Stellalyra Eyepieces experience

[Jimmy81]

Afternoon all

I'm after some advice on the Stellalyra eyepieces. Particularly their LER/UWA 80° range. I’m already convinced on buying the 30mm UFF as I’ve only heard good things about them. I currently have a nice selection of BST starguiders 8mm, 12mm, 18mm and 2x Barlow. Plus a 28mm 2” Orion eyepiece. I love viewing wide open space/DSO so am thinking of refining my lens selection. I was thinking of keeping the 8mm and 12mm BST for planetary/luna  and selling the 18mm, 28mm and Barlow to make way for the 30mm UFF and 20mm LER/UWA. 
does anyone have any hands on experience with the 20mm 80° UWA from Stellalyra?? Are they as good quality and value as the UFF range?

Thanks

 

Jim

Edited February 15 by Jimmy81

[cajen2]

The 20mil LER/UWA is a real gem: mine is sharp, flat to the EOF and almost a 3D image. A friend of mine also has the 14mm and says it's just as good. HOWEVER, I don't think this is true right across the range. I also got the 4mm for planetary views and find the image much softer and less detailed than my Morpheus 4.5mil.

So two of them highly recommended but one not. 

Edit: I also own a Celestron Ultima Edge 30mm (same as the UFF range) and it's excellent. The SL 20 is as good imo.

Edited February 15 by cajen2

[Jimmy81]

5 minutes ago, cajen2 said:

The 20mil LER/UWA is a real gem: mine is sharp, flat to the EOF and almost a 3D image. A friend of mine also has the 14mm and says it's just as good. HOWEVER, I don't think this is true right across the range. I also got the 4mm for planetary views and find the image much softer and less detailed than my Morpheus 4.5mil.

So two of them highly recommended but one not. 

Edit: I also own a Celestron Ultima Edge 30mm (same as the UFF range) and it's excellent. The SL 20 is as good imo.

Thanks for replying. I actually just found your review of this eyepiece (I shoulda looked harder before asking) and found it to be very helpful. I’m pleased to hear that the eyepiece performs well. I feel for what I want to view the 30mm and 20mm are the way to go. I will retain my BST 12mm which gives a 60° view and is good for wider planetary as this eyepiece gives lovely sharp images but for wider views I would like to go really wide to get that ‘star walking’ immersive feel to viewing. 

[Louis D]

If you don't need to wear eyeglasses at the eyepiece, you might also consider the APM XWA 20mm and its many other brandings.  Here in the US, the Astro-Tech version is $247.50 while the Orion LHD 20mm (StellaLyra 80º LER / UWA equivalent) is $299 (both pre-tax prices).  You might be able to hunt around and find a reasonably priced version of the 100º 20mm eyepiece in the UK.  It's supposed to be very well corrected across ~90% of its field.  Since that's way out in your peripheral vision, it's hard to notice when it gets a bit less well corrected unless you go looking for it.  Eye relief is certainly less than the 80º 20mm, so taking in the view will be a bit less relaxed.  Just another data point for you to ponder.

[Don Pensack]

6 hours ago, Jimmy81 said:

Afternoon all

I'm after some advice on the Stellalyra eyepieces. Particularly their LER/UWA 80° range. I’m already convinced on buying the 30mm UFF as I’ve only heard good things about them. I currently have a nice selection of BST starguiders 8mm, 12mm, 18mm and 2x Barlow. Plus a 28mm 2” Orion eyepiece. I love viewing wide open space/DSO so am thinking of refining my lens selection. I was thinking of keeping the 8mm and 12mm BST for planetary/luna  and selling the 18mm, 28mm and Barlow to make way for the 30mm UFF and 20mm LER/UWA. 
does anyone have any hands on experience with the 20mm 80° UWA from Stellalyra?? Are they as good quality and value as the UFF range?

Thanks

 

Jim

One thing to know: The eyepieces have 20mm of eye relief from the glass, but only 12mm of eye relief from the rubber eyecup up.

If you wear glasses and wish to use these eyepieces, the best course of action is to replace the rubber eyecup with a regular flip up/fold down type.

You then would easily have enough eye relief for glasses use.  If you don't wear glasses, the eyepiece is fine as is.

Long Perng, the maker, has, I understand, addressed some of the internal light scatter issues they had with the earlier versions from Orion (the LHD), so this has likely improved.

Comparing the Orion LHD 14mm (80°) to the 14mm Baader Morpheus (78°), the Morpheus had better contrast and went deeper, but it looked like the culprit was light scatter in the Orion LHD.

The issue was communicated to the maker and I've been told that later productions have been better in that regard.

Since StellaLyra is a latecomer to the model, it is likely the issue has been addressed.

[Jimmy81]

8 hours ago, Don Pensack said:

One thing to know: The eyepieces have 20mm of eye relief from the glass, but only 12mm of eye relief from the rubber eyecup up.

If you wear glasses and wish to use these eyepieces, the best course of action is to replace the rubber eyecup with a regular flip up/fold down type.

You then would easily have enough eye relief for glasses use.  If you don't wear glasses, the eyepiece is fine as is.

Long Perng, the maker, has, I understand, addressed some of the internal light scatter issues they had with the earlier versions from Orion (the LHD), so this has likely improved.

Comparing the Orion LHD 14mm (80°) to the 14mm Baader Morpheus (78°), the Morpheus had better contrast and went deeper, but it looked like the culprit was light scatter in the Orion LHD.

The issue was communicated to the maker and I've been told that later productions have been better in that regard.

Since StellaLyra is a latecomer to the model, it is likely the issue has been addressed.

Thanks for sharing. I had read somewhere about the light scatter issue and have since read that this has been addressed in the Stellalyra incarnation. One of the big factors that is attracting me to this brand is what appears to be the value for money. A lot of people are talking about how good some of the eyepieces are and how they compete (and in some cases better) some of the established higher end brands. If they are as good as many others have suggested, then I think I would be happy to give them a try. 

[Jimmy81]

I took the plunge and purchased the 30mm UFF and the 20mm LER/UWA. 
I’ll leave some feedback when I’ve had a chance to try them out. Can’t wait 😛 

[Moonlit Night]

Nice

[cajen2]

18 hours ago, Jimmy81 said:

I took the plunge and purchased the 30mm UFF and the 20mm LER/UWA. 
I’ll leave some feedback when I’ve had a chance to try them out. Can’t wait 😛 

I have both of those and I am sure you won't be disappointed.

Oh, by the way, the SL has NO light scatter that I can discern.

Edited February 21 by cajen2

[Jimmy81]

6 minutes ago, cajen2 said:

I have both of those and I am sure you won't be disappointed.

Oh, by the way, the SL has NO light scatter that I can discern.

I think I mentioned before about whether the 20mm might be a bit close to the 30mm in terms of magnification, but all will be revealed. If I find them too similar (40x and 60x in my 8” f6 dob) then I may switch the 20mm for the 14mm LER/UWA. With regards to the light scatter issue, that seemed to come up on the CN forums when I was searching for reviews, but it seems the SL range has been very well received. Maybe a few people who have shelled out on higher priced branded pieces don’t want to believe that they can be bettered or equalled by a lower costing lesser known brand?? Either way, I gotta feeling I made a good decision.

[cajen2]

The "issue" with scatter which keeps being referred to was a tiny ring in the light path which was originally silver. A few people said that there was a refection from this. Long Perng changed that ring to a matt black one after the first version of the EP and most certainly all the StellaLyra iterations have the black one.  Have another look at my review where this is discussed.

I think there may be a lot of truth in your final assertion....😉

[cajen2]

I find both EPs excellent and different enough in their FOV and mag to both be useful. That's in my Starfield 102ED - your mileage may vary! 😄

[Nakedgun]

On 15/02/2024 at 13:35, Don Pensack said:

One thing to know: The eyepieces have 20mm of eye relief from the glass, but only 12mm of eye relief from the rubber eyecup up.

If you wear glasses and wish to use these eyepieces, the best course of action is to replace the rubber eyecup with a regular flip up/fold down type.

You then would easily have enough eye relief for glasses use.  If you don't wear glasses, the eyepiece is fine as is.

Long Perng, the maker, has, I understand, addressed some of the internal light scatter issues they had with the earlier versions from Orion (the LHD), so this has likely improved.

Comparing the Orion LHD 14mm (80°) to the 14mm Baader Morpheus (78°), the Morpheus had better contrast and went deeper, but it looked like the culprit was light scatter in the Orion LHD.

The issue was communicated to the maker and I've been told that later productions have been better in that regard.

Since StellaLyra is a latecomer to the model, it is likely the issue has been addressed.

~

What other brand-names is this Long Perng LER/UWA series (other than the Orion) sold as, I wonder?

 

 

.

[Don Pensack]

2 hours ago, Nakedgun said:

~

What other brand-names is this Long Perng LER/UWA series (other than the Orion) sold as, I wonder?

.

Orion LHD

Stella Lyra 80° UWA

Founder Optics Marvel

Long Perng 80° UWA

 

Edited February 21 by Don Pensack

[Don Pensack]

5 hours ago, Jimmy81 said:

I think I mentioned before about whether the 20mm might be a bit close to the 30mm in terms of magnification, but all will be revealed. If I find them too similar (40x and 60x in my 8” f6 dob) then I may switch the 20mm for the 14mm LER/UWA. With regards to the light scatter issue, that seemed to come up on the CN forums when I was searching for reviews, but it seems the SL range has been very well received. Maybe a few people who have shelled out on higher priced branded pieces don’t want to believe that they can be bettered or equalled by a lower costing lesser known brand?? Either way, I gotta feeling I made a good decision.

8" f/6 dob 1200mm focal length

For a set of 50x/100x/150x/200x/250x for generally good seeing.

24mm, 12mm, 8mm, 6mm, 4.8mm

For a set of 40x/80x/120x/160x/200x for generally poor seeing.

30mm, 15mm, 10mm, 7.5mm, 6mm.

Eyepieces can be +/- of course.

[SCANS]

2 hours ago, Don Pensack said:

Eyepieces can be +/- of course.

Hi Don,

Hope retirement is treating you well. I just noticed the sizes you list for your current eyepieces. If I'm not mistaken, you mentioned on CN that the Morpheus lineup was part of your main collection, but those focal lengths don't align with your list. Have you switched things up with some new glass? Or is this indicative of what you mean re: +/-?

[Jimmy81]

8 hours ago, Don Pensack said:

8" f/6 dob 1200mm focal length

For a set of 50x/100x/150x/200x/250x for generally good seeing.

24mm, 12mm, 8mm, 6mm, 4.8mm

For a set of 40x/80x/120x/160x/200x for generally poor seeing.

30mm, 15mm, 10mm, 7.5mm, 6mm.

Eyepieces can be +/- of course.

My preferred viewing is DSO and wider star views, but I also like the checking the planets every now and then. I really wanted to limit myself to 3 eyepieces. So at the moment I have:

30mm, 20mm, 12mm. 
I haven’t had a chance yet but I’m hoping to try the 20 & 30mm tonight as the forecast is for clear skies from 8pm.

i may change the 20mm for the 14mm and then change the 12mm for a 10mm or 8mm. We’ll see how tonight’s viewing goes with the 2 new eyepieces. 

[Don Pensack]

13 hours ago, SCANS said:

Hi Don,

Hope retirement is treating you well. I just noticed the sizes you list for your current eyepieces. If I'm not mistaken, you mentioned on CN that the Morpheus lineup was part of your main collection, but those focal lengths don't align with your list. Have you switched things up with some new glass? Or is this indicative of what you mean re: +/-?

I list the actual focal lengths as found on the test bench.

Here is what Baader labels them: 17.5, 14, 12.5, 9, 6.5, 4.5mm

Here is what they actually are: 17.2, 13.9, 12.4, 8.9, 6.7, 4.8mm

Those differences are pretty small--even on the high end, where the difference in my scope is 26x between claimed and actual focal lengths.

 

Cn you tell the difference between 380x and 406x in the field?  I don't think I can.  Both are "around 400x".

The same is true at very low powers.  I can see the difference between 50x and 70x if I really try to look for it, but I regard both as a low power for large objects.

And if they had the same true field size, it would be even harder to tell them apart.

We tend to obsess over small differences.  How many times have you seen someone asking about an eyepiece in between, say, 30mm and 18mm when those two eyepieces are only 30x apart in his/her scope?

 

When I said +/-, I was not referring to the measurements of the eyepieces' actual focal lengths, but the idea that someone choosing eyepieces could still follow a progression

by modifying the eyepieces chosen by moving up or down to match a series of preferred eyepieces.

For instance, if a series progression would be 20mm..14mm..10mm..7mm..5mm..3.5mm in the scope for a mathematical sequence,

and the eyepieces came in 21mm, 13mm, 9mm, 6.5mm, 4.5mm, 3mm, then you might simply adjust to pick up the eyepieces offered, even if the sequence was not perfect.

There really is no difference in the field between 145x and 155x anyway--they're both around 150x.

Edited February 22 by Don Pensack

[Moonlit Night]

Brilliant Don, exactly that. 

[Jimmy81]

So I have had a chance to use these 2 eyepieces now over a few nights so thought I’d share my findings. I’m fairly new to astronomy so don’t have  or know all the technical talk so this will be a very laymen’s style review. Both eyepieces used in my 8” f6 1200mm Orion Goto dob.

First off is the SL 30mm UFF. 
Going from having 1.25” eyepieces to this was a substantial change in terms of size and weight, but in a good way. It feels hefty and solid in the hand, it looks slick and subtle. 
I tried out a few clusters - Starfish Cluster, Double cluster, Pleiades etc. Eye relief was comfortable and easy to get set. The views were great, lovely wide field of view and pin sharp stars across the whole view - which is what I expected given what I had read about it. I did have an almost full moon lighting up the sky which affected the overall contrast of the image and prevented me from looking at things to the east and south east. But Orion Nebula looked great, even without any fancy filters, I could make out more of the gas/dust clouds than with my cheaper 28mm 2” Orion eyepiece. The only other eyepieces in my collection to date have been BST Starguiders (which I really enjoyed using). 
so overall the 30mm UFF is a fantastic heavy weight sturdy well built eyepiece. Pin sharp stars across the 70° view and just comfortable to look through. I will be keeping this lens. 

[Jimmy81]

Second up was the SL 20mm 80° LER/UWA. 

First impressions on this are wow! It’s slightly bigger and heavier than the 30mm UFF, but again, not in a bad way. It feels premium and very well made. I wasn’t as keen on colour scheme of the black and red, I felt the all black 30mm looks a bit better. But that just my taste. 
I popped this into my scope and the first impressions of being wowed were quickly reduced by the hassle of getting the eye relief right. It’s neither a flip up/down or twist up/down. It’s a screw up/down affair. There is no resistance when screwing/unscrewing the eyecup and no stop point when you reach max, so it just simply comes right off in your hand. I found that when I finally got it to position that was comfy and I could see the whole field of view, it felt loose like it could move easily because of the lack of resistance in setting the position. 
Anyway, moving on to the viewing, the wow factor came back! The images I was seeing were again pin sharp from edge to edge. Each star was a wonderful point of light, contrast seemed better than the 30mm even with the now full moon high in the sky. The 20mm (60x in my scope) framed things really nicely, especially with the 80° Afov. Orion again looked superb, as did the starfish cluster. Optically I just cannot fault it. The only negatives I can comment on are that I was concerned the 20mm was too close in magnification to the 30mm, and for me it is too close. The 30mm gives you the vista, but the 20mm, for me, is kind of at that range where it’s not enough to be considered ‘a closer peek’ at something and not quite wide enough to replace the 30mm full time. 
the other negative is the eyecup. I really struggled to set it right so I could view without getting that blackout effect from my eye being in the wrong position. Now this is a deal breaker, as £179 for an eyepiece that will just frustrate me and will struggle to use, just doesn’t make sense. 
if this eyepiece had a different eyecup I would still return it and swap it for it’s 14mm sibling (as this will be a much better useful mag for me). I would still highly recommend this eyepiece to anyone, because if you can get the eye relief right then this is an astonishingly good eyepiece to look through. 
 

I hope someone finds this info useful. Both are superb and capable eyepieces. 

[Don Pensack]

One way to set the 20mm's eyepiece:

place an o-ring (or o-rings) under the eyecup so it threads down tightly when it is in the right position.

 

Or, simply change the eyecup to a flip-up/fold down type.  You have to have access to a retailer who sells a lot of eyecups in various diameters to do that, as the eyepiece is a non-standard 50mm thread on the aluminum top.

And, if doing so, you'd have to deal with the bright red anodized top to the eyepiece.

[Jimmy81]

@Don Pensack that’s a good shout with the o ring solution. I was just really surprised that they opted for that design?!

it leaves me wondering what to do in terms of filling the gap with a 14mm/15mm/16mm in that price range.  There is a StellaLyra 14.5mm  68° eyepiece, ES 14mm 82°, or the SL 14mm 80° and try a find a work around with the eyecup?? Decisions, decisions!

[Louis D]

How about the 13mm APM HDC-XWA 100° and other brandings by the same manufacturer, if you don't need long eye relief?  Apparently, they're lighter than the competition while still having excellent correction.

There's also the 12.5mm APM Hi-FW and its Sky Rover stable mate if you need long eye relief.  Don dislikes its EOFB, but I've yet to even notice it.  Perhaps if I observed under truly dark skies I'd notice it.  I find it to be very well corrected.

The 12.5mm Morpheus is also well liked if you need long eye relief.  I don't have it, but I do have the 14mm Morpheus and find it very good, with just a bit of astigmatism in the last 5%, although Don reports there being none.  Perhaps I got a dud.  I measure 78° on it, so just barely narrower than the 14mm SL 80°, but in a 1.25 barrel.

I really like the 12mm ES-92, but it is very large, heavy, and expensive.  You might struggle with eye position with it.  Ironically, I've measured the 12.5mm Hi-FW to have a slightly larger field stop than the 12mm ES-92 despite the former being in a 1.25" barrel and the latter in a 2" barrel.  They have opposite distortion as well.  The ES-92, like most astronomy eyepieces, stretches objects toward the edge while the Hi-FW compresses them.

People rave about the 12.5mm Noblex and 12.5mm/10mm Nikon NAV-HW, but both are very expensive.

There's also the 11mm Tele Vue Apollo if you can find one used and afford it.  I believe the limited edition production run ran out.

There are lots of excellent options between 11mm and 14mm.

[Don Pensack]

7 hours ago, Jimmy81 said:

@Don Pensack that’s a good shout with the o ring solution. I was just really surprised that they opted for that design?!

it leaves me wondering what to do in terms of filling the gap with a 14mm/15mm/16mm in that price range.  There is a StellaLyra 14.5mm  68° eyepiece, ES 14mm 82°, or the SL 14mm 80° and try a find a work around with the eyecup?? Decisions, decisions!

Or 14mm Morpheus, or 13mm XWA.  Louis had some good suggestions, too.

 

The issue Louis sees with the 14 Morpheus serves as an example of what is seen in various scopes with the same eyepiece.

The main issue with it is field curvature.  It performs fine in a newtonian at f/5.75 with Paracorr (which flattens the field some), as all that's left at the edge is a tiny trace of astigmatism in the last couple degrees.

I find the astigmatism is only seen when running back and forth through focus, not in focus.

The astigmatism looks worse in my f/7 refractor because the field of the refractor is a lot more curved than the newtonian, and that curve doesn't match whatever the eyepiece might have, so the astigmatism is defocused, making it look worse.

And the eyepiece performed poorly in a friends f/3.45 newtonian (with Paracorr), indicating the eyepiece image deteriorates with ultra fact focal ratios.

 

The 12.5mm Morpheus is sharper, though not greatly so.  It's sharp enough to be excellent for globular clusters in my 12.5", resolving M15 right to the core.