Siebert 24 EP's or ES 24-68's in Black Night BV's?
Posted 16 November 2012 - 08:38 AM
I know a lot of people like the ES 24-68's. But Siebert's 24-65's are cheaper, and probably lighter. I'll be using them with the 1.3x-2x-2.7x multimag corrector, on my 16" f/4.5 dob.
I'm really looking forward to my first ever look through a binoviewer, based on what I've read here on CN.
Posted 16 November 2012 - 10:07 AM
Posted 16 November 2012 - 10:19 AM
On Seibert's website, he says that his 24's best above f/7.
He also says they are great for binoviewers. So I'm wondering if my f/4.5 dob will be too much for those EP's. Maybe the ES 24's will be a better performer?
Posted 16 November 2012 - 11:20 AM
Posted 16 November 2012 - 12:21 PM
Ask Harry. He will be upfront with you.
When we were speakin with him, he sounded genuinely discouraged that we'd gone with the Aspherics rather than with his, in an objective way rather than bein personally disappointed. Sorry I can't give you a definitive comparo, except to say that the ES 24mm 68s are our hands-down favorite for our mag 4.5 skies. Eye relief, comfort and view are superb. Of course they're heavier--maybe double Harry's weights--and we're at f/6. Am certain his are good, but we couldn't pass up the ES and Aspheric hype. Too bad that, by sheer number, Harry's comparisons are probly receivin short shrift.
Posted 16 November 2012 - 01:11 PM
Posted 16 November 2012 - 02:21 PM
Don't recall the focal ratios he was testin under, but that shootout convinced us, especially since Bill gave the nod to the ES over his own Pan. But 3.6? Wow.
Posted 16 November 2012 - 06:28 PM
Posted 17 November 2012 - 01:03 PM
what i can see the es24 barrel are wider than the pans. are you having any problem with nose space when binoviewing? my ipd is 58mm.
I have fat nose, and dont have nose space problem
Posted 17 November 2012 - 07:35 PM
Or even seen a pair? I'm thinking to cancel my Siebert 24 order, and get the ES 24-68*s instead.
Posted 17 November 2012 - 09:14 PM
Posted 19 November 2012 - 12:15 PM
On Siebert's website, he says that the ultra 24's are especially optimized for binoviewing using an optical corrector, but not good for monoviewing below f/7. That made me wonder about their quality. But, from your real world experience, I see that even for monoviewing, they are pretty good, and for Binoviewing, superior to the ES 24's.
I especially like the fact that they are very lightweight, compared to the ES's, which are 11.2 ounces each. I think my dob will balance much better with the lighter EP's in the binos, so that is a very important consideration, as well. Sharp and contrasty to the edge is just fine with me, too. The Siebert's are also cheaper than the ES's. I also really like the attention to mechanical useability in Siebert's designs; diopters, short optical path, light weight, eye relief, barrel shape, etc.
Posted 19 November 2012 - 12:31 PM
Posted 19 November 2012 - 01:28 PM
Posted 20 November 2012 - 12:25 AM
At home, I tend to use my C8 instead because I just like using a mount that tracks at home. Siebert's system works great with that scope, too. I don't need an OCA with the C8, but use Siebert's Galaxy View .6 focal reducer when I want a wider field of view. And I have a screw in adapter which turns the focal reducer into a 1.5 barlow!
The point is, it's very easy to call up Harry and ask for an additional part that enhancers your system, and to get it for a reasonable price. That's why I picked his system, even though I really didn't know in advance if it would be as good as a Denk or Baader.
Everything I've purchased from Harry has worked well. I have no regrets about not buying a Denk or Baader, etc. although I have nothing bad to say about those systems.