I don’t like eyepieces - is there something wrong with me?

[Rob]

Eyepieces are a very personal choice for the observer. To one person, not so great.. to another a real winner!. This is fine, we are all different in some respects. I found mid range premium are just great for me, that said there are some gems sub £100 bracket also.

best advice - try out where possible, and try them again. 
 

Rob

[markse68]

collecting eyepieces takes up far less space than collecting scopes

 

[Alan White]

Rob, Louis has it bad, real bad.....
But I do like the eyepiece trumps idea.

[dweller25]

1 hour ago, Louis D said:

Nothing wrong with you wrt eyepieces.  To each their own.  I must be going now, or I'll be late for my EA (EyepieceAholics Anonymous) meeting: 😉

Where’s the Leica ASPH zoom?  😈

[Don Pensack]

17 hours ago, RobertI said:

Ok, perhaps the title is a bit of an exaggeration, but I have never been that excited by eyepieces, and I’m wondering why. Do I get excited by telescopes? Most definitely. Mounts? Oh yes, some lovely mounts out there, a Rowan AZ75 is definitely on my list. But not eyepieces. With my new 102ED refractor (admittedly not ‘premium’) with its fancy FPL53 glass, I have considered a new premium eyepiece, but I’ve struggled to find a good case for the spend. I know that the best eyepieces have fewer aberrations, less scatter, etc, but from what I’ve read there is very little difference in what you can actually SEE. And I recall one famous reviewer who said he could make out very little difference between a premium eyepiece and a cheaper zoom when viewing the planets. I bought a couple of Baader Hyperions at least 10 years ago, and have supplemented them with a BST, a Baader Zoom and a OVL Panoptic for wide field, and I have been neither delighted or disappointed by any of them, they do the job, but none have transformed my viewing pleasure. My binoviewer did, but that’s another story! So am I missing out on a whole world of eyepiece pleasure? What am I doing wrong? 🙂

Many people go searching for premium eyepieces looking for a sharper or clearer image on axis.  Having owned nearing 400 different eyepieces over the last 6 decades, I can tell you that the axial difference between eyepieces is only a tiny

fraction of the difference in seeing and transparency from night to night.  You can be happy with a set of £65 eyepieces for nearly every type of object you'll ever view.

BUT:

--if you want an ultra-wide (or even wider) field of view because you prefer to take off the 'blinders'.

--if you want star images that are center-of-field sharp all the way to the edge.

--if you want eyepieces with superb contrast across that entire field.

--if you want eyepieces that just 'immerse' you in the field so you forget you're looking through an eyepiece instead of a porthole into space.

--if you want eyepieces you can use with glasses on to make it easier to see sharp star images and share the view with others without refocusing.

THEN:

--you will wind your way through series of eyepieces looking for the ones that fulfill your requirements.

--you will try this and that eyepiece, always looking for the Holy Grail of eyepieces--the perfect one (hint: it doesn't exist)

 

It is not lunar and planetary observing that pushes you in this direction, it is deep-sky observing.

How low a power do I need?  How large a field do I need?  How high a power is usable?  What eyepieces provide the most satisfying views?

If I change scopes, will I change eyepieces?  Do I need different sets for different scopes?  How far apart should I space the magnifications?

All of those are questions that take experimentation and experience to answer.

 

You just haven't gone through enough eyepieces to find one that is just perfect for your use.  Your scope is a high enough quality to justify some experimentation.

Along the way (and you can buy used to save money and resell what you don't like very easily), you'll run into one that will just stay with you.

In 1998, I bought a 22mm TeleVue Nagler.  I found it immersive, easy to use, a very satisfying low power eyepiece with a nice bright image.

It was like an old shoe that is just immediately comfortable when you wear it.  It was just a great eyepiece in each of the 4 scopes I owned from 1998-2010, when I replaced it with a 21mm Ethos.

But something always kept me from using the 21mm Ethos.  It was a great eyepiece, but lacked that indefinable quality of immersiveness and ease of use.  I found myself reaching for the 17mm Ethos

every time.  A trip to Australia in 2014 reacquainted me with a friend's 22mm Nagler again, and I realized what I had been missing since giving up the 22mm Nagler, but I still kept the 21mm Ethos.

By 2020, my astigmatism had worsened and I needed to wear glasses at the eyepiece at that focal length, so I replaced the 21mm Ethos with the 22mm Nagler again.

It was like coming home.  I was once again using that focal length a lot and enjoying the view a lot more.  Narrower field, yes, but that simply didn't matter.

 

What did it take to get there?  Experimentation.  Long term use of both eyepieces.  And an understanding that my reaction to the eyepiece was as important, maybe more important, than the eyepiece itself.

I wasn't disappointed with the 21mm Ethos.  I don't find the 22mm Nagler optically superior to the 21E in any way.  But the view it gives just 'gets out of the way' and engages me with the field of view in a way the 21mm Ethos never did.

It's an eyepiece that yields the same engagement in my 12.5" and 4" and will likely be my chosen low power eyepiece in my upcoming 16".

 

Delighted?  I wouldn't use that word.  Finding an eyepiece that engages me in the process of observing?  Priceless.

 

 

Edited September 15, 2022 by Don Pensack

[Alan White]

5 minutes ago, Don Pensack said:

always looking for the Holy Grail of eyepieces--the perfect one (hint: it doesn't exist)

Never truer word spoken Don 👍

[Louis D]

1 hour ago, dweller25 said:

Where’s the Leica ASPH zoom?  😈

Well, I am looking at having Santa drop off an APM SuperZoom for Christmas if they come back in stock before then. 😁

I've never been convinced that the Leica ASPH zoom would have enough eye relief for me and my massive astigmatism.

[Mr Spock]

If you are happy with what you have, there's nothing wrong with that. Just go out and enjoy observing. That's what it's all about after all 

I have a few different types of eyepiece and they each have their purpose. They are all equally good in their own way:
LVW: sharp right to the edge and comfortable to use. Great for stars, lunar and solar. Negatives - big and heavy.
Orthos: wonderful crisp, clean views, especially with the x2.5 Powermate. There isn't a better eyepiece for planetary detail. Negatives - narrow fov and not parfocal.
SLV - in between the two. Good allrounders with no obvious weakness. Negatives - this type of design with long eye relief and twist up cups isn't always ideal. You have to have your eye in the right position.

[MalcolmM]

As my partner said to me last night 'my what a difference 2mm makes' 

[Stephenstargazer]

Surely you have explained the FoV per Kilogram relationship?

(Can anyone really understand the minds of eyepiece designers?)

Edited September 15, 2022 by Stephenstargazer

[RobertI]

Some really great thoughts there, thanks everyone, I knew eyepieces would generate a lot of discussion, in fact I was a little worried about unearthing a hornet’s nest! 🙂

The truth is I am very curious about eyepieces and would love to see whether a super-wide-field would give me that wow, or whether edge-to-edge sharpness improves my viewing pleasure. With my scopes I’ve always been very clear on what I want to achieve with my observing before buying - I think the 102ED was the only scope where I bought for other reasons - namely to treat myself to something a bit more ‘premium’ and to see if what everyone said about them was true. Well the 102ED turned out to be a resounding success, so perhaps I should just try the same experiment with a new eyepiece and see where it goes ……. surely just one little eyepiece can’t hurt? 😉

Edited September 15, 2022 by RobertI

[Ags]

I am afraid eyepieces trigger an unresolvable collecting glitch in my brain. I am constantly thinking about how to rejig my collection - I don't have many but my particular "thing' is trying to create the smallest collection of eyepieces that feel "complete". This is complicated by my wish to have parallel sets of widefields for regular viewing and plossl-likes for nostalgic viewing.

[Louis D]

12 minutes ago, RobertI said:

surely just one little eyepiece can’t hurt? 😉

A very slippery slope indeed as I can attest. 🙄

[Alan White]

29 minutes ago, RobertI said:

Well the 102ED turned out to be a resounding success, so perhaps I should just try the same experiment with a new eyepiece and see where it goes ……. surely just one little eyepiece can’t hurt? 😉

I will send you a Eyepeice-O-Holic Anonymous link straight away, it always start with that line...

[NGC 1502]

Just read the above with interest.  For some of us eyepiece choice is a never ending journey, sometimes buying eyepieces we once sold, or deeply regretting selling something we cannot find again.

I think it’s a bit like cars. I’m completely happy with my 2008 Fiesta, someone else might not be.  

I definitely think it’s worth upgrading the stock eyepieces that come with lots of new scopes.  Something like the BST Starguiders  is a big improvement that could fully meet many folks needs.

My all time favourite eyepiece is my Vixen 22mm LVW. Sorry, it’s not for sale, just works so well in all my scopes.

Ed.

[Stu]

16 hours ago, Don Pensack said:

I wasn't disappointed with the 21mm Ethos.  I don't find the 22mm Nagler optically superior to the 21E in any way.  But the view it gives just 'gets out of the way' and engages me with the field of view in a way the 21mm Ethos never did.

I think I may well fall into the same camp as you Don. I’ve had 13, 17 and 21mm Ethos’ and thought they were fantastic optically, but just not totally relaxing to view through. The 31mm Nag I find very comfortable, so perhaps I should revisit a 22 Nag as well.

[lvan]

I concur with the OP. I bought the ES24mm 68° that everyone raves about, it’s great but i don’t get more enjoyment than the basic 25mm that comes a scope purchase. I use the ES cause it’s there but I wouldn’t miss it. I once read that there are 3 categories when choosing an eyepiece: cheap, sharp, wide field. You can only choose 2.

[Mr Spock]

On 16/09/2022 at 06:46, NGC 1502 said:

My all time favourite eyepiece is my Vixen 22mm LVW. Sorry, it’s not for sale, just works so well in all my scopes.

Same here. I sold my 22mm and 17mm T4 Naglers and bought LVWs. Never looked back 👍

[Ags]

3 hours ago, lvan said:

I concur with the OP. I bought the ES24mm 68° that everyone raves about, it’s great but i don’t get more enjoyment than the basic 25mm that comes a scope purchase. I use the ES cause it’s there but I wouldn’t miss it. I once read that there are 3 categories when choosing an eyepiece: cheap, sharp, wide field. You can only choose 2.

What kind of telescope are you using? For example, I recall that the difference between a Hyperion 24 and an ES 24 was drastic in an f5 Newt, but the eyepieces performed indistinguishably in an f13 Mak.

I use a Super 25 a lot, but it definitely has shortcomings, such as a real fishbowl effect if you try to use it for daylight spotting.

Edited September 21, 2022 by Ags

[lvan]

8 hours ago, Ags said:

What kind of telescope are you using?

Currently an ED80 f7.5, 200p f5 and 130p f5.

Since I seem to have accumulated numerous Super 25’s, I use them for daytime solar viewing.

Edited September 22, 2022 by lvan

[Paz]

I think these days in so many things there is so much choice it can be depressing trying to decide what to get. I think I was lucky in that I have asigmatism and that forced me stick to long eye relief options and I also knew I did not mind so much about having extremely wide fields of view - they are nice if possible but not essential for me personally.  The fact that this narrowed the field made my eyepiece journey a lot shorter and less stressful than it otherwise would have been. A good example being where I read everything there was to read about Ethos eyepieces and they sounded amazing, but I knew they would not work for me and I got a 22mm Nagler and years later every time I get the 22m Nagler out it still feels like a treat.

[bomberbaz]

Some interesting opinions on here, nothing wrong with not having the eyepiece bug, certainly helps your wallet.

When I first started my glasses wearing kind of dictated what I used to buy as I too have astigmatism, but I pay little notice to it these days as I use contact lens which all but eradicate it.  I don't even bother with contacts when looking through my refractors as the exit pupil is so small for most eyepieces that the astigmatism is not really a noticeable problem. I believe it's called learning to live with your disabilities.

Personally, some of my most recent eyepiece purchases have been impulse buys rather than I really need them buys. (Baader and Nagler zooms to name two) 

However, I have had the Nikons in my signature for five + years and I have no intention/wish/need to sell them. The TS and APM 24 are similarly long term and no plan to move on.

I like the extra wide views of the first three and the flat field the 24mm APM gives.  I also like to know I am holding a thing of beauty when I pick it up, a piece of fine engineering with years of design experience in its making, something that I know holds its value very well and will serve me well for the rest of my observing days.

All the others in my sig are more recent but when purchasing I used my experience of what I already have to pick most of them. And I have confidence that I will have no need to replace any of them even if "eyepiece provider" makes a new, super-duper range of glass.

Hmm, am I actually saying I no longer have the bug 🤣

Steve