82 Degree Price V Quality - Baader, Explore, and Skywatcher

[Louis D]

1 hour ago, hal9550 said:

EDIT  - included picture of my 5.5 for consideration - would be curious to know if this is/was ES82 sibling - iv seen varying reports about different Meade UWAs

I have a vague recollection this focal length was the last to be added to the Meade 5000 UWA eyepiece line.  As such, it seemed to benefit from the lessons learned from the rest of the line, and it is widely regarded as the best of the bunch.

[Bivanus]

2 hours ago, hal9550 said:

but the main thing im trying to understand, is the negative opinion on the ES82 series eye relief

😂 Well now , since you list the ES 18mm 82deg as being in your wanted list , let me ask you what do you think about this comparison:

	FL	ER	D	W
MORPH	17.5mm	23mm	1.25/2"	76°
DELITE	18.2mm	20mm	1.25"	62°
ES	18mm	13mm	2"	82°
NAG	17mm	17mm	2"	82°

That is a TWO INCH eyepiece with a 13mm eye relief.... 

 

[John]

3 minutes ago, Bivanus said:

😂 Well now , since you list the ES 18mm 82deg as being in your wanted list , let me ask you what do you think about this comparison:

	FL	ER	D	W
MORPH	17.5mm	23mm	1.25/2"	76°
DELITE	18.2mm	20mm	1.25"	62°
ES	18mm	13mm	2"	82°
NAG	17mm	17mm	2"	82°

That is a TWO INCH eyepiece with a 13mm eye relief.... 

 

It is interesting to note that the actual useable eye relief can often be less than the specs quote due to factors such as the eye lens being recessed, the top surface of the eye lens being concave and the design of the eye cup.

The reviewer "Ernest" in Russia has measured quite a few eyepieces where the useable eye relief is quite a bit less than the claimed figure.

 

[Bivanus]

Yup, I tested the ES 18mm because it looked ok , and 13mm is 1 mm more than the Nagler that  I use without issues (no glasses) and it was available at Astro Black Friday with a god price.

Well, humbug , I could see from where Jupiter will enter the field way before it did , and I knew exactly where the street lamps were , and if I wanted to see the whole field I had to press the eye quite closer than I was truly comfortable. 

So back it went and when a SH 18.2mm DeLite become available I went for it and I'm happy with the  performance. even if the FOV is smaller.

EDIT: I am still 'desperately' seeking Susan  the 17mm Nag so if any of you kind gents see her or one of her siblings kindly let me know 😉

Edited yesterday at 17:21 by Bivanus

[hal9550]

49 minutes ago, Bivanus said:

😂 Well now , since you list the ES 18mm 82deg as being in your wanted list , let me ask you what do you think about this comparison:

	FL	ER	D	W
MORPH	17.5mm	23mm	1.25/2"	76°
DELITE	18.2mm	20mm	1.25"	62°
ES	18mm	13mm	2"	82°
NAG	17mm	17mm	2"	82°

That is a TWO INCH eyepiece with a 13mm eye relief.... 

 

Of course thats a notable difference - and from what i have gathered it will be slightly less - perhaps a 3mm subtraction would be more accurate - so roughly 10mm

You are correct thats a serious con AGAINST Explore Scientific in that focal length

Pros

• from what i have seen in the other focal lengths - reported as 16mm ER sop we can assume 13mm actual- thats in the 8.8, 11, and 14
• iv taken out a scope and set it up for a day time test of my Eye Relief tolerance - and my 12.4mm omni is acceptable - and its manufacturing specs for eye-relief - is 8mm - i find this acceptable

I suppose the final pro is

Morpheus 17.5mm  285euro

Delite 18.2              392 euro

ES82 18                  219 euro 

Nagler 16mmT5      519 euro (you mentioned a 17mm, i cant find this  - the 16mm is closest, and its manufacturer stated ER is 10mm - same as the ES82 subtracting 3mm for measure as we said)

Putting it differently i could buy a morph and an ES82 for the price of the nagler so - Delites intrigue me given the reviews of Ortho Sharpness across the range, with 62 Degree AFOV - but less intriguing when considering the price

This is a learning curve for me, and of course, i appreciate the feedback.

Currently its hard for me to argue against the 8.8mm, the 11, and the 14mm in the explore scientific line with aprox 16mm ER (subtracting 3mm for good measure is fair i guess) - I have also added the Omegon Redline 22mm to my list  - its 70 degrees, but gets a hell of a right up from several users.

Between 22 and 14 - im looking at 

• Baader Morpheus 17.5 (17.2) - 72 degree
• ES82 18mm -82 degree
• Omegon Redline 17mm -70 degree
• nothing, and just step down between 22 and 14

I delved deep into eye-relief discussion today, and also set up a day time test of my tolerance so (also explaining to neighbours what i was doing with a 6" Refractor during the day, and why i was looking at trees!)- iv learned a lot - 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 17:37 by hal9550

[Bivanus]

Of course , because the long FL your telescopes have , there is also the other step too - 13mm to 16mm - with something like this because we are in the EU:  https://www.teleskop-express.de/en/telescope-accessories-5/eyepieces-295/eyepieces-1-25-inch-with-big-field-70/ts-optics-1-25-ultra-wide-angle-eyepiece-uwan-16-mm-82-field-of-view-8990  At 159 euro and with decent results ( but not a fast scope EP for certain)

The 17mm Nag is out of production since (I think) end of 2021  😥 SH only , and not often.

[hal9550]

30 minutes ago, Bivanus said:

Of course , because the long FL your telescopes have , there is also the other step too - 13mm to 16mm - with something like this because we are in the EU:  https://www.teleskop-express.de/en/telescope-accessories-5/eyepieces-295/eyepieces-1-25-inch-with-big-field-70/ts-optics-1-25-ultra-wide-angle-eyepiece-uwan-16-mm-82-field-of-view-8990  At 159 euro and with decent results ( but not a fast scope EP for certain)

The 17mm Nag is out of production since (I think) end of 2021  😥 SH only , and not often.

Yea the 16mm TS looks very much like the Astrotech UWA, and the Skywatcher Nirvana, which are not well rated at 16- i had this entirely family on my list, at one point. Ernests tests, which iv referenced multiple times, would seem to suggest it isnt the best. I debated this family of brand siblings for a while actually but decided to shelve it - 

[John]

1 hour ago, hal9550 said:

Yea the 16mm TS looks very much like the Astrotech UWA, and the Skywatcher Nirvana, which are not well rated at 16- i had this entirely family on my list, at one point. Ernests tests, which iv referenced multiple times, would seem to suggest it isnt the best. I debated this family of brand siblings for a while actually but decided to shelve it - 

The 16mm Nirvana is the under-performer of the range but still a pretty decent eyepiece in scopes like your F/8 and F/10. I used to have the Wiliam Optics UWAN 16mm (which I think is the same optically) and found it pretty nice in the F/6.5 and F/6 scopes that I owned back then. Not perfect at the edges in the F/6 but still good. I spent quite a lot on moving to a 16mm T5 Nagler but felt that didn't get a lot of return on my investment in the same scopes. When I got on to F/5's and a little faster scopes a little later the Nagler showed it's qualities somewhat more.

 

 

[Bivanus]

29 minutes ago, John said:

I spent quite a lot on moving to a 16mm T5 Nagler but felt that didn't get a lot of return on my investment in the same scopes.

@John how did you feel the 16mm Nag? For me is simply too  close...to the cornea... 😅

[Mr Spock]

The 16mm Nirvana has field curvature. I still use it though. It's fine as a finder for doubles. x46 and 1.77° in the Tak.

[John]

20 minutes ago, Bivanus said:

@John how did you feel the 16mm Nag? For me is simply too  close...to the cornea... 😅

Very, very sharp but the eye relief did feel noticeably tighter than the Nagler T6's that I also had back then.

Usually I've no problem with short eye relief though. I love my Nagler zooms which have the same as the Nagler 16 T5 - 10mm. I can go down to 3-4mm of eye relief as long as the quality of optical performance is worthwhile. 

If the quality of the view is good enough, I'm usually OK make some compromises elsewhere. If I wore glasses when observing I'd have a different opinion on this of course 🙂

 

 

[Louis D]

9 hours ago, Bivanus said:

EDIT: I am still 'desperately' seeking Susan  the 17mm Nag so if any of you kind gents see her or one of her siblings kindly let me know 😉

I have one, but I'm keeping it for comparison purposes.  While quite nice, it has a lot of SAEP that makes it very difficult to take in the entire view at once, forcing the user to back off a bit and lose some AFOV.  When you press in enough to see the field stop pop into view, suddenly, it seems like the eyepiece is fighting you by producing flitting blackouts everywhere.  I replaced mine with the ES-92 17mm, and am much happier with the longer eye relief, wider AFOV, and much lower level of SAEP that doesn't seem to intrude whatsoever.

I've recently picked up, and have been evaluating, the Founder Optics Marvel 20mm 80°.  If you can live with a bit lower magnification than the 17mm NT4, it has no SAEP, a slightly wider field stop (28.1mm vs. 24.3mm), and is sharp across the field with no field curvature.  Usable eye relief is about the same for both with the Marvel's eye cup screwed off.

Here are images I took through various eyepieces using my 127mm Orion (Synta) Mak and the ultrawide camera on an LG G5 smartphone:

Those black rings are due to perfectly centered SAEP shadows.  The sharp edged rings are much harder to deal with than the fuzzy edged rings.

The rainbow rings are due to CAEP.

Edited 18 hours ago by Louis D

[Don Pensack]

6 hours ago, John said:

It is interesting to note that the actual useable eye relief can often be less than the specs quote due to factors such as the eye lens being recessed, the top surface of the eye lens being concave and the design of the eye cup.

The reviewer "Ernest" in Russia has measured quite a few eyepieces where the useable eye relief is quite a bit less than the claimed figure.

 

Of those 4, the one with the most effective eye relief is the Morpheus.

[Don Pensack]

6 hours ago, Bivanus said:

😂 Well now , since you list the ES 18mm 82deg as being in your wanted list , let me ask you what do you think about this comparison:

	FL	ER	D	W
MORPH	17.2	23mm	1.25/2"	72°
DELITE	18.2mm	20mm	1.25"	62°
ES	18mm	13mm	2"	80°
NAG	17mm	17mm	2"	82°

That is a TWO INCH eyepiece with a 13mm eye relief.... 

 

Some measured modifications to your list are above.

[Louis D]

And I've measured 15mm of usable eye relief for the 17mm NT4.  In reality, it feels closer to 16mm.  Regardless, you need to be well dark adapted and not looking at anything bright to overcome the severe SAEP.

I've also photographically measured all of the NT4s to have 83 degree AFOVs.