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

Morpheus. Ugliest eyepieces I think I've ever seen

This topic has been archived.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

#51 jackofalltrades

jackofalltrades

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,015
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2014

Posted 24 August 2015 - 02:42 PM

They all look the same in the dark...



#52 Meadeball

Meadeball

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,572
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012

Posted 24 August 2015 - 03:12 PM

Must be quite an oversupply of http://img.hisupplie..._Drainage_s.jpg in the market!

 

:lol:


Edited by Meadeball, 24 August 2015 - 03:13 PM.


#53 Meadeball

Meadeball

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,572
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012

Posted 24 August 2015 - 03:28 PM

I have figured out a way to make the Morpheus look better. Put it up next to this eyepiece: Celestron Ultima Duo

 

I understand Celestron's got a 1mm version in the works ...

 

gallery_213382_4494_50061.jpg

Edited by Meadeball, 24 August 2015 - 03:30 PM.


#54 Scanning4Comets

Scanning4Comets

    Markus, a.k.a. Scanning4Comets

  • *****
  • Posts: 17,938
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2004

Posted 24 August 2015 - 04:54 PM

:lol: :roflmao:



#55 Scanning4Comets

Scanning4Comets

    Markus, a.k.a. Scanning4Comets

  • *****
  • Posts: 17,938
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2004

Posted 24 August 2015 - 04:56 PM

I found this one ugly too.....but I was able to strip the ugly from it.

 

What are these designers thinking???? :lol:


Edited by Scanning4Comets, 24 August 2015 - 04:56 PM.


#56 Scanning4Comets

Scanning4Comets

    Markus, a.k.a. Scanning4Comets

  • *****
  • Posts: 17,938
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2004

Posted 24 August 2015 - 04:58 PM

Did the same to the 17mm Uglima LX....



#57 MortonH

MortonH

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,033
  • Joined: 12 May 2007

Posted 24 August 2015 - 05:58 PM

Did the same to the 17mm Uglima LX....

 
Looks much better that way. Kinda like a Hallowe'en Plossl on steroids.


#58 Meadeball

Meadeball

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,572
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012

Posted 24 August 2015 - 06:10 PM

Well, unlike the EP that's the subject of this thread, at least the Ultima's curves have functionality. That EP, as produced, would be hard to drop wearing gloves.



#59 Scanning4Comets

Scanning4Comets

    Markus, a.k.a. Scanning4Comets

  • *****
  • Posts: 17,938
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2004

Posted 24 August 2015 - 07:11 PM

Well, unlike the EP that's the subject of this thread, at least the Ultima's curves have functionality. That EP, as produced, would be hard to drop wearing gloves.

In my 30+ years of observing, I have never dropped an eyepiece with or without gloves on...You either hold it, (curves or no curves), or you don't. :lol: Some have been less fortunate I guess.

 

The only positive function coming from the ugly rubber on the Ultima LX is laying them sideways...... they won't roll.

 

I never lay my eyepieces sideways. They go right back in my case, (when it is quite cold or very "dewy" out), or they go right side up in my eyepiece rack I made myself. I think 95% of people put their eyepieces right side up.

 

CS!


Edited by Scanning4Comets, 24 August 2015 - 07:18 PM.


#60 A6Q6

A6Q6

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,200
  • Joined: 31 May 2011

Posted 24 August 2015 - 08:16 PM

 

Well, unlike the EP that's the subject of this thread, at least the Ultima's curves have functionality. That EP, as produced, would be hard to drop wearing gloves.

In my 30+ years of observing, I have never dropped an eyepiece with or without gloves on..


 

:bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow:



#61 Meadeball

Meadeball

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,572
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012

Posted 24 August 2015 - 08:50 PM

Granted. Me neither, thankfully.

 

But in my 40 years of observing I've come to appreciate the little touches (most of them, anyway) that they've started putting on eyepieces.

 

I have a 40-year-old UO eyepiece that has only a metal housing (no rubber grip) and the "fluting" is counterproductively vertical instead of horizontal; I much prefer the raised rubber bumps on the grip of a Meade Plossl (to compare eyepieces of similar cost). I also really appreciate the reverse taper on the barrels of my Zhumell eyepieces which helps prevent them from falling out of the focuser too. (Not that I've ever had that happen -- but I've worried about it when I've rotated my refractor around on its EQ mount to find the diagonal pointing straight down with an expensive eyepiece looking at the ground. You didn't see tapered barrels 40 years ago. Most eyepieces of the '60s and '70s didn't have eyecups either, and I don't think many astronomers are cursing them as unnecessary frills.

 

Granted, some of the newer designs may take ergonomics to an extreme, but for the most part -- with possibly the exception of the "styling" on the EP at the subject of this thread, lol -- the changes are usually functional in one way or another.



#62 GeneT

GeneT

    Ely Kid

  • *****
  • Posts: 16,035
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008

Posted 24 August 2015 - 09:18 PM

I enjoyed reading BillP's review & I appreciated his or anyone who takes the time to review astro gear. Anyone that makes a review also opens himself to a lot of scrutiny as some people will dissect  & nitpick about every single word, comma,& nuance. I also like to hear from many reviews from the CN community. I certainly don't take any single review as gospel. As far as wagering Ben Franklins, wager all you want, its your money. Personally, the only one I bet on is myself. In the end, the only way I'll know for sure is to try one for myself. Clear skies, Doug

 

True. I wish there was enough profit for a qualified testing lab to give us some scientific findings (There isn't). There are some competent, fair CN reviewers like BillP and DonP, but an independent laboratory would give some scientific analysis to go along with the subjective observations now provided.     



#63 dotnet

dotnet

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 393
  • Joined: 27 Jun 2013

Posted 24 August 2015 - 11:23 PM

If eyepieces were required to be pretty then this wouldn't exist:

 

EP_EN5-31.0.jpg

 

And don't get me started on this (what were they thinking?):

 

EP_ETH-04.7.jpg

 

:foreheadslap:



#64 SStoffer

SStoffer

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 233
  • Joined: 15 Apr 2011

Posted 25 August 2015 - 01:24 AM

Some of the replies here are funny, but to me eyepieces are to look through not gaze upon. I have many of  the Celestron Ultima LX eyepieces that so many people think on this forum are ugly. But I don't care one bit how they look but how well they work. So far I love them all, except I am getting tired of the fuzzy edge of field look through the 32 mm.

 

Let's give Morpheus a chance I may be in the marketplace for a new ocular soon. I am curious to see how these will compare to Televue's Delos.

 

 

-Stephen 



#65 SStoffer

SStoffer

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 233
  • Joined: 15 Apr 2011

Posted 25 August 2015 - 01:45 AM

If these sell well than what is the point of buying the Vixen Lanthanum LVW's. Sixy five degree field versus seventy six for about the same price. I would like to see a comparison between these two. 

 

-Stephen



#66 Meadeball

Meadeball

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,572
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012

Posted 25 August 2015 - 04:10 AM

If eyepieces were required to be pretty then this wouldn't exist:

 

EP_EN5-31.0.jpg

 

Here's a rare shot of the Tele Vue guys building a new eyepiece for the Hubble ...


Edited by Meadeball, 25 August 2015 - 04:13 AM.


#67 precaud

precaud

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,010
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2012

Posted 25 August 2015 - 07:37 AM

Looking forward to seeing these appear on the used market... prices should be really good as visually-repulsed owners sell them in disgust...  :)



#68 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 50,343
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003

Posted 25 August 2015 - 09:19 AM

If these sell well than what is the point of buying the Vixen Lanthanum LVW's. Sixy five degree field versus seventy six for about the same price. I would like to see a comparison between these two. 

 

-Stephen

I can do that when the Morpheus come in.  



#69 Roragi

Roragi

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 680
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2013

Posted 25 August 2015 - 09:20 AM

As we say in my country, it is uglier than sending a grandfather for drugs.

 

 

Roberto.



#70 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 50,343
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003

Posted 25 August 2015 - 09:21 AM

 

If eyepieces were required to be pretty then this wouldn't exist:

 

EP_EN5-31.0.jpg

 

Here's a rare shot of the Tele Vue guys building a new eyepiece for the Hubble ...

 

No, that's for the 100 meter telescope. ;)



#71 paradise

paradise

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 553
  • Joined: 06 Nov 2014

Posted 25 August 2015 - 09:22 AM

 

I have figured out a way to make the Morpheus look better. Put it up next to this eyepiece: Celestron Ultima Duo

 

I understand Celestron's got a 1mm version in the works ...

 

gallery_213382_4494_50061.jpg

 

A **** toy ?? :lol:



#72 precaud

precaud

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,010
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2012

Posted 25 August 2015 - 10:33 AM

 

I have figured out a way to make the Morpheus look better. Put it up next to this eyepiece: Celestron Ultima Duo

 

I understand Celestron's got a 1mm version in the works ...

 

gallery_213382_4494_50061.jpg

 

 

Maybe this is a better visual acuity test than the "color-difference" one. I see five segments spliced in.  :)



#73 ibase

ibase

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,826
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2008

Posted 25 August 2015 - 12:39 PM



I don't get the obsession with how these things look, either. It's night. When I'm using an eyepiece, my main concern is how good the view is, not what the eyepiece looks like. Besides, maybe it's just me, but I don't think they look that bad. As to the eyelash oil comment, these are long eyerelief eyepieces so, unless you have some absurdly long eyelashes, they shouldn't be touching the eyelens.

 

Anyway, from first reports, they sound like potentially nice eyepieces to look through. If I needed more eyepieces, I think I'd be interested in giving one a try, goofy appearance or not.

 

John

+1, they sure don't look that bad at all.

 

Best,



#74 Scanning4Comets

Scanning4Comets

    Markus, a.k.a. Scanning4Comets

  • *****
  • Posts: 17,938
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2004

Posted 25 August 2015 - 04:58 PM

I agree.....The Morpheus don't look bad at all IMHO.



#75 rogan

rogan

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 563
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2015

Posted 25 August 2015 - 05:26 PM

If the Morpheus ends up being the next best thing you will have makers copying the look. Until the next next best thing...

Pretty is as...well...you know the rest.


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