Jump to content


Photo

Review of the Sterling series of eyepieces

  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 Olivier Biot

Olivier Biot

    Amused

  • *****
  • Posts: 24945
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2005
  • Loc: 51°N (Belgium)

Posted 12 October 2010 - 01:58 PM

Review of the Sterling series of eyepieces

#2 teskridg

teskridg

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1268
  • Joined: 15 Jan 2008
  • Loc: PA

Posted 12 October 2010 - 03:02 PM

This review of the Sterling eyepieces strongly supports what I've contended for years- that there are quality eyepieces out there that are difficult to discriminate from much more expensive ones at 1/3 or 1/4 the price. Tim

#3 T R Conners

T R Conners

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: 10 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Statesboro, Georgia

Posted 14 October 2010 - 05:49 PM

I was admiring the wonderful photos of the Moon by Michael Downs when I ran across this at the end of his article about the Sterlings:

"Keep in mind that I simply hand held a point and shoot camera up to the eyepiece."

Wow. The color and contrast of the images are fantastic for such a simple method! Nice work, Michael.

#4 easye

easye

    Thinking Ahead

  • *****
  • Posts: 915
  • Joined: 08 Apr 2010
  • Loc: Moved to Long Island

Posted 15 October 2010 - 12:09 PM

I purchased the Sterling Plossl based on the reviews at CN! It's really is a great value.

Thanks for the wonderful review!!!

Regards,

#5 arpruss

arpruss

    Vendor: Omega Centauri Software

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 1794
  • Joined: 23 May 2008
  • Loc: Waco, TX

Posted 26 October 2010 - 07:45 PM

Great review.

I would also be really curious how the Sterlings stack up against cheaper Plossls, like the $20 Owl ones.

#6 mdowns

mdowns

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1652
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Englewood,FL

Posted 26 October 2010 - 08:37 PM

When I first received the sterlings I had a couple of lower end plossls on hand,a 26mm (meade 4000 clone) and a 20mm. There simply was no comparison.Much better definition and contrast levels left those two in the dirt.Really.I have not had an owl eyepiece in some time and cannot comment on such other to say unless they have improved thier coatings significantly in the past few years I don't think they could really compare.Thank you for your comments and interest!

#7 rdandrea

rdandrea

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2860
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Colorado, USA DM59ra

Posted 27 October 2010 - 08:39 AM

I would also be really curious how the Sterlings stack up against cheaper Plossls, like the $20 Owl ones.


I only have one Owl and it does not overlap in focal length with my Sterlings, but it has a somewhat narrower AFOV. I like the Sterlings much better in terms of crispness and the quality of the views. Not a fair comparison, though, since I don't have the two models in the same focal length.

#8 pineknotpineknot

pineknotpineknot

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: 08 Jan 2013

Posted 07 April 2013 - 08:44 AM

I just went out last night and made a direct comparison between a 20 mm sterling plossl and a 20 mm televue plossl. I was looking at the orion nebula and the sharpness of the image was noticeably better(not by a huge margin) in the tv. My brother was there and he also agreed. I saw the stars as being sharper pinpoints in the nebula. Another very very annoying thing about the sterling was that it has no eyecup and it has a very large exposed lense near your eye. This means your eyeball is practically on the lense unless you hover your face back from the lense without touching the eyepiece. Basically if you let your face touch the eyepiece your eyelashes will touch the lense and deposit eyelash grease on the lense. I saw the grease after my brother and i used the eyepiece. So cut off your eyelashes before using this eyepiece, dont blink so your eyelashes will stay away from the glass, or don't buy this eyepiece. The optical quality of the sterling is not far off the tv, but it needs an eye cup. I could not find any available on the internet. Edmund optics has some, but they are not properly designed to distance your eye from the sterling. Conclusion: the sterling has a bit of a *BLEEP* design, and the eyelash grease will degrade your view. I say go for the tv. As far as tv eyepieces go this one is a bargain at $120. It will give you the quality of picture that a $330 nagler will give you but just a little narrower. Plossls rock!






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics