Zoom eyepiece?

[malgpz900]

Thoughts on zoom eyepieces please. Looking at options. 

Sky-Watcher 200P.

TIA.

Malcolm.

[Don Pensack]

Most affordable option with decent quality: Baader Hyperion Zoom 8-24mm.

If you have a widefield low power eyepiece already, perhaps the APM Super Zoom 7.7-15.4mm.

The innumerable zooms at £100 or lower have many issues (some have all these issues, most have a few):

--poor baffling (lots of internal light scatter)

--excessively narrow fields of view in the long focal length half of the range.

--poor control of edge of field aberrations at f/6 or shorter f/ratios

--short eye reliefs

--lots of variation in the zoom mechanism: how easy to turn, how well it deals with cold temperatures

--more internal debris.

A truly minimal set of eyepieces could be with the zoom plus one low power 2" widefield eyepiece (APM 30mm Ultra Flat Field as an example)

and possibly a 2X Barlow for high powers (your scope is usable with eyepieces down to 3mm under superlative conditions, though usually 5mm is about as short as you'll go)

[malgpz900]

1 hour ago, Don Pensack said:

Most affordable option with decent quality: Baader Hyperion Zoom 8-24mm.

If you have a widefield low power eyepiece already, perhaps the APM Super Zoom 7.7-15.4mm.

The innumerable zooms at £100 or lower have many issues (some have all these issues, most have a few):

--poor baffling (lots of internal light scatter)

--excessively narrow fields of view in the long focal length half of the range.

--poor control of edge of field aberrations at f/6 or shorter f/ratios

--short eye reliefs

--lots of variation in the zoom mechanism: how easy to turn, how well it deals with cold temperatures

--more internal debris.

A truly minimal set of eyepieces could be with the zoom plus one low power 2" widefield eyepiece (APM 30mm Ultra Flat Field as an example)

and possibly a 2X Barlow for high powers (your scope is usable with eyepieces down to 3mm under superlative conditions, though usually 5mm is about as short as you'll go)

Many thanks, plenty to think about.

[Greymouser]

I have a svbony 8 - 24 zoom, which whilst maybe not the best, it is decent enough and barlows very well, with the little  Baader x 2.25 zoom. In fact the barlow improves it. Used it at F10 and F6.3. I also have a Hyperflex 9-27mm Zoom, which is better and also goes well with a barlow. I recognise none of the faults that Don states in either of these. Though do not go below F6. Here:  https://www.firstlightoptics.com/ovl-eyepieces/hyperflex-9-27mm-zoom.html

The 7.2 - 21.5 also gets a good press, also barlows well. https://www.firstlightoptics.com/ovl-eyepieces/hyperflex-72mm-215mm-eyepiece.html

From what I have seen and been told, Zooms do not suit everyone, so a cheaper one to try out can only be a good idea, at least to see if they suit you.

Most people tend to use the zoom, to zero in on the focal length that suits the conditions, then go over to the superior fixed eyepiece of that length. I quite like sticking with the zoom, just for that grab and go simplicity.

[Spile]

I love my zoom and matching Barlow. I did consider a number of fixed eyepieces but decided that a quality zoom would give me convenience and I am happy with my decision. The slightly narrower field of view is not an issue for me but I do enjoy wide angle low power views with a 2” eyepiece.

See

https://astro.catshill.com/the-zoom-eyepiece/

[Mr Spock]

Zoom eyepieces are always going to be a compromise on image quality / aberration correction v convenience. Still, a good 24-8 mm and x2 Barlow could be all you'll ever need. It's certainly the simplest option; just look at how many eyepieces some of us have 

[DaveL59]

I went the SVbony route after a number of good reviews with the 8-24 and find it works fine for me. I also bought their 7-21 to go with the Celestron LT70AZ Starsense scope which will be passed on to my daughter sometime soon. I don't find the FoV an issue with either but then I never went the wider FoV eyepiece direction, using mainly plossl and a couple ortho EPs. They are very handy in saving swapping EPs in the dark and give decent view to my eye so I'd happily recommend.

As above posters have noted tho, the higher end ones are no doubt better as a long term investment, after all others have blazed the trail and weeded out the really good stuff to recommend.

[Voyager 3]

4 hours ago, Mr Spock said:

Zoom eyepieces are always going to be a compromise on image quality / aberration correction v convenience. Still, a good 24-8 mm and x2 Barlow could be all you'll ever need. It's certainly the simplest option; just look at how many eyepieces some of us have 

Have you tried the Leica zoom? Every eyepiece is a compromise, one way or the other.

[LaurenceT]

The Baader zoom  8-24 has a screw on 2" barrel which I use with my 200p. This removes the need for a 2"-1.25" converter and subjectively improves viewing according to some reviews.

As a beginner in astronomy I found that using this zoom improved my overall experience removing the need to constantly change eyepieces.

[Guest]

I have the Orion 8 to 24 zoom.  It's better then the Celestron version and half a step behind the Baader.  It was 200ish USD.  I am sure Flo has the equivalent of it under a different name.

[cajen2]

The best VFM zoom that I've used is the OVL Hyperflex. Mine is the 7.2 - 21.5mm version. It has only two drawbacks for me: small FOV at low mags (common to most affordable zooms) and a very stiff action on mine, requiring two hands, which is irritating. The optics, however, are excellent.

[RT65CB-SWL]

Though I do not own the Baader Hyperion 8-24mm zoom, I have tried it and was very impressed with it.

[Spile]

15 hours ago, LaurenceT said:

The Baader zoom  8-24 has a screw on 2" barrel which I use with my 200p. This removes the need for a 2"-1.25" converter and subjectively improves viewing according to some reviews.

As a beginner in astronomy I found that using this zoom improved my overall experience removing the need to constantly change eyepieces.

I can’t see how. I use my BHZ in 2” mode but purely for convenience. It is still a 1.25” barrel at the end of the day.

[LaurenceT]

2 hours ago, Spile said:

I can’t see how. I use my BHZ in 2” mode but purely for convenience. It is still a 1.25” barrel at the end of the day.

Im not disagreeing with you which is why I included the caveats of "subjectively" and "according to some reviews".

[F15Rules]

Baader Zoom 8-24mm in all versions have been excellent in my experience (I haven't used the MkIV yet).

The best two I ever used were the Pentax XL 8-24mm (superb build and great optics) and the earlier Leica Vario zoom (not the Aspheric).

HTH,

Dave

[wookie1965]

Sorry to jump on this but what do people think about the Celestron 8-24mm, I have found very good although I have nothing to compare it with.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, wookie1965 said:

Sorry to jump on this but what do people think about the Celestron 8-24mm, I have found very good although I have nothing to compare it with.

I had the opportunity to run it next to my Orion and a Baader.  It's not bad glass and if you need to pinch pennies it's a good option, but the Baader is far and away better when it comes to image quality with the Orion just a half step behind it.  So performance and price wise is went Baader, Orion then Celestron 

[wookie1965]

7 minutes ago, Mike Q said:

I had the opportunity to run it next to my Orion and a Baader.  It's not bad glass and if you need to pinch pennies it's a good option, but the Baader is far and away better when it comes to image quality with the Orion just a half step behind it.  So performance and price wise is went Baader, Orion then Celestron 

Thanks Mike really appreciate your I put looks like I am saving for the baader now 😄

Paul 

[LaurenceT]

11 minutes ago, wookie1965 said:

Thanks Mike really appreciate your I put looks like I am saving for the baader now 😄

Paul 

There's one for sale on UK Astro Buy and Sell site with the dedicated barlow.

 Ad # 188444

Edited July 7, 2022 by LaurenceT

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, wookie1965 said:

Thanks Mike really appreciate your I put looks like I am saving for the baader now 😄

Paul 

The Baader is good glass no doubt about it.  As I remember it was 50 or so dollars more then what Orion sells.  The only thing I didn't care for on it was the positive  stops at each power setting, but that is just me.

Edited July 7, 2022 by Mike Q

[M40]

+1 for the Baader Zoom. Cannot compare it to any other as it has been the only zoom I have bought but it is now central to the kit. Out of interest, I have never used the paired 2.25x barlow that I bought at the same time, so dependent upon budget you can always get that later if you want. 

36 minutes ago, Mike Q said:

The only thing I didn't care for on it was the positive  stops at each power setting, but that is just me.

I rather like the click stop arrangement, let's me know whats going on without looking away from the eyepiece. 

Another aspect of the Baader range which no doubt adds to the cost is the ability to put adapters on the eyepiece allowing afocal or eyepiece projection with a dslr camera. 

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, M40 said:

+1 for the Baader Zoom. Cannot compare it to any other as it has been the only zoom I have bought but it is now central to the kit. Out of interest, I have never used the paired 2.25x barlow that I bought at the same time, so dependent upon budget you can always get that later if you want. 

I rather like the click stop arrangement, let's me know whats going on without looking away from the eyepiece. 

Another aspect of the Baader range which no doubt adds to the cost is the ability to put adapters on the eyepiece allowing afocal or eyepiece projection with a dslr camera. 

I get it, seems like most people prefer the click stops.  For me the Orion is more like my rifle scopes, so it is what I am already used to.

[Spile]

I cannot see the point in click stops. I want to find the right power for the object I am looking at/for. The actual fl I am using is of no interest to me.

[Franklin]

6 minutes ago, Spile said:

I cannot see the point in click stops.

Handy for binoviewing though.

[Louis D]

9 minutes ago, Franklin said:

Handy for binoviewing though.

Not really.  I just grab both zooms and twist them in sync until the power roughly frames what I want to view.  I then slowly adjust the zoom at my nondominant eye back and forth a bit until the two images snap into merger.  It's pretty quick and obvious when it happens, much more so than when best focus has been achieved.  I originally had concerns it would be an issue merging non-click-stop zooms in a BV, but it hasn't been an issue at all.

Besides, with click-stops, you're relying on tight manufacturing tolerances for the two eyepieces to be perfectly matched at every click-stop.  If one eyepiece's click-stop magnification is slightly off from the other eyepiece's, it would be hard to move the zoom mechanism of one of them off by a small amount because the click mechanism would want to force you onto the nearby detent.  Thus, you're having to force your brain to merge two images of slightly different magnifications in that situation.  It's doable, but not comfortable long term.

To avoid a headache or eyestrain during power changes since my brain is trying to merge unmergable images, I concentrate on the view through my dominant eye since I can't twist the two eyepieces at exactly the same rate.  This would be an issue with click-stops as well unless you looked away entirely and just counted clicks.