Celestron Ultima Edge 30mm = APM UFF = StellaLyra UF

[FLO]

6 minutes ago, LDW1 said:

My how quickly things get done, get changed, get corrected when !

This isn't unusual. We always fix typos when found.

Though today I have been extra quick because I am in bed with a laptop recovering from Covid. I mean, I have nothing else to do 🙂 

Steve 

[LDW1]

2 minutes ago, FLO said:

This isn't unusual. We always fix typos when found.

Though today I have been extra quick because I am in bed with a laptop recovering from Covid. I mean, I have nothing else to do 🙂 

Steve 

LOL !

[LDW1]

3 minutes ago, FLO said:

This isn't unusual. We always fix typos when found.

Though today I have been extra quick because I am in bed with a laptop recovering from Covid. I mean, I have nothing else to do 🙂 

Steve 

My point is / was is that on this sight and on CN this sort of thing is always being brought up by the same p****, its continual, it seems to be wide spread not just with your company.

[FLO]

It doesn't matter. Adding virtual dimensions was easy. Now everyone is happy 🙂 

And @markse68 was right. We had some typos on our product pages. It is good he mentioned this. 

Steve 

[markse68]

Thanks Steve, and get well soon!

Mark

[Louis D]

16 minutes ago, FLO said:

Though today I have been extra quick because I am in bed with a laptop recovering from Covid.

I had the alpha variant back in 2021 before I was eligible for a vaccine shot.  It was not fun.  I wish you a speedy recovery.

[LDW1]

How about an explanation of what the numbers mean, a comparison if you will, at the bottom of the pages, for those that don't know when perusing to buy an ep. It may be important to an astronomer buying, in search of a new eyepiece.

[FLO]

Just now, LDW1 said:

How about an explanation of what the numbers mean, a comparison if you will, at the bottom of the pages, for those that don't know when perusing to buy an ep. It may be important to an astronomer buying, in search of a new eyepiece.

Perhaps later 🙂 

[Don Pensack]

17 hours ago, LDW1 said:

Has anyone ever pointed these discrepancies, these errors out to these professionals for their perusal and explanation ? I am sure they would be receptive !

You are assuming the engineering diagrams are wrong, and they are not.

The problem is that the virtual field stops, the figures relevant to our figuring out the true fields in our scopes, have not been quoted.

Other companies have not published the engineering diagrams and so we do not know the physical field stop figures for them.

So they are not discrepancies, merely not figures relevant to amateur astronomers.

I agree, they should be corrected for amateurs to have a better idea of what true fields they can see in their scopes.

[LDW1]

1 minute ago, Don Pensack said:

You are assuming the engineering diagrams are wrong, and they are not.

The problem is that the virtual field stops, the figures relevant to our figuring out the true fields in our scopes, have not been quoted.

Other companies have not published the engineering diagrams and so we do not know the physical field stop figures for them.

So they are not discrepancies, merely not figures relevant to amateur astronomers.

I agree, they should be corrected for amateurs to have a better idea of what true fields they can see in their scopes.

I am not assuming the engineering is wrong, my experience tells me that with any issue a clarification of the exact concern is normally requested to precluded any ongoing issues. It should be a pretty fast resolution once the pertinent parties are involved and those that may be affected are satisfied. It saves a lot of.

[cajen2]

Ok, at last, my take on the new EP.

Cloud cover tonight but patchy, so I took the chance of doing some cloud dodging with the CUE 30mm.

Firstly and most importantly, in my scope / focuser it wouldn't come to focus. I had either to ferret around for my extender or just pull it slightly out of the drawtube, which is what I did (simple with a Baader Clicklock). This was only ever going to be a brief first light with the prevailing conditions. I chose Jupiter, as it was sometimes still visible even through the clouds.

Once focused, the image was sharp and high contrast for a long f/l EP. I compared it with my Vixen NPL 30mil, which I've always rated highly for the price, and the Celestron blew it out of the water:

* much wider FOV (50° v. 70°)

* much sharper, higher contrast views 

* much more detail than the Vixen. Three out of four moons were clear in the Vixen, with one only with AV, but the Celestron showed all four clearly.

* sharp image right across the FOV. The Vixen is pretty good in this respect, but not as clear as the CUE. 

Now, none of this comes as a huge shock as the Vixen retails at £58 compared with the UFF at £179 - £219, depending on whose version you choose.

I checked the seeing with my Baader Morpheus 6.5 mm, which clearly showed several bands on Jupiter without shimmer or shake, so between clouds, tonight was a good test.

Tech: StellaLyra 8" F/6 dob - two-speed Crayford focuser. Other EPs used - Vixen NPL 30 mm,  Pentax XW 14, Baader Morpheus 6.5 mm. The Vixen and Celestron gave 40x mag in my scope.

Conclusions: initial reactions were extremely positive. Low-magnification EPs around these mags are usually Plossls with narrow fields of view (making their niche as wide-field EPs more problematic) or ridiculously expensive. The Celestron Ultima Edge 30mil is neither.

Do remember that the APM UFF and the StellaLyra UF are said to be the same EP. I've had no opportunity to confirm this with a side-by-side test, but if so, the StellaLyra looks to be an incredible bargain!

 

 

Edited December 25, 2022 by cajen2

[JeremyS]

1 hour ago, cajen2 said:

Ok, at last, my take on the new EP.

Cloud cover tonight but patchy, so I took the chance of doing some cloud dodging with the CUE 30mm.

Firstly and most importantly, in my scope / focuser it wouldn't come to focus. I had either to ferret around for my extender or just pull it slightly out of the drawtube, which is what I did (simple with a Baader Clicklock). This was only ever going to be a brief first light with the prevailing conditions. I chose Jupiter, as it was sometimes still visible even through the clouds.

Once focused, the image was sharp and high contrast for a long f/l EP. I compared it with my Vixen NPL 30mil, which I've always rated highly for the price, and the Celestron blew it out of the water:

* much wider FOV (50° v. 70°)

* much sharper, higher contrast views 

* much more detail than the Vixen. Three out of four moons were clear in the Vixen, with one only with AV, but the Celestron showed all four clearly.

* sharp image right across the FOV. The Vixen is pretty good in this respect, but not as clear as the CUE. 

Now, none of this comes as a huge shock as the Vixen retails at £58 compared with the UFF at £179 - £219, depending on whose version you choose.

I checked the seeing with my Baader Morpheus 6.5 mm, which clearly showed several bands on Jupiter without shimmer or shake, so between clouds, tonight was a good test.

Tech: StellaLyra 8" F/6 dob - two-speed Crayford focuser. Other EPs used - Vixen NPL 30 mm,  Pentax XW 14, Baader Morpheus 6.5 mm. The Vixen and Celestron gave 40x mag in my scope.

Conclusions: initial reactions were extremely positive. Low-magnification EPs around these mags are usually Plossls with narrow fields of view (making their niche as wide-field EPs more problematic) or ridiculously expensive. The Celestron Ultima Edge 30mil is neither.

Do remember that the APM UFF and the StellaLyra UF are said to be the same EP. I've had no opportunity to confirm this with a side-by-side test, but if so, the StellaLyra looks to be an incredible bargain!

 

 

Nice report. These two are of course chalk and cheese given the fov they offer.

[cajen2]

1 minute ago, JeremyS said:

Nice report. These two are of course chalk and cheese given the fov they offer.

Of course. However, I think any EP review is enhanced by making comparisons with other EPs of the same type, even if different prices. Had the CUE not been any material improvement over the Vixen, I could have recommended that everyone save their money!

[Louis D]

Also, it's easier to nail down good field performance over a 50° AFOV than over a 70° AFOV.  So, for a 70° AFOV eyepiece to do it better than a 50° AFOV eyepiece is quite an achievement.

[Mr Spock]

I haven't gotten round to using my SL 30mm yet. Fist impressions are of an excellent build quality, a sharp field stop and it feeling heavy for the size.

Tests to follow when (if) I get a clear sky 

[Don Pensack]

The 30mm Ultima Edge focuses only 5.1mm above the focal plane of the scope.

That says your scope's focal plane is very far out in the focuser travel if you had to use an extension tube.

I wonder if it's possible to lower the primary mirror in your scope by a few mm so you don't have to use an extension tube.

[cajen2]

3 hours ago, Don Pensack said:

The 30mm Ultima Edge focuses only 5.1mm above the focal plane of the scope.

That says your scope's focal plane is very far out in the focuser travel if you had to use an extension tube.

I wonder if it's possible to lower the primary mirror in your scope by a few mm so you don't have to use an extension tube.

No, doesn't bother me much. I've found my extender and put it in my EP case, so all good. The Skywatcher 2" 30mm EP which came with the scope also needs the extender, if that's of any relevance. I assume the scope and focuser have been set up mainly for 1.25" EPs (using a 2"-1.25" adaptor), and without the adaptor, the f/l is a bit short. There again, I may be spouting nonsense! 😄

Edited December 26, 2022 by cajen2

[TheLookingGlass]

On 10/12/2022 at 10:23, johnturley said:

Would be interested to know how it compares with the Baader Hyperion Aspheric 31 mm, which has a similar APFOV.

John 

It will be miles better than the 31mm Hyperion, or even the 36mm Hyperion. This thread is good, but it is getting wrecked by too much Bru-ha-ha.

Edited December 26, 2022 by TheLookingGlass