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 | (show all)
Levine
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 03/24/06

Loc: 40° 47' 52" N / 85° 49' 14" ...
ZAO I vs. ZAO II...?
      #5841640 - 05/05/13 01:04 PM

I recently corresponded with a friend overseas. He had bench tested the two generations of ZAO's with a laser interferometer, and found the results to be so dissimilar that he felt that there was hardly basis for comparison.

He much prefers and recommends the I's over the II's

Now, those are his eyes, and all of our eyes are FAR less sensitive than an interferometer.

So the question: given the following conditions -

Dark and steady skies with optimal seeing
An optically perfect telescope
Sample EP's from both batches selected at random
An experienced observer who has worked with "good" orthos for a long period of time

- would any *MEANINGFUL* differences in performance be detected?

Any of you who have had "head to head" experience with these pieces, please tell us about your observations and preference.



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

Reged: 10/19/07

Loc: West Virginia
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: Levine]
      #5841705 - 05/05/13 01:34 PM


Hello ,

>>>>> I recently corresponded with a friend overseas. He had bench tested the two generations of ZAO's with a laser interferometer, and found the results to be so dissimilar that he felt that there was hardly basis for comparison.

He much prefers and recommends the I's over the II's <<<<<

Which brings up the question , what did this test show your friend ????????????????????????


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

Reged: 03/24/06

Loc: 40° 47' 52" N / 85° 49' 14" ...
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: leonard]
      #5841765 - 05/05/13 02:19 PM

Quote:


Hello ,

>>>>> I recently corresponded with a friend overseas. He had bench tested the two generations of ZAO's with a laser interferometer, and found the results to be so dissimilar that he felt that there was hardly basis for comparison.

He much prefers and recommends the I's over the II's <<<<<

Which brings up the question , what did this test show your friend ????????????????????????





Only that the resulting diffraction patterns were different.
That's all.


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

Reged: 10/19/07

Loc: West Virginia
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: Levine]
      #5841868 - 05/05/13 03:24 PM

Hello Levine,

IMO , this test your friend did would have no bearing on the optical performance of these two eyepieces . I may be wrong but both the Zeiss 1 an Zeiss 2 are excellent .
The fact this person is basing his judgement on a different pattern says nothing at all.

Leonard


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff Morgan
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 09/28/03

Loc: Prescott, AZ
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: Levine]
      #5841896 - 05/05/13 03:39 PM

Good question.

Send me a set of each and I'll get back to you in a year.


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

Reged: 03/24/06

Loc: 40° 47' 52" N / 85° 49' 14" ...
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: leonard]
      #5841899 - 05/05/13 03:41 PM

Quote:

Hello Levine,

IMO , this test your friend did would have no bearing on the optical performance of these two eyepieces . I may be wrong but both the Zeiss 1 an Zeiss 2 are excellent .
The fact this person is basing his judgement on a different pattern says nothing at all.

Leonard




Right...Interferometry, and viewing with one's eye, are two different things: you cannot directly infer or predict "real world" perfomance based solely upon bench testing.



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

Reged: 06/15/06

Loc: Sunshine State & Ocean State
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: leonard]
      #5841900 - 05/05/13 03:41 PM

I compared both sets and couldn't find any visual differences, other than the fact that ZAO I's were available in 25mm and 34mm (?). I kept the ZAO II's because they were newer and sold off the I's..............except for the 25mm, which I still own.

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

Reged: 03/24/06

Loc: 40° 47' 52" N / 85° 49' 14" ...
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: SteveC]
      #5841904 - 05/05/13 03:44 PM

Quote:

I compared both sets and couldn't find any visual differences, other than the fact that ZAO I's were available in 25mm and 34mm (?). I kept the ZAO II's because they were newer and sold off the I's..............except for the 25mm, which I still own.




I have the 34 and 25 ZAO I's, plus the II set.
My eyes, 'scopes, and seeing are all so-so.
Given that, I have found no reson to complain.



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

Reged: 11/12/06

Loc: Sherman Oaks, CA
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: Levine]
      #5841916 - 05/05/13 03:55 PM

The ZAO-IIs are supposed to have better edge correction for faster scopes, down to f4. Whether this makes a difference on axis I dunno since I don't have any ZAO-Is for comparison.

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

Reged: 06/15/06

Loc: Sunshine State & Ocean State
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: Levine]
      #5842005 - 05/05/13 04:42 PM

Quote:

Quote:

I compared both sets and couldn't find any visual differences, other than the fact that ZAO I's were available in 25mm and 34mm (?). I kept the ZAO II's because they were newer and sold off the I's..............except for the 25mm, which I still own.





I have the 34 and 25 ZAO I's, plus the II set.
My eyes, 'scopes, and seeing are all so-so.
Given that, I have found no reson to complain.






You're a lucky guy, that 34mm ZAO is a rare bird. I gave up my search for one a couple of years ago, just too difficult to find.


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

Reged: 03/24/06

Loc: 40° 47' 52" N / 85° 49' 14" ...
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: SteveC]
      #5842096 - 05/05/13 05:31 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

I compared both sets and couldn't find any visual differences, other than the fact that ZAO I's were available in 25mm and 34mm (?). I kept the ZAO II's because they were newer and sold off the I's..............except for the 25mm, which I still own.





I have the 34 and 25 ZAO I's, plus the II set.
My eyes, 'scopes, and seeing are all so-so.
Given that, I have found no reson to complain.






You're a lucky guy, that 34mm ZAO is a rare bird. I gave up my search for one a couple of years ago, just too difficult to find.




Pieces like this require determination, to be sure!

Acquisition requires 4 ingredients:

Time
Persistence
Ready cash
LUCK

When one finally came up for auction, I refused to allow it to slip away.

In my experiece, just about any EP you could imagine can eventually had, if you just stick to your guns.

For example, I once assembled a FULL Set of Clave focal lengths, including the 2" pieces.

I did it in 11 months.

10 piece Silvertop set? Two weeks.

Etc...



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Paul G
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 05/08/03

Loc: Freedonia
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: Levine]
      #5842985 - 05/06/13 06:42 AM

Quote:

I recently corresponded with a friend overseas. He had bench tested the two generations of ZAO's with a laser interferometer, and found the results to be so dissimilar that he felt that there was hardly basis for comparison.

He much prefers and recommends the I's over the II's

Now, those are his eyes, and all of our eyes are FAR less sensitive than an interferometer.

So the question: given the following conditions -

Dark and steady skies with optimal seeing
An optically perfect telescope
Sample EP's from both batches selected at random
An experienced observer who has worked with "good" orthos for a long period of time

- would any *MEANINGFUL* differences in performance be detected?

Any of you who have had "head to head" experience with these pieces, please tell us about your observations and preference.






I've side-by-sided the I's and II's, both mono and binoviewing with the Mk V, in several scopes including the following Astro-Physics refractors and Mak-Cass:

92 mm f4.9
92 mm f6.6
105 mm f5.8
130 mm f6
130 mm f6.3
155 mm f7
175 mm f8
254 mm f14.6

I've seen no noticeable difference between the I's and the II's. It's possible that one might notice a slight difference in edge correction in a fast scope if one were observing in an area with excellent seeing, but that's not where I live. In our seeing here, no difference.

The real gems of the I's were the 25 and 34mm. I was disappointed they didn't include those focal lengths when they brought out the II's.

Edited by Paul G (05/06/13 06:44 AM)


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


Reged: 12/19/05

Loc: Madrid, Spain
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: Paul G]
      #5843009 - 05/06/13 07:14 AM

ZAO II: less afov, better corrected for fast optics
ZAO I: less eye relief, I like the eyecup of the 16

That's all, folks ;-)


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


Reged: 08/27/05

Loc: Houston, Texas
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: ManuelJ]
      #5843040 - 05/06/13 07:40 AM

Two ways to look at this:

1 Newer is always better, be that an eyepiece, a camera, a car or whatever, if you subscribe to this theory then there is your answer !!!!

2 I took that question to ap-ug and got an answer from Roland (#61232 & #61241)
According to Roland;

They are optically the same, mechanically a bit different. The newer ones have smaller field stops because a few picky people complained in the past that the outer part of the field were not sharp in the version 1, so Baader had them made with smaller field stops.

And for coatings;
I have both and they look quite similar, I am not sure there was any great improvement. Both types produce very dark fields and both produce the same sharp planet images.

I have three pairs of version 1, 16, 25 & 34mm, with my F/20 Maks the 34mm offers the finest planetary views of any eyepiece, head and shoulder above all else including ZAO-25 and 24mm Brandons which are my only eyepieces that rival Zeiss on planets.

Vahe


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

Reged: 03/24/06

Loc: 40° 47' 52" N / 85° 49' 14" ...
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: vahe]
      #5843045 - 05/06/13 07:48 AM

Quote:

Two ways to look at this:

1 Newer is always better, be that an eyepiece, a camera, a car or whatever, if you subscribe to this theory then there is your answer !!!!

2 I took that question to ap-ug and got an answer from Roland (#61232 & #61241)
According to Roland;

They are optically the same, mechanically a bit different. The newer ones have smaller field stops because a few picky people complained in the past that the outer part of the field were not sharp in the version 1, so Baader had them made with smaller field stops.

And for coatings;
I have both and they look quite similar, I am not sure there was any great improvement. Both types produce very dark fields and both produce the same sharp planet images.

I have three pairs of version 1, 16, 25 & 34mm, with my F/20 Maks the 34mm offers the finest planetary views of any eyepiece, head and shoulder above all else including ZAO-25 and 24mm Brandons which are my only eyepieces that rival Zeiss on planets.

Vahe




Great stuff!



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scott99
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 05/10/07

Loc: New England
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: Levine]
      #5843264 - 05/06/13 10:58 AM

there is one obvious difference.....the dreaded undercut. ZAO I has it and also the sliding eyeguard

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scott99
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 05/10/07

Loc: New England
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: vahe]
      #5843273 - 05/06/13 11:02 AM

Quote:

I have three pairs of version 1, 16, 25 & 34mm, with my F/20 Maks the 34mm offers the finest planetary views of any eyepiece, head and shoulder above all else including ZAO-25 and 24mm Brandons which are my only eyepieces that rival Zeiss on planets.




Interesting, I don't do much planetary with the longer ones but I've heard this before - people also liking the 25mm orthos best for planetary and just using barlows to get to higher magnfication.

Could it be that larger lenses somehow deliver better contrast? Maybe because the light is spread out over a larger area of glass. People have been saying for a long time that you get better contrast with a high quality Barlow + ortho rather than with an eyepiece with a tiny integrated barlow, could be the same effect.


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

Reged: 12/18/07

Loc: Suburban Maryland, USA
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: Scott99]
      #5843276 - 05/06/13 11:05 AM

Take into account that his Mak is an f/20.


Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Paul G
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 05/08/03

Loc: Freedonia
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? new [Re: Levine]
      #5843288 - 05/06/13 11:12 AM

Obligatory pic:



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

Reged: 12/18/07

Loc: Suburban Maryland, USA
Re: ZAO I vs. ZAO II...? [Re: Scott99]
      #5843289 - 05/06/13 11:13 AM

Scott,

Quote:

Could it be that larger lenses somehow deliver better contrast? Maybe because the light is spread out over a larger area of glass. People have been saying for a long time that you get better contrast with a high quality Barlow + ortho rather than with an eyepiece with a tiny integrated barlow, could be the same effect.




FWIW, my XO 5.1 showed more perceived contrast and ease of discerning surface detail than my BGO 5. The XO 5.1 has 5 elements in 3 groups, the BGO has 4 elements in 2 groups. Some observers have said that the XO's are at the same level as the ZAO's.

I think that how well an eyepiece with an integrated Barlow (Smyth lens or whatever) performs might vary quite a bit from eyepiece to eyepiece. I usually avoid separate Barlows except to bring my binoviewer to focus in my Newts.

Mike


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


Extra information
12 registered and 28 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: 1848

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics