Jump to content


Photo

Help a Noob?

  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#1 ponz

ponz

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 144
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2012
  • Loc: Kansas City, MO

Posted 14 January 2013 - 06:46 PM

Howdy.

I recently bought a Skywatcher Pro 80ED with an Atlas mount, etc.....to get into imaging.

However, I'd also like to utilize the scope for viewing. The scope came with a 5mm and 20mm eyepiece, 2" diag, step down, etc....

As a photographer I'm experiencing lens lust all over again!

I'd like a quality eyepiece for lunar and planetary viewing to make the scope a little more versatile. I've been eyeballing the Neglar 6-3mm as a one eyepiece fits all.

It's my understanding that 2" is better tha 1.25"? If so, I don't see any 2"ers in that focal length....

Your thoughts please?

Thanks,
Ponz

#2 MikeBOKC

MikeBOKC

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4666
  • Joined: 10 May 2010
  • Loc: Oklahoma City, OK

Posted 14 January 2013 - 08:21 PM

Two inch eyepieces are generally north of about 24mm. The gap in your lineup would be well filled by something in the 10-12mm range. The Explore Scientific 11mm 82 degree eyepiece is a sweet spot for many, well regarded and currently on sale if you can find one in stock. Or if you want to go a little richer take a look at the 10mm Delos from Televue.

#3 Hermie

Hermie

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 338
  • Joined: 20 Apr 2005
  • Loc: Cloudy HKG

Posted 14 January 2013 - 08:23 PM

Ponz,

Congratulations on your purchase! The Nagler 3-6 is a great eyepiece for a short refractor. I think that your scope is 900mm focal length and in that case the Nagler zoom is very high power. If you increase power too much, you will find the view becomes very dim and unsteady.

Short focal length (high magnification) eyepieces are all 1.25" because the light cone entering the eyepiece is small. As you go to longer focal length/lower power eyepieces the field of view has to be increased to 2" or become narrower. So 2" eyepieces become the norm as you increase past about 20mm.

I won't make any specific recommendations, but I think you should consider something around 7-8mm for a high power eyepiece, and around 20mm for medium power.

What do you think of the eyepieces that came with the scope? Are they comfortable to use? That will help others guide you on what you might like.

Hermie

#4 ibase

ibase

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4629
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2008
  • Loc: Manila, Philippines 121°E 14°N

Posted 14 January 2013 - 08:29 PM

Interested in astrophotography too? Then consider a Baader Hyperion 8-24mm zoom, it adapts to the camera quite well:

Posted Image
Baader Hyperion 8-24mm zoom mated to a Canon DSLR D1000

Afocal shots are also my favorite for Moon shots using the 8mm Hyperion zoom setting and a WO66mm petzval refractor, like below, biggest Supermoon in 18 years when it was taken.

Posted Image

Best,

#5 ponz

ponz

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 144
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2012
  • Loc: Kansas City, MO

Posted 14 January 2013 - 08:56 PM

Two inch eyepieces are generally north of about 24mm. The gap in your lineup would be well filled by something in the 10-12mm range. The Explore Scientific 11mm 82 degree eyepiece is a sweet spot for many, well regarded and currently on sale if you can find one in stock. Or if you want to go a little richer take a look at the 10mm Delos from Televue.


A "little" richer? Jeez - 370 bucks for the single focal length 10mm Delos! The Explore Scientific
11mm looks pretty good.

Wha are your thoughts on a barlow? Any need with my current puny lineup, even if spring for the zoom or not?

Thanks - Ponz

#6 ponz

ponz

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 144
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2012
  • Loc: Kansas City, MO

Posted 14 January 2013 - 08:57 PM

Interested in astrophotography too? Then consider a Baader Hyperion 8-24mm zoom, it adapts to the camera quite well:

Posted Image
Baader Hyperion 8-24mm zoom mated to a Canon DSLR D1000

Afocal shots are also my favorite for Moon shots using the 8mm Hyperion zoom setting and a WO66mm petzval refractor, like below, biggest Supermoon in 18 years when it was taken.

Posted Image

Best,


Nice shot!

#7 ponz

ponz

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 144
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2012
  • Loc: Kansas City, MO

Posted 14 January 2013 - 09:01 PM

Ponz,

Congratulations on your purchase! The Nagler 3-6 is a great eyepiece for a short refractor. I think that your scope is 900mm focal length and in that case the Nagler zoom is very high power. If you increase power too much, you will find the view becomes very dim and unsteady.

Short focal length (high magnification) eyepieces are all 1.25" because the light cone entering the eyepiece is small. As you go to longer focal length/lower power eyepieces the field of view has to be increased to 2" or become narrower. So 2" eyepieces become the norm as you increase past about 20mm.

I won't make any specific recommendations, but I think you should consider something around 7-8mm for a high power eyepiece, and around 20mm for medium power.

What do you think of the eyepieces that came with the scope? Are they comfortable to use? That will help others guide you on what you might like.

Hermie


Thanks Hermie - Well, I've got a 5 and 20 that came with the scope, but the jury is still out regarding their quality....

#8 Hermie

Hermie

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 338
  • Joined: 20 Apr 2005
  • Loc: Cloudy HKG

Posted 14 January 2013 - 11:11 PM

Ponz,

The reason I asked is because I'm guessing that the eyepieces you have are "plossl" (design). They are probably OK quality, but the apparent field of view (AFOV - how wide the view appears through the eyepiece) is about 45 degrees and the eye relief (how far your eye should be from the eyepiece to view) will be good for the 20mm and very short for the 5mm. I was asking because you will need to decide how much field of view you want to buy, and how much eye relief you need.

For me, I'm happy with about 70 degrees AFOV but other people love wide 82 or 100 degree views. I need at least 15mm eye relief because I wear glasses for observing, but many people are happy with much less.

The Hyperion zoom that Hernando recommended is a great eyepiece and you may not need anything else.

Barlows can be handy. I have one, but rarely use it because I find it a hassle to connect into the system and then the barlowed eyepiece becomes very tall. That's just me, and other people happily barlow most nights.

Hermie

#9 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 44771
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 15 January 2013 - 06:58 AM

Thanks Hermie - Well, I've got a 5 and 20 that came with the scope, but the jury is still out regarding their quality....



Optically, Plossls are good eyepieces, in your 80mm F/7.5, the 5mm is provides you with 120x, a nice place to be. The 50 degree field of view is adequate but more is generally nice. The biggest issue with short focal length Plossls is the eye relief, its only about 3mm-4mm in a 5mm so you have to get very close to the eyepiece. More eye relief makes for more comfort.

At some point you will probably want to observe the great variety of possible objects, not only the planets but also deep space objects, galaxies, nebulae, clusters. It's probably wise to have some sort of long term plan. The Nagler 3mm-6mm zoom is a great choice for viewing the planets with your scope, it provides you with 100x-200x.

At some point you will probably want a low power widefield eyepiece, the right eyepiece in a 2 inch diagonal would give you about 4 degrees TFoV... And of course some eyepieces to handle the middle ground between 20x and 200x...

In terms of cost, it all adds up. But a good set of eyepieces can be a lifetime investment, effective in any scope you might own.

Jon

#10 ponz

ponz

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 144
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2012
  • Loc: Kansas City, MO

Posted 15 January 2013 - 11:57 AM

OK - Before I pull tghe trigger on the Neglar 6-3mm, would someone please explain why the specs for my scope indicate a max magnification of 160? Would I be wasting 40x worth of power?

What determines max magnification? I know seeing conditions play a major role.

Thanks - Ponz

#11 dpwoos

dpwoos

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1540
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2006
  • Loc: United States

Posted 15 January 2013 - 01:04 PM

I don't own a Nagler 3-6 zoom, and here is why. A fellow club member once lent me his for a few weeks, and another member has lent me his several times, and though I agree that it is a very nice eyepiece, it isn't perfect. The fov is 50degrees, which is no better than a plossl. On one occasion I could see Enceladus in my 6" f/8 dob with a $25 6mm plossl and I could not see it with the Nagler zoom. So, I have continued looking at other possibilities for comfortable high-power views. I have recently been experimenting with a 13mm Type 6 Nagler and a TV 2x barlow, and I like the resulting performance a lot.

#12 dpwoos

dpwoos

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1540
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2006
  • Loc: United States

Posted 16 January 2013 - 12:37 AM

Also, the 160x is 50x/inch, which is the accepted max productive magnification. I wouldn't worry about this very much.

#13 ponz

ponz

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 144
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2012
  • Loc: Kansas City, MO

Posted 16 January 2013 - 08:08 AM

Interested in astrophotography too? Then consider a Baader Hyperion 8-24mm zoom, it adapts to the camera quite well:

Posted Image
Baader Hyperion 8-24mm zoom mated to a Canon DSLR D1000

Afocal shots are also my favorite for Moon shots using the 8mm Hyperion zoom setting and a WO66mm petzval refractor, like below, biggest Supermoon in 18 years when it was taken.

Posted Image

Best,


Hernando - I've been reading Baader zoom reviews. They seem, overall, pretty good. Can you direct me to where I might locate an adapter for my camera? I'll be shooting a Sony a900 which is a Minolta mount.

Thanks - Ponz

#14 MRNUTTY

MRNUTTY

    Surveyor 1

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

Posted 16 January 2013 - 10:59 AM

@ponz - of the few places shop; telescopes.com has them in stock. Optcorp.com is out of stock. It's a good eyepiece to start with.

#15 ibase

ibase

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4629
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2008
  • Loc: Manila, Philippines 121°E 14°N

Posted 16 January 2013 - 12:09 PM

Hernando - I've been reading Baader zoom reviews. They seem, overall, pretty good. Can you direct me to where I might locate an adapter for my camera? I'll be shooting a Sony a900 which is a Minolta mount.

Thanks - Ponz


Ponz, it depends on which Baader Hyperion zoom you have; if it's the new Mark III, then you need the M43/T-2 adapter. For the BH zoom II, it's the HTA54/T2, both of them shown below:

Posted Image
Baader Hyperion zoom adaptors: Left - HTA54/T2 for the BH zoom II; Right - M43/T-2 for the new Mark III.

Posted Image
2 Baader Hyperion zoom versions with respective adapters: Left - BH Zoom II; Right - Mark III

Ordered the adapters for my Canon DSLR from Alpine Astro, (to be sure how to adapt to your particular camera, send an email, they are very friendly and knowledgeable) but the adapters are also available from other sources as mentioned in the previous post, or also at Agena.

Best,

#16 oo_void

oo_void

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 609
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2009
  • Loc: San Francisco, CA

Posted 16 January 2013 - 02:17 PM

I agree that the Baader Zoom is a good, first purchase for one with a new scope. It's not the widest field in the world, but you'll learn what works well with your scope and can fill in your favorite spot with a nice, wide FOV when ready. You'll also want to consider a nice planetary to go with the Baader. I went with an ES82 6.7, but a lot of people recommend Ortho's. Both are quite cheap.

As for AP though, EP projection is just the gateway drug ;). Lunar shots are much more easily done at prime with just a T-adapter for your camera. If planetary is your thing, I'd recommend looking into a nice webcam based imager rather than toying with projection. You can get low end cameras starting at under $100, but a nice DMK or QHY should run you between $250 and $350. Though the resolution may look low at first compared to a camera, you can get some exceptional images capturing at ~720 x 480.

#17 GeneT

GeneT

    Ely Kid

  • *****
  • Posts: 12841
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008
  • Loc: South Texas

Posted 16 January 2013 - 05:55 PM

For me, I'm happy with about 70 degrees AFOV but other people love wide 82 or 100 degree views. I need at least 15mm eye relief because I wear glasses for observing, but many people are happy with much less.


All Delos eyepieces have 20mm of eye relief. In the Nagler line, look at the 31, 22, 17, and 12. They have eye relief ranging from 17 20mm of eye relief. I purchased eye pieces so I can do all my viewing while wearing glasses.

#18 ponz

ponz

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 144
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2012
  • Loc: Kansas City, MO

Posted 16 January 2013 - 09:09 PM

Well - I ended up buying the Explore Scientific 11mm 82 degree from optcorp.com

Since my long term goal is deep space photography I decided to just fill the hole between the stock eyepieces (5mm and 20mm) that came with the scope. It didn't cost a fortune, gets good reviews and I should be able to see a difference from the stock eyepieces.

Once again, I think all you guys are wonderful for being so patient and informative with we new guys. I'm learning so much. Thanks you.

Ponz

ps - I was focused on a bird atop a tall tree two houses down and couldn't believe the light loss from the stock 20mm to the stock 5mm. Do the more expensive eyepieces exhibit the same light loss at shorter focal lengths?

Who knows, maybe the eyepiece bug will bite me.

I'll be pestering you again in a nearby thread soon!!

#19 oo_void

oo_void

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 609
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2009
  • Loc: San Francisco, CA

Posted 17 January 2013 - 12:48 AM

Just to warn you (and setting expectation accordingly) ... EP projection my give you usable results for bright objects like the moon and some of the planets, but you're going to be banging you head when it comes to DSO's. Even something bright like M13 takes hours of exposure time at prime with a good DSLR connected via t-ring, or a CCD.

#20 CosmoSat

CosmoSat

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1273
  • Joined: 24 Jul 2009
  • Loc: India

Posted 17 January 2013 - 02:51 AM

I was focused on a bird atop a tall tree two houses down and couldn't believe the light loss from the stock 20mm to the stock 5mm. Do the more expensive eyepieces exhibit the same light loss at shorter focal lengths?


Yes, all eyepieces will exhibit the light loss, With magnification, the brightness curve tends to drop off in any objects that you see because the concentrated light of the image in the low power eyepiece is now spread out in a larger area in the magnified image that you are viewing.

Clear Skies!

#21 ponz

ponz

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 144
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2012
  • Loc: Kansas City, MO

Posted 17 January 2013 - 07:42 AM

Just to warn you (and setting expectation accordingly) ... EP projection my give you usable results for bright objects like the moon and some of the planets, but you're going to be banging you head when it comes to DSO's. Even something bright like M13 takes hours of exposure time at prime with a good DSLR connected via t-ring, or a CCD.


Yes, I realize that. That's why I don't want to spend a fortune on eyepieces - at least not yet ;)

Ponz

#22 ponz

ponz

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 144
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2012
  • Loc: Kansas City, MO

Posted 17 January 2013 - 07:43 AM

I was focused on a bird atop a tall tree two houses down and couldn't believe the light loss from the stock 20mm to the stock 5mm. Do the more expensive eyepieces exhibit the same light loss at shorter focal lengths?


Yes, all eyepieces will exhibit the light loss, With magnification, the brightness curve tends to drop off in any objects that you see because the concentrated light of the image in the low power eyepiece is now spread out in a larger area in the magnified image that you are viewing.

Clear Skies!


The same principle as most long camera lenses, huh.

Ponz

#23 CosmoSat

CosmoSat

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1273
  • Joined: 24 Jul 2009
  • Loc: India

Posted 17 January 2013 - 11:10 AM

No, in a camera, the aperture is stopped down by the inbuilt mechanical iris to control the light throughput.

In a telescope, the amount of light gathered by the primary to form an image is constant, what the eyepieces does is vary the size of the image so that with increase in magnification the amount of light in that image is spread out on an larger area, and hence it appears dimmer, in a lower magnified image, the light is concentrated in a smaller area and so it appears brighter.

Clear Skies!

#24 ponz

ponz

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 144
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2012
  • Loc: Kansas City, MO

Posted 18 January 2013 - 08:59 PM

I'm baaack! :help:

I've been enjoying tracking Jupiter the past couple of nights with my SkyWatcher 600mm 80ED APO with the stock 5mm eyepiece.

How much magnification can I squeak out of this scope?

I realize, from reading here, that seeing/atmospheric conditions play THE primary role. However, I would like to get much closer and clearer with my scope, if that's at all possible.

If so, what will a couple of hundred bucks get me?

Should I purchase a barlow and attempt to magnify the stock 5mm?

Can I ever expect decent views of Mars with my scope?

So many questions - I know.

Thanks
Ponz

#25 dpwoos

dpwoos

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1540
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2006
  • Loc: United States

Posted 18 January 2013 - 10:33 PM

You can only squeeze so much out of an 80mm scope, and most folks won't get much more out of it than you are. However, everyone is different and so why not go for it? Rather than get a 4mm eyepiece, why not use/get an 8mm and a 2x barlow, or a 12mm and a 3x barlow? That way you will have much better eye relief, and the barlow to use with other eyepieces? The best advice is to observe with folks who have stuff that you can borrow to try these options for yourself.

Also, Mars is relatively small and so I think the best you will do is see an orange ball with small white polar cap(s). Very cool, but nowhere near as impressive as Jupiter or Saturn, at least for most folks.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics