Jump to content

  •  

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.

Photo

Celestron Luminnos eyepiece, 31mm is a pain

  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#26 MrJones

MrJones

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2436
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Indiana

Posted 02 July 2015 - 11:11 AM

Every Nagler-type 82 degree eyepiece I've used including Naglers, Meade UWAs, Luminos and ES 82 clones have the tricky eye placement issue. Some are better, some are worse. Interesting how the 100 degree "tall" eyepieces like Ethos are less finicky in this regard.

 

As for Nagler 31mm vs the clones, the Nagler uses "four exotic glasses." Do the clones? Probably not.

 

I recently rebought a 31mm Luminos. I liked the views the first time but decided it was too big and got a 26mmT5 instead. Then Usquebae mentioned the decloaking and one came up cheap ... The decloaking is easy and wow as you can see in the photo with the slim decloaked Luminos in the middle and shroud on it's left.

 

I am using an Agena 40mm eyecup http://goo.gl/BZhgTq upside down for now. A standard 2" cover fits well on the top (not shown). If they get the 48mm back in stock that would probably be ideal.

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

  • fat2.jpg

  • Scanning4Comets and rowdy388 like this

#27 Peter Besenbruch

Peter Besenbruch

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7011
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2014
  • Loc: Oahu

Posted 02 July 2015 - 03:13 PM

I recently rebought a 31mm Luminos. I liked the views the first time but decided it was too big and got a 26mmT5 instead. Then Usquebae mentioned the decloaking and one came up cheap ... The decloaking is easy and wow as you can see in the photo with the slim decloaked Luminos in the middle and shroud on it's left.

 

I am using an Agena 40mm eyecup http://goo.gl/BZhgTq upside down for now. A standard 2" cover fits well on the top (not shown). If they get the 48mm back in stock that would probably be ideal.

 

I'm sorry, but it still looks beefy. ;) I like your eye cup solution. I hope it works well.


Edited by Peter Besenbruch, 02 July 2015 - 09:08 PM.


#28 Herr Ointment

Herr Ointment

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9769
  • Joined: 12 Mar 2011
  • Loc: North of 64

Posted 02 July 2015 - 05:31 PM

I'd call it porky myself.....
 
5442055-GEDC0012.JPG

  • MrJones and Usquebae like this

#29 Usquebae

Usquebae

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 828
  • Joined: 11 Jun 2013
  • Loc: 43° N, 73° W

Posted 02 July 2015 - 06:22 PM

Are you collecting ham cans, too, or just Axiom shells?  :grin:



#30 Herr Ointment

Herr Ointment

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9769
  • Joined: 12 Mar 2011
  • Loc: North of 64

Posted 03 July 2015 - 11:23 AM

Axiom/Luminos 23mm and 31mm shells.....making a counterweight set for a nice eq mount I picked up.

 

If anybody has shells they don't want shoot me a PM.



#31 suvowner

suvowner

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 366
  • Joined: 22 May 2016
  • Loc: Arkansas

Posted 08 June 2016 - 08:53 AM

I picked up a 31mm luminous, despite some of the comments, I think it is just beautiful looking through my cpc edge hd 8"....the moon perfectly filled the entire field of view and was tack sharp, the craters looked like I could reach out and touch them...star fields were tack sharp in the center and almost perfect to the edges, I didn't notice any significant eof brightness........therefore I suspect there may be some variance in the quality of this eyepiece, it feels like a large and heavy grenade in your hand, and it would be easy to drop and damage I suspect, and I also suspect it must be tuned a bit to work will in the edge hd scopes....so for me it is definitely a keeper.....



#32 Scanning4Comets

Scanning4Comets

    Markus, a.k.a. Scanning4Comets

  • *****
  • Posts: 17938
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2004

Posted 08 June 2016 - 09:02 AM

I tried the 31mm in a friends scope. He said "Hey Mark, come check this out"....He never told me what it was, but eye placement was crazy hard to get right. When I went in closer to see the field stop, kidney beaning was horrendous. When I backed off to stop this from happening, I couldn't see the field stop at all. It was the worst eyepiece ever for that problem. I don't think a rubber eyecup can cure it. :lol:


Edited by Cygnus2112, 08 June 2016 - 09:03 AM.


#33 junomike

junomike

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 16811
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Ontario

Posted 08 June 2016 - 01:27 PM

I picked up a 31mm luminous, despite some of the comments, I think it is just beautiful looking through my cpc edge hd 8"....the moon perfectly filled the entire field of view and was tack sharp, the craters looked like I could reach out and touch them...star fields were tack sharp in the center and almost perfect to the edges, I didn't notice any significant eof brightness........therefore I suspect there may be some variance in the quality of this eyepiece, it feels like a large and heavy grenade in your hand, and it would be easy to drop and damage I suspect, and I also suspect it must be tuned a bit to work will in the edge hd scopes....so for me it is definitely a keeper.....

That's great that you like it, but there's no variance in characteristics IMO.

 

Mike


  • Scanning4Comets likes this

#34 suvowner

suvowner

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 366
  • Joined: 22 May 2016
  • Loc: Arkansas

Posted 08 June 2016 - 02:02 PM

 

I picked up a 31mm luminous, despite some of the comments, I think it is just beautiful looking through my cpc edge hd 8"....the moon perfectly filled the entire field of view and was tack sharp, the craters looked like I could reach out and touch them...star fields were tack sharp in the center and almost perfect to the edges, I didn't notice any significant eof brightness........therefore I suspect there may be some variance in the quality of this eyepiece, it feels like a large and heavy grenade in your hand, and it would be easy to drop and damage I suspect, and I also suspect it must be tuned a bit to work will in the edge hd scopes....so for me it is definitely a keeper.....

That's great that you like it, but there's no variance in characteristics IMO.

 

Mike

 

 

yep, who really knows unless you sample atleast a few hundred copies and measure performance on each one, otherwise just speculation......I am just speculating as well that a large piece of glass like this at its price range probably can't have premium quality control, and might be somewhat susceptible to good and bad copies, I seem to have either gotten a good copy, or it just really likes my edge hd 8" scope, or my eyes are worse than I realize......but I am generally happy with canon zoom L glass, and 800-1200 dollar range binoculars and riflescopes, you can double or triple the price and get a tad better image quality, just the way some of the comments read it was going to be the most awful thing i had ever looked through, and it wasn't, so thought it might be helpful for other readers to know my experience...




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.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics