Vixen SLVs

[Ags]

I really do like these eyepieces. I have a 25 mm for the Sun with my Quark, and a 6 mm for planets in my f6 scopes. I don’t need, but I absolutely want, to build a set of 2.5, 4, 6, 9, 15, and 25. It’s a nearly perfect 1.5x progression, and would be great for my two small refractors!

 I have an NLV 9 and 12, but their build quality is so far below the SLVs the NLVs’ Japanese glass is no compensation…

[Knighty2112]

Just bought the 4mm SLV off a member here. I’m the third owner, but the EP in excellent new condition. Got it out briefly on Jupiter last night in my 80mm ED ‘frac and got great view with it. Waiting for some more clear skies to test out further on my 102mm ED f11  ‘frac, and Celestron Omni 120mm f8.3 ‘frac on the planets and also double star observations.

[John]

I was impressed with the 3 that I tried:

Vixen SLV Eyepiece Report: 6mm, 12mm and 20mm - Member Equipment Reviews - Stargazers Lounge

There was some talk of internal light scatter from a lens retaining ring in an early manufacturing run but I can't recall which FL that was 🤔

 

[Ags]

I believe that was fixed a while ago, still something to think about when buying second hand.

[Louis D]

2 hours ago, Ags said:

I have an NLV 9 and 12, but their build quality is so far below the SLVs the NLVs’ Japanese glass is no compensation…

Interesting.  I hadn't heard about NLV build quality issues.  My 9mm LV exudes quality except for the cracking rubber roll-up/down eye cup.

[Ags]

Well, the NLVs are outwardly almost identical to NPLs. 

[Franklin]

I've tried the original LV, the NLV and the SLV and in my eyes the SLV wins every time. Nothing wrong with the earlier versions, optically speaking, but the build of the SLV is better as you say. Optically excellent eyepieces and only lack in FOV when compared with other more premium ranges.

[IB20]

I really like the 6mm LV I have. Never tried the SLVs but they seem to get rave reviews. 

[Paz]

I have a set of SLVs as my light let up, currently 25, 20, 15, 10, 6, 4, 2.5, including binoviewing pairs at 20, 15, and 10.

I've also got a 5 but that's on long term loan out.

I think they are great and I got on to these due to needing more eye relief.

I sometimes thing about swapping out the 10s and getting 12s and 9s for better intervals, but I continue to procrastinate about it.

[Mr Spock]

I'm a big fan of the SLV. Even though I sold them all because of the other premium eyepieces I have, I've 're-bought' the 6mm as it will be an excellent lunar eyepiece and fills the gap between my 8mm and 5mm LVWs.

[Naughty Neal]

I keep reading the very favourable reviews of the SLV so have decided to dip my toe in to the waters and try one,  Mr Tim's  unsold 12mm on the sales thread  will be winging it's way to me next week.  If they are as good as I read them to be then I may bide my time and get a few others in the range such as the 6, 9 & 25.

  To me the 15 & 20 seem an odd FL in the range and a 17 or 18 would have been a better FL.   To me the step up from 12 to 15 then 15 to 20 are a bit to close in mags and  in my fracs would only represent a 16/18x & 17/19x increase, a little to close .

 

Edited March 3 by Naughty Neal
Paragraphed better.

[Ags]

I could save a bit of money and shorten the buying cycle if I can persuade myself of a more minimal 2x progression rather than 1.5x: 2.5, 6, 12, 25.

The strongest argument is my Svbony 3-8 zoom, it really does make owning a lot of short eyepieces a bit superfluous. But the SLV 2.5 would be a useful lunar/doubles eyepiece, and the SLV 12 would give 1.2 degrees of FOV in my longest frac… The four eyepieces would cover the 4 basic magnifications - low, medium, high and optimistic 😀

Edited March 3 by Ags

[Louis D]

5 hours ago, Paz said:

I have a set of SLVs as my light let up, currently 25, 20, 15, 10, 6, 4, 2.5, including binoviewing pairs at 20, 15, and 10.

I've also got a 5 but that's on long term loan out.

Do you find that the 6, 5, 4, and 2.5 are all actually 45° like the original LVs instead of the claimed 50°?  I've read many conflicting accounts.

[Zermelo]

38 minutes ago, Louis D said:

Do you find that the 6, 5, 4, and 2.5 are all actually 45° like the original LVs instead of the claimed 50°?  I've read many conflicting accounts.

The blurb on FLO says 45 degrees for those four FLs.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/vixen-eyepieces/vixen-slv-eyepieces.html

[Franklin]

The only problem with the SLV range is that there are just too many of them and some of them are too close together. Why Vixen dropped the 18mm and the 7mm from the original LV range is beyond me. I had a full set of SLV's at one time but found I really only used the 25mm, 12mm, 9mm, 6mm and 4mm, with the 2.5mm being an optimistic option as mentioned above.

[Naughty Neal]

I agree Tim, no need for the 15 and 20 as I mentioned above , 18 would have been the better FL to keep.

I can understand the high power ep's being close as some times it can be a fine line with the seeing, for the most part now I shall likely rely more heavily on my SvB 3-8 zoom for high power.

Edited March 3 by Naughty Neal

[Paz]

2 hours ago, Louis D said:

Do you find that the 6, 5, 4, and 2.5 are all actually 45° like the original LVs instead of the claimed 50°?  I've read many conflicting accounts.

I remember reading about this at the time I was researching eyepieces but I can't remember if I did a test myself when I first got them. I do know I've got them set up in sky safari as 45 degrees, that might be me that added them in as that or that might be the stock eyepiece defaults in sky safari.

[Paz]

1 hour ago, Franklin said:

The only problem with the SLV range is that there are just too many of them and some of them are too close together. Why Vixen dropped the 18mm and the 7mm from the original LV range is beyond me. I had a full set of SLV's at one time but found I really only used the 25mm, 12mm, 9mm, 6mm and 4mm, with the 2.5mm being an optimistic option as mentioned above.

I have the pairs at 20/15/10 for use with high magnifications barlows and glass path correctors which for example at 2.6x makes them equivalent to 7.7/5.8/3.8mm.

[Louis D]

The one original LV I really want is the 50mm.  It's supposed to be really special.  That, and it looks awesome.

[Acrab67]

A while ago I was carefully comparing my SLV 5mm with the Svbony zoom 8-3mm with my TS 125 f7'8 refractor in double stars and planetary and, apart from the better eye relief of the SLV, I found the optical performance very similar, including the contrast and dispersion. The SLV didn't show anything I couldn't see with the zoom. Regardless of this, I prefer binocular viewing with relatively cheap eyepieces to monocular viewing with the more expensive eyepiece.

[John]

6 hours ago, Acrab67 said:

A while ago I was carefully comparing my SLV 5mm with the Svbony zoom 8-3mm with my TS 125 f7'8 refractor in double stars and planetary and, apart from the better eye relief of the SLV, I found the optical performance very similar, including the contrast and dispersion. The SLV didn't show anything I couldn't see with the zoom. Regardless of this, I prefer binocular viewing with relatively cheap eyepieces to monocular viewing with the more expensive eyepiece.

The Svbony 8-3mm zoom is turning out to be a bit of a revelation 🙂

[Stu]

31 minutes ago, John said:

The Svbony 8-3mm zoom is turning out to be a bit of a revelation 🙂

It is indeed John. It’s actually great that something with performance that good is now within reach for most people even on a fairly tight budget. Given the current weather, we will likely see a lot of expensive fixed focal length eyepieces up for sale!

[mikeDnight]

 I really hate the look of the SLV's with their cheap looking grey plastic bulbous head. I've only ever used one briefly after I inherited if from a late astronomer friend, but moved it on because it was ugly. I think it was a 25mm but can't be certain as it was a few years ago. I might take a closer look at some of my friends to see if its time I moved them on too, but then again, having ugly friends has the advantage of making me appear better looking - possibly?!

 I did however really love the old LV's across the range. A pair of 15mm LV's in my barlowed binoviewer gave me the best defined view of the Alpine Valley's central rill that ive ever had, and that was in a FC100DC. And using the same scope in 2016, an early morning Mars through the 2.5mm LV was simply gorgeous. If the SLV's got rid of the grey bulbous bit, I'd probably like them. I love the clean, simple look of older eyepieces coz I'm a bit of a fossil.

[Ags]

Ugly? Ugly? I think they are beautiful and well made, particularly in comparison to the earlier LVs and NLVs.

Morpheus - now that's what I call ugly (except for the eye lens which is gorgeous).

Edited March 22 by Ags

[Stu]

6 minutes ago, Ags said:

Ugly? Ugly? I think they are beautiful and well made, particularly in comparison to the earlier LVs and NLVs.

Morpheus - now that's what I call ugly (except for the eye lens which is gorgeous).

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess 😊

Let’s not start a thread on ‘Best looking eyepieces’ now, please 🤪🤣

When will these clouds go away? 🤬