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
Craig Smith
sage
Reged: 05/22/06
Posts: 229
Loc: Utah
|
|
I'm struggling to find the right eyepieces for my AT66 f6 refractor. For high powers, a Nagler 3-6 zoom would be perfect but is too expensive. So I'm looking for a single eyepiece in the 3-4mm range. Ideally something lightweight but with good eye relief (and not too expensive). The 3 options listed are the best I've come up with (I'd prefer something that fits in a 1.25" eyepiece case hole but that doesn't seem to exist with these criteria). From what I've read, the Edge-On & clones is the best in my fast scope, but it's the heaviest and most expensive and it doesn't come in a 4mm size. But 3mm (133x) might be doable in my scope; 4mm gives 100x. I've read a lot of negative things about the TMB, but those were about longer focal lengths and the 4 seemed better. I haven't heard much about the ED. So any advice would be appreciated. Thanks.
--------------------
Celestron Nexstar 6SE
OPT 2" Dielectric SCT Diagonal
Baader Hyperion Zoom
Stellarvue F50 Finderscope
Telecovers Case
Astro-Tech AT66ED
William-Optics 1.25" Dielectric Diagonal
|
starrancher
professor emeritus
Reged: 06/09/09
Posts: 606
Loc: Northern Arizona
|
|
Quote:
I'm struggling to find the right eyepieces for my AT66 f6 refractor. For high powers, a Nagler 3-6 zoom would be perfect but is too expensive. So I'm looking for a single eyepiece in the 3-4mm range. Ideally something lightweight but with good eye relief (and not too expensive). The 3 options listed are the best I've come up with (I'd prefer something that fits in a 1.25" eyepiece case hole but that doesn't seem to exist with these criteria). From what I've read, the Edge-On & clones is the best in my fast scope, but it's the heaviest and most expensive and it doesn't come in a 4mm size. But 3mm (133x) might be doable in my scope; 4mm gives 100x. I've read a lot of negative things about the TMB, but those were about longer focal lengths and the 4 seemed better. I haven't heard much about the ED. So any advice would be appreciated. Thanks.
I've heard a lot more negative than positive about the ED units . Some say they like them . Probably because they bought them . 
What I have heard is that it's hard to hold the exit pupil on them & optically they leave a lot to be desired along with less than par light throughput . This is just here say from reviews & reputable authors as I haven't used them personally .
Too bad Orion was unable to keep the Lanthinum line as they were good oculars ,
Of the two , I would go with the Edge On or one of the generic clones .
--------------------
LXD75 AR5
LXD75 SN8
Series 4000 Plossls
Misc. other stuff
Fort Rock , Az .
|
Loren Toole
super member
Reged: 03/23/04
Posts: 123
Loc: New Mexico USA
|
|
On the Epics, it depends on which focal length you choose. I had an opportunity to try out nearly the entire eyepiece line once in Orion's Cupertino store, using a spare ST120 and looking at distant objects through the store window. Maybe not the most exacting test, but enlightening.
What I found was the 22mm is the best of the lot, as focal length decreases there are increasing problems with blackout and eye placement. I bought the 22mm and still have it, great finder eyepiece with excellent sharpness, bright images.
--------------------
My binos: 6x30, 7x35, 10x70, 15x60, 20x80
My scopes: 5"f5 newt, 4"f5 TV Genesis, 4"f5 TV 101, 3"f9, 3"f5
ARCO OBSERVATORY 7200'
|
Sean Cunneen
Let Me Think
Reged: 08/01/07
Posts: 1222
Loc: Blue Island Illinois
|
|
I have had all of those and of your three, the Planetary are the best. Honestly, if you don't mind short eye relief, then I would go Orthos (oh wait, I have...) I've found Orthos are a step better than the planetaries. Also try a Siebert Star-Splitter, on par with Orthos, but with slightly better eye relief
--------------------
Sean Cunneen
Blue Island, IL
12.5" Ultralight Strut Dob
127mm f/9 refractor
35Pan, 10XW, 5XO
Member of the Calumet Astronomical Society
|
Craig Smith
sage
Reged: 05/22/06
Posts: 229
Loc: Utah
|
|
Thanks very much for the great info. The Siebert Star-Splitter is a very interesting option; I'll look into that option.
--------------------
Celestron Nexstar 6SE
OPT 2" Dielectric SCT Diagonal
Baader Hyperion Zoom
Stellarvue F50 Finderscope
Telecovers Case
Astro-Tech AT66ED
William-Optics 1.25" Dielectric Diagonal
|
Lane
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 11/19/07
Posts: 1513
Loc: Frisco, Texas
|
|
I don't know about the other eyepieces in your list but I got the planetaries primarily for my small refractors. What I like most about them is their nice undistorted view, which means I can use my scopes as spotting scopes in the daytime. Most other eyepieces I have found have some type of curvature or pincushioning that makes daytime use annoying. These have pretty much the same kind of view I see in my orthos, nice and flat, but much wider. The other thing I like about them is they have just the right amount of eye relief to make them very comfortable. And because they are only 60 degrees I can even use my glasses with them and still see the whole field.
Are they as sharp as an Ortho? Some say no, but I have compared mine on a lot of occasions to my HD Orthos and I honestly have never seen a difference. On very faint objects I can tell that the orthos are delivering a little more light through the lens but it is a small difference. Light scatter on bright objects is an issue with the planetaries but no worse than with any of my naglers, just not quite as low as the orthos.
--------------------
Mounts: CGEM, ORION SIRIUS, AT Voyager/motorized
SCTs: C6, C8, C9.25, C11,
Refractors: TV Pronto, Orion ED80
|
russell23
sage
Reged: 05/31/09
Posts: 425
Loc: Upstate NY
|
|
The Edge on are definitely better than the Epic-ED eyepieces. Blackouts are a significant problem with the Epic's and there are no blackout problems with the Edge on. The edge on's are also sharper to the edge.
|
RussL
Music Maker
Reged: 03/18/08
Posts: 1925
Loc: Cayce, SC
|
|
Craig, I can confirm the negative comments about the TMBs. I bought the 8mm TMB Planetary, and while the build quality is nice, I find it to have a soft image, plenty of scattered light, and an annoying ghost image on bright objects. A real bummer after all the hype I read about it, even on this forum.
--------------------
--Dawg, the Russell
"Akita mani yo." Observe everything as you walk. (--Lakota)
Celestron Celestar 8 Standard SCT, f10
Celestron 80mm Wide View ref., f5
Orion 120ST ref., f5
Criterion RV-6 Dynascope, Newt., f8, (c. 1962)
Sears Discoverer 60mm ref., f7, (c. 1973)
Celestron Ultima DX 10x50, 6.5 TFOV
Tasco 7x35 wide
Several mediocre eyepieces
|
Lane
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 11/19/07
Posts: 1513
Loc: Frisco, Texas
|
|
I am going to have to respectfully disagree with the above statements. I think clearly something else was going on there. The image in the planetaries is not soft, if it was I would drop them in a trash can and buy something else. I have never seen a ghost image in any of mine when viewing Jupiter or the Moon. And although they scatter light more than I like when viewing Jupiter, if you compare the amount with any eyepieces that have more elements, it is the same amount of scatter. So the only issue is, considering they have fewer lenses you would just naturally expect less scatter than something with more lenses and you don't get it.
Many of the TMB's rattle if you shake them. That rattle indicates a problem that will make them blurry. The bottom retaining ring loosens, which causes the lower lens to drop into the wrong position. It is easy to correct by unscrewing the inner part of the eyepiece from the outer case, then you can tighten the retaining ring.
I have also compared the Hyperion Zoom in its 8mm position to the 8mm TMB and the TMB was better in all respects except for its narrower field of view.
As for the complaints about the 9mm I have seen from many people, that was mainly a complaint that the 9mm did not have the same flat field as the others. I decided not to buy it either after reading all the various negative comments. But the 8mm is probably my favorite of all the TMB's. It is always with me when I go to out to view.
Edited by Lane (11/07/09 12:25 PM)
|
Craig Smith
sage
Reged: 05/22/06
Posts: 229
Loc: Utah
|
|
Thanks everyone, I will definitely scratch the Epics from my list, and since they were my first choice, I really appreciate the info. Part of the difficulty of course is that eyepiece behavior is dependent on the scope, and different focal lengths in a series behave differently. But at least I have some good info to go on. I'm also considering whether I should get one or two fixed eyepieces instead of a zoom for mid powers, but that'll be another post as soon as I analyze the options better.
--------------------
Celestron Nexstar 6SE
OPT 2" Dielectric SCT Diagonal
Baader Hyperion Zoom
Stellarvue F50 Finderscope
Telecovers Case
Astro-Tech AT66ED
William-Optics 1.25" Dielectric Diagonal
|
sailor70623
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 01/12/08
Posts: 944
Loc: Ok.
|
|
I had the TMB Planetary EP set (yes all of them) and have the Edge-On clone set from Zhumell, the Zhumell Z series palnetary EP set (yes all of them). The Zs (Edge-On) beat the TMB's in every way EXCEPT weight. I find the Orion Edge-On to be a bit too pricey, and got lucky enough to grab my Zs for less than $50, some at less than $20. I had the TMBs when I tried my first Zhumell Z, and loved it so much I bought all the focal lengths. Save your money and don't bother with the 18mm and 14.5mm. They still are available at telescopes.com for under $60 ea. These are my pick for planetary EPs with ER (gave my TMBs to my grand daughter). Now much better are my few orthos, but the ER is also much less, so I usually enjoy using a Z over an Ortho most of the time, when doing any planetary observing. ORTHOS ARE BETTER, but I don't like the short ER. I also have a complete set of Celestron X-Cell EPs (Epic ED), these are not as good as they should be. A bit over priced for what they are, they work fine in my smaller Go-To scopes. They are not planetary EPs. Nor are they WIDE FOV EPs. They are a step up from plossls, except when you first get them the black outs will drive you crazy. After a few nights you seem to get your eye's posistion right and don't have that problem anymore, but these bite on Dobs. Have only a 55 degree FOV so are not even an SWA EP, they do not let as much light through as the Zs or TMBs, but DO have a nice high eyecup that keeps light off the eyelens, and OPs (Other People's) lash make up off the EPs lens too. Yes the 21mm and 25mm have less eye posistioning problems and make good lenses for star parties. Newbies usually have few problems with these EPs down to 18mm. One other thought if $$$ is a problem, good plossls with a 3X barlow work very nice for planetary observing too.
--------------------
Corornado PST
LB 16" & 12"
Z 10"
LX50 8"
8" CPC
ETX127
102&90mm MAKs
80mm Richfield APO
70mm refractor
ETX60
|
BillP
Post Laureate
Reged: 11/26/06
Posts: 3940
Loc: Vienna, VA
|
|
Craig,
Since you already have the Hyperion Zoom, why not just use that with a barlow? I found it barlows very well for planetary and used to use it for planetary all the time when I had it. Would really recommend something like the Siebert 1.25" barlows. They are fairly inexpensive at around $79, extremely transparent and sharp, and you can get them in pretty much any power if you call Harry. I would shoot for a 3.2x Barlow from Siebert as this would make your Hyperion into a 2.5x - 7.5mm EP, a perfect compliment and it lets you go a little higher in magnification then as usually these 66mm scope can take a 2.5mm EP fine for lunar viewing really close up for those evenings that allow it. Anyway, I think that would be most flexible as the one eyepiece and one barlow gives you everything you need from 24mm all the way to 2.5mm.
-Bill
--------------------
Bill Paolini
XT10i Dob---TSA-102 S-APO---APM80/480 S-APO--- P.S.T.
TMB Supermonos---Meade UWAs---TV Panoptic---AT Titan II ED
To your own eyes be true...
|
RussL
Music Maker
Reged: 03/18/08
Posts: 1925
Loc: Cayce, SC
|
|
Lane, I did have the rattle in my 8mm TMB at first. I tightened it, but without diassembling anything (I could just barely get my fingertips on the barrel in the recess). That didn't make any difference, though. If you think that disassembling the piece would help, I would like to try that. Perhaps the lens is out of position in there. I also wondered if the lens could rotate and whether that would cause any problems. I understand what you are saying about the light scatter, but I do ALWAYS have a ghost image on things like Jupiter. Guess I must've gotten a lemon, and that is no reason to dishonor the whole line, so I apologize for that. I have noticed a bright ring when looking in the bottom, not metalic-looking, but more like white (although it may be metallic). The one I got has the black barrel, so I assume it's not the newer Type II. It was on sale for $40 back this spring. I also compared the image in it with a 7.5mm Sirius Plossl and found the Plossl to have a sharper image. The soft image in mine was the first thing I noticed in my first view with it. Shoulda sent it back for a replacement, I guess. Otherwise, I like the eyepiece in all other respects.
If you have any info or suggestion for me, please send me a PM. I do use the piece all the time anyway, and would like to correct whatever is wrong with it, if possible.
With all due respect. 
--------------------
--Dawg, the Russell
"Akita mani yo." Observe everything as you walk. (--Lakota)
Celestron Celestar 8 Standard SCT, f10
Celestron 80mm Wide View ref., f5
Orion 120ST ref., f5
Criterion RV-6 Dynascope, Newt., f8, (c. 1962)
Sears Discoverer 60mm ref., f7, (c. 1973)
Celestron Ultima DX 10x50, 6.5 TFOV
Tasco 7x35 wide
Several mediocre eyepieces
|
NerfMonkey
sage
Reged: 06/12/08
Posts: 482
Loc: NE Ohio
|
|
Quote:
Also try a Siebert Star-Splitter, on par with Orthos, but with slightly better eye relief
Don't forget the much wider apparent field, 65°. I have a 5.9mm Starsplitter, and while I don't much like it for DSO use (eye relief's a little short for that), it's a fantastic eyepiece for planetary observing. My best and sharpest views of Saturn and the moon were through that eyepiece.
I imagine the other focal lengths are just as good but I haven't heard much talk about these eyepieces. The only problems I see are a tiny bit of chromatic aberration and minor ghosting on very bright objects (the ones that it's used the most on). Oh, and I have to clean it often because taking in the whole field of view requires my eye to be so close that my eyelashes brush the lens.
--------------------
Mike
Zhumell 12", Oberwerk 15x70s
107 Messiers, 247 total DSOs, 6 planets, 1 comet
|
JadeSmith
sage
Reged: 07/15/08
Posts: 413
Loc: 5 miles from Obama's house
|
|
I had the Celestron version of the Epic Ed 5mm and I had major blackout problems. Eye placement was VERY critical...too critical for my taste. I sold it and moved on. I now have UO HD's in that range and I'm much happier...who needs super wide FOV's in a short FL Ep? I guess in a dob it's convenient...
--------------------
Astro Tech 8" Imaging Newt (Thanks Astronomics!)
Stellarvue SV80ED
Celestron C6R Backyard Artillery
Zhumell Z10 dob
Celestron CGEM
William Optics EzTouch
Canon 20D
...and lots of goodies
|
Craig Smith
sage
Reged: 05/22/06
Posts: 229
Loc: Utah
|
|
Thanks everyone! Excellent feedback. As far as the zoom goes, that is an interesting option, although putting the light through that much glass makes me cringe a little. The main problem is the Hyperion is too big and heavy as it is, and adding a barlow will only make it worse. I was planning on getting a smaller zoom for the mid-range powers, which would primarily be for spotting scope use. But then I was thinking of one or two fixed-length eyepieces instead of the zoom.
--------------------
Celestron Nexstar 6SE
OPT 2" Dielectric SCT Diagonal
Baader Hyperion Zoom
Stellarvue F50 Finderscope
Telecovers Case
Astro-Tech AT66ED
William-Optics 1.25" Dielectric Diagonal
|
richardr
super member
Reged: 11/07/06
Posts: 100
|
|
They kidney bean and black out if you move your eye at all. The eyecup does not come up and help guide you. When you do get set, they have a reasonably wide field and decent optics. I would take a good plossl over it, in a heartbeat.
|
|
28 registered and 20 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: Greg K., Jason B, csa/montana
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 504
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
