Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu uh, User

Equipment Discussions >> Eyepieces

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | (show all)
HCR32
sage


Reged: 08/27/10

Loc: Australia
University Abbe Orthoscopics
      #4823213 - 09/23/11 07:56 AM

What do ppl know about these EP? How do they perform how dont they perform?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Dave Ponder
super member
*****

Reged: 04/12/06

Loc: Greenville, SC
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: HCR32]
      #4823226 - 09/23/11 08:13 AM

Pros: Sharp views, not expensive, good quality
Cons: Narrow FOV, short eye relief


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
BDS316
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 09/16/09

Loc: Sol 3
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: Dave Ponder]
      #4823240 - 09/23/11 08:30 AM

Quote:

Pros: Sharp views, not expensive, good quality
Cons: Narrow FOV, short eye relief




+1

These eyepieces have been around for a gazillion years. They were very popular in the 60's and 70's when most telescopes were on equatorial mounts and this lessened the disadvantage of the narrow fields of view. Now with the Dobsonian revolution, far fewer scopes are able to track and eyepiece designs with larger fields of view are more popular.

With the Dob revolution also came reflectors of shorter focal ratio (faster) and the demand for wide field eyepieces with better edge of field correction in these faster scopes.

UO used to sell quite a few wide field eyepieces that they no longer carry like widescans, erfles and konigs. They did not work well in faster scopes.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
tomchris
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/22/10

Loc: Connecticut, U.S.A.
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: BDS316]
      #4823278 - 09/23/11 08:42 AM

Recently bought the 12.5mm and have been impressed with it's sharp views. I'm now thinking of buying another. From what I've read, the University HD orthos (available from some sellers) seem to be slightly better than the "classic" one but not enough to matter. I hear the same about comparison with the Baaders. Anyway, the UO classic orthos are cheaper & have had an excellent reputation for years.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
great_bear
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 07/05/09

Loc: Walthamstow, London, UK
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: tomchris]
      #4823296 - 09/23/11 08:53 AM

If you can afford the HD ones, they are a better choice, but both are top-rated performers.

Nonetheless, these days many observers prefer the comfort afforded by the wider fields and longer eye-relief of more modern eyepiece designs.

I used to use the orthoscopics. Now I use 16 and 24mm Meade SWAs in conjunction with a Tele Vue Powermate for mono use, and Burgess Binolites and Vernonscope Brandons for bino use.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Tank
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 07/27/09

Loc: Stoney Creek, Ontario, CANADA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: great_bear]
      #4823464 - 09/23/11 10:31 AM

Love the sharp views of the UO HD's!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ibase
Vendor Affiliate
*****

Reged: 03/20/08

Loc: Manila, Philippines 121*E 14*N
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: Tank]
      #4823501 - 09/23/11 10:52 AM

Have both UO HD and Volcano Tops. As others have mentioned, both are very sharp but with tight eye relief in the shorter focal lengths. The VT's just seem to be a bit more comfortable to use.

Best,


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
planet earth
Pooh-Bah
****

Reged: 09/07/10

Loc: Ontario Canada
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: Dave Ponder]
      #4823537 - 09/23/11 11:14 AM

Quote:

Pros: Sharp views, not expensive, good quality
Cons: Narrow FOV, short eye relief



+2
And they are a good looking eyepiece!
Clear Skies
Sam


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
FeynmanFan
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 02/18/11

Loc: N Colo front range
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: planet earth]
      #4823642 - 09/23/11 12:05 PM

I've used the 6 and 9mm volocano tops, and the 12mm HD for years, and I love them. They give sharp views and don't cost a fortune. They do have narrow fields of view (about 40) and pretty tight eye relief, although the 12mm isn't bad at all and in the shorter focal lengths the volcano shape kind of mitigates the problem. They've been around forever, and you never hear anything bad about them, although some are bothered by the "porthole effect" and the need to get your eye pretty close. FYI, the HD's are not shown on the website, and presumably are not available new. I gather that the Baader Genuine orthos are the same eyepiece, though.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
astro_baby
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 06/17/08

Loc: United Kingdom
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: FeynmanFan]
      #4823824 - 09/23/11 02:13 PM

I just bought 9mm and 12.5 UO Abbes for use as planetary eyepieces in my Mak 180. Eye relief for me is usually a problem and I cant get on with tight eye relief eyepieces most Plossls below about 15 I find too tough. I did try a Baader GO but found it uncomfy.

Someone suggested the UO Volcano tops might be better so I thought I'd take a punt.

The tight FOV doesnt worry me as the Mak is pretty restricted anyway and I always use a tracking mount.

I cant say I have exhaustively tested them by any means as the only night I have used them the moon was full and Jupiter was suffering haze BUT they seemed very good to me and they look beautiful too in an understated way.

The moon at 300 was razor sharp and they got as good a view of Jupiter as anything could given the freaky atmosphere. Looking forward to trying them out on a deep sky target.

One of the nice things with the Mak is the power of magnification means you dont need much below about 10mm and indeed on most nights I'd not expect to get under about 12 mm and eye releif with the 9mm seemed find to me. Its at the limit of what I can cope with and the Volcano tops were definietly more comfy for me. It seemed a bit counter intuitive that a pointy topped eyepiece would be more comfy than one with a rubber cup but there you go.

They arent expensive either which is why I felt justified in taking a punt - I am happy based on limited viewing so far.

Edited by astro_baby (09/23/11 02:15 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
tomchris
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/22/10

Loc: Connecticut, U.S.A.
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: astro_baby]
      #4823845 - 09/23/11 02:39 PM

Quote:

I just bought 9mm and 12.5 UO Abbes for use as planetary eyepieces. The moon at 300 was razor sharp and they got a good a view of Jupiter...eye releif with the 9mm seemed find to me.




Well, I don't know about the OP, but you convinced ME to buy the 9MM!! I just ordered it!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
desertlens
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 12/06/10

Loc: 36N 105W
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: HCR32]
      #4824289 - 09/23/11 09:04 PM

Excellent EPs. I have a full set and have found that I use them as much as my widefields. AFoV runs from about 43 degrees at the short end to 47 degrees with the 25mm. As others have mentioned, eye relief is tight with the shorter FLs but I observe without glasses so this is less of a problem. If you must wear glasses, I'd recommend the longer FLs with a decent Barlow. The volcano top configuration works better for me than the flat top format of the UO HDs and the BGOs. Image quality is difficult to beat. As gravy, I use the 25mm in a 60mm finder for cyclops views that rival many binoculars. IMO, The UO Abbes are among the best of the old school eyepieces.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
telescopemullet
professor emeritus
****

Reged: 11/16/09

Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: desertlens]
      #4824305 - 09/23/11 09:20 PM

What say the masses about their 80 degree 2" oculars?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
HCR32
sage


Reged: 08/27/10

Loc: Australia
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: telescopemullet]
      #4824638 - 09/24/11 03:09 AM

Are these the same as Kokusai Kohki Or's

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
t.r.
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 02/14/08

Loc: Upstate NY
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: HCR32]
      #4824781 - 09/24/11 07:17 AM

I had the whole set of VT's as my base eyepiece set. Loved them for all facets of observable objects. Highly recommended within their FOV/ER limitations.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Richard McC
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 12/31/04

Loc: Australia
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: HCR32]
      #4824797 - 09/24/11 08:01 AM

Quote:

Are these the same as Kokusai Kohki Or's




Yes Peter, the KK Orthos are the same as the UO `volcano top' orthos (but not the same as the UO HD series).


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
astro_baby
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 06/17/08

Loc: United Kingdom
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: Richard McC]
      #4824808 - 09/24/11 08:13 AM

Damn....I just convinced myself to order the 18 and 25 as well.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
bgavin
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 01/25/11

Loc: 38°41' x 121°13'
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: astro_baby]
      #4825225 - 09/24/11 12:41 PM

I was out at 4am this morning specifically for Jupiter.
The back yard conditions limited me to the BGO 7mm ortho in the XT10, but views are excellent.
I saw at least 4 moons and the various color bands in my first look at Jupiter.

My astigmatism is a non-issue without glasses and the 7mm ortho.
Jupiter is an easy track by nudging the dob.
I am one of those who are not at all put off by the narrower FOV.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: HCR32]
      #4825464 - 09/24/11 03:42 PM

They perform much better in slow telescopes. At f/14.4 to f/16.7 they rock. At f/8.6 to f/10, they are still excellent. At f/7 they start to weaken even on axis. Faster than that, there are better choices.

Regards,

Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
bgavin
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 01/25/11

Loc: 38°41' x 121°13'
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #4825630 - 09/24/11 05:25 PM

Jim,

What would be your pick in an XT10 1200/4.7, in the 5~10mm range for sharpness and contrast?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: bgavin]
      #4825889 - 09/24/11 08:27 PM

How much you wanna spend and do you want/need decent eye relief?

Here's my "Ortho" collection, by the way:



My faves are the Pentax SMCs.

- Jim

Edited by jrbarnett (09/24/11 08:32 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
bgavin
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 01/25/11

Loc: 38°41' x 121°13'
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #4825915 - 09/24/11 08:50 PM

You were quite specific about the UO orthos being already soft at f/7, so I'm curious out your herd, which are Exc performers at f/4.7?

The Pentax SMC is a pretty rare bird, and flies in the same rarified atmosphere as the ZAO, ZAO-II.
I'm thinking of something a bit more close to the ground..


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: bgavin]
      #4826125 - 09/24/11 11:48 PM

Honestly no Orthos other, perhaps, than the ZAO-IIs are going to do reasonably well at f/4.7.

How about an 6.7mm ($99), 8.8mm or 11mm ES 82 ($119)?

For about the same price (~$130) you might be able to pick up an 8mm Vixen LVW (my favorite in that series).

At f/4.7, I'd stick with well-corrected designs.

- Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
bgavin
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 01/25/11

Loc: 38°41' x 121°13'
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #4826180 - 09/25/11 12:36 AM

I have the ES 4.7mm 6.7mm, 11mm and also 18mm.

I'm surprised at the expected ZAO performance, considering the design is much older than f/4.7 scopes.
I really value your expertise, but this is drifting off topic from the OP's question about UO orthos.

In adhoc daylight terrestrial testing, I don't see any appreciable sharpness/contrast differences between my ES6.7, the BGO 7, the Nagler 9T6, and my Radian 14.
The noticeable difference is with my low-end LERs.
I expected this, as the LER are intended for use in an f/6.2 environment.

If I am fortunate enough to find an AT111EDT, I can try out my orthos at f/7 and see if there is a noticeable improvement.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
buddyjesus
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 07/07/10

Loc: Davison, Michigan
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: bgavin]
      #4826214 - 09/25/11 01:16 AM

That is my dream collection Jim. Please put me in your will!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
astro_baby
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 06/17/08

Loc: United Kingdom
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: buddyjesus]
      #4826369 - 09/25/11 07:01 AM

Maybe I should have tempered my post a bit then - my Orthos are principally for use in an F9/F10 Refractor and an F15 Mak. I also own an F5 Newt which the Orthos will be used on but they are not the Newts principle eyepieces.

The OP might like this review
http://www.cloudynights.com/item.php?item_id=1935


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
tomchris
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/22/10

Loc: Connecticut, U.S.A.
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #4826591 - 09/25/11 10:40 AM

Quote:


Here's my "Ortho" collection, by the way:



My faves are the Pentax SMCs.

- Jim




Good grief, Jim -- what does your WHOLE ep collection look like? Just kidding-- but I guess you'd be the person to ask re: orthos!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
bgavin
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 01/25/11

Loc: 38°41' x 121°13'
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: tomchris]
      #4826642 - 09/25/11 11:22 AM

It looks like the entire UO volcano series is present in that photo..

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
astro_baby
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 06/17/08

Loc: United Kingdom
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: bgavin]
      #4826679 - 09/25/11 11:45 AM

Heck - I'd never get any observing done with that much choice. I'd be constantly swapping to get a better view and dithering over which was going to work best. How do you ever choose what you going to use with that lot ?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
skypilgrim
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 12/25/06

Loc: PNW, US
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: FeynmanFan]
      #4826707 - 09/25/11 12:07 PM

I have owned and still own both styles, (volcano top and HD), for years and consider the eye relief advantage of the volcano top to be a myth.

On both styles the eye lens is right at the top of the black housing and unless you have a very small eye socket you eye can get just as close with either one without bumping into the housing.

Psychologically it does seem like the volcano tops should be more comfortable but in practice there is no difference. Just my humble opinion.

Not challenging anyone here, just stating my own experience.

Cheers - Sam


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
kepheus
sage
*****

Reged: 10/11/09

Loc: Germany
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: skypilgrim]
      #4826978 - 09/25/11 02:42 PM

Hi Melanie!

Quote:

Heck - I'd never get any observing done with that much choice. I'd be constantly swapping to get a better view and dithering over which was going to work best. How do you ever choose what you going to use with that lot ?




I guess that Jim does not use any of these eyepieces at all. Probably, even his World Cup winning 7mm Meade RGO might stay in his eyepiece case all the time. Why do I think so? Because Jim is neither a sinner, nor is he a heathen.
You can read the whole story here: please not yet another....

Regards, Brend.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
great_bear
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 07/05/09

Loc: Walthamstow, London, UK
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: skypilgrim]
      #4828100 - 09/26/11 06:55 AM

Quote:

I [...] consider the eye relief advantage of the volcano top to be a myth. On both styles the eye lens is right at the top of the black housing and unless you have a very small eye socket you eye can get just as close with either one without bumping into the housing.




The reason why people find the volcano-tops more comfortable is that - whilst what you say is true - on the VTs one's eyelashes don't brush the eyepiece housing quite so much.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: bgavin]
      #4828368 - 09/26/11 10:57 AM

Note that I specified ZAO-IIs. They are better corrected for fast scopes than the ZAO-Is. But in any case, the ZAO-Is debuted after the Dob revolution was well underway; in 1997 if memory serves. Don't confuse the ZAO-Is and ZAO-IIs with Carl Zeiss Jena Orthos (the little 0.965" T-topped units), which are much older and fare much worse in very fast instruments.

Regards,

Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: astro_baby]
      #4828379 - 09/26/11 11:03 AM

"How do you ever choose what you going to use with that lot ?"



I never field more than a handful of eyepieces at a time. I make the gear selection decision a day or two before the session, and stick to my plan when I pack up to hit the field.

Now the gear selection phase can be agonizing, but I usually pick gear after I pull my target list together. In turn, I build my list based on site, season and expected length of the session. With targets in mind and a particular scope selected, it makes eyepiece selection a bit easier.

That said, I have more eyepieces than I need, and seem to have developed a mildly alarming hoarding habit.

- Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: great_bear]
      #4828389 - 09/26/11 11:07 AM

I certainly find the volcano top design to be more comfortable for the reason you state; there's nothing for eyelashes to contact (especially in the shorter focal lengths where eye relief is scarcest).

Regards,

Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #4828402 - 09/26/11 11:13 AM

Okay, here's a fun little quiz. In the Ortho picture, how many non-Abbe-Orthoscopics (i.e., having other than 4-elements in two groups, with a 1-3 configuration) can you spot?

Regards,

Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: bgavin]
      #4828422 - 09/26/11 11:22 AM

"It looks like the entire UO volcano series is present in that photo."

Yep, all of the UO Abbes are there, as are the entire Meade Research Grade Ortho series, the entire Pentax SMC Ortho series and the entire Apogee Super Abbe Ortho series, and an almost complete set of Takahashi MC Orthos (missing 9mm and 5mm only), with two of the CZJ Orthos to round out the photo. Missing are the Pentax XOs and XP, which are quasi Orthos, but likely should have been pictured for completeness.

- Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
skypilgrim
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 12/25/06

Loc: PNW, US
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: great_bear]
      #4828555 - 09/26/11 12:29 PM

Quote:



The reason why people find the volcano-tops more comfortable is that... on the VTs one's eyelashes don't brush the eyepiece housing quite so much.




If I'm that close I have that problem with any eyepiece...
I've found one more advantage to the HD style over the VT's.
In any light polluted environment light can reflect off the beveled top while the filled in tops of the HDs actually block the unwanted incoming light.

Guess that's why we get to share all of our different opinions...
Sam


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
astro_baby
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 06/17/08

Loc: United Kingdom
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: skypilgrim]
      #4828859 - 09/26/11 03:12 PM

Jim,

Working your eyepieces out before a session would just stall me further back in the chain. I'd probably spend so long umming and ahhing over what to take the clouds would have moved in.

Its bad enough with three scopes to choose from. I could take the TAL (yeah but the views wont be as good, on the other hand it will be light to carry, but on the other hand its too beautiful to risk - it might rain).
So ok then I'll take the Mak (yes but the Moons not up so you'd get better DSO views with the newt, the maks heavy, you need dew control but on the other hand its compact and the easiest to transport, but on the other hand think of the cool down).
OK its the newt then (you sure Mel - its very heavy and bulky, a real pain to lug about and the collimation wont be perfect either but on the plus side its got good views for DSOs but then again you might get there and find you'd rather look at a planet in which case you should take the mak)

On and on it goes and what usually gets taken is what I can be bothered to pack, whats not in bits on another OCD inspired 'improvement' program and modification etc etc and what I 'feel' like using.

With an eyepiece collection that size I just know (much as I'd like the eyepieces) they would become a curse as choice often is. I sometimes wish I had just stuck with a 4.5" reflector and a collection of cheesy Kelners and Ramsdens - life was soooooo much simpler


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mike bacanin
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 03/19/07

Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: astro_baby]
      #4829828 - 09/27/11 03:09 AM

Hi Mel,

Yes,its often a compromise. I'm sure you will enjoy the orthos you have,especially in the mak,their planetary performance for such a reasonable cost is hard to beat. The current KK offerings to me seem to have nice coatings, maybe a little better than the old versions, i may be wrong though. Btw, as Jim well knows, the Meade Research Grade orthos are great performers, and can be had sometimes for about 45-55 here in the UK.

Regards
Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Doug76
Long Achro Junkie
*****

Reged: 12/05/07

Loc: Refractor Heaven
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: HCR32]
      #4830946 - 09/27/11 06:04 PM Attachment (38 downloads)

One of the finest planetary and small DSO ep lines there is.
I own the entire set. My shortest scope is f/6, and I find that the only length where my Plossls finally beat them.
Eye relief is a bit better in Abbes than Plossl/Symmetrical designs.
The UO's are my favorite ep's.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
tomchris
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/22/10

Loc: Connecticut, U.S.A.
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: Doug76]
      #4831085 - 09/27/11 07:39 PM

I wonder how the short focal length UO Abbes (eg. 6mm and below) would work in my small refractors-- anyone try them in refractors as small as mine? (Please check my telescope list below)

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
bgavin
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 01/25/11

Loc: 38°41' x 121°13'
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: tomchris]
      #4831242 - 09/27/11 09:38 PM

One of the prime factors in acquiring my recent AT90EDT f/6.7 (thanks, Doug76!) is the nearly f/7 aperture.
I've not seen published the design focal ratio for the UO orthos, but Jim says f/7 and smaller is the sweet spot.

I'm really looking forward to trying my orthos in an optimal APO scope.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
desertlens
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 12/06/10

Loc: 36N 105W
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: tomchris]
      #4833399 - 09/29/11 03:13 AM

Tom: I use my set of UO VTs almost exclusively with my 80mm refractor. They are excellent but you're in for a bit of a shock as a 6mm Ethos user. Under 6mm, eye relief is very short. It's manageable if you don't wear glasses but I find the 4 and 5mm a bit tedious to use. I will often Barlow the 9mm to tease out a bit of ER.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
tomchris
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/22/10

Loc: Connecticut, U.S.A.
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: desertlens]
      #4833566 - 09/29/11 07:30 AM

Quote:

Tom: I use my set of UO VTs almost exclusively with my 80mm refractor. They are excellent but you're in for a bit of a shock as a 6mm Ethos user. Under 6mm, eye relief is very short. It's manageable if you don't wear glasses but I find the 4 and 5mm a bit tedious to use. I will often Barlow the 9mm to tease out a bit of ER.




Craig-

I agree with the barlow idea. I may just pick up the 7mm to add to my other two.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Doug76
Long Achro Junkie
*****

Reged: 12/05/07

Loc: Refractor Heaven
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: bgavin]
      #4834788 - 09/29/11 07:01 PM

Quote:

One of the prime factors in acquiring my recent AT90EDT f/6.7 (thanks, Doug76!) is the nearly f/7 aperture.
I've not seen published the design focal ratio for the UO orthos, but Jim says f/7 and smaller is the sweet spot.

I'm really looking forward to trying my orthos in an optimal APO scope.




All my UO's worked very nicely in the AT90EDT.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
bgavin
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 01/25/11

Loc: 38°41' x 121°13'
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: Doug76]
      #4835040 - 09/29/11 09:20 PM

I figured they would.
This was a big factor in my choosing this model scope.

I admit being a sucker for orthos.
Even the BGO:7 works a treat for me in the XT10.
The pair of UO 25mm are similar to the RKE thing, where the perimeter "disappears" into a fluid image.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
astro_baby
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 06/17/08

Loc: United Kingdom
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: bgavin]
      #4836022 - 09/30/11 01:25 PM

I was out a few nights back with the Mak 180 and I have to say the views with the UO Orthos were pretty fine. Nice and sharp and very crisp.

Unfortunately just as I was getting going the mist appeared. My observing site can go that way after a hot day and everyting dewed up. Even equipment which wasnt at the site with me dewed up - it was that bad.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
bob irvin
sage


Reged: 03/22/11

Loc: Greater Los Angeles, CA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: tomchris]
      #4836327 - 09/30/11 04:15 PM

Quote:

I wonder how the short focal length UO Abbes (eg. 6mm and below) would work in my small refractors-- anyone try them in refractors as small as mine? (Please check my telescope list below)




My UO 5mm is the best short Focal Length EP (5mm-9mm) in both my 102mm Refractor and my 10" Dob. Great planetary views.

bob


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
astro_baby
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 06/17/08

Loc: United Kingdom
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: bob irvin]
      #4836543 - 09/30/11 06:50 PM Attachment (30 downloads)

Not quite such an impressive set as others on here. I am in the midst of redefining my eyepiece collection.

Heres the UO orthos which are the first replacements to other eyepieces which have been sold.

Any smaller than 9mm I would struggle with as the eye relief gets too tight.



Edited by astro_baby (09/30/11 06:53 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ibase
Vendor Affiliate
*****

Reged: 03/20/08

Loc: Manila, Philippines 121*E 14*N
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: astro_baby]
      #4836899 - 09/30/11 11:40 PM

Quote:

Any smaller than 9mm I would struggle with as the eye relief gets too tight.




Same reason here why I don't have shorter than 9mm of this line, (VT's) although a pair of the 12.5mm's are used in my binoviewer. BTW, very nice pic!

Best,


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DeSoto Kid
super member


Reged: 08/24/07

Loc: DeSoto, Texas
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: ibase]
      #4836968 - 10/01/11 01:15 AM

Jim : If you don't have this eyepiece then it likely can't be found. It's the .965 Carton Ortho-A http://www.astromart.com/classifieds/details.asp?classified_id=364817.
There were two made, a 9mm and a 6mm. I have the 6mm, but I want to be like you, Jim ... I want to own a WHOLE SET of them. If I could get a 9mm I would have a WHOLE SET. Do a through search, Jim ... you've got to have a least one in there someplace.

Wayne R. owner of a rare, Certified 4K 14mm UWA eyepiece.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
tmbuser6
sage
*****

Reged: 07/01/11

Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: Dave Ponder]
      #4837403 - 10/01/11 11:21 AM

Quote:

Pros: Sharp views, not expensive, good quality
Cons: Narrow FOV, short eye relief




-- I have to disagree somewhat, Dave. A normal FOV is not narrow, 45 degree FOV is the reference point from which other eyepieces are measured. Those smaller than 45 degree are considered narrow, those larger are considered wide. When the TV plossl (50 degree) came out, it was considered wide. People have simply lost sight of this with 70, 80, 100 and 110 degree eyepieces now that anything w/o a view that wraps around their head is now deemed "narrow."

Short eye relief? Again, not true. The eye relief is a function of focal length and at about 0.85X the focal length, those above 12mm are comfortable, the 18 and 25mm are generous with their relief. Only the shortest f.l.'s can get to be a little bit of a squeeze to look through; another perception created by the many uber-complex eyepieces now that have built in Smyth lenses employing an extremely long eyepiece design multiplied out by an integral barlow.

The perception of the smaller FOV being a "con" should also be reexamined--- in the fields of use where these eyepieces were designed to be used, implicitly planetary, double star and some deep sky work more often than not, the smaller FOV is usually deemed an /advantage/ desired by the user.

The Zeiss Abbe Ortho (3-1) is a high performing, high throughput, flat field (distortionless) design noted for its extreme contrast, razor definition and very low ghosting that still remains among the top performers of all time, which is why some people pay as much as $600-$800 for them! (ZAO).

Regards,

Wayne


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
skypilgrim
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 12/25/06

Loc: PNW, US
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: bgavin]
      #4837478 - 10/01/11 12:18 PM

Big UO fan here as well.

But I have to wonder what they were thinking when they switched to those @$#%# undercuts? Yes, we've gone down this thread many times but the supporters of undercuts talk about how the undercut saved their bacon when their diagonal slipped with some large Nagler or Pentax XW on board.

But these are feather-light oculars! If a diagonal is going to slip with a UO ortho in it then the dang thing would have slipped on it's own!

Sorry for the sidetrack. Just blowing off steam...
Sam


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jim Curry
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 10/29/07

Loc: STL
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: skypilgrim]
      #4837543 - 10/01/11 01:00 PM

Sam: Being almost an exclusive user of turrets I'm always rotating an eyepiece down. I LOVE the undercut :>)

Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rod Kaufman
member


Reged: 01/14/09

Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: FeynmanFan]
      #4837608 - 10/01/11 01:28 PM

I disagree with the statement that the UO orthos are the same as the Baaders. I reviewed the 9mm Baader in comparo with other 9mm eyepieces and found the color saturation in the belts on Jupiter to be superior with the Baader. Additionally, consider the following review:
http://www.eyepiecereviews.com/baader-genuine-orthoscopic-eyepiece-5-and-6mm.htm


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: DeSoto Kid]
      #4840467 - 10/02/11 11:23 PM

Can't help ya on the Carton Ortho, unfortunately.

I did have a few 0.965" Vixen Orthos for awhile, but with the other 0.965" sets and partial sets I have, I elected not to try and fill out that set.

Regards,

Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike Hosea
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 09/24/03

Loc: "Metrowest" Boston
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: tmbuser6]
      #4840539 - 10/03/11 12:15 AM

Quote:

A normal FOV is not narrow, 45 degree FOV is the reference point from which other eyepieces are measured. Those smaller than 45 degree are considered narrow, those larger are considered wide. When the TV plossl (50 degree) came out, it was considered wide. People have simply lost sight of this with 70, 80, 100 and 110 degree eyepieces now that anything w/o a view that wraps around their head is now deemed "narrow."




Well, most Abbe orthos are in the 38-42 degree range. Consequently, they are "narrow" even according to your preferred definition. The BGO and UO HD are 40 degrees. The 18mm and 24mm UO classics are 45 degrees or so, but the 12.5mm I had measured at 39 degrees.

Setting aside that point, however, I agree that 45 degrees is not "narrow" if we use "wide" and "narrow" in their historical contexts. OTOH, I would point that language has always been an evolving thing, and "wide" and "narrow" must inevitably be redefined by current usage. The quixotic fight against such trends is ever fought by a passionate few. For a long time I tried to explain that in the beginning of usenet groups, a person who was "trolling" was not called a "troll" on that account, the reference being to a form of fishing where a baited line is dragged behind a slow-moving boat in hopes of catching certain types of large fish (including sailfish, for example). The fishing reference being obscure to those who are never around such activities, and fairy tales of "trolls" dwelling under bridges and such being well-known, it wasn't long before the average person using the term to complain about some individual's behavior online was imagining that "trolling" is what "trolls" do, which is true, I suppose, given that English is such a flexible language when it comes to inventing words. But knowing what "trolling" is supposed to be, and the fishing metaphor making perfect sense (the fairy tale much less so), it always gives me a start when somebody uses the word "troll" to describe a person who is "trolling". I usually call them "fishermen".


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DeSoto Kid
super member


Reged: 08/24/07

Loc: DeSoto, Texas
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #4840604 - 10/03/11 01:14 AM

Quote:

Can't help ya on the Carton Ortho, unfortunately.

I did have a few 0.965" Vixen Orthos for awhile, but with the other 0.965" sets and partial sets I have, I elected not to try and fill out that set.

Regards,

Jim




Thanks for looking, Jim ... guess I'll have to keep looking.
At least I can say, "I have half of a set".


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
kepheus
sage
*****

Reged: 10/11/09

Loc: Germany
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: astro_baby]
      #4840711 - 10/03/11 04:51 AM

Quote:

Not quite such an impressive set as others on here. I am in the midst of redefining my eyepiece collection.

Heres the UO orthos which are the first replacements to other eyepieces which have been sold.

Any smaller than 9mm I would struggle with as the eye relief gets too tight.








Oh, how cute! I didn't know that there was a 50th anniversary set by University Optics. It looks pretty nice! I still think, that the 7mm and 9mm UO Abbe volcano top Orthos are two of the best looking eyepieces, which have ever been build.

- Brend


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
astro_baby
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 06/17/08

Loc: United Kingdom
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: kepheus]
      #4841309 - 10/03/11 12:47 PM

The last two I bought cam in those boxes. They are the same as normal boxes but with a metal foil sticker. It does look cute though.

Tell you what I'll trade the box for a 7mm...hows that


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Zad
super member


Reged: 01/05/08

Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #4842223 - 10/03/11 08:19 PM

Hi Jim,

I am considering getting the ES 127 ED scope for some planetary work (Mars is coming). Since this scope is f/7.5, do you think a 4mm UO volcano top would be an effective planetary eyepiece? I don't wear glasses, and this will be GEM mounted with tracking. I was thinking about the 4mm because that would bring me to 238x (near the limits of a 5" scope).

I have several ES 82 Deg. Waterproof eyepieces for my 10" Dob including the 4.7mm. Which brings up another question - am I going to get more detail on Mars from the bigger appeture of the 10" dob (Sky-Watcher USA) or the ES 127 with an ortho eyepiece due to better contrast?

Decisions decisions....

Thanks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: Zad]
      #4842496 - 10/03/11 10:59 PM

"Since this scope is f/7.5, do you think a 4mm UO volcano top would be an effective planetary eyepiece?"

Yes. However, the difference between Orthos and quality ultra-wides isn't monumental, but is instead subtle. I don't think you'd be giving up that much using the ES 82s rather than adding some Orthos.

Now the 10" Dob vs. 5" triplet is an interesting question. On a steady night, with the 10-incher cooled and perfectly collimated, it should easily outdo the refractor on Mars. However, on a less steady night, or with the Dob not cooled or slightly miscollimated, the 5-incher would likely bet the better performer. Also, the fact that the refractor will be on a tracking mount cuts in its favor on planets. I see substantially more detail when (a) seated and (b) the planet remains centered.

I love refractors, but mainly because they tend to perform well out of the box, with little care and feeding.

Regards,

Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ibase
Vendor Affiliate
*****

Reged: 03/20/08

Loc: Manila, Philippines 121*E 14*N
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #4842786 - 10/04/11 03:18 AM

Quite intrigued that a 5" refractor would perform better than a Dob w/ double the former's aperture in a less steady night. What's involved in this gravity-defying act? Thanks.

Best,


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike Hosea
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 09/24/03

Loc: "Metrowest" Boston
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: skypilgrim]
      #4843382 - 10/04/11 12:01 PM

Quote:


But I have to wonder what they were thinking when they switched to those @$#%# undercuts?





BTW, anybody who doesn't like the undercut on the 12.5mm and shorter UO Abbe (classics) can use the black anodized aluminum 1.25" barrels from Surplus Shed. You can use them on the 18mm and 25mm, too, I expect, but you'd probably want to move the field stops over, which would be more work and might be hard to do if they're not easily loosened.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: ibase]
      #4843455 - 10/04/11 12:36 PM

Larger and faster scopes are more affected by poor seeing than smaller. Neil and Vlad's work on the topic is instructive.

http://www.cloudynights.com/item.php?item_id=2529

http://www.telescope-optics.net/induced.htm#environment

Also, adding aperture isn't a panacea for ills affecting a particular system. A poor quality or poor condition 8" scope wouldn't be any better than a similarly impaired 16" scope.

So I'd call it hardly "gravity-defying" but rather I would liken it to an understanding that the convention of a flat Earth is wrong.

Regards,

Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
astro_baby
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 06/17/08

Loc: United Kingdom
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #4843732 - 10/04/11 03:08 PM

Jim,

Thats interesting because I was flamed one time ona nother board for suggeting my 100mm Achro could whup my 200mm F5 Newt on planets and lunar.

On deep sky the newt will win but the 100mm is not actually that far behind.

People told me it was impossible and must be shockingly bad collimation on the newt (which isnt so) or the newt must have terrible mirrors (doubt it myself).

I have long suspected it was down to the newts susceptibility to poor seeing which your post confirms.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: astro_baby]
      #4843816 - 10/04/11 03:59 PM

While not generally accepted yet, your results certainly mirror my own field testing.

http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/3911979/page/0/view/collapsed/sb/5/o/all/fpart/1

Neil and Vlad have further studied the phenomenon and, in my opinion, have provided a very well explained theory as to why that would be the case.

As they say, she who flames last flames hottest. You have every right to feel smug.

- Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
sixela
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/23/04

Loc: Boechout, Belgium
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: astro_baby]
      #4843927 - 10/04/11 05:41 PM

Quote:

Jim,
That[']s interesting because I was flamed one time on another board for sugge[s]ting my 100mm Achro could whup [sic] my 200mm F5 Newt on planets and lunar.




I was flamed on this board for suggesting something similar as well (by someone living in Florida who couldn't believe anyone would look at planets with less than 600x magnification!).

The devil's in the detail. For that 100mm to likely beat the 200mm because of seeing D>3*r0 should hold for the 200mm, which means the Fried parameter should be hovering around 70mm or so. That corresponds to roughly 2.1 arcsecond seeing.

So yes, if the seeing was that bad then it's not only possible but likely.

If it was a night with better seeing than that, though, then something is amiss with the Newt, but it's not easy to conquer the thermal gremlins on them: even the fact that you're personally very close to the tube opening on a Newt but at the back on a refractor is sometimes enough to give "bad seeing" if the wind direction isn't favourable! Not to mention cooling mirrors to ambient temperatures is a constant battle (if you don't engage in that battle then you're almost guaranteed "bad seeing " very close to the primary).

we had some excellent nights recently (where 350x-450x was basically the minimum you'd be using on Jupiter, with peaks to 710x to see detail on Ganymede!), and on my Dob just moving your arm to the focuser would have visible effects on the image. I had to wear lots of clothing and hold my arms behind my back to get the very best images...

Here, it's indeed not that interesting to look at planets in 2 arcsecond seeing, given there are enough nights in which the seeing is a lot better, so the smaller scope (a 130mm) only gets preferred if there's something special to see (Saturn very close to opposition, some Jovian satellite transits) and the seeing happens to be abysmal.

There are enough nights of better seeing even here to make it worthwhile to have roughly 250mm of good quality aperture, but you'll certainly get better images some of the nights with a 130mm APO.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ibase
Vendor Affiliate
*****

Reged: 03/20/08

Loc: Manila, Philippines 121*E 14*N
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #4844037 - 10/04/11 06:56 PM

Quote:

Larger and faster scopes are more affected by poor seeing than smaller. Neil and Vlad's work on the topic is instructive.

http://www.cloudynights.com/item.php?item_id=2529

http://www.telescope-optics.net/induced.htm#environment

Also, adding aperture isn't a panacea for ills affecting a particular system. A poor quality or poor condition 8" scope wouldn't be any better than a similarly impaired 16" scope.

So I'd call it hardly "gravity-defying" but rather I would liken it to an understanding that the convention of a flat Earth is wrong.

Regards,

Jim




Jim thanks for the note, and those are indeed instructive links! Was half-expecting that you'd allude to using a Brandon to pull off the gravity-defying act.

Best,


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
deSitter
Still in Old School


Reged: 12/09/04

Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #4844990 - 10/05/11 11:05 AM

Quote:

How much you wanna spend and do you want/need decent eye relief?

Here's my "Ortho" collection, by the way:



My faves are the Pentax SMCs.

- Jim




You are not well

-drl


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
deSitter
Still in Old School


Reged: 12/09/04

Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: deSitter]
      #4845010 - 10/05/11 11:19 AM

My standard comment about Orthos involves the completely flat exit pupil (in optical language, no spherical aberration of the exit pupil). You can put your eye anywhere in the exit pupil and the view is the same. For looking at planets, you don't even need the whole 40 degree field, just the central 10 or 20 degrees, so you can use the short ones for high power viewing at some comfortable distance from the eye lens. Even Plossls will not allow this, and widefields demand that the eye be in a specific place in the exit pupil. This adds up to complete eye comfort and no dropout effects from a moving head. Being forced to fix one's head in one place to use a widefield adds up to muscle strain that diminishes one's ability to see fine details. This is particularly important with Newtonians where one may be standing up and the head wavering to and fro (the older I get, the harder it is to stand stock still).

The other consequence is a field stop that appears to be effectively at infinity. This gives deep sky objects an objective and crystalline appearance, and the telescope seems to melt away. This is what I most love about Orthos. The telescope disappears and one is in direct touch with the field of view, like looking out a window.

So Orthos are all about eye comfort and a strong "clinical" view, despite the short eye relief in the shorter focal lengths. The UO Orthos are all winners!

-drl


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
astro_baby
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 06/17/08

Loc: United Kingdom
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: deSitter]
      #4845712 - 10/05/11 05:44 PM

Off topics on the aperture issue.....

Seeing conditions where I live are seldom great. Even when the upper air is stable there are huge thermals created by a large airport nearby and a town.

I have long suspected that the achros abillity to outperform the newt is down to some kind of cell disruption which the newt with its bigger aperture is more unsettled by.

Jim the articles about apo versus achro seem to hold true in my experience as well. Ie the achro does have CA but tha aside its ability to extract detail is not significantly worse than an APO.

i ran my TAL 100RS against a Meade 5000 102 which wa being offerec to me cheap a few months back. I decided to pass on the .Meade as it was more bucks and to be honest I couls see little difference in views apart from the CA which while present is not obtrusive and can be controlled with filters sufficient fir my needs.

Its been really fascinating to have some of this confirmed, especially after some of the brickbats I took. Thanks for posting those very enlightening articles.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mike bacanin
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 03/19/07

Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: astro_baby]
      #4845767 - 10/05/11 06:20 PM

I live in UK, with generally quite poor seeing, which only improves after midnight. My current C8, has very nice optics, but frustratingly, is hampered by the seeing. That said, its potential is obvious in those split second moments of great clarity.
The absolute best scope which seemed to always work well was the Tak FS128.I think it was a perfect scope for my seeing.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
great_bear
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 07/05/09

Loc: Walthamstow, London, UK
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: astro_baby]
      #4846985 - 10/06/11 11:26 AM

Quote:

The last two I bought cam in those boxes. They are the same as normal boxes but with a metal foil sticker.




Howcome you're buying UOs when you live in the UK?
Isn't it cheaper just to buy the unbranded Circle-Ts from Glen at Lyra?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
astro_baby
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 06/17/08

Loc: United Kingdom
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: great_bear]
      #4847247 - 10/06/11 01:39 PM

Well to be honest I never knew Glen was selling them until after I bought the first two - by then I wanted them all to look the same ( I have moderately severe OCD ) . But I also had in mind resale value.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
t.r.
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 02/14/08

Loc: Upstate NY
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: astro_baby]
      #4847305 - 10/06/11 02:06 PM

Quote:

by then I wanted them all to look the same ( I have moderately severe OCD ) . But I also had in mind resale value.



I think we all suffer from it to some degree!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
azure1961p
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 01/17/09

Loc: USA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: deSitter]
      #4848215 - 10/07/11 12:12 AM

Quote:

My standard comment about Orthos involves the completely flat exit pupil (in optical language, no spherical aberration of the exit pupil). You can put your eye anywhere in the exit pupil and the view is the same. For looking at planets, you don't even need the whole 40 degree field, just the central 10 or 20 degrees, so you can use the short ones for high power viewing at some comfortable distance from the eye lens. Even Plossls will not allow this, and widefields demand that the eye be in a specific place in the exit pupil. This adds up to complete eye comfort and no dropout effects from a moving head. Being forced to fix one's head in one place to use a widefield adds up to muscle strain that diminishes one's ability to see fine details. This is particularly important with Newtonians where one may be standing up and the head wavering to and fro (the older I get, the harder it is to stand stock still).

The other consequence is a field stop that appears to be effectively at infinity. This gives deep sky objects an objective and crystalline appearance, and the telescope seems to melt away. This is what I most love about Orthos. The telescope disappears and one is in direct touch with the field of view, like looking out a window.

So Orthos are all about eye comfort and a strong "clinical" view, despite the short eye relief in the shorter focal lengths. The UO Orthos are all winners!

-drl




Excellent post. I agree 100%. And i do enjoy comfortable eye relief even with my 4mm abbe just because i keep that ten or twenty degrees centered on the planet. I love my orthos. I only regret i cant get a 3.5mm UO ABBE.

Pete


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
great_bear
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 07/05/09

Loc: Walthamstow, London, UK
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: astro_baby]
      #4848311 - 10/07/11 02:22 AM

Quote:

I wanted them all to look the same




Well that's fair enough really - even I express a shudder when a forum poster says: "Here's my set of orthos" and puts up a photo showing a mixture of UO and unbranded Circle-Ts!!

I think to myself - that's not a set, that's an assortment!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
deSitter
Still in Old School


Reged: 12/09/04

Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: great_bear]
      #4856727 - 10/11/11 10:33 PM

I'll bet jbarnett, the eyepiece hooligan, has a complete set of 6mm Orthos!

-drl


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wprince
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 02/26/06

Loc: Atlanta, GA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: HCR32]
      #4857114 - 10/12/11 07:33 AM

Hello all, I know I'm posting very late to this thread. I've always wanted some more University Optics orthos, I only have my one 7mm HD version. However, I just checked the price on the UO website, almost $90 plus shipping for new ones!? THAT is a significant price increase (previously I checked they were about $55). I won't say $90 a piece is too much, but that places pause in acquiring the whole set. Don't the HD's cost just little bit more? I will say the I found the 7mm HD excellent, and more comfortable to use than a 11mm TV plossl I used to own as far as eye relief.

Edited by wprince (10/12/11 07:34 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wprince
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 02/26/06

Loc: Atlanta, GA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: wprince]
      #4857118 - 10/12/11 07:36 AM

Ok, not quite $90, but $85.95 each. My apologies.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
tomchris
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/22/10

Loc: Connecticut, U.S.A.
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: wprince]
      #4857148 - 10/12/11 08:26 AM

When the longer focal length abbes are barlowed, does anyone find a real noticeable decrease in contrast? I've been thinking of buying a shorter focal length UO Abbe but maybe just barlowing my 12.5mm or 9mm will give me larger eye relief as well as the increased magnification without too much loss of contrast.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jim Rosenstock
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/14/05

Loc: MD, south of the DC Nebula
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: tomchris]
      #4857159 - 10/12/11 08:42 AM

They barlow quite well. Uae good barlow, of course.

Short eye relief doesn't bother me a bit, so I go for the "least glass" option....

...but there's a reason every great set of Orthos comes with a barlow.

Enjoy!

Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Monoeil
super member
*****

Reged: 08/01/11

Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: tomchris]
      #4857226 - 10/12/11 09:43 AM

As Jim stated, as long as you use a quality barlow lens, you should not notice any major negative effect.

Some prefer short focal lenses, other (like me) favor the use of barlow lens for a better comfort there is no universal answer. It is really a matter of personal taste.

From the financial standpoint, the barlow lens solution is somewhat economical as it costs the price of a decent eyepiece but it can replace multiple eyepieces.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
tomchris
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/22/10

Loc: Connecticut, U.S.A.
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: Monoeil]
      #4857251 - 10/12/11 09:55 AM

Quote:

As Jim stated, as long as you use a quality barlow lens, you should not notice any major negative effect.





Well- as you can see from my sign-off list, I think I've got a good amount of what I think are quality barlows. Thanks!!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wprince
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 02/26/06

Loc: Atlanta, GA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: Jim Rosenstock]
      #4857265 - 10/12/11 10:06 AM

Quote:

They barlow quite well. Uae good barlow, of course.

Short eye relief doesn't bother me a bit, so I go for the "least glass" option....





IMO, for the $85.95/ea price, the only ones that make sense to me are the 7, 6, 5, and 4mm (and MAYBE the 9mm). Those for the really good nights on a tracking mount, where I don't want to use a barlow, and want the "least glass" option. For the 25, 18, 12.5, 9mm, for the price there are too many other options like TV Plossls, Antares elites, AstroTech Paradigms, even my 12.4mm Meade series 4000 plossl is excellent. Of course, some like the thought of owning the whole matching set of the UO orthos and nothing wrong with that! But from what I understand they are NOT parfocal.

I just bought a 4mm UO ortho from a well known member here at CN and am looking forward to a good night to try it.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
great_bear
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 07/05/09

Loc: Walthamstow, London, UK
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: wprince]
      #4857656 - 10/12/11 01:39 PM

Orthos are like fine food - all this talk of them is making me want to buy a set again!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Bart
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 05/28/06

Loc: Somewhere near Charlottesville...
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #5620671 - 01/13/13 12:19 PM

Quote:

They perform much better in slow telescopes. At f/14.4 to f/16.7 they rock. At f/8.6 to f/10, they are still excellent. At f/7 they start to weaken even on axis. Faster than that, there are better choices.

Regards,

Jim




My ED80 is an f/7.5. The UO Orthos look fine to me when used with it. I guess it's just far enough from an f/7 that the views are still good. I was surprised that you said that they start to weaken.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sarkikos
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/18/07

Loc: Suburban Maryland, USA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #5622465 - 01/14/13 11:02 AM

Jim,

Quote:

Here's my "Ortho" collection, by the way:



My faves are the Pentax SMCs.

- Jim




Why no BGO's?

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
junomike
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 09/07/09

Loc: Ontario
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: Sarkikos]
      #5622737 - 01/14/13 01:59 PM

He had no need for the BGO's. The Pentax Or.'s have a similar FOV but are better for scatter control.
Also, with his coveted Brandon's, the BGO's would never see light anyway.

Mike

Edited by junomike (01/14/13 02:01 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sarkikos
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/18/07

Loc: Suburban Maryland, USA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: junomike]
      #5622774 - 01/14/13 02:22 PM

JunoMike,

I don't know about that. I would have replaced the UO VT's from 5mm to 18mm with BGO's. In fact, that's what I did. The BGO's have better coatings, and I prefer the flat-tops. The Pentax Or's are something else entirely.

IME, BGO's and Brandons run nose-to-nose for planet/lunar. Also IME, the BGO's surpass the Brandons for deep sky because they are FMC instead of just FC. That's if transmission is important to the observer. Otherwise, the Brandons might show more structure in bright nebulae than the BGO's (not so much on the dimmer stuff). But I'd rather get that effect by putting a DSO filter on the BGO. YMMV

I have all the Brandons from 6-24mm, BGO 6/7/9/18 and only UO VT 4/25. The BGO 5 was sold after I acquired an XO 5.1. The BGO 12.5 was sold for a price I liked (otherwise I would have kept it). I have bino pairs of the Brandon 12 & 16, BGO 9 & 18 and UO VT 25. That pretty much sums up my viewpoint on these eyepieces.


Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
SteveTheSwede
member


Reged: 09/28/09

Loc: Stockholm, Sweden
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #5623233 - 01/14/13 06:58 PM

Quote:

While not generally accepted yet, your results certainly mirror my own field testing.




Actually, the theory is generally accepted.
Ask any refractor-owner who invested a small fortune in their latest top quality glass and they will happily tell tales about how their ridiculously expensive 4" refractors "out-performs" cheap 12" dobs right and left. Heck, let's make it 18" if the seeing isn't perfect, we all know how poorly those light-buckets perform when the seeing isn't perfect, right?
So the theory, I'd say, is very much accepted (just ask the right people).

Steve


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
junomike
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 09/07/09

Loc: Ontario
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: Sarkikos]
      #5623244 - 01/14/13 07:06 PM

Mike, I replaced my UO VT's with UO H.D.'s as I found them a tad better. I've also compared the Brandon's to the UO H.D.'s and found them to be more similar than different. However, others feel the Brandon's are superior for Star color saturation (which I'm not into).

In direct comparison (UO H.D.'s) on Planets and DSO's I found the Pentax Or. go deeper and offer a darker background. I only sold mine as I had the TMB SMC's as well. The difference wasn't huge, but noticeable.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sarkikos
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/18/07

Loc: Suburban Maryland, USA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: SteveTheSwede]
      #5627601 - 01/17/13 08:31 AM

Steve,

Quote:

Ask any refractor-owner who invested a small fortune in their latest top quality glass and they will happily tell tales about how their ridiculously expensive 4" refractors "out-performs" cheap 12" dobs right and left. Heck, let's make it 18" if the seeing isn't perfect, we all know how poorly those light-buckets perform when the seeing isn't perfect, right?




If you go down to an 8" or 10" Dob, though, I think the Dob would give the 4" APO a run for the money. This is especially true if the owner of the Dob collimates very closely and has worked on solving thermal problems.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sarkikos
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/18/07

Loc: Suburban Maryland, USA
Re: University Abbe Orthoscopics new [Re: junomike]
      #5627619 - 01/17/13 08:42 AM

Mike,

Quote:

Mike, I replaced my UO VT's with UO H.D.'s as I found them a tad better.




BGO's and UO HD's are near equivalent, so mirrors my strategy.

Quote:

I've also compared the Brandon's to the UO H.D.'s and found them to be more similar than different. However, others feel the Brandon's are superior for Star color saturation (which I'm not into).




Agreed and agreed. I have more than a suspicion that many Brandonistas are double star enthusiasts. I like double stars, but I'm not an enthusiast. In my own personal list of preferences, doubles would fall behind planets, DSO and the Moon.

Quote:

In direct comparison (UO H.D.'s) on Planets and DSO's I found the Pentax Or. go deeper and offer a darker background. I only sold mine as I had the TMB SMC's as well. The difference wasn't huge, but noticeable.




I've never tried Pentax Orthos or TMB SMC's, so I wouldn't know anything about them first hand.

I'm glad, though, that I have the XO 5.1 and 2.5. They are supposed to be about as good as the ZAO-II's. (I wouldn't know about those, either.) So far, the XO's have excelled at planets, Moon and double stars. I need to give them a try on DSO, maybe planetaries and galaxies. A little too high power for comfort when viewing the Moon, though, for me. But they gave me a great view of the Pup star!

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | (show all)


Extra information
18 registered and 38 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  ausastronomer, Scott in NC, iceblaze 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 8242

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics