Vixen HR 3.4mm

[Louis D]

21 hours ago, jetstream said:

Perfect! there are few eyepieces that have ever reached this level and I hope to complete the set, and use them. They are bizarrely good IMHO. I wonder what their minimum number of units would be needed to get them interested in another run?

I've read that Chinese eyepiece manufacturers (probably from Don) will make a run of eyepieces for you in your choice of livery with a minimum order of 300 per focal length.  However, this is for eyepieces still considered to be in current production.

I don't know about Japanese manufacturers like Vixen who have much higher production costs, though.  It may simply be a minimum cost that they want to recapture regardless of order size.

I know when the companies I work for send an ASIC out to a fab for build, the NRE (nonrecoverable/nonrecurring expense) has risen from $1.5 million to closer to $10 million or more over the past 25 years.  I would think that restarting discontinued eyepiece production might incur a similar (if much smaller) NRE regardless of order size.

[jetstream]

40 minutes ago, Louis D said:

an ASIC

I just had to look this up 😶 Well, I hope that whoever made these eyepieces for Vixen is still able to fire up production for some more. Last night the 3.4HR/2.4HR bested the Zeiss zoom/VIP noticeably on Mars under excellent seeing, which is no easy task.

[Franklin]

On 07/04/2023 at 15:11, mikeDnight said:

Unfortunately, what is under the Vixen HR's bottom baffle is not a filter thread, so if you use a planetary filter of some kind, it has to be attached elsewhere.

The HR's do have a standard filter thread but it is set back a little too deep for modern, low-profile filters to engage with. My vintage Vixen set of luna/planetary/colour filters all have the same deeper threads like the HR baffles have and all fit fine. In fact I used the green filter with the HR 3.4 last night to star test my scopes on Regulus and was very pleased with the results. Very nice, clean and concentric bulls-eyes on either side of focus.

 

[mikeDnight]

13 minutes ago, Franklin said:

The HR's do have a standard filter thread but it is set back a little too deep for modern, low-profile filters to engage with. My vintage Vixen set of luna/planetary/colour filters all have the same deeper threads like the HR baffles have and all fit fine. In fact I used the green filter with the HR 3.4 last night to star test my scopes on Regulus and was very pleased with the results. Very nice, clean and concentric bulls-eyes on either side of focus.

 

I didnt know the bottom baffle could be removed. And now I'm jealous of your beautiful vintage filter set. 

[Franklin]

3 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

I didnt know the bottom baffle could be removed. And now I'm jealous of your beautiful vintage filter set. 

I think Vixen only do the Moon filter now, it is a good quality ND filter in a metal cell, unlike the budget green Moon filters that Celestron and others sell, which are in a plastic cell. The Vixen colour set I have must be about 30 years old as I have seen it for sale (7000yen) in a 1993 Vixen catalogue, they are quite nice to have but I don't use them much really. There is Blue #80a, Green #56, Yellow #15, Orange #21 and Violet #47 but I tend to just use the 2" Baader Neodymium in the diagonal nosepiece for a little contrast boost. Not sure on filters, it all seems very subtle and subjective to me, though I do enjoy playing around with them.

[Franklin]

Older runs of Baader 1.25" filters had a much deeper threaded ring than the new low-profile type which only have about 2 or 3 threads on them. They would most likely be deep enough to engage with the deep set threads inside the HR nosepiece.

[Mr Spock]

I have far too many eyepieces but would love both a HR 3.4 and LVW 3.5 to go with my TOE 3.3 

[Franklin]

11 minutes ago, Mr Spock said:

I have far too many eyepieces

Ditto.

23 at the last count🤔.

[Stu]

I tried my 3.4mm in the 60mm f10 last night and really enjoyed it. I looked at the Moon which was a bit low and not that great so I tried some doubles. There’s something about the large airy disks you get with a small scope that is just perfect, and very aesthetically pleasing. I viewed Castor, Algieba, Mizar and Izar. The first three were resolved beautifully of course, whilst Izar was a lovely disk, surrounded by a diffraction ring with the blue grey secondary ‘gem’ embedded in it. Beautiful. Maybe I’ll try a 2.4mm….. again! If one comes up that is.

[HollyHound]

I'm just happy to have the HR 2.0... sits perfectly below the XW3.5 and (when conditions allow), is a beautiful eyepiece for lunar in the my 100mm refractor 😍 

[Roy Challen]

I need one of these, as good as my BCOs are, both natively and barlowed, they just don't have the reach in a short focal length frac. Or maybe a x3 or x5 barlow would work.

[jetstream]

6 hours ago, Mr Spock said:

I have far too many eyepieces but would love both a HR 3.4 and LVW 3.5 to go with my TOE 3.3 

And the 2.4mm, which might be more used than one might think, IMHO. Last night I could have used the 2mm on Mars.

[Mr Spock]

3 hours ago, jetstream said:

And the 2.4mm, which might be more used than one might think, IMHO. Last night I could have used the 2mm on Mars.

Indeed, a 2.4 would be nice. I have a 2.5 SLV which I might replace with a TOE as HRs seem to be unobtainable. 

[jetstream]

8 minutes ago, Mr Spock said:

Indeed, a 2.4 would be nice. I have a 2.5 SLV which I might replace with a TOE as HRs seem to be unobtainable. 

Your new scope can utilize these eyepieces frequently IMHO and I would not hesitate to use the TOE EPs from what I hear from respected friends. Im on the lookout for the 2mm and 1,6mm and might have to wait a long time unfortunately.

[Highburymark]

HR 3.4 and 2.4 for sale on Astromart in the States, if anyone’s interested. 

[Littleguy80]

I received the response below from Vixen:

”Thank you very much for your inquiry.
The HR-series eyepieces were discontinued and we do not keep stock any more.
The Reason for the discontinuation was due to dramatically increasing material costs.
We wish to keep your comments in mind for future product plans.”

[Alan White]

@Littleguy80, very much the response we probably expected, sadly.
I think Vixen have missed a trick as a higher priced HR would still sell, all be it into a small market.
 

[Littleguy80]

1 minute ago, Alan White said:

@Littleguy80, very much the response we probably expected, sadly.
I think Vixen have missed a trick as a higher priced HR would still sell, all be it into a small market.
 

I have made that suggestion to them in response. I guess only they have the sales and manufacturing numbers to know what is and isn’t viable though. 

[Highburymark]

Does make you wonder how long the TOEs will be around if costs are escalating so much - and whether there will be another specialist planetary eyepiece produced once they are gone. Although they must have picked up a lot of sales since HRs were killed off. Maybe that’s helped keep the line profitable for Takahashi. Vixen’s response suggests the HRs were indeed too cheaply priced. 

[Mr Spock]

There is a market for them, and people will pay. Nobody seems to mind paying extortionate sums for an Ethos for example 

[IB20]

This thread is really making me want a 3.3mm TOE.

[Mr Spock]

51 minutes ago, IB20 said:

This thread is really making me want a 3.3mm TOE.

Just do it - you know you want to 😜

[josefk]

3 hours ago, IB20 said:

This thread is really making me want a 3.3mm TOE.

i'm in the same head space - out of stock at FLO at the moment - i'm using the FLO advised waiting time as a "cooling off period" because 3.3mm is 300x for me and so perhaps a bit "occasional" as a focal length. Not sure.

[jetstream]

3 hours ago, IB20 said:

This thread is really making me want a 3.3mm TOE.

These types of eyepieces do make a real difference IMHO. My best planetary/lunar eyepieces best all the others in all of my scopes- from the SW120ED through the 24" f4.1/PCII. Yeah even the big one, after fiddling some astig out and with the 3.4HR gave a superb view of the moon at 845x. A neutral density filter is mandatory here.

I would presume the difference between the TOE and HR to be very small and the difference between those two and others like XW and Delos to be easily noticeable.

Forgot to say- my 90mm SV uses the 3.4mm HR very frequently, not even a challenge.

Edited April 13, 2023 by jetstream
Forgot to say...

[IB20]

I have the 4mm & 2.5mm TOEs and they are absolutely sublime. The 4mm is my favourite eyepiece. I use them a lot more than I thought I would; lunar and planetary views are sensational but I think double stars are my favourite with these eyepieces. I need and want the full set, if they ever get discontinued it’ll be a sad day!

I should add if the Vixen HR line did ever make a reappearance I’d be sorely tempted to try one!

Edited April 13, 2023 by IB20