Jump to content


Photo

Eyepieces for 6se please

  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

#26 azure1961p

azure1961p

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10235
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2009
  • Loc: USA

Posted 03 April 2013 - 06:45 AM

Televues are definitely the top of the line in terms of quality. Just keep in mind that a Plossls generally has a field of view of around 50°, which can seem somewhat limiting by the standards of modern designs. I think the reason they are often found in the classifieds is because people want to upgrade to wider fields.

-Dan


My stock suggestion is always: get a set of Televue Plossls. I'm thinking of adding but to my signature. One thing to consider about frequency in used ads is the reasoning which can often be a result of one or the other: the product stinks, everyone bought into the hype and then got butter and disenchanted with the reality if the limitations. The 70s used ads were CRAMMED with used Questars everyone wanted to unload particularly after seeing a cheaper C8 whip its butt.

That isn't the case with the plossls though...

The other reason in used ads frequency is the sheer popularity of the product where its abundant new and used. That's the case here in the latter.

It could be true that folks are selling off their plossls to fund the very expensive Ethos and and such mega wide field oculars. This is unfortunate however as my opinion is every eyepiece kit ought to have a foundation set of Televue Plossls (though everyone loves Sterling now too).

Between the contrasty planetary views that accentuate the coffee tinge of jupiters belts for example, wonderful clarity and exquisite doublestar views it provides it holds its own place quite well. You don't need to have an 80 degree field of view and all the extra glass to have first rate views. One eyepiece in particular, the Radian always seems to lag behind plossls in planetary contrast while (based on Internet chatter) the Pentax XW seem to have both high contrast and widefield optimized. But at steeper cost than that of a good plossl.

I've enjoyed views through Naglers but Im just not pushed to the great attraction so many find in using these. But that's just me. The ocular forum is a buzz with mega wide angle topics - tis the rage. Just don't lose sight of the excellence had through one of the most successful four element designs ever.

Pete

#27 azure1961p

azure1961p

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10235
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2009
  • Loc: USA

Posted 03 April 2013 - 06:54 AM

But does a wider field of view do anything for planetary viewing? I don't have any (just the 32mm that came with my 6SE) but to my thinking a wider field EP would be good for Pleides, or DSO viewing, right? I mean do I need 68 degree FOV for looking at Jupiter? Or Saturn?

Jim


No. It will more than likely detract some from contrast though there are exceptions in the Pentax and Nagler T6 series.* What you are really buying for all the extra cost is extra drift time for the planet to move across your fiend if view in a scope that doesn't track. Too, consider that in a very fast reflector this useful field of view where the is no coma degrading the image might be significantly smaller than the actual field of view hence the need for a coma corrector lens assembly. Aside from tracking, Ive seen Saturn floating in a Nagler field big and empty - I'm not a fan of the look.

Pete
*some of which ice seen firsthand the other being the consensus of what Id regard as reliable observing testimonials from others.

#28 Jammer53

Jammer53

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 114
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2012
  • Loc: Central NY

Posted 03 April 2013 - 07:14 AM

Hi Pete. Thanks for the info. I've been tossing back and forth between the Baader Hyperion Planetariums ($139 new) and the Tele Vue Plossls ($100-120 new) for quite awhile for my 6SE. As you can see in my sig, the only single fl eyepiece I have is the Celestron 32mm, although I do have a Zhumell 8-24 Zoom and a Baader Planetarium 2.25 Barlow. Unfortunately, the weather hasn't been cooperating in the last couple of weeks (got snow yesterday and today), so I haven't been able to use my scope at all.

Anyway, what I'm thinking (and would like opinions on) is which EPs to get, and in what focal length. Pentax and Naglers are way out of my price range. I'm thinking of buying two, either a 13/15/17mm, and a 20/22/24mm to start. Mostly, I want to look at the planets. Some day as I mature in this hobby, I'll look a little deeper. But for now I want to see Mars, Venus, Jupiter and Saturn.

Clear skies!

Jim

#29 coutleef

coutleef

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3964
  • Joined: 21 Feb 2008
  • Loc: Saint-Donat, Quebec, Canada

Posted 03 April 2013 - 08:09 AM

i would suggest to use your zoom for a while and that will give you an idea of what FL suits your need.

i must admit that i like looking at planets at least at 150x. so that would mean at most a 10mm EP. unless you use a barlow the FL you mention will not give a lot of power for viewing planets.

use your zoom for a while and then decide

#30 Peter9

Peter9

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4689
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Yorkshire - Born & Bred

Posted 03 April 2013 - 08:33 AM

I agree with Francois's sound advice. With the 24mm x 8mm zoom you have all the focal lengths you will need for now. If you then decide to buy some single eyepieces, wide angle or not, you will have some idea of the focal lengths to go for i.e the ones you've found most useful with the zoom.

Regards. Peter.

#31 Jammer53

Jammer53

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 114
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2012
  • Loc: Central NY

Posted 03 April 2013 - 10:12 AM

Francois and Peter. Thanks. That is in fact the game plan. But I'm wondering which brand EP to buy as well as focal length. The trouble with my 8-24 is it's not a "click-stop" so I don't have any way to distinguish if I'm at 13mm, 15mm or 20mm (or anywhere in between).

The advice I guess I'm after is what works best for you experienced seers on planetary viewing.

Or maybe I'm just too inexperienced to phrase this properly.

Jim

#32 BigC

BigC

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3112
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2010
  • Loc: SE Indiana

Posted 03 April 2013 - 11:52 AM

First ,a 20mm ,unless used with a barlow isn't going to give much planetary detail.A 20mm with a 3x or 5x barlow can be pretty good and the big eye relief is helpful to eyeglass wearers.

You bring up a very good question about knowing what equivalent f/l the Z-zoom is at in-between setting.I,too,have one of those.

With warmer weather I hope to observe a bit more and doing a methodical eyepiece comparison is an excellent project.Of course my results might not match your needs.

#33 Peter9

Peter9

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4689
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Yorkshire - Born & Bred

Posted 03 April 2013 - 11:56 AM

Hi Jim,

I have a Baader 24mm x 8mm "click stop" zoom along with an A&E 24mm x 8mm non "clickstop". While the click stop helps, its not a necessity. I successfully used my non clickstop for many years before Yvonne (our Lass) bought me the Baader.
The A&E zoom is marked at focal lengths 24,20,16,12 and 8mm (as I assume yours is) so half way between 20mm and 16mm would be be near enough 18mm while slightly nearer 20mm would give 19mm etc. The click stop on the Baader is just a guide, it can be used in between the stops.
As I stated in my earlier post, I use the zoom as my main eyepiece and have bought 3 wide angle eyepieces of 26mm, 30mm and 38mm. All are G.S.Os which are on the cheaper side pricewise. They give me very good results at a fair price.

As Dan said, eyepieces are very individual things, so you must study the advice given and make your choice.

Lucky old you. :roflmao:

Regards. Peter.

#34 Tassydevil

Tassydevil

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 636
  • Joined: 17 Aug 2011
  • Loc: Tasmania, Australia

Posted 04 April 2013 - 02:26 PM

An update I went with the 24mm & 13mm Baader, only got a chance to look with the 24mm and wow what a great view over the celestron 25mm that came with the scope so much sharper never got the 13mm out of the box, you know the story Clouds will report again when the sky clears but so far so good :)

Cheers

Graeme.

#35 Midnight Dan

Midnight Dan

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11170
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2008
  • Loc: Hilton, NY, Yellow Zone (Bortle 4.5)

Posted 04 April 2013 - 03:23 PM

Congrats on the new eyepieces. :waytogo: Wait till you get a chance to try out that 13mm!

-Dan

#36 Jammer53

Jammer53

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 114
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2012
  • Loc: Central NY

Posted 04 April 2013 - 03:28 PM

Nice. Do let us know how you like the 13mm. I'm on the fence between the Baaders and the TeleVue Plossls.

Thanks.

Jim

#37 Jammer53

Jammer53

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 114
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2012
  • Loc: Central NY

Posted 04 April 2013 - 04:20 PM

A.E. I had already read your thread that you linked. Someone else had pointed me to it in another thread. Thanks for the info.

I'm not really interested in wide angle views at this point. I'm really trying to concentrate on planets and the moon for my first few months of warm weather. I've only had it out once since I bought it and froze my patoot off.

Jim

#38 ben2112

ben2112

    Cloud Magnet

  • *****
  • Posts: 1119
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2012
  • Loc: North Charleston SC

Posted 04 April 2013 - 04:30 PM

Cool!! Yeah, the Baader is like a night and day difference. :jump:

#39 Jammer53

Jammer53

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 114
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2012
  • Loc: Central NY

Posted 04 April 2013 - 08:33 PM

Ben, are you saying the Baaders are better than the Televue Plossls? Do you/have you had both?

#40 ben2112

ben2112

    Cloud Magnet

  • *****
  • Posts: 1119
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2012
  • Loc: North Charleston SC

Posted 04 April 2013 - 10:17 PM

No.. I don't have any TV eyepieces. But comparing the Baader eyepieces to my Celestron eyepiece kit I got with my scope, there is a huge difference. From my understanding, any TV eyepieces are going to be to notch.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics