Quote:

---

Phil, I wish you had access to the XW 14 or Denk 14 or even the LVW 13 for a shootout with the Delos. Nonetheless, I'm looking forward to your findings on the 14 Delos.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

I decided to go with the 14mm Delos

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

I have been thinking about this. I have 3 Ethoi, but I have to use a Dioptrx with my astigmatism to see anywhere near the apparent FOV and so have to do a lot of switching as I change eyepieces. Plus i kinda get lost in that huge view. Although it is nice to observe without glasses it's a little bit of a hassle too. I got a Delos 17.3 and I really liked the nice framing of an object and that I was able to see it all with my glasses on. So was thinking of getting one or two more Delos before observing season really hits in a couple months.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Nothing but snow and clouds here, so no first light. Weather around here is usually atrocious in the wintertime, and the next stretch of days looks like no exception.

My test chamber's going to be fairly brutal--an 8" f/4.9 w/o Paracorr. We'll see how it works when the skies clear.

Clear Skies,
Phil

---

Actually looking at Clear Sky Chart it looks like its going to be clear tonight

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Between the clouds, I just got a very, very quick peek at the moon in the fading hours of day with the 14mm Delos in the 8" f/4.9.

First impressions:

(1) Very sharp on and off-axis. It's a Televue. In other shocking news, Lake Erie is moist.

(2) I'm grateful that the Orion 8" f/4.9 is a dual photo/visual instrument. These tend to require extension tubes to get most eyepieces to focus. Most. The 14mm Delos, though, requires significantly more infocus than the 10mm Delos, so I just took off the extension tube. I don't know the exact amount, but it's not a smidge; it's a lot. Definitely more infocus than a 30ES-82.

3. Slight softness near the extreme edge of the FOV (>97% out), manifesting itself in a tiny bit less detail in shadows around the craters and along the terminator. I don't know if it's a slight field curvature, off-axis astimgatism or--what I suspect--coma from the mirror itself. I had no stars to test for any of these aberrations; maybe later on tonight if I get a viewing window I could narrow it down. Don't get the impression it's "mushy" at the edges. Anything but, and this is w/o a Paracorr. It's much sharper near the edges than a T4 Nagler w/o a Paracorr at f/4.9.

(4) I had no difficulty holding the exit pupil. The 20mm of eye relief is actually a tiny bit *too* much for my eyeglasses, but the adjustable housing makes for a quick fix. The exit pupil is a bit more difficult to hold than a Pentax XW or my 22LVW, but nowhere near as finicky as a 12T4 or 17T4.

(5) Um, in the world of hyper-wide 100- and 120-deg eyepieces, it's easy to forget that 72-deg AFOV is still a wide-angle eyepiece. It "feels" like more than 72-deg AFOV; maybe it's having plentiful eye relief that does that. I definitely felt a 17T4 had a larger AFOV than my old 13T6, even though they were both 82-deg AFOV.

Clear Skies,
Phil

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

The exit pupil is a bit more difficult to hold than a Pentax XW or my 22LVW, but nowhere near as finicky as a 12T4 or 17T4.

---

Post Extras: