Baader Hyperions and fast scopes

[Nick P]

I am thinking of upgrading my eyepieces and I quite like the look of the baader hyperions having heard some quite good things about them.

Not sure how well they would work in a fast scope though (f4.5 newtonian) does anyone have any experience?

Thanks

Nick

[jgs001]

I've used them in my Konus (ST80) f/5, there was some distortion around the edges, but I found them easy to use, plenty of eye relief and generally good views. Having only tried Hyperions, cheap plossls and an Ortho I'm probably not the most experienced.

[russ]

They are a good eyepiece, especially the 13mm and 17mm (my fav from the series). But they work best in scopes f6 or slower. Still work quite well at f5 (except the 24mm or at least mine) but at f4.5 i would be less inclined to recommend them. I sold mine after being disappointed with the way they worked in my f4.7 dob. But in hind sight i needed to spend a lot more for an eyepiece that worked well at f4.7 and the Hyperion was actually as good as i could afford.

Every series has it's best and the runt. The 13mm and 17mm are the ones highlighted in reviews as best in the series. While the 21mm and 24mm come in for a little stick. I was less than pleased with my 8mm too. Much preferred the TMB Planetary 8mm.

[Nick P]

Thanks for the responses jgs and Russ, Hyperions don't seem to be what I need then - guess they would be fine of the refractor though at f8.

Russ, what do you use for wide field views on your 4.7 dob? that should be a good comparison.

Need a couple of eyepieces I can use equally well in both scopes although higher power for the refractor for planetary viewing and low power for the newt for wide field.

Thanks

Nick

[russ]

Hi Nick,

Not sure what your budget is but i would seriously look at getting a premium workhorse eyepiece around 13mm mark. Then spend less on high power end, you can still buy a TMB Planetary for £36 or look for a secondhand University Optics Ortho for the same money. But for me the most important eyepiece to get right, the one to be well corrected, is the workhorse. It will be the one you go DSO hunting with, look at clusters etc. You'll want it to be sharp as close to the edge as possible, which is where the Hyperion will fall down at f4.5. So i would be inclined to look for a secondhand Nagler 13mm, perhaps an 11mm. But you would be looking at £150 for a single eyepiece but it would be a keeper. Failing that, the William Optics UWAN 16mm is a cheaper Nagler alternative but maybe considered too low powered (56x) as a workhorse in a 900mm fl scope.

A 13mm Nagler will give you 69x and 1.2deg true field. The 11mm will give 82x and 1.0deg fov. You could add a quality barlow to those if you wanted.

I was using the UWAN 16mm, which in my scope gave 95x and 0.86deg. Had to sell it too raise money. For me and my scope, i think a 17mm T4 Nagler would be near perfect and a TV Ethos 17mm perfect.

Edited July 27, 2010 by russ

[Macavity]

I'd agree with the ideas above. The 13mm & 17mm Hyperions are difficult to fault, as a "workhorse" eyepiece - Either in my F5 achromat or (F10-15?) MAKs. (i.e. "Good for most things" - Especially in 2" format?) The 5mm & 8mm are useful for occasional higher powers in my short focal length F5 refractor, but smaller exit pupils in a "vast area of glass" makes them (personally!) harder to use in any slower scope? Idem, the 24mm (31mm Aspheric), although OK for sky sweeping with an F5 achromat, might find an F5 "main" scope a little beyond their capabilities?

The upshot: Ultimately, I'm looking to upgrade my 5 & 8mm Hyperions with "dedicated planetary" eyepieces, and the longer focal lengths Hyperions with e.g. a "Pan 35(24)"? We'll have to see how the "funding" pans(?) out. LOL. I'd still like to keep most of my Hyperions tho'...

You might EVEN consider a Hyperion 8-24mm Zoom, which is supposed to be a match for an 8mm fixed focus Hyperion, and provides about the same TRUE field as the 17mm fixed focus Hyperion at it's (albeit limited apparent field) 24mm setting.

Edited July 27, 2010 by Macavity

[Doc]

I used to have nearly a full set and used them in my 16" F4.5 dob. I would say distortion at least outer 25% of FOV.

IMO better then your normal plossl's but not as good as premium eyepieces.

[John]

The Skywatcher Nirvana 16mm might be worth considering - at £135 new they are good value IMHO and work pretty well even in fast scopes - 90% as well as Naglers at a lot less money. If they are not exactly the same as a UWAN, then they are pretty darn close

Edited July 27, 2010 by John

[Nick P]

Thanks for all the input, unfortunately the Nagler/Nirvana/UWAN options are probably going to be out due to cost - although I am tempted to manufacture a solution so that I could get a 13mm Nagler!

Am falling on the side of getting a reasonable quality range together now and then update each later as needs be, so am thinking of |Tele Vue Plossles in 32 15 and 8mm which should give a high enough mag for planets (a 7mm would be better) and good wide views at 32mm and with the 15 mm being the workhorse for the newt and the 8 mm being the workhorse for the refractor.

What do you think? does this sound sensible? (and all these EP's for the cost of a new Nagler!) my only concern is that the 8mm won't give enough power for planets/lunar viewing, allthough TBH the mount rather limits magnification rather than seeing or the scope!

Thanks

Nick

[russ]

Hi Nick,

The TV Plossls are a great idea. Stick with that and update when the funds allow. You're right, 8mm (150x) is a tad too low for good nights. But you could add a 6mm TMB Planetary (200x) for those occasions. It's only £36 and an excellent eyepiece. Or get two TV plossl (15mm & 32mm) and two TMB's (6mm & 8mm). Cost would be the same as 3 TV Plossls.

Edited July 27, 2010 by russ

[nicnac]

thumbs up for the TVs, im looking at 32mm 20mm 15mm then switching to radians in a 12mm 10mm 8mm and a 6mm.

telescope house has them and they sell for a fair price

[Nick P]

Thanks everyone your advise has been invaluable and saved me from a costly error!

Russ where can you source TMB EP's for £35? I can see them from £48 - £65!

[Lowenbrau]

What confuses me know, when I read about Hyperions and fast scopes here, that they market it as a such eyepiece, what many people on other forums confirm. Actually only here I read that they're not behaving well in fast fs, when I was thinking of getting one 8mm for my f/4.5 dob.

Only thing that really worry me is big glass diameter compared to exit pupil which would mean lot of blackouts and uncomfortable use, but it's the same story with other premium eyepieces of the comparable FL. Maybe something like Takahashi LEs might be ultimate solution...

[John]

It's an old thread but I'll move it to the eyepiece discussion section as it will get more attention there.

[cs1cjc]

I have a 17mm Hyperion. It is big and quite heavy and needs a lot of in focus in 1.25" mode and a lot of out focus in 2" mode. It works fine in my newtonians (with a GSO coma corrector). The fact that you can tune the focal length is unique. It has got a lot of eye relief and nothing to guide your eye to the right point for viewing, but I am sure that this is something people adapt to. Try one and see how you find it.

[Tinker1947]

I find the little rubber ring that fits over the thread makes a good guide as to how close my eye needs to be....

[Lowenbrau]

I have actually used 13 and 17 mm Hyperions but not on faster than f/6 so can't know before trying. Will go for some higher class anyway. Didn't have problems although I understand it might be an issue in higher power eyepieces.

[rwilkey]

Never had any blackouts with Hyperions in my 200P f/5.

[Jazzo111]

Hey im a noob but are these eye peices suitable for a celestron omni xlt 150?