Jump to content


Photo

Best planetary EPs being made today...

  • Please log in to reply
113 replies to this topic

#26 Astrojensen

Astrojensen

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5070
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Bornholm, Denmark

Posted 28 June 2013 - 12:23 PM

Yea, throw them in the trash. Send it to me, I have some other junk pre war Zeiss stuff.



So that was your cunning plan, you sneaky little bugger! :grin: But no way, José! I've got a small collection of prewar Zeiss stuff myself.


Clear skies!
Thomas, Denmark

#27 SteveC

SteveC

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3341
  • Joined: 15 Jun 2006
  • Loc: Sunshine State & Ocean State

Posted 28 June 2013 - 01:12 PM

Perhaps relating the market trend towards wide field, "glass heavy" designs, many of the favored high end planetary EPs are no longer being produced (Zeiss, University Optics HDs, Baader GOs, Pentax SMC XOs, etc.). Curious, therefore, to hear opinions are as to best planetary EPs in current production.

Joe


Inevitably, some respected observers, will comment that all modern eyepieces are equal in on-axis performance. I would agree to that, since the eyepieces that excede the mediocrity of today's offerings are no longer being produced. The one exception might be the Supermonos supplied by APM, if it's the same product that was offered a few years ago. They're not inexpensive though, so that has to be weight into your personal performance/cost equation.

#28 Astrojensen

Astrojensen

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5070
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Bornholm, Denmark

Posted 28 June 2013 - 01:35 PM

Inevitably, some respected observers, will comment that all modern eyepieces are equal in on-axis performance.


That is absolutely not true, in my experience. Not that someone might not say that, but that all eyepieces today are of similar high quality. That is simply not true.

Personal example: My 9mm ES100 is a little bit sharper on-axis than my 8.8mm ES82. The 8.8mm ES82 is on par with the 9mm UO ortho (okay, not made anymore, but made until recently, so still "modern"), but the 9mm ES100 surpass both.


Clear skies!
Thomas, Denmark

#29 Mike B

Mike B

    Starstruck

  • *****
  • Posts: 9895
  • Joined: 06 Apr 2005
  • Loc: shake, rattle, & roll, CA

Posted 28 June 2013 - 02:11 PM

Sieberts are junk cause he doesn't have access to hi-quality coatings.

You mean, possibly, hi-complexity coatings? Yes, iirc his have more simple A/R coatings. Like the Brandon EPs are reputed to have. But i wouldn't assume their level isn't "hi-quality".

The Pentax XW and Delos are equal to the Zeiss II's on the planets...



Coatings & their application to telescopic viewing is a subject having tremendous degrees of variation among observers. ;)

#30 SteveC

SteveC

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3341
  • Joined: 15 Jun 2006
  • Loc: Sunshine State & Ocean State

Posted 28 June 2013 - 02:28 PM

Inevitably, some respected observers, will comment that all modern eyepieces are equal in on-axis performance.


That is absolutely not true, in my experience. Not that someone might not say that, but that all eyepieces today are of similar high quality. That is simply not true.

Personal example: My 9mm ES100 is a little bit sharper on-axis than my 8.8mm ES82. The 8.8mm ES82 is on par with the 9mm UO ortho (okay, not made anymore, but made until recently, so still "modern"), but the 9mm ES100 surpass both.


Clear skies!
Thomas, Denmark


I don't doubt your viewing experiences in the least. If I can find differences in on-axis performance, I'm sure you can.

I have issues with the claim that all eyepieces have the same on-axis performance, but note my experiences are limited to those views delivered by modern eyepieces such as Naglers and Panoptics, both of which don't deliver the same sharp on-axis views that my ZAO's and Supermonos do. Of course, the ZAO's and Supermonos don't give me the same wide field views as the Naglers and Panoptics, which is an entirely different perspective and experience.

#31 tomharri

tomharri

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 463
  • Joined: 19 Sep 2008
  • Loc: USA

Posted 28 June 2013 - 02:53 PM

A few months ago when Jupiter was still around, decided to do a 6mm ortho/plossl comparison with the newly out Kasai and Baader classic orthos. Put the 10" Zambuto out to cool off couple hours before using.

First look at Jupiter showed the Great Red Spot just coming around the edge of planet. At that time the little red spot was preceeding the GRS, so it should have been front and centered on Jupiter. But to no avail could I see any sign of the 2nd red spot with any 6mm ortho/plossl pictured below.

Then I remembered had one more 6mm- the new Delos. Popped it in and there was the 2nd red spot, and it even showed some color to it. Less lens count does not mean more detail seen. Quality is quality and you usually gotta pay for it.

Attached Files



#32 Cliff C

Cliff C

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 101
  • Joined: 11 Feb 2009
  • Loc: Long Island, NY

Posted 28 June 2013 - 03:08 PM

The best way is to contact Markus by email at;
anfrage@apm-telescopes.de
He had announced that an never before produced but designed by Thomas Back 18mm and 21mm(I believe)were in the works.
Other focal lengths come and go and he occasionally gets used Sumermonos of various focal lengths. The shorter focal lengths (4-6mm) pop up often for $300-$350. I have the 4,5,6 and 14mm's and love them. They are getting very expensive however.

#33 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 16139
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 28 June 2013 - 03:24 PM

By the way, the NLVs are a bit brighter than the old LV series , which I used to have too.

Still looking for a used NLV 4mm , but I haven't been able to nail one though :(

George


I wonder how an NLV 4mm would compare to a Radian 4mm?

:grin:
Mike

#34 amicus sidera

amicus sidera

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3998
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011
  • Loc: East of the Sun, West of the Moon...

Posted 28 June 2013 - 04:02 PM

RKE's (8mm and 12mm) get the job done. Three elements, no waiting... :grin:

Fred

#35 jtpowers

jtpowers

    more clever in the first place

  • *****
  • Posts: 1091
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2005
  • Loc: Cambridge, MA

Posted 28 June 2013 - 04:43 PM

The following are the best I've tried:

TeleVue Plossls 8mm, 11mm.
Pentax XO 5.1mm
Vixen LVW 8mm (I like the view better than an 8mm Ethos I had at the same time. The LVW had better on axis contrast and it was perhaps a tad sharper- I couldn't believe it)

Other notes: I've not been terribly impressed by the 0.965 Pentax orthos (I've only tested one 6mm and one 7mm though). I found myself more impressed with 6 and 7mm UO Abbes that I was head to head testing at the time.

#36 hfjacinto

hfjacinto

    I think he's got it!

  • *****
  • Posts: 11802
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2009
  • Loc: Land of clouds and LP

Posted 28 June 2013 - 04:44 PM

I've used lots of eyepieces and while the TMB Supermonos, showed a tiny bit more details on planets and planetary nebula, I didn't like using them. I liked using the Brandons less.

Lately I tried a few Orthos (from Edmunds and UO) and both showed almost as much planetary details as the TMB.

Now here is the big BUTT, the day that the TMBs showed more was around 2 years ago. The air was stopped and I was easily using 400 power on my SCT. Seeing and transparency were essentially perfect.

Recently I tried Brandons in my EON and SCT and a few DOBs and they showed nothing more than the UO. Actually the Meade and Nagler kept up with them.

But to preface this I am not a super faint fuzzy finder, if I can't see it, its time to look for something else.

So the answer to your question is.....

The few times a year that seeing and transperancy are superb, an Ortho, Brandon or TMB will be a better planetary eyepiece, every other time it makes no difference.

#37 george tatsis

george tatsis

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 709
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2008
  • Loc: Flushing, NY - Europe

Posted 28 June 2013 - 04:58 PM

By the way, the NLVs are a bit brighter than the old LV series , which I used to have too.

Still looking for a used NLV 4mm , but I haven't been able to nail one though :(

George


I wonder how an NLV 4mm would compare to a Radian 4mm?

:grin:
Mike


Mike,

Would you stop reading my mind please? :bow:

George

#38 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 16139
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 28 June 2013 - 05:47 PM

Now you'll have me looking for a used NLV 4mm! :poke:

:grin:
Mike

#39 SteveC

SteveC

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3341
  • Joined: 15 Jun 2006
  • Loc: Sunshine State & Ocean State

Posted 28 June 2013 - 05:59 PM

Then I remembered had one more 6mm- the new Delos. Popped it in and there was the 2nd red spot, and it even showed some color to it. Less lens count does not mean more detail seen. Quality is quality and you usually gotta pay for it.


I don't doubt your statement that the 6mm Delos was better than those other 6mm eyepieces. Fewer lens in the eyepiece may not offer the best view, but some do. I had about 13-15 7mm eyepieces several years ago that I spent countless hours observing through. A bunch of those 7mm orthos and plossls could only equal, and many were even outperformed by the Radian that was in the mix. The Radian was the most expensive eyepiece in that pool of "good" performers and I was impressed by the fact that it did so well considering the number of elements it had. I would have kept the Radian as a planetary eyepiece had it not been for the performance of the Supermono. I added the ZAO I's(sold) and II's later. I've given up trying to find a performance difference between my ZAO II's, Supermonos, and the 5mm Pentax XO, but if the Supermonos are the benchmark, then I'm quite sure all of them would outperform those other orthos and plossls.

Somebody should do a planetary on axis comparison between the 6mm Delos, Ethos, ZAO II, and Supermono.

#40 Rick Woods

Rick Woods

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 14384
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2005
  • Loc: Inner Solar System

Posted 28 June 2013 - 06:01 PM

My immediate response would historically be Brandons; however, that was when Don Yeier was making them. Everything I've ever gotten from him has been the very best I've ever used.
My understanding is that the new owners of Vernonscope are maintaining the high quality standards, though. So, Brandons.

#41 GeneT

GeneT

    Ely Kid

  • *****
  • Posts: 12620
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008
  • Loc: South Texas

Posted 28 June 2013 - 06:06 PM

Does anyone know what TMB Supermonocentrics are available from Markus currently? I saw an ad a few days ago announcing a new run of focal lengths but it is gone now. I'm thinking I should pick up one pair of these for the binoviewer.


A few months ago, he opened up the line, took orders, and then closed out the batch. He hopes to be shipping in July. I don't believe any can be ordered at this time.

#42 Dave Mitsky

Dave Mitsky

    ISS

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 34929
  • Joined: 08 Apr 2002
  • Loc: PA, USA, Planet Earth

Posted 28 June 2013 - 06:14 PM

John
I have heard this about the XWs over and over again. I since wondered how the TV Delos stack up against them.
Joe


It's essentially a toss up. I own one Pentax XW and now three Delos eyepieces and like them equally.

Dave Mitsky

#43 leonard

leonard

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 963
  • Joined: 19 Oct 2007
  • Loc: West Virginia

Posted 28 June 2013 - 08:51 PM

Hello ,

Thank You Thomas , I think I remember you posting this information but I forgot about it .



Leonard

#44 bremms

bremms

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2525
  • Joined: 31 Aug 2012
  • Loc: SC

Posted 28 June 2013 - 09:20 PM

Forgot about Meade RGO's the 10.5 and 7 are superb. the 10.5 is my sharpest EP in that range. Don't have a 7mm at the moment. it was a great planetary EP way back when.

#45 ibase

ibase

    Vendor Affiliate

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 4492
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2008
  • Loc: Manila, Philippines 121*E 14*N

Posted 28 June 2013 - 09:34 PM

John
I have heard this about the XWs over and over again. I since wondered how the TV Delos stack up against them.
Joe


Many reports have it that it's a wash between the Pentax XW and Delos. I've traded my XW-7mm for a Delos 6mm and couldn't be any happier with the Delos. From my recollection of the XW's performance, both EP's were equally excellent but to my eyes the Delos was less prone to beaning with eyecups fully retracted. There is probably more leeway for head room movements in the Delos before triggering the bean as compared to the XW, but that's just my opinion.

If one owns a Pentax, keep it. But how about those who are deciding between the Pentax & Delos? My take is go for the Delos, the state-of-the-art in EP design and implementation to date with the most modern coatings from one of the best EP co. around (TeleVue).

On a side-note, one deep sky observer who is well-regarded in the forum has the Delos besting the Pentax in detecting faint objects on the big scopes, click here and here (w/graph) to view forum posts.

With regards to the best planetary EPs and still made today, here's my list (and the one's I currently own):

- Baader Classic Orthos (BCO)
- Delos
- TV plossls
- Nagler T6
- Brandon
- University Optics HD (very recently re-introduced)

Best,

#46 azure1961p

azure1961p

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10217
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2009
  • Loc: USA

Posted 28 June 2013 - 10:02 PM

I've heard fantastic things about Siebert consistently . I want to get the ball lenses. In fact aside from your remark Ive never heard of a bad Siebert.

Pete

#47 BillP

BillP

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11316
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2006
  • Loc: Vienna, VA

Posted 28 June 2013 - 10:25 PM

Inevitably, some respected observers, will comment that all modern eyepieces are equal in on-axis performance.


That is absolutely not true, in my experience.


I wish that were true. We all have different eyes, so that probably the issue why some can and can't see any differences. FWIW the acuity of my eyes was 20/10 for most of my life, now down to 20/15. I keep waiting for my eyes to no longer see a difference between my ZAO/XO and Heavy Glass EPs on-axis so I can sell all those specialized planetaries and buy a new telescope!! :lol:

#48 george tatsis

george tatsis

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 709
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2008
  • Loc: Flushing, NY - Europe

Posted 28 June 2013 - 10:25 PM

Now you'll have me looking for a used NLV 4mm! :poke:

:grin:
Mike


Hi Mike,

It all started a few months ago when out of curiosity ( I'm the dead cat by the way) bought a used NLV to verify the findings of this thread :

http://stargazerslou...radian-v-vix...

Since then I have bought both the 6mm and the 5mm NLVs as well.Lateral color is more evident in the NLVs than it is in the Radians during daytime observing. At night, for some reason, it is hardly visible in my 10" reflector.

The NLVs are as sharp as most high quality planetary eyepieces out there , save your XO 5mm though!

George

#49 beatlejuice

beatlejuice

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1553
  • Joined: 05 Apr 2011
  • Loc: Hamilton, ON,Canada

Posted 29 June 2013 - 12:34 AM

The NLVs are as sharp as most high quality planetary eyepieces out there


All I can say is that the 4mm NLV that I got used a few weeks ago is great max mag eyepiece for my 80ED. Have yet to try it in my 10"

Eric

#50 jpcannavo

jpcannavo

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 924
  • Joined: 21 Feb 2005
  • Loc: Ex NYCer, Now in Denver CO!

Posted 29 June 2013 - 03:13 AM

I've heard fantastic things about Siebert consistently . I want to get the ball lenses. In fact aside from your remark Ive never heard of a bad Siebert.

Pete


Would still love to understand this...






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics