Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Orthoscopic eyepeices

Started by teelgul , Apr 20 2014 04:34 PM

Prev

Next

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.

78 replies to this topic

#26 JustaBoy

Skylab

Posts: 4,356
Joined: 19 Jun 2012

Posted 22 April 2014 - 01:14 PM

Go Ahead - Just Rub it In, you Young Wippersnapper, you!

:-)

Back to top

#27 bremms

Fly Me to the Moon

Posts: 5,351
Joined: 31 Aug 2012

Posted 22 April 2014 - 02:38 PM

They are easier to look through than a TV Plossl My 7mm UO circle t is still a great EP. I like my 7mm RGO a little more. The TV 7.4 is good, but more difficult to use. I prefer the UO or the RGO 7mm

Back to top

#28 Jeff Morgan

James Webb Space Telescope

Posts: 16,243
Joined: 28 Sep 2003

Posted 22 April 2014 - 03:19 PM

In Europe, they never really left the mainstream scene at all. Every visual observer I know/knew seem(ed) to have some, even if they also owned more recent designs. Zeiss sold loads of them, as did Takahashi, Vixen and Tani Optics (same as UO orthos).

Visual observers over here never forgot what a good ortho is capable of, certainly not the planetary observers, but also to some degree deep-sky specialists.

Perhaps this is the influence of marketing and conspicuous consumption, things we have no shortage of on this side of the Atlantic.

Up until about 5 years ago I was caught up in the marketing spell too. Rediscovery is nice too.

Back to top

#29 bremms

Fly Me to the Moon

Posts: 5,351
Joined: 31 Aug 2012

Posted 22 April 2014 - 04:24 PM

A few years ago, the used prices were low for UO green letters. I picked up a few for under $35.00 and one for under 30.00 shipped. They are about double that these days. Still looking for a 5mm

Back to top

#30 bayou sky

Lift Off

Posts: 23
Joined: 09 Mar 2014

Posted 22 April 2014 - 09:26 PM

I'm not that familar with the various orthos

But I was looking at a used one for sale.

"Celestron by Vixen 7mm Ortho 1.25" Eyepiece Orthoscopic Circle V Japan" for $42 shipped

My question

1) Is this a good eyepiece?

2) If so, is this a good price?

I'm interested in this 7mm for planetary detail

My scope is a 8" Dobs F/6 Orion XT8 1200FL

Back to top

#31 JustaBoy

Skylab

Posts: 4,356
Joined: 19 Jun 2012

Posted 22 April 2014 - 09:39 PM

It's not an Ortho in the classic Abbe sense - It uses 2 doublets instead of a triplet and a singlet. - More like a Plossl.

In short, if you are wanting to try an Ortho in the classic sense, keep looking.

Back to top

#32 bayou sky

Lift Off

Posts: 23
Joined: 09 Mar 2014

Posted 22 April 2014 - 09:59 PM

Thanks

I thought so. I knew some of the orthos were two doublets under a volcano top' but did not know enough but did not know which ones.

I,ll keep looking

Back to top

#33 Traveler

Aurora

Posts: 4,765
Joined: 19 Aug 2007

Posted 23 April 2014 - 01:30 AM

Hi Vaidya,

I use an BGO 7mm in my A-P Traveler wich has almost the same specs as your CFF telescope. I use this ep when i want the last details out of the planets. This BGO can do that with my telescope and not only with the APO, it does a really good job in SCT's as well.

In a planet observing session i use first some TV Radian's for long periods of observing because of the bigger ER. When i have the details in my mind, then i take the BGO for a shorter time to squeeze the last details.

So Ortho's will work with your telescope. But they are not very comfortable for very long sessions imo.

How is your CFF doing btw?

Back to top

#34 Astrojensen

James Webb Space Telescope

Posts: 16,762
Joined: 05 Oct 2008

Posted 23 April 2014 - 03:57 AM

Orthos - the "buggy whips" of the eyepiece world. **** fine buggy whips they are, too. But who whips an automobile?

I sure would like to whip my car once in a while, when it acts up.

But I think the analogy is somewhat flawed. Orthos are still mighty fine eyepieces, even if more wide field designs exist. They are by no means made nearly useless by modern eyepieces, unlike the horse, which is not supported by modern infrastructure. I used orthos for much of my observing for many years and were perfectly happy with them. I now use wide-field designs for my deep-sky observing, but in my binoviewer, I still use narrow field eyepieces with the greatest possible image definition. I used to use UO orthos, but currently use 25mm Zeiss microscope eyepieces (a 1-2-1 König variety) and 40mm TS Superviews (probably plössls). I basically only use the 40mm TS Superviews because 40mm orthos were not available at the time I bought them. I am now looking into getting a pair of 32mm orthos.

Clear skies!
Thomas, Denmark

Back to top

#35 teelgul

Messenger

topic starter

Posts: 491
Joined: 02 Sep 2011

Posted 23 April 2014 - 05:48 AM

Thanks Patrick , for the info from you and all others. The makers of the scope
Suggested that I should also try some, orthos to get some perfect views.i think i will try the new Fujiyama orthos, of Japanese make but cheaper than Tak.
Yes the CFF is great, and stubby,but its heavier, than your AP, I feel.
Cheers
Vaidya

Back to top

#36 Fomalhaut

Surveyor 1

Posts: 1,764
Joined: 16 Aug 2008

Posted 23 April 2014 - 08:12 AM

For an F6, I would say no. It is a little too fast and the point of a fast scope is the wide field. Orthos have a narrow FOV. Orthos IMO are for long focal length scopes and planetary viewing. YMMV

For high powers on my FCT 100/640 Fluorite triplet, I'm exclusively using the Tak Hi-Orthos 4mm (160x) and 2.8mm (230x) with 0.96"-barrel.
Both are of 1-3--2 design (Ortho plus integrated matched Barlow or Smyth-lens). => In fact, the 1-3-part of the "2.8" is actually a 5mm and the "4" is a 7mm ortho, both including their own Barlow.

Orthos are especially good if used with scope focal-lengths longer than f/8 and that's exactly what these built-in Barlow/Smyth-lenses do for my f/6.4 relatively short-focus-apo! Additionally, they also prolong the eye-relief plus flatten the field => pinpoint stars to the edge.
These eyepieces were developped by Takahashi for providing comfortable high magnifications to their short-focus FCT apochromatic refractors.

On my own FCT, these have turned out to be much easier to use than good standard orthos and (thanks to the prolonged telescopic f.l.) optically at least the same good as any of them.

In good seeing, the 2.8-HiOr (230x) shows all of the Jovian's detail that's optically accessible to any 4-incher, and it does so to perfection: No loss of (even low contrast-) detail compared to 160x! - Well, also no real gain: Everything (not more and not less) that is visible at 160x can also be seen at 230x, but more extended and therefore a little easier.

My wonderful (though non-ortho) Pentax XO-5.1 OTOH, compared to these two and also in excellent seeing, cannot quite provide my eyes at mag 125x with the same information of Jovian surface Detail in the same scope. => This magnification seems just to be a bit below (Jovian) optimum, which I rather consider to be the HiOr-4's pupil-diameter of 0.63mm than the XO's 0.8mm.
For Saturn and Mars in excellent seeing, I prefer the 2.8mm (230x).

In bino-mode, planets appear definitely bigger than at same magnification in mono-mode. Therefore, with my TV-Binoview plus 2x Barlow/glasspath-corrector, I'm exclusively using two 9mm Volcano-Top-Orthos (Tani=U.O.). The resulting 142x (0.7mm) seems to be optimum for stereo-viewing Jupiter with this telescope.

Chris

Back to top

#37 azure1961p

Hubble

Posts: 14,330
Joined: 17 Jan 2009

Posted 23 April 2014 - 09:54 PM

I love my Orthos but in an f/10 sct and 8" f/9 newt and f6.8 refractor so I never deal with the demons faster scopes reveal. I will say you have to have the ortho mindset meaning - wide field is not on the table. Its not a Pentax with the sprawly view and some people MUST have or get bothered if its not there. I'm in the minority as I can take or leave UWA and so 45-50 degree apparent fields are fine.

Pete

Back to top

#38 Subaru45

Mariner 2

Posts: 272
Joined: 07 Mar 2013

Posted 23 April 2014 - 11:41 PM

Early this morning I saw an ad in the classifieds; OPTICA b/c OR 12.5mm for sale. I think I saw a reference to these eyepieces some months ago , but so far haven't been able to find anything in my search. Is there anyone out there who can refresh me on the OPTICA b/c line?

Back to top

#39 JustaBoy

Skylab

Posts: 4,356
Joined: 19 Jun 2012

Posted 23 April 2014 - 11:43 PM

It is like the older University Optics Volcano Top Orthos, a Circle-T, made by Tani in Japan.

A fine eyepiece - I have used them for 50yrs.

Back to top

#40 Subaru45

Mariner 2

Posts: 272
Joined: 07 Mar 2013

Posted 23 April 2014 - 11:50 PM

Thanks Chuck!

Richard

Back to top

#41 JustaBoy

Skylab

Posts: 4,356
Joined: 19 Jun 2012

Posted 23 April 2014 - 11:54 PM

No Problem, Richard...

Enjoy!

Back to top

#42 SandyHouTex

Cosmos

Posts: 8,906
Joined: 02 Jun 2009

Posted 24 April 2014 - 10:45 AM

I use orthos almost exclusively. I have a BGO set and a binoviewing set of the new Taks. The thing I like about them are that they are probably the best corrected eyepiece out there with no distortion.

Back to top

#43 bayou sky

Lift Off

Posts: 23
Joined: 09 Mar 2014

Posted 25 April 2014 - 03:05 PM

I took the advice of someone in another post and just ordered, from Agena Astro, the Baader Classic Ortho 6mm. Shipped it was $69 total (after I applied a $5 coupon Agena had given me from a previous purchase). I am looking for an eyepiece for more planetary detail at 200x. For the rare occasion when seeing is really good I can unscrew the bottom of my Orion 2x shorty barlow, screw it into the filter barrel of the baader ortho 6mm and get 300x as it will have a barlow effect of 1.5x. Since I do not wear eyeglasses while viewing the 4.8mm eye relief is do-able for me. My scope is an 8" XT8 Orion Dobs f/6 1200 FL.

Back to top

#44 penguinx64

Skylab

Posts: 4,144
Joined: 12 Nov 2013

Posted 25 April 2014 - 05:05 PM

The Baader Classic Orthos look good, but I wish they had more focal lengths available. How about a 24-25mm version? The 18mm version isn't low enough power for me.

Back to top

#45 Starman1

Stargeezer

Posts: 65,335
Joined: 23 Jun 2003

Posted 26 April 2014 - 12:25 AM

Near as I can tell, Abbe orthoscopic eyepieces come from:
Astro hutech
Baader planetarium
Carl Zeiss
Edmund
Fujiyama
Telescope Service
University optics
and if you count slightly modified versions of the above, also Harry Siebert and Takahashi (Hi-LE)

Back to top

#46 fjs

Cosmos

Posts: 8,287
Joined: 25 Mar 2013

Posted 26 April 2014 - 07:08 AM

Hi Don, Did you forget these?

Takahashi Abbe

Back to top

#47 bayou sky

Lift Off

Posts: 23
Joined: 09 Mar 2014

Posted 26 April 2014 - 08:38 AM

When I looked for orthos my highest price range was $70-$75. Due to my budget couldn't do the $100. Between the UO super abbe ortho shipped $69 and the baader classic ortho $74 shipped, the baader classic ortho got just a bit higher ratings from the various forum reviews etc.. I read. With my Agenda $5 coupon I got the baader classic for $69 shipped (same price as UO super abbe shipped) so the bladder classic won out in my view. wow..agenda is fast, choose free shipping' ordered about 12:15 PM PST Fri 4/25/14 it shipped same day USPS 1st class tracking shows expected delivery Monday 4/28/14. Kudos to agenda and the USPS..