Checking what eyepieces I should have

[Player Zero]

Hi all,

complete newbie here. I've had a read of the above sticky as to what eyepieces I should get, but as this is all still fairly damn new to me, I want to rest assured that what I'm getting is actually the right stuff.

So anyway...

Currently, I have 3 eyepieces, 2 came stock with the Celestron telescope (NexStar 80SLT) which are 25 mm and 9 mm, and I also purchased (incorrectly, I realise now) a 4 mm Omni series eyepiece.

I personally would love to view the planets at least, and so going by the sticky within this section I assume that I should get the following?

Telescope properties: FL = 900 mm, D = 80 mm, therefore F/11.

Eyepieces:

8mm (high power eyepiece)

14mm (medium power eyepiece)

22mm (medium/low power eyepiece)

34mm (low power eyepiece)

What about the quality/brand? Celestron has a few ranges and I don't really understand what the difference is?#

Thanks for the help in advance!

[Earl]

To sound like a stuck record Televue Plossls are great eyepieces, and hold there price well second hand.

I would consider adding a 32mm to your existing eyepieces and a 15mm

Maybe repalce the others later.

[John]

I agree with Earl but you could consider a 6mm for highest power - 150x should be useable with a decent 80mm refractor.

If your budget won't run to Tele Vue then the Meade 4000 series plossls would work fine in your scope.

[pvaz]

I would also suggest 6mm as high power as 150x will be useful and is likely to show more detail on planets. Maybe a TMB planetary 6mm, this retail fo 38£.

A low power EP around 32mm would be great for widefield views. Personally I would jump over the 15mm and go straight to 12 or 10mm for smaller DSOs and planets on bad seeing conditions.

This would be my selection for an 80mm, 900mm FL scope:

6mm, 10mm, 32mm

A 25 mm would be wide enough and could replace the 32mm if you don't want to spend much for now.

And maybe another one in the 15 to 17mm range to fill in the gap but 10mm (= 90x on your scope) is pretty close to my favorite middle power magnification (80x) and I don't see a 15mm getting that much use on a 900mm FL scope. In my scope, with 1200mm FL, I always go straight from 39x (31mm EP) to 77x (15.5mm) or 120x (10mm).

[acey]

TeleVue plossl 32mm

TeleVue plossl 8mm

The 32mm is a classic, the 8mm is a small bit of glass and not everybody's cup of tea, but very nice on planets.

[russ]

What sort of budget do you have for this?

We have the 90mm version of your scope and it holds up very well to about 180x-200x. But i mainly use it around the 150x mark for planets.

Because it's F11, you can get away with some cheaper designs. Our favourite budget eyepiece for planetary is the Skywatcher Ultrawide 66. We have the 6mm and 9mm (just added the 20mm too). Generous eyerelief, very comfortable, sharp on axis (better than our chinese Meade 4000), good light throughput and nice field of view (seems larger than the quoted 66). My only dislike for the eyepiece is some light scatter with the moon.

We picked them up brand new on Ebay for £16 delivered.

[Capricorn]

I would go for the 8mm over the 6mm at this time. 6mm could be a liitle much and the 8mm would be safe. If you got the 6 and found it similar to the 4 then another useless one. Get a 6mm later.

The ones you have specified seem a good range although I would have a 12mm in place of the 14 and a 32mm in place of the 34mm. Not seen a 34 but have seen 32's fairly often.

As to make, depends on budget. TV's are always reckoned to be good. As much as anything their QA is good so they tend to not have bad ones.

Buy a set/range that has a good selection. The WO SWANS are decent but they go down to 9mm, so if you wanted a 6mm it would have to be different. TV plossl's stop at 8mm, so no 6mm there also.

Search round FLO, Rother Valley, Sherwoods, Wide Screen, SCS, Harrisons, 365Astronomy, Astronomica etc and see what is offered. Telescope-Service in Germany also have a selection and good reports of service.

[Kef9]

I would get a 6mm aswell as the 8mm as both I feel would be useful. I have found that 133x for high power as stated in the guide is nowhere near enough. You can push alot further. I have my nagler zoom sometimes set at 2mm for that exact reason. This gives me 450x in my C100ED.

Like Earl said the TV Plossls are the business for the money. They provide great images and I personally like the short eye relief. Shame they only go down to 8mm. Also remember that when viewing at high power the less glass elements the better. I know coatings have come on but I feel this still holds true. Its a good job then that these type of eyepieces at high powers are also some of the cheapest. You dont need large a large degree FoV at high powers.

For this reason I would say that you should spend most of the money at the low power end. I've heard good things about the 28mm Nirvana/WO UWAN and these probably give the best £/performance ratio at this end. Some sites are selling the meade SWA's at low prices also at the moment to get rid of stock as they are being discontinued. Another one to consider?

[pvaz]

Kef, I don't mean to sound rude but his 80mm refractor costs about half the price of a Nirvana 28mm and I doubt it would handle the weight well.

Besides at f/11 it would be a waste of money. The Agena astro SWAs I got for my sister's f/10 refractor don't display any edge distortion and if there's a difference in performance to the Nagler 31T5 or Ethos 10mm on my f/6, aside from the extra FoV, it's so small I can't notice. Maybe a 5% drop at most which is hard to justify with them costing 10 to 15x more.

So, unless he's planning to get a big Dob with an extremely low f/ratio I don't see the point in paying over 100£ per EP, other then having a nice looking collection that brings weight problems while in use.

[Kef9]

Sorry. I only looked at the F ratio and not the aperture. I was skim reading.

However it depends on what you want at the low power end. These eyepieces are generally heavy anyway and I have found that you get what you pay for. I've seen a second hand nirvana for £150 on here which is a great deal.

Regarding the f number - I had a panaview and with my F9 frac I noticed the outer 40% was distorted. So I dont think that you are immune at F11.

At the end of the day you can have your eyepieces for life. This is not often the case with a scope. Everyones experience differs.

[pvaz]

You do have a point. EPs can last a lifetime and that's one of the reasons I got a few well chosen top EPs for the focal lengths I use the most. I just think if PZ is not planning to get another scope he can start slowly and, if the bug bites, then move on to a bigger scope and some EPs suited for that scope.

[Player Zero]

Wow so many replies! Thank you all!

To help filter through any choices that you guys have offered, I can safely say that my budget is around £30-40 per eyepiece, with a little stretch if need be. Obviously I'll try to see if I can get some more expensive ones second hand as well.

[brantuk]

Hi player - might be a good idea to build a decent range of ep's anywhere from 8mm to 40mm to suite your scope. Don't concentrate too much on magnification but think more about quality and width of views.

My set goes roughly in 5mm or 6mm increments, has a variety of 1.25" and 2", and these days I go for quality ep's based on models discussed in the threads. You'll soon get a "feel" for which ep's and makes are popular, useful, and offer good viewing.

Your budget will certainly afford some pretty tasty mid range ep's if chosen carefully - also consider s/h. Hope that helps