Controversial, "I don't get buying lot's of eyepieces."

[scarp15]

Backyard visual astronomy can quite profoundly differ to trips to dark sky sessions. For the later; complete dark adaptation is a fundamental necessity and enabling much lower power / larger exit pupil focal lengths, determined by specific subject characteristics of course. Therefore screens are definitely a no go. Conversely certain suitably selective targets observed from a typical garden / yard setting, may enable very high power oculars to be employed. Then there is everything in-between.

The complete joy of visual astronomy is capturing; seeing (and learning to see) extraordinary encounters in real time.  

[Highburymark]

28 minutes ago, scarp15 said:

Backyard visual astronomy can quite profoundly differ to trips to dark sky sessions. For the later; complete dark adaptation is a fundamental necessity and enabling much lower power / larger exit pupil focal lengths, determined by specific subject characteristics of course. Therefore screens are definitely a no go. Conversely certain suitably selective targets observed from a typical garden / yard setting, may enable very high power oculars to be employed. Then there is everything in-between.

The complete joy of visual astronomy is capturing; seeing (and learning to see) extraordinary encounters in real time.  

Absolutely. One day I’d love to experience views through a large dob at a dark site - something I’ve never done. Maybe in 2023.

My astronomy highlight of 2022 was watching an X-class flare explode on the Sun - the first time that I’ve watched solar plasma move in real time - this particular example was many times the size of the earth and travelling at over 500km a second. Seeing it through an eyepiece was incredible.

[Nigella Bryant]

3 hours ago, Ian McCallum said:

A camera can't capture the dynamic brilliance, colour and magic of a view through the eyepiece.  For the time being, a 'live' view can't be matched on bright objects like stars and star clusters, etc.

True, but I guess it depends on what you like to specialise in. I'm primarily solar and planetary. I'd like to to do more spectroscopy in the coming months but even that's imaging, lol. 

[Ian McCallum]

2 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

Colour? Come now, that is precisely what a camera can capture. These are natural colour RGB.

 

Olly

You know what I mean. The whole human eye experience can't be replicated by a camera and screen, at present. 

[JeremyS]

33 minutes ago, Highburymark said:

My astronomy highlight of 2022 was watching an X-class flare 

Are you sure you’re  old enough, Mark?

🤣

[rwilkey]

On 29/12/2022 at 12:45, Nigella Bryant said:

OK, I'm going to get some flack with this. I see many post's about new eyepieces arriving and pic's with all the others they have. The cost of some more than some of my scopes, lol. 

I confess at the beginning, I either use my Astro cameras to view on the computer screen or image with same camera's. I don't get why so many eyepieces and sometimes expensive one's. I own about three eyepieces but invariably use just the 32mm sometimes to centre an object before inserting the camera. 

So, may the controversy begin, lol. 

Hi Nigella, if you were an observer, you would probably understand.  As Ian says above!

Edited December 30, 2022 by rwilkey
typo

[Paul M]

4 hours ago, Mr Spock said:

If you are going to look at a screen, why not just subscribe to one of the many telescope feeds out there 

Joking aside (you were joking, weren't you? 😇), that too is a valid observational experience. 

Perhaps though, in this age of shared experience, it's easier to share an imaging session on a forum such as SGL than to share a visual observing session. I do like to read accounts of someone's night at the eyepiece but they tend to be "wordy".

An image speaks a thousand words!

 

[Ratlet]

2 minutes ago, Paul M said:

Joking aside (you were joking, weren't you? 😇), that too is a valid observational experience. 

Perhaps though, in this age of shared experience, it's easier to share an imaging session on a forum such as SGL than to share a visual observing session. I do like to read accounts of someone's night at the eyepiece but they tend to be "wordy".

An image speaks a thousand words!

 

Absolutely. 👼

Edited December 30, 2022 by Ratlet

[Paul M]

4 hours ago, Mr Spock said:

If you are going to look at a screen, why not just subscribe to one of the many telescope feeds out there 

Joking aside (you were joking, weren't you? 😇), that too is a valid observational experience. 

Perhaps though, in this age of shared experience, it's easier to share an imaging session on a forum such as SGL than to share a visual observing session. I do like to read accounts of someone's night at the eyepiece but they tend to be "wordy".

An image speaks a thousand words!

 

[Nigella Bryant]

1 minute ago, Ratlet said:

Absolutely.

It's not in colour, lol 🤔

[Ratlet]

1 minute ago, Nigella Bryant said:

It's not in colour, lol 🤔

It is.  Those are the colours I saw lol

[Highburymark]

27 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

Are you sure you’re  old enough, Mark?

🤣

Well I waited 58 years to see it Jeremy, so I think I’m old enough.
Sun’s a little quieter at the moment so it’s back to those tame PG-class flares…..

[scarp15]

26 minutes ago, Paul M said:

Joking aside (you were joking, weren't you? 😇), that too is a valid observational experience. 

Perhaps though, in this age of shared experience, it's easier to share an imaging session on a forum such as SGL than to share a visual observing session. I do like to read accounts of someone's night at the eyepiece but they tend to be "wordy".

An image speaks a thousand words!

 

Aye that's true Paul in terms of good images, good sketches; can speak a thousand words.

A good written presentation report evokes a narrative, a kind of story telling, conveys an atmosphere as well as an analysis. Statistical and rational content can be exchanged and shared with others. Therefore conversely, a good written report can convey a thousand images.  

[Mr Spock]

Nothing can describe the awe of sitting at the eyepiece watching Io transit across Jupiter. Anything else would feel secondhand.

[Nigella Bryant]

Good discussion, nice and friendly too. We all have our preferences and constraints of income, well most, lol. I'm dreaming of an automated dome, oh goodness, do I start a controversial question over domes v RoR, lol. How many is to many, lol. How big does one go? Does an all sky camera count as an observatory, lol. 

[Don Pensack]

Cameras can capture things invisible to the eye, but the view through the eyepiece can encompass a greater dynamic range.

You can see the Trapezium in M42 at the same time you can see wisps of nebulosity in the Fish Mouth.

You can see details in the Regio Centralis at the same time you can see the very faint nebulosity almost a degree away that closes the oval.

Here is a sketch that captures what can be seen visually, which would be an impossible image:

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/399146-sketch-of-m42-m43-dobsonian-22/?p=5112451

[scarp15]

3 hours ago, Mr Spock said:

Nothing can describe the awe of sitting at the eyepiece watching Io transit across Jupiter. Anything else would feel secondhand.

The simplicity of that scenario and a nip of whiskey. 

[JTEC]

Interesting debate 🙂.  Is the outcome the measure of an observation or is it the entirety of the observing experience? For a decade or so I imaged, lugging equipment to remote places with beautiful skies slogging away in gaps of cloud in the UK and teaching others to image as well. I remember the excitement of the early results.  But more than that I think back to being out under the stars, being there,  being part of the night and its silent progress and, as the mount ticked away, scanning the sky with binos or just looking up. Now, I’m a visual observer and haven’t imaged for years and I’m not tempted back.  I had enough of jiggling with field-flatteners, trouble-shooting autoguiders, tripping over wires, staring at screens, trialling software, pixel peeping for the technical edge, processing and reprocessing … all of which took far more time than I spent under the sky.  But I’m glad I did the imaging.  The good thing is we have both, each has its own power, each complements and neither excludes the other. 

Edited December 30, 2022 by JTEC

[Louis D]

44 minutes ago, JTEC said:

Interesting debate 🙂.  Is the outcome the measure of an observation or is it the entirety of the observing experience? For a decade or so I imaged, lugging equipment to remote places with beautiful skies slogging away in gaps of cloud in the UK and teaching others to image as well. I remember the excitement of the early results.  But more than that I think back to being out under the stars, being there,  being part of the night and its silent progress and, as the mount ticked away, scanning the sky with binos or just looking up. Now, I’m a visual observer and haven’t imaged for years and I’m not tempted back.  I had enough of jiggling with field-flatteners, trouble-shooting autoguiders, tripping over wires, staring at screens, trialling software, pixel peeping for the technical edge, processing and reprocessing … all of which took far more time than I spent under the sky.  But I’m glad I did the imaging.  The good thing is we have both, each has its own power, each complements and neither excludes the other. 

You make some very good points.  When I've only got an hour to get outside after work and before bedtime to get up rested enough to go to work the next day, I simply don't have the time, desire, or patience to mess around with setting up and fine-tuning an imaging rig.  If I lived in the mountains of New Mexico and had a permanent observatory imaging setup, I might feel completely different about imaging versus observing.  I could actually do both at the same time using preprogrammed imaging runs.  However, unless I was imaging something no one else had imaged in the same way, I'd have a hard time justifying doing it at all.  I took a lot of snap-shot images through the eyepiece of bright objects starting out in amateur astronomy years ago and lost interest in it within a couple of years.  Nowadays, I just enjoy communing with nature and the celestial sphere from the quiet of my backyard.

[F15Rules]

"I remember skipping most imaging equipment related threads here on SGL as being esoteric and unfathomable. "

I've done that for years! And shouldn't there be a law against wrapping lovely scope ota's in miles of wire and spaghetti??😂😂

I do like some of the pictures, though 😊

Dave

Edited December 30, 2022 by F15Rules

[SuburbanMak]

Hmm. This prompted me to go off and count eyepieces and was a little shocked to find that it’s 24 - I have been doing this seriously for 2 years so that is quite a rate! 

My Skywatcher Mak came with a 20mm and a 10mm Plossl. The 10 was horrible and the 20 didn’t get the max FoV out of the Mak which is limited anyway. So, after much pleasurable research I plumped for a Baader 8-24mm zoom + Barlow and a wider Hyperion 24mm.  These are still my main EPs in this scope. 

Next I got hooked on cheapo eBay classic frac’s and have ended up with 4 - which between them came with 6 generally murky old .965’s.  I converted these scopes to 1.25” but needed lighter weight EPs and was struck that the whole minimum glass thing chimed with the vibe of these old scopes. So along came a set of 3 Baader Classic Orthos (I love them, especially the 18mm) + a 32mm Plossl.  I later added a TV 15mm Plossl as I wanted an in between magnification and was curious to see what all the fuss was about with Televue. 
Next up came an ST80 and a conversion to 2inch for super widefield viewing - having loved the Baader Hyperion 24mm, I stuck with the brand and bought the 31mm Aspehric (turns out this was a mistake, lovely EP but not great in a scope this fast, hence an order today for the Stella Lyra 30mm UFF to replace!). 

Then in the hunt for ever dimmer Messier objects with the Mak @Stu pointed out something technical about exit pupil and I acquired a 40mm Celestron Plossl to aid with galaxy hunting (good tip btw). 

Lastly, Dob fever got the better of me and I picked up a used 10” GSO f5 Dob, which brought with it a comprehensive set of 7 Plossls and (I think) an Erfle. 

And just like that, I have a drawer full. 
 

Hang on, I just realised I also picked up a box of old RAS fit EPs for the brass Clarkson Edwardian observing experience - there’s another 12 right there. 

So with the UFF on order, that’s 37. 

Someone should set up a self-help group for this. 


 

 

[Voxish]

I own one telescope (an 4 inch fl7 apo) and 6 eyepieces, which I confess is probably 2 too many. Mine are a mixture of ES 68 and 82 of numbers. They are 4.7, 6.7, 11, 16, 20 and 28 mm. The 28 mm 68 is a really very good eyepiece. The 6.7 is my most used planetary eyepiece and if I get the chance my 4.7. However I conceed that I have too many. The 4.7 gets a lot more use than I had imagined, but the 20 mms doesn't get used much and the 11 mm really only for white light solar, and even then the 16 mm could probably be just as useful. I had thought about changing the 16 mm for a 82 degree 14 mm, but the 16 is very good and I have a morbid fear of buying astro gear. Getting it wrong is expensive and I have been very lucky so far judging from some of the stories I have read on here over the years. 

 

On a different matter I have never understood why ES eyepiece are not more popular in the UK, excellent build quality, identical optical quality to TV and less than half the price, I don't get it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 14, 2023 by Voxish

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

On 29/12/2022 at 14:44, vlaiv said:

I don't subscribe to 3 EPs per scope approach.

I can easily list 5-6 eyepieces one "needs" for general purpose scope like 8" f/6 dobsonian.

First you need very low power eyepiece. I used 32mm Plossl in that role, but now use 28mm ES 68 degrees

Then you need general DSO eyepiece that is around 17-18mm for this scope.

Then you need dual use EP that is around 11-12mm. It will be high power EP for globulars, or very low power for planets.

Last - you need at least 2 planetary EPs - like 5mm one for good seeing and 7-8mm one for average seeing conditions (in worse than average seeing - use 11-12mm one).

I prefer not to use barlow and like around 60 degrees AFOV (so no very wide options, although I don't mind them - I have 82 degrees ES line).

What he said ^^. I've a modest collection of 10 eyepieces stored in one case, covering two telescopes of very different focal ratios. Slightly more than the suggested 'three for each telescope' but they all do get used especially during planetary sessions in variable seeing conditions.

I don't get why anyone needs twenty five eyepieces in three cases either, but whatever makes them happy. 👍

 

[Mr Spock]

I'd love a Nirvana to fit between the 7mm and 4mm. Sadly they don't make one. However, the 13mm with x2.5 Powermate equals 5.2mm so that's near enough 
With my 12" the 7mm gives x217 and the 4mm x380; the 13mm plus x2.5 gives x293, so a nice fit.

[Paz]

I have quite a few eyepieces but I do genuinely use lots of different eyepieces over time as I have a variety of scopes and observe all sorts of targets.

However I also think Internet forums, Facebook, etc do encourage hobbyists to end up with far more gear than they really need if they're not careful and being honest this is the case with me and astronomy.

I realised this when I took up some other hobbies and saw how much gear people have these days in any hobby. 

In all my hobbies except for astronomy  I am disciplined about gear, e.g. I play guitar and I have one guitar, one amp, and one pedal board and that's it so I spend my time playing not thinking about what gear I'm going to play. I find the forums about guitar playing to be preoccupied with gear rather than music and I don't participate in them.

One last interesting point is that despite an unhealthy collection of eyepieces, on any given session I know what I'll be looking at and I will pick never normally more than 3 eyepieces to take out, and often I'll only use 1 or 2 in a session.