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 | (show all)
David Knisely
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 04/19/04

Loc: southeastern Nebraska
Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: ibase]
      #5609858 - 01/07/13 10:09 AM

Quote:

Agree, why strain the eye trying to view the edge of field on a 100-deg. EP? It's just great having that extra field at the periphery of vision; that said, I do enjoy using 70, 82, and 100-deg EP's in equal measures. Just my 2 cents.

Best,




I have never found the 100 degree apparent field eyepieces to create any kind of eye strain in normal use. I just look in and see the field without deliberately forcing myself to to see the field stop. The only time when the wide field might become slightly distracting is when one of those eyepieces is not producing a good star quality uniformly across the entire field of view. In my Newtonians, this only happens when coma starts to interfere, and I can negate that with my Paracorr. Otherwise, the field is just "there" and I don't think about it all that much (except to really appreciate it when hunting small faint objects in my undriven 14 inch Dob at 135x (14mm ES100 eyepiece) with a whopping true field of 44.7 arc minutes). My most used eyepieces have measured apparent fields of 68.0 degrees, 68.8 degrees, 76.4 degrees, 81.4 degrees, and 101 degrees. Guess which one gets the most use? It's my 100+ degree 14mm ES100 eyepiece. That eyepiece is just a killer combination with my scope. Is a really large apparent field absolutely necessary? No, but from my experience, it can definitely be nice to have. Clear skies to you.


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

Reged: 02/01/06

Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: JayinUT]
      #5609942 - 01/07/13 10:57 AM

I actually have a very strong preference for wider apparent fields.

That being said, I have grown somewhat intolerant of having a field that is not sharp all the way across.

For this reason, I believe that it is important to match the eyepeice AFOV to the scope type that it is used in.

If the scope has a flattish field and low off axis abberations (low coma), then the wider, the better (though I am happy with Naglers), but if the scope has field curvature and coma (standard SCT or fast Newt), I prefer the 68 degree types because the lower magnification for given true field size will hide some of the off axis abberations coming from the scope.

I use 68 degree AFOV eyepecies in my standard SCT, but I love the Naglers in my 6" APO and my EdgeHD. I have two sets of eyepieces in the different AFOVs and I take out the set that is appropriate to the off axis performnace of the scope I have out.

But lately, I have been doing almost 100% binoviwing, and here, it is not as easy to move your head around.

When I use my 31mm Nagler in my EdgeHD or 6" APO, I find myself moving my head slightlhy as I tour the field.

With the Binoviewers, I find that I cannot tilt my head slightly and keep properly aligned with the IPD settings of the scope.

For binoviewers, I find 68 degree AFOV eyepeices at the edge, meaning that sometimes, I feel like I am getting blackouts when I try to reposition to see things on the edge of the field clearly. This experience has made it less likely that I would pursue getting sets of Naglers for binoviewing.

And even the 50 degree AFOV eyepecies seem far more acceptable in the binoviewers than when used mono-vision.

I have become such a huge fan of binoviewers that I even re-vamped my eyepeice lineup to a set of 68s for general viewing and a few inexpensive plossl pairs for imtermediate magnificatoins for planetary work.


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

Reged: 09/23/09

Loc: Piraeus, Greece
Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: David Knisely]
      #5609953 - 01/07/13 11:01 AM

I like them all. I don't particularly prefer eyepieces <60 degrees but I bear them for planetary work. Above 68 degrees I prefer the long eye relief ones, like Hyperions and Delos. But in Nagler T4s I trust.
ES100s though give me 60-80 degrees from a long eye relief point plus some more degrees from a closer point, so I count on them also.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mark Peterman
super member


Reged: 08/07/12

Loc: Texas
Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: JayinUT]
      #5609998 - 01/07/13 11:22 AM

No doubt, 65-72 rules in my eyes.

I've discovered that I prefer to see the whole field without moving my eyeball.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Doug Culbertson
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 01/06/05

Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: Mark Peterman]
      #5610037 - 01/07/13 11:38 AM

Other than my binoviewer eyepieces (52-60 degrees fov) I only use three other eyepieces and a barlow. My current fovs are 82 degrees, 100 degrees, and my Leica ASPH which is 60-80 degrees, from low to high power. I like them all.

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

Reged: 12/18/07

Loc: Suburban Maryland, USA
Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: David Knisely]
      #5610166 - 01/07/13 12:44 PM

David,

Quote:

Otherwise, the field is just "there" and I don't think about it all that much (except to really appreciate it when hunting small faint objects in my undriven 14 inch Dob at 135x (14mm ES100 eyepiece) with a whopping true field of 44.7 arc minutes).




I obviate the advantage of a super wide field eyepiece for finding faint fuzzies by making sure my 15x70 finder scope is very closely aligned with the main scope. Then I just look for the location of the object in the finder scope as indicated on SkySafari Pro. I don't need to see the object itself in the finder scope. Nearly everytime the DSO will appear near center of field even in moderately high-power eyepieces in the main scope.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
turtle86
Pooh-Bah Everywhere Else
*****

Reged: 10/09/06

Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: GlennLeDrew]
      #5610218 - 01/07/13 01:12 PM

Quote:

So I take it then that those who prefer the 'smaller' AFoVs clap on a pair of blinders when naked eye gazing... If not, how is a 100 degree field too expansive, when the eye's inherent field approaches 180 degrees?

Nothing says one has to 'work' at swiveling the eye from field edge to field edge. I look at the extra field a useful bonus, which allows the sensitive outer retina to be put to good use. Especially when panning and star hopping, and taking in the really big stuff.




It has been remarked that the Ethos is "better than it oughta be." Indeed, my own experience is that with the same focal length EP, some DSO's appear noticeably brighter and with more detail in the 100 degree Ethos than even in the 82 degree Nagler. When doing a comparison some time back, to my eyes, and putting aside TFOV, M51 looked better with the 13E than with the 13T6, and M101 looked better with the 17E than with the 17T4. There has been speculation that the Ethos has better coatings, but I've never really heard a satisfactory explanation for why the Ethos is "better than it oughta be." I'm now wondering if it's somehow possible that the extra TFOV of EP's like the Ethos simply activate more of the sensitive outer retina away from the center of the FOV, so that the brain has more data to process, with the result that we might perceive a seemingly brighter image of a DSO. I'd be especially curious to hear the opinion of an ophthalmologist on this...


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

Reged: 11/24/03

Loc: Lubbock, Texas, USA
Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: turtle86]
      #5610251 - 01/07/13 01:35 PM

I hear the Barenaked Ladies playing ...

It's all been done

See this thread here for a good review of this subject.

For the record, I'm with Knisely, et alia. 180* would be fine with me, but I'll settle on whatever I can get. I find below the Sterling Plossl (about 58*) a bit tight and cramped, but I'd resort to the tunnel vision orthos if that's all I had. But like Bill Paolini wrote, it's all a personal preference kind of thing, baby!

Enjoy the skies, whatever you like and use.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
FirstSight
Duke of Deneb
*****

Reged: 12/26/05

Loc: Raleigh, NC
Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: Sarkikos]
      #5610256 - 01/07/13 01:37 PM

For me, 82 degrees is where I can simultaneously take in the entire view in the same sense many people seem to experience and find comfortable at 70 degrees. The field stop is always plainly visible to me at 82 degrees, perhaps outside the field of sharpest vision, but nevertheless providing a quite obvious frame constraining the field of view. However, for the same reason, 100 degrees AFOV is a far more "natural" view to my perception, convincingly mimicking e.g. in my NP-101 what my eye's view would be like if I had 100mm pupils instead of 5mm. I can still, however see the field stop, but it's at the far edge of my peripheral vision. I can amplify this sensation of "naturalness" by rolling the eyecup down, which has the effect that after a few seconds I do lose perception of the field stop if I'm looking at a view dense enough with stars, and it's like the view of the night sky lying on a blanket on a grassy, treeless field atop a small hill looking up.

OVERALL VERDICT: For panoramic views of rich starfields, or views of particular objects in context of the wider celestial background, 100 degrees is best, as is the greater convenience of the wider true field of view at any given focal-length when manually tracking objects at higher powers. That's what makes the 3.7E through 8E inclusive such such wonderfully powerful tools for planetary observing with my two manually-tracked scopes.

I'm fortunate in that I get to have both! I acquired a generous suite of 8 Naglers 5mm through 31mm + 2x and 2.5x Powermates before the Ethos ever came out, and still have all of them. I probably use them about a third of the time, with one exception: the 31T5 Nagler to my tastes is able to hold its own with 100 degree AFOV eyepieces in its panoramic immersiveness, and gets used almost interchangeably as if it was a member of my 100 degree Ethos set. I've also acquired a full set of all 8 Ethos. I use these about 2/3 of the time. I nearly always bring both full sets out with me to every observing session, and use a mixed variety of 82 and 100 degree eyepieces at each session roughly in the proportions stated.

WHAT ABOUT 70 DEGREES? I have just one of those, a 24 Panoptic which is *perfect* as the eyepiece for my SV60 finderscope on my dob. It's a big functional advantage in a finderscope eyepiece to have a field of view that is both generous and at the same time easily seen all at once. However, good as the 24 Pan is there, I would not choose it over e.g. my 26T5 Nagler, 21 Ethos, or 17 Nagler or Ethos. THAT SAID, I've now viewed several times through other folks' Pentax XWs and Delos, and do find the views comfortable and pleasing enough that had I never tasted 82 or 100 degree AFOV eyepieces, I could be entirely happy with them. But for my tastes, there's no real advantage to 70 degree AFOV eyepieces when 82 degrees does the same trick 70 degrees seems to do for so many of you, and I already have a comprehensive set of 82 deg AFOV eyepieces.

Don't get me wrong, should I be without my own scopes and eps and viewing through others' equipment on a given night, I can be perfectly happy looking through your 70 degree AFOV eyepieces. However, I find AFOVs below 70 to be too constrictive if I have any choice, and I'll never, never own any orthos for that reason. The candle of alleged extra detail's not worth the flame for my tastes. Nevertheless, I'll happily indulge if someone has a B....um, the B word, and complement the owner on the quality of the views, even if they aren't really my cup of tea.

Edited by FirstSight (01/07/13 09:40 PM)


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

Reged: 12/18/07

Loc: Suburban Maryland, USA
Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: FirstSight]
      #5610274 - 01/07/13 01:55 PM

Chris,

The 82 and 70 degree AFOV eyepieces are not so very far apart in presentation and application to my eyes and frame of mind. For me, it's the 100 degrees that are a different class of critter altogether.

Quote:

Nevertheless, I'll happily indulge if someone has a B....um, the B word, and complement the owner on the quality of the views, even if they aren't really my cup of tea.



Hmmm ... could you mean, perhaps the BRANDON?

FWIW, I had a contrarian experience with a Brandon and my 10" f/4.8 Dob this past Friday. A very transparent evening, it was the first time I was able to tease out the Horsehead from IC 434 at my yellow zone site. I tried several eyepieces, including a Brandon 24. They all revealed the Horsehead to varying degrees of certainty and perceived contrast.

But guess what? The Brandon 24 was not the best. It had a mediocre showing. The best view was given by my humble Sterling Plossl 25.1. Next best was an XW 20.

Mike


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

Reged: 03/01/05

Loc: Northern California
Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: Sarkikos]
      #5610314 - 01/07/13 02:18 PM

The vast majority of the eyepieces I use have apparent fields of at least 100° - ES and Ethos. But the eyepiece that stays in my focuser the most - since I received it - is my 9mm ES "120°" which actually has an apparent field of around 140°. The apparent field is practically the same as the 13mm Ethos, and I've been using it as a finder eyepiece in my 22" f/4. But at 250X it's also great for viewing objects. When seeing is above average, I'll use Ethoi up to 3.7mm for appropriate objects. The more I use the 9mm, the greater the field I can see without having to move my head. There are two minor drawbacks: the eyepiece is heavy (about 2lb 14oz) and eye relief is 6mm, maybe a bit less.

Clears,


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


Reged: 05/11/06

Loc: Covington, GA
Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: Sarkikos]
      #5610338 - 01/07/13 02:31 PM

So far my preference has been to wide field glass. I love my ES82 30mm and ES100 14mm. The ES82 6.7mm and 4.7mm are also excellent. I love my Nagler 13mm T1 for when I am using a scope that does not have a 2" focuser. I don't have any problem taking in the whole field of any of these eyepieces. The 14/100 does force me to look around if I want to see detail in any one spot but I have no problems seeing the whole FOV when looking at or near the center. I find it great that the field stop is so far out that, though I see it plainly enough, I am only just aware of it when concentrating on portions of the FOV near the center. It almost makes the scope just disappear.

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

Reged: 12/18/07

Loc: Suburban Maryland, USA
Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: Shneor]
      #5610340 - 01/07/13 02:32 PM

Shneor,

Why do you keep both the ES 100 9 and ES 120 9? Is it just that the ES 100 9 is lighter and more convenient for your smaller scopes?

Mike


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

Reged: 07/16/06

Loc: South West England
Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: Shneor]
      #5610341 - 01/07/13 02:32 PM

All my scopes are on undriven alt-az mounts and I love ultra-wide fields of view. I currently have the 13, 8 and 6mm Ethos complimented with the 20mm and 31mm T5 Naglers at one end and a couple of Pentax XW's at the other. If I had the funds for the shorter length Ethos I'd go for them.

Personally, I've no problem not seeing the edge of the FoV clearly when I'm viewing the central part - the impression of a "boundless sea of stars" is grand for me


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: FirstSight]
      #5610357 - 01/07/13 02:44 PM

Judging from the replies on this thread, TeleVue was smart to have introduced the 72 degree Delos eyepieces.

I started viewing with 35-50 degree eyepieces, and viewed with them for nearly 20 years before I got my first eyepiece with a 65 degree field. I liked that one a lot. It "opened up" the view.

Roughly 20+ years after starting observing, I was introduced to a sharp 82 degree eyepiece and by the time I'd been observing 35 years, all my eyepieces had 82 degree fields. I got very used to using them. No blackouts, kidney-beaning, or any problems whatsoever seeing the entire field or looking around the field with direct vision.

Fast forward to when I'd been observing 40+ some years, and a 100 degree eyepiece came out (TeleVue Ethos 13mm). I got one and spent a lot of time comparing it to the 13T6 Nagler, and soon sold the Nagler (even though it was the sharpest eyepiece I'd owned up to that time). It seemed the extra lenses had made the eyepiece brighter, and with better color rendition and more contrast. Go figure.
But, perhaps because I was so used to using 82 degree eyepieces, I had no troubles whatsoever with the 100 degree eyepiece: no problems seeing the field stop with peripheral vision or anything, and I loved being "unblindered" so I could look around the field and see what else was there. Many objects that were formerly separate objects became pairs visible in the same field.

Since then, and this year will celebrate 50 years of observing, I've also had the opportunity to use 110 degree eyepieces (Ethos SX), and they *almost* make the Ethos seem "cramped". Once I get a chance to try the 120 degree ES, I may see if that FOV is worth the extra cash (it's a lot more expensive than an Ethos).

But some of the comments made about 100 degree eyepieces imply a misunderstanding of what they are and how they can be used. Picture a porthole and a picture window. Which gives you the bigger view? Do you look at everything at once? Of course not. You look around the field with direct vision to see what's there. You can see the entire field and the field stop all at once if you want, using peripheral vision (using a star at the edge you can easily verify you are, indeed, seeing the entire field), but that's not the point. When you look at some detail in the center of the field, the edges of the field seem to melt away--you're just not aware at that moment that there are any edges to the field of view.

But it's easy to simply redirect your gaze to the edge of the field. Perhaps because I'd had so many years' experience with 82 degrees, I knew to rotate my head around the pupil of the eye to not lose sight of the field--if you simply redirect your gaze, one edge of your pupil cuts off half of the field or more. You can do that, but by learning to rotate your head around the pupil of your eye, you can see the edge of the field, more or less, without losing sight of the rest of the field with peripheral vision.

The really large field was nice, but did it mean I could let an object drift a lot longer before it exited the field of view? Well, with the 13 Ethos, yes. I use a Paracorr at f/5, so no coma is present. I could watch M15, resolved to the core, exit the field of view still completely resolved and in focus. There may be scope combinations where this isn't true, but it was true in my 12.5" scope.

And that meant the true field was so large that I could use a 140X eyepiece as a finder eyepiece, and still have enough magnification to examine details in objects. So it meant the 13mm Ethos replaced a 13mm, 16mm and 17mm 82 degree eyepiece. It was a 3 for 1 exchange. And therein lies another aspect of the truly wide fields--you need fewer eyepieces because a higher magnification eyepiece can replace both the higher power eyepiece and the next lower power. So I went from a 31-22-20-17-16-13-11-9-7-5 set to a 31-21-13-8-6 set ( I added the 10mm this year to compensate for seeing conditions when the 8mm is too much magnification). And I'm teetering on the fence about getting rid of the 31.

So I would sooner give up observing than go back to the narrower fields of view. I would ask people (who don't need glasses on to observe) why they feel they have to be able to see the entire field of view at one time (and, of course, in reality, that's not even really possible with 70 degrees and direct vision)? Why is it disturbing to have an edge-of-field that isn't immediately noticeable when looking through an eyepiece? And especially when the edge of the field in that 100 degree eyepiece is actually sharper and better corrected than those in a lot of narrower-field eyepieces.

And, they're even credibly good as planetary eyepieces. Purists will scoff, but I've used the 9-element Ethos, 5-element Paracorr, and 4-element PowerMate to get a lifetime-best image of Jupiter at 456X.
Of course, seeing was simply spectacularly good. But through that 18 element stack, I got a glimpse of a series of blue-green festoons actually casting shadows on the ocher-colored equatorial belt below it. And a series of cream and reddish storms inside the EQ belt being torn apart by winds. Now sure, I'm not a planetary observer most of the time (maybe 5 minutes out of every 8 hours), but that night the details were simply stunning. If all those elements really reduced what I could see, that was lost on me, because I'd never seen that much detail in any other scope, all the way to 60". Sharpness-wise, the 100 degree guys don't really suffer much, in my experience.

So I think it really boils down to personal preferences, and that's really OK. It explains why eyepieces are available from 30 to 120 degrees and from $7.50 to well over $1000.

As for me, though, I'm glad I lived long enough to experience the "unboundedness" of 100 degree eyepieces. They certainly have made my viewing a lot more enjoyable. Whatever does that is OK in my book.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
coutleef
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 02/21/08

Loc: Saint-Donat, Québec, Canada
Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: Starman1]
      #5610427 - 01/07/13 03:22 PM

the best is to try them all. i played with EPs from 40 to 100 degrees. owned an Ethos for over a year.

after these years of actually using these EPs in various scopes, i just prefer the 68 to 72 degrees. i was thrilled atfirst by the Ethos but that feeling just vanished over time. i did not use the extra view of the 100 degree fov so i did not feel unconfortable or 'tired' using the Ethos. i just looked at the center and felt flotting in space. when i lost that feeling i just stopped seeing an advantage of using an ethos. i now like seeing the field stop.

difficult to keep a minimalist collection with scopes with different FL considering power and exit pupil. but i consistently use 6 eps and they are all 70 degrees.

but if i only had ethoi or naglers i would have a lot of fun. the important is to use whatever we have.


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

Reged: 11/12/06

Loc: Sherman Oaks, CA
Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: coutleef]
      #5610440 - 01/07/13 03:31 PM

I like widefield 82 degree 31T5 for my low power views, 13 Ethos ultrawide for medium power, Leica ASPH 60-80 degree fields for medium-high powers, and orthos in a binoviewer for medium to high power. I also have a set of 10-7-5 XWs that I consider just about perfect. I use a Paracorr 1 in my f4.65 dob.

I also love binoviewing Pan 24s at 1X in my FS152.

All of the combinations I mentioned above work well in my two scopes.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
turtle86
Pooh-Bah Everywhere Else
*****

Reged: 10/09/06

Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: Starman1]
      #5610464 - 01/07/13 03:43 PM

Quote:

And, they're even credibly good as planetary eyepieces. Purists will scoff, but I've used the 9-element Ethos, 5-element Paracorr, and 4-element PowerMate to get a lifetime-best image of Jupiter at 456X.
Of course, seeing was simply spectacularly good. But through that 18 element stack, I got a glimpse of a series of blue-green festoons actually casting shadows on the ocher-colored equatorial belt below it. And a series of cream and reddish storms inside the EQ belt being torn apart by winds. Now sure, I'm not a planetary observer most of the time (maybe 5 minutes out of every 8 hours), but that night the details were simply stunning. If all those elements really reduced what I could see, that was lost on me, because I'd never seen that much detail in any other scope, all the way to 60". Sharpness-wise, the 100 degree guys don't really suffer much, in my experience.





You won't hear any scoffing from me. Some of my own best planetary views have been through the 4.7 and 6mm Ethos (377 and 481x). The way I look at it, photons from planets and DSO's already have to navigate through some 14.7 ppsi of sometimes turbulent air and atmospheric crud to get to our scope's objective. Any additional tiny loss of photons occasioned by the extra glass of the Ethos and Paracorr is more than made up for by having that extra glass put those photons in their proper place, to make those exquisite details appear when the seeing permits.


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

Reged: 02/25/06

Loc: Mobile, Alabama, USA
Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces new [Re: JayinUT]
      #5610708 - 01/07/13 06:49 PM

I prefer eyepieces with a 60 to 82 degree apparent field of view. Those are comfortable for me and allow me to see the whole FOV without shifiting my eye to take it all in.

Taras


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
zjc26138
Loved By All
*****

Reged: 02/24/05

Loc: Mingo Junction, Ohio
Re: What Field of View for Your Eyepieces [Re: Achernar]
      #5610729 - 01/07/13 06:57 PM

I prefer the wider field of view. My 10mm Ethos and my 6.7mm ES 82 degree are my most used eyepieces.

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


Extra information
11 registered and 21 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: 3143

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics