10 replies to this topic

[tomykay12]

Otherwise known as the ultra wide, anyone have experience with this EP? I have the 9mm, and find it nice for the price, about 50.00, but wonder if the view deteriorates at higher mags in this price range. I'm looking for a little more magnification in my Omni 150 xlt 6" reflector, as the 9mm gives me a max of about 166x thru my ES focal extender. I'm in no great hurry and am also watching the classifieds for something in the 6-7mm range if anyone has another suggestion. I am guessing my average conditions will likely max me out at around  low to mid 200x ? Not exactly dark nights here, lol. Thankyou in advance, tk

Edited by tomykay12, 11 May 2015 - 11:49 AM.

[foxtrot9]

I use the same scope, and I find my Agena Starguider/Paradigm 5mm meets this goal pretty well and for only 65 bucks to boot. I hear the EWAs are prone to kidney beaning and blurry near the edges. I believe the scope can go up to 350x magnification, but I would only go to a max of 300x. Just my 2 cents.

[ecuador]

I think it is one of the best bang/buck at 6mm. For its price there is no complaint from me, it offers comfortable and decent quality viewing. I had ordered once a $20 clone from China (ebay) and it seemed to be the same quality as the Agena, but I can't recommend that way as risk free (who knows if I was just lucky with the particular seller 2 years ago).

[EuropaWill]

I have a pair of the 6mm EWA rebrands. For the price, they are amazing values although I like the 9mm better. 

 

In absolute terms the only negatives I can think of are:

 

• The last 10% is a bit darkened by self vignetting and the last 5% portion is quite heavily abberated as well. These and the 9mm's should have been stopped down to 63* AFOV IMO. If anyone has a drop in field stop solution to suggest please do so!
• There is some light flooding that occurs on lunar viewing. The full AFOV seems to get washed out a bit as if it isn't handling the bright out of field light sources well. I don't experience this with the 9mm's. So these 6mm's are not my first choice for lunar but they work well on Jupiter. 
• They are a bit sensitive to blackouts/ kidney beaning like the 9mm's. 

I wonder if I would prefer the TMB clones at this 6mm FL?  

Edited by EuropaWill, 13 May 2015 - 07:00 PM.

[Peter Besenbruch]

I wonder if I would prefer the TMB clones at this 6mm FL?  

 

Probably. You could get an actual TMB Planetary II here.

[Usquebae]

I do mostly lower power viewing and use a barlowed Baader zoom for focal lengths 10.5 - 3.5mm when higher power is called for.  But I picked up a used 6mm EWA to keep in my pocket for quick-checking higher mags while I'm at the scope (6mm gives me 200x in my biggest scope).  I have been quite happy with it, actually finding the blackouts less problematic that with my 9mm Expanse.

 

Last night I checked Saturn at 200x - typically WAY too much mag for my awful seeing - and found, to my delight, that the seeing supported this.  Apart from a bit of ghosting when I put Saturn in the last 5% of the field I was very happy with the view.  I felt no need to switch to a "better" EP with a Barlow fitted to it.  My scope is F/6 and Saturn appeared sharp through maybe 80% of the view.

 

In the range you (O.P.) are looking at I also have a 7mm X-Cel LX, which I like a lot.  It is exceptionally comfortable to use and I think cleaner through its 60° than the 66° eyepieces are to their edges.  This focal length may be a better choice for you - in native mode, 7mm bumps your mag up from 83x to 107x over the 9mm; on the focal extender you will get 214x, a good jump up from 166x, which may prove more useful than the 250x you would get from a 6mm.

[tomykay12]

Ah, and the 7mm also has the potential for usefullness in my SCT, whereas the 6mm is really pushing the limit, thankyou, tk

[Lew Zealand]

I have a pair of the 6mm EWA rebrands. For the price, they are amazing values although I like the 9mm better. 

 

In absolute terms the only negatives I can think of are:

 

• The last 10% is a bit darkened by self vignetting and the last 5% portion is quite heavily abberated as well. These and the 9mm's should have been stopped down to 63* AFOV IMO. If anyone has a drop in field stop solution to suggest please do so!
• There is some light flooding that occurs on lunar viewing. The full AFOV seems to get washed out a bit as if it isn't handling the bright out of field light sources well. I don't experience this with the 9mm's. So these 6mm's are not my first choice for lunar but they work well on Jupiter. 
• They are a bit sensitive to blackouts/ kidney beaning like the 9mm's. 

I wonder if I would prefer the TMB clones at this 6mm FL?  

 

I have both and preferred the TMB Planetarys because they do not show the kidney beaning at all.  In fact that is the major difference between these 2 EP sets.  I was not bothered by it in the nighttime but they were unusable during the daytime for solar viewing.

 

Otherwise, they both have excellent ER and substandard glare rejection which you mention in your second point.  I did not find the EWAs (I have older KnightOwl clones) to have particularly messy edges like you mention, in fact I thought they had very good edge correction though the last 2% is a bit messy because of an out of focus field stop.  Maybe we're seeing the same thing but interpreting it differently.

[Peter Besenbruch]

Otherwise, they both have excellent ER and substandard glare rejection which you mention in your second point.  I did not find the EWAs (I have older KnightOwl clones) to have particularly messy edges like you mention, in fact I thought they had very good edge correction though the last 2% is a bit messy because of an out of focus field stop.  Maybe we're seeing the same thing but interpreting it differently.

 

I fixed the glare rejection issues on the later TMB types with black, stick on felt. Black paint also works, but not as well. The one eyepiece I have that is labeled a TMB Planetary II has very good internal blackening.

 

If the EWAs are similarly modular in construction, folks could try that with them.

[EuropaWill]

 

Otherwise, they both have excellent ER and substandard glare rejection which you mention in your second point.  I did not find the EWAs (I have older KnightOwl clones) to have particularly messy edges like you mention, in fact I thought they had very good edge correction though the last 2% is a bit messy because of an out of focus field stop.  Maybe we're seeing the same thing but interpreting it differently.

 

I fixed the glare rejection issues on the later TMB types with black, stick on felt. Black paint also works, but not as well. The one eyepiece I have that is labeled a TMB Planetary II has very good internal blackening.

 

If the EWAs are similarly modular in construction, folks could try that with them.

 

Could you please go into detail on how you used the stick on felt to fix the light flaring and flooding? What did you do specifically?

[Peter Besenbruch]

A I've mentioned elsewhere, the TMB type eyepiece is quite modular. The built in Barlow screws off the bottom. You then remove the rubber eye cup, and unscrew the retaining ring on the top of the eyepiece. Then you screw down the fat portion of the eyepiece enough to expose and grab the top lens collection. You unscrew that and you are left with an empty, and on the more recent versions, shiny tube. The felt goes on the inside of the tube, leaving enough room to allow you to screw the top lenses back in.