Jump to content


Photo

ES 28mm 68 degree

  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 Tim D

Tim D

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 175
  • Joined: 08 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Temecula, CA

Posted 07 April 2013 - 12:32 PM

I have been doing some research on getting a new low power EP for my XT10g f/4.7 and have narrowed it down to the ES 28mm 68 degree. I based this off of Budget, 21.6mm eye relief (I wear glasses), exit pupil diameter of 6.04 and it seems to be the longest useful EP focal length for f/4.7. I was comparing it to the ES 24MM 82 deg but that EP has 17.5mm eye relief which I don't think I would like.
So does anyone own the ES 28mm 68 and what are your opinions on fast dobs? Also I own a 2" Orion Ultrablock, how are the threads on this EP for filters? Thanks for any feedback.
Tim

#2 REC

REC

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5142
  • Joined: 20 Oct 2010
  • Loc: NC

Posted 07 April 2013 - 12:49 PM

I have this EP under the Meade label and it works very well and has some very good reviews out there on the web. Pretty much the same glass as the current ES I believe.

#3 Scanning4Comets

Scanning4Comets

    Markus

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

Posted 07 April 2013 - 12:58 PM

I have owned a 28mm Meade 5000 SWA and a Meade 5000 24mm UWA, which is basically the same as the ES line. I have also owned two different 2 inch Ultrablock filters. IMO, I liked the 28mm SWA more as I could hang back a bit from the eye lens and easily take in the view which is just over 70 degrees. with the 24mm UWA is was more "in the view" if you know what I mean.

My first 2" Orion Ultrablock had excellent threads and my second one had funky threads. I now own a DGM Optics O-III and the filter stays threaded on a 2 inch, 35mm Blue Fireball extension tube because I detest threading filters onto any of my eyepieces and just insert the ext tube into the focuser and any of my eyepieces that have all 1.25"-2" adapters on them.

I plan on getting another 2" Orion Ultrablock and keeping that one on an extension tube also.

I heartily recommend the 28mm ES 68 or the ES 24mm UWA, as they are both good Ep's.

#4 russell23

russell23

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4380
  • Joined: 31 May 2009
  • Loc: Upstate NY

Posted 07 April 2013 - 01:12 PM

I have been doing some research on getting a new low power EP for my XT10g f/4.7 and have narrowed it down to the ES 28mm 68 degree. I based this off of Budget, 21.6mm eye relief (I wear glasses), exit pupil diameter of 6.04 and it seems to be the longest useful EP focal length for f/4.7. I was comparing it to the ES 24MM 82 deg but that EP has 17.5mm eye relief which I don't think I would like.
So does anyone own the ES 28mm 68 and what are your opinions on fast dobs? Also I own a 2" Orion Ultrablock, how are the threads on this EP for filters? Thanks for any feedback.
Tim


Tim,

I don't own a dob, but I love this eyepiece with my Vixen 140NA f/5.7 refractor. It has excellent coatings and provides nice sharp stars almost to the edge. There are no issues with blackouts and the FOV is very clean and bright.

I think it is one of those outstanding eyepieces that seems to fly under the radar a bit.

Dave

#5 Tim D

Tim D

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 175
  • Joined: 08 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Temecula, CA

Posted 07 April 2013 - 08:18 PM

Thanks I have also been looking at the 24mm 68 vice the 24mm 82, the 68 has more eye relief. I am leaning on going with the 24 over the 28 because of the exit pupil diameter being 6.04 on the 28mm and 5.16 on the 24mm, I am 45 years old.
Tim

#6 BDS316

BDS316

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2071
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Sol 3

Posted 08 April 2013 - 12:25 PM

I have been doing some research on getting a new low power EP for my XT10g f/4.7 and have narrowed it down to the ES 28mm 68 degree. I based this off of Budget, 21.6mm eye relief (I wear glasses), exit pupil diameter of 6.04 and it seems to be the longest useful EP focal length for f/4.7. I was comparing it to the ES 24MM 82 deg but that EP has 17.5mm eye relief which I don't think I would like.
So does anyone own the ES 28mm 68 and what are your opinions on fast dobs? Also I own a 2" Orion Ultrablock, how are the threads on this EP for filters? Thanks for any feedback.
Tim


Seveal of our club members have 10 inch f/4.7 Dobs and we have had the opportunity to evaluate a few different 2 inch low power eyepieces in these scopes. In the low price range we like the Sterling plossl 30mm. We also like the ES 28mm 68 and the apparently optically identical Meade 5000 28mm SWA. We haven't had the opportunity to compare the ES head-to-head against a 27mm Panoptic which costs alot more. Has anyone had the chance to do an ES-Panoptic shootout?

#7 Scanning4Comets

Scanning4Comets

    Markus

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

Posted 08 April 2013 - 12:36 PM

Shootout between 27mm Pan and 28mm Meade 5000 SWA right HERE!

Hernando is THE MAN! :bow:

#8 CollinofAlabama

CollinofAlabama

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2171
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2003
  • Loc: Lubbock, Texas, USA

Posted 08 April 2013 - 09:05 PM

I agree with Hernando's review in the single brief instance of comparing the two. I own the 68ES 28mm, and, although I think the Pan 27 offers a better view, it is not better enough to make me pay that kind of money difference.

It's been said before by Jim Barnett and others, as the exit pupil gets larger, finer distinctions between eyepieces of 90% equivalence, differences that can and do show up at the planetary focal lengths (i.e., sub 1.5mm exit pupil views), are less pronounced and so subtle they become somewhat negligible. That's my take.

One more thing, tho, about these two I didn't get to compare, since this was a friend's Pan 27, not mine, but it has to do with Rectilinear Distortion. The TV Panoptic line is notorious for RD, with a frequent consequence that these can cause queasiness, and a sense of seasickness in use. I have suffered from this in spades with the Pan 19 vs the Meade 20mm SWA (68ES 20mm progenitor). I eventually sold the Pan 19. I honestly think the Pan 19 was better as a framed image, but I would get physically ill trying to use this eyepiece while panning about the sky. The Meade 20mm SWA causes no such effect on me. Not saying the Pan 27 has this defect compared to the 68ES 28mm -- I don't know. But it could be a difference.

#9 ibase

ibase

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4502
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2008
  • Loc: Manila, Philippines 121*E 14*N

Posted 08 April 2013 - 09:12 PM

Shootout between 27mm Pan and 28mm Meade 5000 SWA right HERE!

Hernando is THE MAN! :bow:


Thanks for the mention Mark, you are most kind dear sir!

Tim, go for the ES68 28mm, it gets a lot of very good reviews around here.

Best,

#10 ibase

ibase

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4502
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2008
  • Loc: Manila, Philippines 121*E 14*N

Posted 08 April 2013 - 09:14 PM

It's been said before by Jim Barnett and others, as the exit pupil gets larger, finer distinctions between eyepieces of 90% equivalence, differences that can and do show up at the planetary focal lengths (i.e., sub 1.5mm exit pupil views), are less pronounced and so subtle they become somewhat negligible. That's my take.


Well put, so true!

Best,

#11 Tim D

Tim D

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 175
  • Joined: 08 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Temecula, CA

Posted 08 April 2013 - 10:22 PM

Thanks for all the input, yes the more I add it up, the ES68 28MM looks like the one for me. Nice review Hernando- You got me on the Hyperion Zoom and now this one :jump:

#12 Allan...

Allan...

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 346
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Penticton B.C. Canada

Posted 09 April 2013 - 12:59 AM

Tim, there's one for sale in the classified section right now. FYI: link: ES28mm 2"

#13 Starman81

Starman81

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 1985
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2008
  • Loc: Metro Detroit, MI, USA

Posted 09 April 2013 - 01:06 AM

I would like to compare the two myself for the heck of it... I've had the ES68 28 for nearly a year but it doesn't get much focuser time between the Pan 35 and then skipping down to the XW 20. I would have expected to use it more for backyard observing where the skies are bright and you want a little more magnification to darken the background while still retaining a nice wide field.

#14 Scanning4Comets

Scanning4Comets

    Markus

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

Posted 09 April 2013 - 02:59 AM

One more thing, tho, about these two I didn't get to compare, since this was a friend's Pan 27, not mine, but it has to do with Rectilinear Distortion. The TV Panoptic line is notorious for RD, with a frequent consequence that these can cause queasiness, and a sense of seasickness in use. I have suffered from this in spades with the Pan 19 vs the Meade 20mm SWA (68ES 20mm progenitor). I eventually sold the Pan 19. I honestly think the Pan 19 was better as a framed image, but I would get physically ill trying to use this eyepiece while panning about the sky. The Meade 20mm SWA causes no such effect on me. Not saying the Pan 27 has this defect compared to the 68ES 28mm -- I don't know. But it could be a difference.


This is true, however not everybody, (including myself), pans around the sky with any eyepiece, so that RD wouldn't be an issue at all. When I want to see something, I will star hop to the area with my 38mm Q70 and use another eyepiece to frame the target. Star hopping and "panning" are two completely different things.

#15 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 43876
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 09 April 2013 - 03:46 AM

This is true, however not everybody, (including myself), pans around the sky with any eyepiece, so that RD wouldn't be an issue at all.



And it is also true that RD bothers some people but many, myself being one, have no issues with it. I spend a lot of time sweeping the sky, messy edge stars bother me and make it difficult to spot tiny faint fuzzies, rectilinear distortion doesn't bother me.

Jon

#16 russell23

russell23

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4380
  • Joined: 31 May 2009
  • Loc: Upstate NY

Posted 09 April 2013 - 05:48 AM


One more thing, tho, about these two I didn't get to compare, since this was a friend's Pan 27, not mine, but it has to do with Rectilinear Distortion. The TV Panoptic line is notorious for RD, with a frequent consequence that these can cause queasiness, and a sense of seasickness in use. I have suffered from this in spades with the Pan 19 vs the Meade 20mm SWA (68ES 20mm progenitor). I eventually sold the Pan 19. I honestly think the Pan 19 was better as a framed image, but I would get physically ill trying to use this eyepiece while panning about the sky. The Meade 20mm SWA causes no such effect on me. Not saying the Pan 27 has this defect compared to the 68ES 28mm -- I don't know. But it could be a difference.


The 27mm Pan does have severe RD commpared with the 28mm ES68 which has very little. In addition, when I had a 27mm Pan I felt the views were dim - as if I was losing light. Not so with the 28mm ES68.

Dave

#17 Scanning4Comets

Scanning4Comets

    Markus

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

Posted 09 April 2013 - 06:38 AM

The 27mm Pan does have severe RD compared with the 28mm ES68 which has very little. In addition, when I had a 27mm Pan I felt the views were dim - as if I was losing light. Not so with the 28mm ES68.

Dave


That's good to know about the dimming factor Dave! One could save some large $$$ if getting the 28mm ES or 28mm Meade 5000 SWA! :waytogo:

#18 Tim D

Tim D

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 175
  • Joined: 08 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Temecula, CA

Posted 09 April 2013 - 08:37 AM

Allan,
That baby is gone! No worries there will be others, thanks for looking.
Tim

#19 Starman81

Starman81

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 1985
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2008
  • Loc: Metro Detroit, MI, USA

Posted 09 April 2013 - 09:28 AM

RD doesn't bother me either, but really surprised to here about noticeable dimming in the Pan 27 vs ES68 28.

BTW, another ES68 28 hit the used market, but on that other site...

#20 Allan...

Allan...

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 346
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Penticton B.C. Canada

Posted 09 April 2013 - 09:56 AM

Wow..that didn't take long. Yes, there will be others.

#21 russell23

russell23

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4380
  • Joined: 31 May 2009
  • Loc: Upstate NY

Posted 09 April 2013 - 11:20 AM

RD doesn't bother me either, but really surprised to here about noticeable dimming in the Pan 27 vs ES68 28.

BTW, another ES68 28 hit the used market, but on that other site...


Just to be clear. I never did a direct side-by-side between a 27mm Pan and a 28mm ES68. What I was saying is that when I did have a 27mm Pan, one of the reasons I sold it was that I felt like I was losing light. I do not feel the same with the 28mm ES68. BillP reported similar results when comparing the 24mm Pan to the 24mm ES68 if I am remembering correctly.

As for RD, it was so bad in the 27mm Pan that I don't need to do a side-by-side to know that the 28mm ES68 is significantly better in that aspect.

Dave

#22 Schaden

Schaden

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 224
  • Joined: 30 Jun 2008
  • Loc: Sonoran Desert

Posted 09 April 2013 - 07:13 PM


It's been said before by Jim Barnett and others, as the exit pupil gets larger, finer distinctions between eyepieces of 90% equivalence, differences that can and do show up at the planetary focal lengths (i.e., sub 1.5mm exit pupil views), are less pronounced and so subtle they become somewhat negligible. That's my take


This is interesting. Does that apply to all ep designs like orthos and plossels? So if you're on a budget, it's better to splurge on the shorter focal lengths ? So if I were buying some new ep, like an 8mm for planetary and a 20-25mm for DSO, it would be smarter to get an 8mm TV plossel or Brandon and go more generic with the 20-25mm, assuming budget wouldn't allow top of the line for both sizes ?

That is especially good news on widefield ep, since the longer focal lengths are always more expensive. Those 24 and 30mm ES82's are a real bargain compared to the equivalent Naglers.

#23 CollinofAlabama

CollinofAlabama

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2171
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2003
  • Loc: Lubbock, Texas, USA

Posted 09 April 2013 - 09:38 PM

Jim Barnett once wrote he felt the ES 82* line were essentially 86% as good as the Nagler line. I'd say this is somewhat variable, again, depending on the exit pupil, and therefore focal length. The lower focal length models perform closer to 80%, while the longer focal length models perform closer to 90%. So, even tho I found the Pan 27 to frame things slightly better than the corresponding Meade 28mm SWA, the difference was genuinely very, very close, and certainly not $100 (or $200+) better, IMHO.

A personal revelation was here. And once something like that happens to you, you just can't ignore it. I'm now a big Brandon and Nagler T6 fan for planetary. I have a weight restriction regarding eyepieces, so I don't personally want to own a 1.25" that weighs over 10 oz. But I do believe from reading here on CN that the Pentax XW, TV Delos, and, tho not in the same weight category, Baader Classic Ortho lines of eyepieces would perform very well. I have a friend who's owned a number of TV Ethos, so I know they perform very well first hand. When I was younger, I loved the shorter focal length TV Plossls, but age and experience caught up with their über short eye relief, and, tho optically very good performers, are just too much for me to own, nowadays. Any of these, should perform very well, however. I'd splurge in the lower focal lengths on them, tho the BCOs are hardly hardly expensive.

Additionally, I can strongly recommend a good Barlow. I own an old school Orion made in Japan, 4.5" long 1.25". These are no longer sold by Orion, tho there may be others still selling the longer, i.e., non-shorty barlows. I know the TeleVue 2x and 3x barlows are not shorty types. Get one of those to turn your mid-focal lengths into longer eye relief high performance short focal length equivalents. With very good glass (and a good Barlow) this works very well. Absolutely love my Brandon 12mm model barlowed. Don't use it stand alone very often (I have the Nagler T6 11 & 13mm's), but paired with my old school Orion Barlow, planets, the moon, and tight double stars, look out!

#24 BDS316

BDS316

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2071
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Sol 3

Posted 10 April 2013 - 11:28 AM

Jim Barnett once wrote he felt the ES 82* line were essentially 86% as good as the Nagler line. I'd say this is somewhat variable, again, depending on the exit pupil, and therefore focal length. The lower focal length models perform closer to 80%, while the longer focal length models perform closer to 90%. So, even tho I found the Pan 27 to frame things slightly better than the corresponding Meade 28mm SWA, the difference was genuinely very, very close, and certainly not $100 (or $200+) better, IMHO.

A personal revelation was here. And once something like that happens to you, you just can't ignore it. I'm now a big Brandon and Nagler T6 fan for planetary. I have a weight restriction regarding eyepieces, so I don't personally want to own a 1.25" that weighs over 10 oz. But I do believe from reading here on CN that the Pentax XW, TV Delos, and, tho not in the same weight category, Baader Classic Ortho lines of eyepieces would perform very well. I have a friend who's owned a number of TV Ethos, so I know they perform very well first hand. When I was younger, I loved the shorter focal length TV Plossls, but age and experience caught up with their über short eye relief, and, tho optically very good performers, are just too much for me to own, nowadays. Any of these, should perform very well, however. I'd splurge in the lower focal lengths on them, tho the BCOs are hardly hardly expensive.

Additionally, I can strongly recommend a good Barlow. I own an old school Orion made in Japan, 4.5" long 1.25". These are no longer sold by Orion, tho there may be others still selling the longer, i.e., non-shorty barlows. I know the TeleVue 2x and 3x barlows are not shorty types. Get one of those to turn your mid-focal lengths into longer eye relief high performance short focal length equivalents. With very good glass (and a good Barlow) this works very well. Absolutely love my Brandon 12mm model barlowed. Don't use it stand alone very often (I have the Nagler T6 11 & 13mm's), but paired with my old school Orion Barlow, planets, the moon, and tight double stars, look out!


Is your old school Japanese Orion barlow the ultrascopic or the "fully baffled" version? Both have been highly recommended in the past

#25 CollinofAlabama

CollinofAlabama

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2171
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2003
  • Loc: Lubbock, Texas, USA

Posted 10 April 2013 - 08:36 PM

Tim, duh, forgot to mention about the 2" filters. Honestly, haven't put one on the ES yet, but I also owned the Meade predecessor of this one and it accepted my 2" Orion O-III filter no problem. This summer I'm sure to put in the O-3 on the Veil, but just hasn't happened yet.

Bryan, mine is one of the "FULLY BAFFLED" ones. I'd attach an image but on the iPhone, I can't do it. For shame.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics