A Very Unscientific 10mm Shootout

[MalcolmM]

I have tried to do a comparison of my 10mm eyepieces. I used my Tak FS60CB, as this is the fastest scope I have and I thought this would be the toughest test for the eyepieces, particularly the wide field ones.

This is unscientific, no hard data and numbers, just my impressions.
The eyepieces are: 
Tak 10mm LE
Tak 9mm Abbe Ortho (OK, it's not 10mm, but it's close!)
Baader Classic Ortho 10mm
Masuyama 85 degree 10mm
Pentax 85 degree XW 10mm

The targets were the moon and the Perseus Double Cluster - this was all I had time for before the clouds rolled in.
The scope was the Tak FS60CB giving a magnification of 35.5 (and 39.5 for the TAO)

The main takeaway from this experiment was that if any of the eyepieces were my only 10mm eyepiece, I would be very happy with it. To my relatively inexperienced eye, there was not a huge difference in any of them (aside from FOV differences). My favorites were the 9mm TAO and the Masuyama. My least favorite was the Pentax ... but there is a twist at the end to this!

Tak Abbe Ortho
This little eyepiece was simply sharper and presented more contrast than all the others. Moon features just popped and Perseus's stars were pin point sharp to pretty well the field stop. There was not a huge difference to the others, but I could definitely see a difference. It's a narrow FOV, particularly noticeable after using one of the 85 degree eyepieces, but if I'm using an ortho, I'm looking for detail, not a panoramic view. I find this eyepiece very easy to look through and I love that it is very light.

Masuyama
Call me strange but I enjoy just holding this eyepiece (as I do for the whole range up to the 32 if I'm honest!). It is beautifully built! I could not really perceive any difference in sharpness or contrast with the TAO on the moon but I think the Masuyama may just have rendered the star colours more vividly in the double cluster. Sharpness was woeful from roughly half way to the field stop in the fast FS60CB, but hey, that still gives you 40 degrees of loveliness! Oddly, the poor outer 40 degrees of FOV do not bother me, even when looking at star clusters but I realise for many this would be a show stopper. It's actually quite hard to see the whole FOV; you really need to press your eye down virtually onto the lens. Don't use this eyepiece in a slow, undriven setup! I also really like the soft eyeguards; very comfortable to use.

Tak 10mm LE
I don't really have to much to say about this eyepiece. I like it. I used it a lot until I got the 9mm TAO. I still use it in binoviewers. It's sharp, the contrast is good, colour rendition is similar to the TAO, but it just lacks a little bit of zing that I'm afraid I cannot quantify or even qualify!

Baader Classic Ortho
This one surprised me. I was expecting it to be noticably worse than the others, being a fraction of the price. But it is really good. Not quite as good as the Taks or Masuyama, but very close. It's the lightest of them all, and so has a less robust feel to it, and I'm not really keen on the winged eye guard, though it's comfortable enough. I do not use this one much but bang for buck, this one is hard to beat.

Pentax XW
This Pentax range gets great reviews. It's a hand grenade compared to the others! It's very well built and feels very solid. The rotating eye cup oozes quality! But I found it a little less sharp with a little less contrast than the others, and the colour rendition was not as vivid as the Masuyama. The image is sharp pretty well to the field stop though so for slow, undriven scopes, this would be a winner. It was also easier to see the whole FOV in the Pentax than in the Masuyama. So, while I was a little disappointed in this one, I realise it's not really a fair comparison when the competition is Orthos. My big beef with this one is the size and weight. But that's just me, I like small and light!

Eyepieces are very personal. One person's supernova is another person's piece of space junk. There are so many variables; type of scope, fast or slow scope, driven mount or manual, one's own eyes, weight and balance (eyepiece weight, not one's own weight 🙂), wide FOV or narrow FOV, type of target ... so I'll not be offended if anyone vehemently disagrees with my impressions 🙂 I would be very interested as to what eyepieces you prefer and why. 

The Twist
So I have maybe given a poor impression of the Pentax. Early this morning (the comparison was done a week ago or so) I was observing the Moon and Jupiter with my Tak FC100DC. I was alternating between a Tak Abbe Ortho 4mm and 6mm wishing I had 5mm Ortho. The 4mm was just slightly too much, the image becoming ever so slightly soft. The 6mm was a lovely sharp view but just begged for a little more. I suddenly remembered I had a 5mm XW hidden away. Hidden, as the house is in disarray with some work being done to it. Anyway, back to the Pentax. Wow! Perfect! It gave me the perfect magnification for the conditions. I did not try detailed comparisons on sharpness or contrast, I just enjoyed a fantastic view and really appreciated being able to rove my eye over the full 85 degrees of sharpness! Jupiter too was a fabulous sight and seeing it suspended with the full 85 degrees of dark background makes for a wonderful sight. My Pentax eyepieces are not going anywhere!

Malcolm
 

[JeremyS]

Great report @MalcolmM

How are you finding the eye relief on the Masuyama 10?

[John]

Interesting report 🙂

Just a small point - the Pentax XW 10mm and 5mm that I have used have 70 degree fields of view. There are now 2 focal lengths in the XW range that give 85 degrees but those are 16.5mm and 23mm focal length.

I do agree that eyepiece preferences are very personal. The 5mm Pentax XW is also one of my favourites though so we do agree on that one 🙂

 

 

 

 

[MalcolmM]

2 hours ago, JeremyS said:

Great report @MalcolmM

How are you finding the eye relief on the Masuyama 10?

It's tight but I find it ok. In fact, compared to the 3mm eye relief of the TAO 4mm, it's huge 🙂

Malcolm 

[MalcolmM]

2 hours ago, John said:

Just a small point - the Pentax XW 10mm and 5mm that I have used have 70 degree fields of view

You're quite right @John, my mistake! Thanks for the correction. 

Malcolm 

[NGC 1502]

Thanks for your informative report. Most good quality eyepieces are more similar than different when compared. A massive factor is the state of the atmosphere.

For those that need glasses for observing the eye relief of the various eyepieces will be a clincher when it comes to choice. Some will be unusable for glasses wearers.

I too prefer small and light, but that’s a very personal decision.

I love my Radians, others hate them!

Ed.

 

[IB20]

Fantastic, I’m chuffed you like the 5XW. The 7XW and 5XW are my favourites of the shorter XW range. Interestingly I was using the 9mm BGO and 10XW last night in the 8” dob. The 9mm BGO seemed to present improved contrast and controlled glare a touch better on the planetary face and ring system of Saturn. The XW easily wins in FOV and comfort mind! The XWs are great eyepieces and are perfect ergonomically despite the heft. The twist up mechanisms are a dream and are so much better than say the Delites; I couldn’t stand their eye relief mechanism.

[MalcolmM]

1 hour ago, IB20 said:

Fantastic, I’m chuffed you like the 5XW. The 7XW and 5XW are my favourites of the shorter XW range. Interestingly I was using the 9mm BGO and 10XW last night in the 8” dob. The 9mm BGO seemed to present improved contrast and controlled glare a touch better on the planetary face and ring system of Saturn. The XW easily wins in FOV and comfort mind! The XWs are great eyepieces and are perfect ergonomically despite the heft. The twist up mechanisms are a dream and are so much better than say the Delites; I couldn’t stand their eye relief mechanism.

I think it was your enthusiasm for the XWs that persuaded me to try them @IB20. Good call 🙂

Malcolm 

[Elp]

Considering how well they Powermate (basically very little loss in fidelity), would I gain much by getting a smaller than 10mm XW? (IE I can already view at 4mm equivalent with the PM).

[John]

I've Powermated XW's and they (like many eyepiece types with the Powermate) seem to retain all of their positive optical characteristics when used with a PM. The only reasons that I stopped using PM's were i) that it was another (quite expensive) optical accessory to install / remove in the dark and ii) the resulting "stack" of an already tall eyepiece plus a Powermate can get long and unwieldy especially if the scope is small.

Powermates are really excellent extenders. As usual with the Tele Vue brand, the cost is quite high though. 

 

Edited September 8, 2023 by John

[Elp]

They are costly, but as a primarily imager I thought I'd reap the benefit, and they are really as good as they say they are, I was surprised how good they are visually too as prior experience using Barlow's you do notice the drop in brightness as well as edge definition. I suspect the 4x and 5x may suffer a little though in this respect.

Edited September 8, 2023 by Elp

[josefk]

Super fair write up Malcolm but why do you have multiple 10mm EPs? (is that a silly question on here?). I only have a pair 18mm TAO but from the first moment with them i was extremely impressed - really tiny stars. They powermate extremely effectively for 9mm as @John points out (as long as the powermate is after the diagonal 🙂).

[Mr Spock]

Although I do have a 10mm Nirvana, at that focal length for planetary I would use a 2.5x Powermate and a 25mm Circle-T Ortho. Those orthos take on a new life when used with the PM.

I have previously compared a 10mm NLV and 10mm Radian - the NLV won that one. 

These days I prefer more compact eyepieces. I'm not a fan of bulk and looking at modern eyepiece design it isn't necessary for medium focal length eyepieces.

[MalcolmM]

2 hours ago, josefk said:

why do you have multiple 10mm EPs?

I wish I knew! It just sorta happened! I realise it's both daft and decadent! And now I have them I'm really reluctant to get rid of any of them as I've read so many posts from people selling eyepieces and then immediately regretting it! I do like the option of using different eyepieces as they give very different viewing experiences and some suit some scopes better than others. The Masuyamas are mostly used in the Mewlon for example. 

I'm trying desperately hard not to buy any more but the new TLPs and the Masuyama orthos are proving hard to resist 🙂

Malcolm 

[Louis D]

57 minutes ago, MalcolmM said:

I wish I knew! It just sorta happened! I realise it's both daft and decadent! And now I have them I'm really reluctant to get rid of any of them as I've read so many posts from people selling eyepieces and then immediately regretting it! I do like the option of using different eyepieces as they give very different viewing experiences and some suit some scopes better than others. The Masuyamas are mostly used in the Mewlon for example. 

I'm trying desperately hard not to buy any more but the new TLPs and the Masuyama orthos are proving hard to resist 🙂

Malcolm 

If you don't need the money from the sale of eyepieces, have the space to store them, and enjoy comparing them once in a while; then by all means keep them all with a clear conscience.  Do what's right for you.

Here's my 9mm to 10mm collection.  Curiously, I only have one 10mm eyepiece. 

Just above that at 12mm to 12.5mm is where the pile-up occurs in my eyepiece collection:

Clearly, some are very specialized eyepieces at this focal length.

[josefk]

That 10mm Delos looks good in the first set @Louis D

[MalcolmM]

My collection is quite small compared to yours @Louis D. That makes me feel much less guilty 🙂

Malcolm 

[badhex]

Great report @MalcolmM, thanks! I own both the BCO 10mm and XW 10mm but have different use cases for each, generally keeping the BCO for planetary work (I also have a 6mm BCO).

As already mentioned above the BCOs powermate very well, and the combination of the BCO 10mm and PM makes for a very good and still reasonably sized 4mm planetary EP. 

[badhex]

3 hours ago, josefk said:

Super fair write up Malcolm but why do you have multiple 10mm EPs? (is that a silly question on here?). I only have a pair 18mm TAO but from the first moment with them i was extremely impressed - really tiny stars. They powermate extremely effectively for 9mm as @John points out (as long as the powermate is after the diagonal 🙂).

Although it's at the other end of the scale I have 30mm, 35mm, 40mm and 41mm EPs; although I don't use the 30mm as it is not great (GSO Superview) I'm fairly close to replacing it with a UFF... sometimes these things just happen 😂

[cajen2]

6 minutes ago, badhex said:

Although it's at the other end of the scale I have 30mm, 35mm, 40mm and 41mm EPs; although I don't use the 30mm as it is not great (GSO Superview) I'm fairly close to replacing it with a UFF... sometimes these things just happen 😂

Do it! You won't be sorry....

[badhex]

3 minutes ago, cajen2 said:

Do it! You won't be sorry....

No I know, the quandary is not whether the UFF will be a good purchase, but rather whether my bank balance can sustain it! 

[John]

I reckon this is the same eyepiece as the 30mm UFF but under different branding:

U.K. Astronomy Buy & Sell (astrobuysell.com)

UF 30mm Ultra Flat Field Eyepiece – Sky Rover Optics

If it is not exactly the same then it is very, very similar.

 

[Don Pensack]

4 hours ago, Elp said:

They are costly, but as a primarily imager I thought I'd reap the benefit, and they are really as good as they say they are, I was surprised how good they are visually too as prior experience using Barlow's you do notice the drop in brightness as well as edge definition. I suspect the 4x and 5x may suffer a little though in this respect.

Of course you notice the drop in brightness.  If you didn't, they wouldn't be magnifying.  The drop in brightness isn't due to transmission loss, it's due to magnification.

Generally, Barlows yield sharper edge definition due to the effective doubling of the f/ratio of the scope.  If they don't improve the edge of the field, there could be something optically mediocre about the Barlow.

As for PowerMates, the 4mm functions about the same as the 2X version, though the extra magnification might be too much.

The 5x unit has its magnification change with distance from the lens, similar to a Barlow.  I think its primary market is for imagers of planets, where it increases the size of the image significantly when used between scope and camera.

[Don Pensack]

19 minutes ago, John said:

I reckon this is the same eyepiece as the 30mm UFF but under different branding:

U.K. Astronomy Buy & Sell (astrobuysell.com)

UF 30mm Ultra Flat Field Eyepiece – Sky Rover Optics

If it is not exactly the same then it is very, very similar.

 

It's the same.  The manufacturer is KunMing United Optics (KUO), and Sky Rover is their "house brand".

They also sell eyepieces private label to at least 10 companies, maybe more.

[John]

Just now, Don Pensack said:

It's the same.  The manufacturer is KunMing United Optics (KUO), and Sky Rover is their "house brand".

They also sell eyepieces private label to at least 10 companies, maybe more.

Are they responsible for the Svbony 3-8mm zoom ?

There is a certain resemblance.