Jump to content


Photo

Do you have an eyepiece problem?

  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

#26 Damo636

Damo636

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 326
  • Joined: 16 Aug 2011
  • Loc: Co Fermanagh, Northern Ireland

Posted 13 January 2013 - 10:52 AM

I have only five so waaaay off the pace if I'm to be considered for eye piece addiction therapy :lol:
Its actually possibly about to become temporarily four, as the 8mm Ethos might be going bye bye :rolling:

#27 JimMo

JimMo

    I'd Rather Do It Myself

  • *****
  • Posts: 5163
  • Joined: 08 Jan 2007
  • Loc: Under the SE Michigan lightdome

Posted 13 January 2013 - 11:20 AM

As far as eyepieces are concerned I buy what I need or want. Of the thirteen I have I use every one in three different telescopes and actually don't "need" any more. There might come a time when I want another one, but for the time I'm happy with what I have. No problem.

#28 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 17149
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 13 January 2013 - 11:41 AM

Mark,

Until recently, I had over 150 eyepieces. Now I've brought it down to around 100. When I sell or give away the 20 or so remaining that I want to sell or give away, I'll be down to a reasonable 80 eyepieces. That's a reasonable amount if you have 12 telescopes.


You're considered a "junkie", LOL....

12 telescopes? Is that one for every child? Or one for every planet you view?


No, at least one telescope for every type of observing: Deep sky, planet, lunar, double star, etc, and then a grab-n-go vs extended session for each of those. They are one of the main reasons I have so many eyepieces. Some eyepieces are great for some scopes but not for others. Some eyepieces are too heavy for some scopes or are 2" format, and so I need lighter 1.25" equivalents for those.

So probably what I need to do to really reduce the number of eyepieces is to reduce the number of telescopes. I sold my C4R, a 4" f/10 achromat, because I was no longer using it. As soon as I sold it, about a dozen eyepieces left right behind, because they were meant for the C4R. I no longer had an excuse to keep them. I've got my eye on a couple other scopes that might be leaving soon, too.

The only common type of telescope I've never owned is an SCT. I don't like Jack-of-all-trades. I like specialists!

One thing that has kept the number of my eyepieces down is that I don't usually buy complete sets. If one or two eyepieces in a line are great, that doesn't always - or even usually - mean that all the focal lengths in that line will be very good. In fact, the same line can have great eyepieces and dogs.

Imagine if I were to have complete sets for every type of eyepiece I own. Then I'd really be a serious eyepiece junkie!

:grin:
Mike

#29 sg6

sg6

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 800
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2010
  • Loc: Norfolk, UK.

Posted 13 January 2013 - 11:48 AM

No problem only have about 50 and they don't get in the way of anything.

I can still find a free chair, get to the fridge, cooker, stairs, bedroom, bathroom and enough free floor space I don't stand on any so no problems.

#30 csrlice12

csrlice12

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11246
  • Joined: 22 May 2012
  • Loc: Denver, CO

Posted 13 January 2013 - 12:09 PM

What then is enough? I have a complete set of UO Abbe Orthos and a complete set of ES 82s. Plus an ES 68 40mm. These are used with my two scopes, ED80 and a C11. For my WO bino it has two 20mm EPs, which is about all the bino unit can use due to it's inexpensive design. And for the folks that might ever want to borrow a scope, I have a set of Celestron plossels for an ST80. And last, but not least, an RKE 28mm. That's my set of 26. For right now, I have all that I need. Now, if I was to get a better bino unit then two 20mms will not be enough, in that case I can see maybe 6 more which would raise the count to 32.


Well, that complete set of UO orthos just went up in value....

#31 pstarr

pstarr

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3024
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2004
  • Loc: NE Ohio

Posted 13 January 2013 - 12:24 PM

At some point in this hobby you will find that quality optics and good seeing are the key to good views. Most premium eyepieces will not degrade what the objective in your scope can deliver. Once you find out what kind of eyepiece you like, be it wide angle or those with narrower afov, 3 eyepieces would serve the average observer very well. On the other hand, if you think the eyepiece is the key to good views or just want to collect them, have at it. This forum is your kind of place. :grin: I have a mere 8 main eyepieces and a Barlow.

#32 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 44370
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 13 January 2013 - 12:32 PM

At some point in this hobby you will find that quality optics and good seeing are the key to good views. Most premium eyepieces will not degrade what the objective in your scope can deliver. Once you find out what kind of eyepiece you like, be it wide angle or those with narrower afov, 3 eyepieces would serve the average observer very well. On the other hand, if you think the eyepiece is the key to good views or just want to collect them, have at it. This forum is your kind of place. :grin: I have a mere 8 main eyepieces and a Barlow.


Up to the 3 eyepieces, I agree with you 100%... But if one considers that at the extreme high end, there are situations where 60x-80x/inch is appropriate and that at the low end there are situations where 4X/inch is appropriate, that leaves only one eyepiece to cover the rest...

Jon

#33 Doug Culbertson

Doug Culbertson

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4218
  • Joined: 06 Jan 2005

Posted 13 January 2013 - 12:40 PM

I used to have 40 or so, but whittled those down over the years based on my personal preferences. I now have four main eyepieces (I haven't added the 56mm to my sig yet) along with a barlow and a Paracorr. This set works well in all of my telescopes on all objects. I have finally reached minimalist nirvana. :cool:

#34 BillP

BillP

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11883
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2006
  • Loc: Vienna, VA

Posted 13 January 2013 - 12:42 PM

Anybody else out there KooKoo for eyepieces? :looney: :bugeyes::roflmao:


No such thing being kookoo related to eyepieces. All there is is those more or less engaged in what the eyepiece provides.

I like good eyepieces, and I like bad eyepieces, because the eyepiece uniquely gives the observer something no other part of the optical chain is even capable of providing! So I like to savor what the eyepiece brings to the experience and strive to never take that for granted, otherwise I would be missing something that is there to experience and enjoy.

Try to imagine a sky that had just one object to observe and none other. Try to imagine a world with only one type and size of telescope and none others. I think you would agree that it would be a strangely boring world one like that. Same with the eyepiece...a world with just one eyepiece would not be a pretty place. The eyepiece enriches the experience like none other, bringing endless variety there at your fingertips, altering the experience from the surgical precision of an Abbe to the majesty of a walk among the stars with an ultra wide-field. It customizes the experience to the desires of the observer with varieties of eye reliefs, eye lens sized, eye guard functions, tonal enhancements, and apparent fields of view. Regardless of what the image any telescope can serve up, it is the eyepiece that makes that image personal, engaging, and accessible in the real-time moment for the observer. In reality, it is kookoo not to be kookoo about the most flexible, the most engaging, and the most personalized part of the telescopic system.

Simply put...the eyepiece is where it's at! :cool:

#35 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 44370
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 13 January 2013 - 12:47 PM

No, at least one telescope for every type of observing: Deep sky, planet, lunar, double star, etc, and then a grab-n-go vs extended session for each of those. They are one of the main reasons I have so many eyepieces. Some eyepieces are great for some scopes but not for others. Some eyepieces are too heavy for some scopes or are 2" format, and so I need lighter 1.25" equivalents for those.

So probably what I need to do to really reduce the number of eyepieces is to reduce the number of telescopes. I sold my C4R, a 4" f/10 achromat, because I was no longer using it. As soon as I sold it, about a dozen eyepieces left right behind, because they were meant for the C4R. I no longer had an excuse to keep them. I've got my eye on a couple other scopes that might be leaving soon, too.

The only common type of telescope I've never owned is an SCT. I don't like Jack-of-all-trades. I like specialists!



Interesting. I own a few more than a dozen telescopes but I find that a good telescope is a good telescope for double stars, planets, the moon and even deep sky. When I setup for an evening, no matter what the conditions, I will be observing doubles, a planet or two, the moon if it is around and a variety of deep sky objects.

SCTs are considered "jack of all trades" because they are competent for both visual and astrophotography. A good Newtonian, a good apochromatic refractor, these are very capable of providing the excellent views of all classes of objects...

Jon

#36 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 44370
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 13 January 2013 - 01:09 PM

In reality, it is kookoo not to be kookoo about the most flexible, the most engaging, and the most personalized part of the telescopic system.



The most important thing about an eyepiece is it's focal length. One needs to have a variety of focal lengths.

Beyond that, there is a great big sky out there filled with more objects than one can possibly see in a life time. I am OK with spending my time with a couple of decent eyepiece of the focal lengths that are useful. I find the particular telescope I use makes the big difference in the view. Beyond that, I look to the heavens for variety.

Jon

#37 BillP

BillP

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11883
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2006
  • Loc: Vienna, VA

Posted 13 January 2013 - 01:22 PM

In reality, it is kookoo not to be kookoo about the most flexible, the most engaging, and the most personalized part of the telescopic system.



The most important thing about an eyepiece is it's focal length. One needs to have a variety of focal lengths.

Beyond that, there is a great big sky out there filled with more objects than one can possibly see in a life time. I am OK with spending my time with a couple of decent eyepiece of the focal lengths that are useful. I find the particular telescope I use makes the big difference in the view. Beyond that, I look to the heavens for variety.

Jon


I'm not satisfied with that. I need to see how the object presents in narrow fields as well as wide fields, in warmer vs cooler toned eyepieces. Basically I need to see the target from as many perspectives as possible...which includes apertures because while larger apertures bring out more, they also mask and hide other characteristics only visible with the smaller apertures. So having "just" a variety of focal lengths does not do it for me. Not saying my approach is any better or worse than yours, just different and adapted to the way I like to do things. Without the eyepiece and the variety of capabilities it brings to the table beyond the simple focal length change, none of this would be possible for me. Love what the eyepiece can and does do that only it can do :D

#38 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 17149
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 13 January 2013 - 01:34 PM

Jon,

Interesting. I own a few more than a dozen telescopes but I find that a good telescope is a good telescope for double stars, planets, the moon and even deep sky. When I setup for an evening, no matter what the conditions, I will be observing doubles, a planet or two, the moon if it is around and a variety of deep sky objects.


Then you do astronomy very differently than I do. When the Moon is up, I look at the Moon and possibly the bright planets. This is at home in a red zone. When the Moon is not in the sky and the sky is clear, I'm usually at the dark site looking at faint fuzzies and other DSO. I usually don't mix and match objects. For one thing, the optimum eye adaptation for observing DSO and planets is different. It's best to be deeply dark-adapted for DSO. The optimum adaptation for planet observation is as close to photopic as possible.

There are also the factors of portability and convenience. During the work week at home it makes more sense to take a grab-n-go look at the Moon or planets with my 5" f/5 Newt or 90mm Mak, or even my 8" Dob if I have a little more time, rather than schlep out the 10". I'm not yet retired.

Obviously YMMV. :shrug:

Mike

#39 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 17149
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 13 January 2013 - 01:40 PM

Jon,

SCTs are considered "jack of all trades" because they are competent for both visual and astrophotography. A good Newtonian, a good apochromatic refractor, these are very capable of providing the excellent views of all classes of objects...


I don't do AP, don't think I ever will. And I want a scope that is hopefully better than merely "competent" for the task at hand. So no SCTs so far.

High-end APO's are above my paygrade. $1000 per inch? No, sir, not happening here.

So that leaves "a good Newtonian." Excellent choice!

:grin:
Mike

#40 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 44370
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 13 January 2013 - 01:49 PM

In reality, it is kookoo not to be kookoo about the most flexible, the most engaging, and the most personalized part of the telescopic system.



The most important thing about an eyepiece is it's focal length. One needs to have a variety of focal lengths.

Beyond that, there is a great big sky out there filled with more objects than one can possibly see in a life time. I am OK with spending my time with a couple of decent eyepiece of the focal lengths that are useful. I find the particular telescope I use makes the big difference in the view. Beyond that, I look to the heavens for variety.

Jon


I'm not satisfied with that. I need to see how the object presents in narrow fields as well as wide fields, in warmer vs cooler toned eyepieces. Basically I need to see the target from as many perspectives as possible...which includes apertures because while larger apertures bring out more, they also mask and hide other characteristics only visible with the smaller apertures. So having "just" a variety of focal lengths does not do it for me. Not saying my approach is any better or worse than yours, just different and adapted to the way I like to do things. Without the eyepiece and the variety of capabilities it brings to the table beyond the simple focal length change, none of this would be possible for me. Love what the eyepiece can and does do that only it can do :D


Bill:

Differences in approaches, attitudes, are often the result of different situations, different conditions as well as different goals. Change the situation, change the attitudes. I feel I am very fortunate to have access to good seeing as well as relatively easy access to dark, clear skies.

Personally, I am not satisfied with spending my eyepiece time making equipment comparisons. There is just so much to see. When the skies are dark and clear, when the Milky Way shines brightly, when Andromeda looks big and bright naked eye, I only ask that the eyepiece not hinder the views.

A good bicycle is transparent to the rider, the rider is not aware of the bicycle, just that he/she is riding. A good eyepiece is very similar, it is there, but it is transparent, the connection between the object and the eye is direct.

There are many good eyepieces out there. I have some.

Jon

#41 astro_baby

astro_baby

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 998
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008
  • Loc: United Kingdom

Posted 13 January 2013 - 02:17 PM

I bought and sold quitea few EPs on my way to my own personal Nirvana.

I have now what I consider to be the optimum set which is a set of UOs, two Pentax XWs and two EPs. Between them they cover al my scope options if not oerfectly then at least to a level tha pleases me.

I also have some EPs I never use ( Baader GOs and a TAL 25mm ) good as they are I dont like them much bu wont sell just in case.

It took me a few years to get to what I wanted, trying out different stuff, but I am happy now with what I have and consider myself fortunate to be able to afford the gear I have.

Contentment is a precious gift, finding it isn't always easy, and sometimes impossible bu I found peace and contentment eventually. May you all acheive the same :)

#42 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 44370
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 13 January 2013 - 02:21 PM

Jon,

SCTs are considered "jack of all trades" because they are competent for both visual and astrophotography. A good Newtonian, a good apochromatic refractor, these are very capable of providing the excellent views of all classes of objects...


I don't do AP, don't think I ever will. And I want a scope that is hopefully better than merely "competent" for the task at hand. So no SCTs so far.

High-end APO's are above my paygrade. $1000 per inch? No, sir, not happening here.

So that leaves "a good Newtonian." Excellent choice!

:grin:
Mike


A 150 eyepieces... take 70 of those, sell them for $30 each and there's enough to buy top of the line 4 inch apo used, a very good 120mm New...

Me, I stumble around finding neat stuff and not so neat stuff by accident.

On a serious note, in terms of the original thread... If eyepieces are important to you, if you really look through them and enjoy the differences the way Bill P. does, that's not a problem, that's enjoying a certain aspect of this hobby. Bill collects and covets eyepieces because he enjoys looking through them and he sees the minor differences. It's a plus because it enhances the observing experience.

I imagine there are some who are caught up in the consumeritis of eyepieces... That can be a problem...

Jon

#43 Monoeil

Monoeil

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 174
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2011

Posted 13 January 2013 - 02:43 PM

At some point in this hobby you will find that quality optics and good seeing are the key to good views. Most premium eyepieces will not degrade what the objective in your scope can deliver. Once you find out what kind of eyepiece you like, be it wide angle or those with narrower afov, 3 eyepieces would serve the average observer very well. On the other hand, if you think the eyepiece is the key to good views or just want to collect them, have at it. This forum is your kind of place. :grin: I have a mere 8 main eyepieces and a Barlow.


3 eyepieces, this is exactly what I own and use. Less to carry, less to worry about.

#44 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 17149
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 13 January 2013 - 02:57 PM

Jon,

A 150 eyepieces... take 70 of those, sell them for $30 each and there's enough to buy top of the line 4 inch apo used, a very good 120mm New...


I did have 150 eyepieces ... now I only have 100! The sale of those 50 eyepieces and other equipment netted me about $2500. But that went to pay off debt and add a few choice eyepieces: three XW's, a couple XO's, Brandon 24, Titan II 40, and such. And I'm constantly thinking about which eyepieces should be sold among those that remain.

I doubt if an APO will ever be in my future. I can't bring myself to pay so much money for so little aperture!

:grin:
Mike

#45 Scanning4Comets

Scanning4Comets

    Markus

  • *****
  • Posts: 13776
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 13 January 2013 - 03:28 PM

On a serious note, in terms of the original thread... If eyepieces are important to you, if you really look through them and enjoy the differences the way Bill P. does, that's not a problem, that's enjoying a certain aspect of this hobby. Bill collects and covets eyepieces because he enjoys looking through them and he sees the minor differences. It's a plus because it enhances the observing experience.

I imagine there are some who are caught up in the consumeritis of eyepieces... That can be a problem...

Jon



Eyepieces are not my life. I buy them and use them and sell them because I can't afford to go out and get 60 or 70 of them.....so I have fun with them sometimes for a year or two, and that would be nice ones I like. The not so nice ones go up for sale to buy something else to try. Is there a problem with that? I don't think so.

The ones I do like get used a lot. As for what you said about Bill P., anybody can look through his eyepiece history on here or A-Mart and clearly see he has bought and sold many as well.....And I have seen some of his posts where he says, "These are keepers", and then you see them sold. There is nothing wrong with that either. Many others have quoted that as well, and you see the eyepieces sold.

I also see major and minor differences in eyepieces myself as do many others.

And just who is getting uptight now...


Uptight? :lol: I said "LOL" in my last post, which was funny....nobody is uptight here Jon except for you saying "I do things for real and I don't dream." Geeze bro, I merely made a post for fun, and you're taking things a bit too seriously here.

I'm far from being caught up in "consuermeritis" and get out whenever I can with star maps, red lights etc and view whenever I can as I really enjoy this hobby. I know that was directed at me....doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that Jon.

Cheers,

#46 BillP

BillP

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11883
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2006
  • Loc: Vienna, VA

Posted 13 January 2013 - 03:38 PM

And I have seen some of his posts where he says, "These are keepers", and then you see them sold. There is nothing wrong with that either. Many others have quoted that as well, and you see the eyepieces sold.


Unfortunately, fiscal realities set in :( No way of keeping the old keepers and also trying new things...so gotta let goodies go unfortunately. Would love to have my Brandon's back, Nagler Zoom, 32mm Konig II, the complete set of UO Konigs I had actually, my beloved Meade 3000 Plossls, the 32mm and 40mm Meade 4000 smoothies, my complete 1.25" TV Circle-NJ smoothies, the RKEs I put chromed barrels on, my set of 1980's Celestron Orthos and Erfles, etc. :bawling:

Part of the issue is also that the observer changes over time as well. We are never who we once were but grow and change always. So what one likes often changes as they change. And since the eyepiece is such a personal part of the telescope, like a coat or glove, as we change then so must the eyepiece. It is an interesting journey for sure. I often wonder what does it mean when one comes to the end of their eyepiece journey and no longer feel the need for new and different eyepieces? Perhaps it means that we come to the end of our changing so no longer feel the need. :question: Whatever the reason, I feel it has more to do with ourselves than with the equipment.

Right now though...searching for things to sell as I really want to give the Paradigms/HD60s/X-Cel LXs a run...and of course want the BCOs with Turret also. :lol:

I am fairly confident that the XWs will stick around...at least until someone makes something as good in a smaller form factor. My planetaries as well will probably stick around as they are perfection...although the 7mm SMC Ortho might say goodbye if I can find a 7 Supermono. But the 5XO, 6ZAO, 8/10/12 AP-SPLs I have are quite the perfectionists for planetary, and excel over anything I place against them. In the end...an eyepiece is a "keeper" as long as it is not surpassed by another...so the distinction is many times not as long lived as they might hope.

#47 MikeBOKC

MikeBOKC

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4604
  • Joined: 10 May 2010
  • Loc: Oklahoma City, OK

Posted 13 January 2013 - 03:39 PM

I must be a slacker. Sixteen eyepieces, and six of those are in binoviewer pairs. so really just 13 specific designs and focal length. So why is there about $2800 tied up in my eyepiece case? Must have something to do with names like Ethis, Delos, Brandon, ES, etc.

#48 Starman81

Starman81

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 2055
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2008
  • Loc: Metro Detroit, MI, USA

Posted 13 January 2013 - 04:41 PM

C'mon guys! Play nice, we are all friends here :cool:.

Yes, I definitely had an eyepiece problem. 'Had' because I believe I am slowly recovering. I have been through 60+ this year but my current holdings show 23 units. One major factor that slowed down my high-level of consumeritis was realizing that I need to wear my glasses while observing more often than not, so that has skewed my EP tastes to those with more ER, thereby sharply reducing the number of contestants in the field of EPs for me. Secondly, that I needed to settle down and just observe more! So I've been doing just that.

My my my what a quick evolution though! 3/25/12 lineup:

Attached Files



#49 Starman81

Starman81

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 2055
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2008
  • Loc: Metro Detroit, MI, USA

Posted 13 January 2013 - 04:42 PM

And the family portrait take on 1/5/13:

Attached Files



#50 MRNUTTY

MRNUTTY

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1862
  • Joined: 22 Nov 2011
  • Loc: Mendon, MA

Posted 13 January 2013 - 04:59 PM

I have about 60 EP's at this point. The ones I use the most are the XW's mainly because they're portable with confidence; Vangaurd case and Bolt's, and my only observations this winter have been at my dark site. While the observatory is being built I don't have a good place to observe from. By and large I prefer getting sets of EP's and viewing with sets; I like the continuity in size, AFOV, wieght, and texture. I always bring a wide field and a narrow field set for more variety. Although the opinion expressed that the greatest joy is in the object itself, there is quite a different joy, not mutually exclusive, in the joy of fine tools and instruments.

I also have a number of telescopes and one set while perfect for one scope, may not be the best for another. In addition, I usually set two scopes up either on different mounts for different targets, or more often both copes on the same mount with either a ADM dual saddle kit, or the innate dual scope ability of the iOptron MiniTower II. One scope is always a refractor :-)

On a more personal EP note I recently sold off my ES 82's and 68's to purchase a set of TV's to observe with. I really enjoyed those ES's EP's, and although, financially, I could have kept them. I knew I would be using them far less than they deserved and their AFOV and FL ranges were far to similar to the planned TV EP's. I kept very good are of those EP, and a good number of lucky astronomers got a LNIB EP for a super price, especially I this ES EP drought :-) It's just good Karma!

I'm awaiting my ES100/25mm soon, and on the look out for the right Naglers to build a set with. Unfortunately, unlike my other sets, I can't afford all the EP's in the line of Naglers :-( so I have a combination of EP that work together rather than all the EP's in a line; excepting the Panoptics

Oh yeah, back on topic. I don't consider myself having a problem with EP's, although I don't make much distinction between 'need' and 'want', which is precisely where folks feel that they get into problems.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics