are looking out of a fairly high window. Do you have to carry your scope some distance or up/down stairs?

[Marian M]

Dear Piero, dear Michael,

 

First, many many thanks in advance! My interest is today in visual only.

I am using the 2 current scopes from the balcony during winter only, on the vegetation is dried, during the summer- less open sky; here is just a picture on the window, between the observations, I am keeping it here; through the window the image is highly affected, so will skip this

Aside this, once/ twice per month, depending on the weather/ Moon/ available time, with few local amateurs, we are going in some darker places/ 20 km away, outside the main city, for half of the night/  a night

Planning in advance, the scopes will be stored in the back side of the car, for acclimatization 

As new scopes, was thinking to go up either with a larger achro (above choice no 4) or similar to 120 ST but apo (eg 120 ED SW), in parallel with C8 or Mak 180 (on existing AZEQ6). Sorry I was not clear, out of the 4 scopes above, should stay with 2 only.

From the current 2 scopes, I like by far the most the view through the refractor, even if it is just a plain achro, for specific targets or just scan through the dark sky. The small Mak is also unbeatable on Moon/ bino. And as preference, DSO + Moon are the favorites, followed by planets. For Moon I prefer bino, DSO cyclops (current aperture seems small for DSO bino)

Did not have the chance to look through a C8 and somehow I am not clear if the view is as pleasant as through the refractor. From many reviews here, it seems that Mak 180 is very apo-like, aside the narrow FOV, but I am a little scared on the weight. On the other side, with similar magnification (120 ST/ APM XWA 13mm vs Mak 127/ 30mm ED), much prefer the refractor view

 

Hope this gives more sense to my research 😇

[Piero]

Thanks for the clarification.

You can certainly mount a C8 on one arm and a refractor on the other arm of an AZ6 mount. If you are happy with moving the trio around, that's fine.

Do you have a garage?

[Marian M]

nope, no garage- living in a block

[Piero]

Then, I would go for something that is easy to carry around and assemble.. A C8 could be a good option for the times you head outside the city, whereas the refractor when observing from your balcony at home.

I'm not sure I would be bothered about taking the refractor under dark skies tbh.. C8+AZ6 are 2 trips from your flat to your car. You will then need another trip for carrying your eyepiece case and other bits. Same when you return. Carrying the refractor adds another trip..

[Marian M]

Plenty of trips to car and back but I think  it worth the effort 😀

Is the image in a C8 so "soft" vs a refractor?

[Piero]

1 hour ago, Marian M said:

Plenty of trips to car and back but I think  it worth the effort 😀

Is the image in a C8 so "soft" vs a refractor?

They are different instruments, but the C8 has a larger aperture. If cooled down and collimated properly, the C8 should not show soft stars. It will show you many more details than the refractor, particularly on DSOs. 

[Marian M]

Thank you again Piero!

One last question please, is it worth taking a C8 Edge instead of plain C8 for visual only/ binoviewer/ wide eyepieces? I have seen here some people saying the Edge does not bring value on the table for visual, others saying that for wide eyepieces, is it worth, stars are pinpoints near to the edge

 

[Louis D]

On 12/06/2022 at 13:47, Marian M said:

Plenty of trips to car and back but I think  it worth the effort 😀

Is the image in a C8 so "soft" vs a refractor?

A C8 does show softer stars than an 8" Newtonian with coma corrector with its much smaller secondary obstruction in my experience.  It's one of the reasons I went with an 8" Dob over an 8" SCT.  I have never looked through an 8" refractor to make that comparison.  In general, smaller APO refractors show even tighter stars than low obstruction Newtonians in my experience.  However, you've traded light gathering and compactness for this.

[Marian M]

Thank you Louis!