125 replies to this topic

[Sarkikos]

I'm waiting for the 1.6mm Ethos-SX.  My Dob doesn't track!

 

Mike

[Sarkikos]

Available now in Italy:  http://www.skypoint....resolution.html  ... the 1.6 Vixen HR, not the 1.6 Ethos!

 

Mike

Edited by Sarkikos, 14 March 2016 - 11:31 AM.

[faackanders2]

I'm waiting for the 1.6mm Ethos-SX.  My Dob doesn't track!

 

Mike

Powermate the 3.5mm 110 AFOV Ethos.

[Sarkikos]

I try to avoid long cantilevers. https://www.google.c...long cantilever

 

Mike

[Sarkikos]

Well, I just ordered the 1.6mm Vixen HR ... not from Italy, but from EyepiecesEtc. 

 

I got tired of waiting for the 1.6mm Ethos-SX!

 

Mike

Edited by Sarkikos, 16 March 2016 - 02:00 PM.

[Sarkikos]

I'm thinking of setting up the 1.6 Vixen HR with three other eyepieces in a Baader turret. Maybe these:

 

1.6 Vixen HR

2.58 XO

5.8 XO

24 AT Illuminated Reticle eyepiece

 

The reticle eyepiece is to bring the object into position, initially and also if I lose the object while viewing.  Most of my scopes do not track!

 

Mike

[Starman1]

For a 1.6mm eyepiece with a 42° field, be sure to work on your axis motions to make tracking as smooth as possible.

You have a lot of scopes to test that, though.

[Sarkikos]

Anyone know the field stop measurements of the Vixen HR's?

 

Mike

Edited by Sarkikos, 18 March 2016 - 10:41 AM.

[Sarkikos]

Here's a website with info on the Vixen HR eyepieces, mostly translated from German:  http://www.vixen-ast...ten/hr-okulare/  (The English translation button did not work for the link in the OP.)

 

Mike

Edited by Sarkikos, 18 March 2016 - 10:55 AM.

[Sarkikos]

Opinions from the StarGazers Lounge ...  https://stargazerslo...ower-eyepieces/

 

All the following opinions are about the 1.6mm Vixen HR:

 

"Will you be able to see anything at all through that tiny lens though?"

 

"On my tv60 ... 225x is definitely beyond the limits of what one would consider acceptable image brightness.. It seems a crazy plan to me.."

 

"Anyone know the japanese for microscope ?"

 

"I am sure floater will be a problem for many people using focal lengths this short."  Well, yes, that's why I would never use one for Moon viewing.

 

"They've certainly lost me as a potential customer. I'm looking for longer FL's, not ridiculously short FL's."

 

"I can't imagine anyone using focal lengths this short though."

 

"I can't imagine a situation where I would want these EP's? If I was Vixen I wouldn't bother manufacturing too many of the 1.6mm."

 

"Floaters would definitely be an issue for me - I had a 2.5mm Nagler for a short while. Fine eyepiece but 'floater ****' when I used it to view the Moon."  True.  Again, not the best choices for looking at the Moon.

 

"I looked through the 1.6mm and it was rather 'dark.'"

 

Mike

Edited by Sarkikos, 18 March 2016 - 11:13 AM.

[Sarkikos]

If the posts at StarGazers Lounge are any indication of the general astronomy community, I'm glad I ordered a 1.6mm while they are still available.   Not because they will be a popular item and sell out quickly, but because most amateur astronomers will not buy them and Vixen will stop production!  

 

Mike

Edited by Sarkikos, 18 March 2016 - 11:01 AM.

[Sarkikos]

The Vixen HR eyepieces will be the subject of an upcoming issue of Astronomy Now. 

 

http://neilenglish.n...roduct-reviews/

 

Mike

Edited by Sarkikos, 18 March 2016 - 11:19 AM.

[Starman1]

Anyone know the field stop measurements of the Vixen HR's?

 

Mike

Even the Japanese site doesn't list that data, but I have calculated:

1.1mm Field stop in 1.6mm

1.4mm field stop in 2.0mm

1.7mm field stop in 2.4mm

[Sarkikos]

Thanks, Don.

 

Mike

[Astrojensen]

Opinions from the StarGazers Lounge ...  https://stargazerslo...ower-eyepieces/

 

All the following opinions are about the 1.6mm Vixen HR:

 

"Will you be able to see anything at all through that tiny lens though?"

 

"On my tv60 ... 225x is definitely beyond the limits of what one would consider acceptable image brightness.. It seems a crazy plan to me.."

 

"Anyone know the japanese for microscope ?"

 

"I am sure floater will be a problem for many people using focal lengths this short."  Well, yes, that's why I would never use one for Moon viewing.

 

"They've certainly lost me as a potential customer. I'm looking for longer FL's, not ridiculously short FL's."

 

"I can't imagine anyone using focal lengths this short though."

 

"I can't imagine a situation where I would want these EP's? If I was Vixen I wouldn't bother manufacturing too many of the 1.6mm."

 

"Floaters would definitely be an issue for me - I had a 2.5mm Nagler for a short while. Fine eyepiece but 'floater ****' when I used it to view the Moon."  True.  Again, not the best choices for looking at the Moon.

 

"I looked through the 1.6mm and it was rather 'dark.'"

 

Mike

I've used my 63mm Zeiss at 380x on more than a few occasions. Not for lunar-planetary, but for double stars and bright planetary nebulae. There floaters don't matter. In the case of doubles, the image is still plenty bright, unless you've chosen a dim star. On planetary nebulae, you use averted vision anyway. 

 

One thing bugs me with these new Vixen eyepieces, though: Their narrow field of view. I've found that at ultra high magnification, a pretty wide apparent field of view is a huge advantage, as you're not as likely to lose the object, if you bump the scope slightly. It's also easier to look through the eyepiece at very high magnification, if it has a decent size eye lens and eye relief. I find my 4.7mm ES82 to be an utterly amazing eyepiece for ultra high magnifications on long focal ratio scopes, also barlowed. They should make 3.5mm and 2.5mm versions as well. I'd totally buy them. 

 

 

Clear skies!

Thomas, Denmark

[Sarkikos]

The hyper-wide AFOV at high power is exactly why I kept the 3.7mm Ethos-SX 110 degree, while I let all my other 100+ degree eyepieces go.  I did say I was waiting for a 1.6mm Ethos.

 

Mike

[Astrojensen]

Methinks you must prepare to be patient...   

 

 

Clear skies!

Thomas, Denmark

[Starman1]

Or add a 2X 2" PowerMate to the ensemble.

That turns the 3.7mm into a 1.85mm.

(assuming the 3.7 is actually 3.7 and not something else just rounded off).

Since my lifetime best image of Jupiter was with a PowerMate and an 8mm Ethos, I can assure you it's quite transparent in use.

Doubles your eyepiece collection, too.

[Tamiji Homma]

The Field Stop is very "Pentax XO" like!

 

Mike

 

I came across an interesting post in Japanese web site.  The person speculated that Vixen HR was designed by ex-Pentax engineer(s) who joined Vixen (after Ricoh took over Pentax), and designed to work well with Vixen astrograph VSD 100 f/3.8.  It could be true but I don't know how the person knows that.  I haven't found any first light report yet but it seems that build quality is very high from the report who bought HR 2.4mm eyepiece.  It would need super stable seeing...

 

From Japanese Vixen web site, it implies that HR eyepiece is designed to be fast Newtonian coma correcting eyepiece.  I don't know how it works well for refractor.

 

2.0mm and 1.6mm are too short for me but it is interesting to see how it compares HR 2.4 to XO 2.58.

 

Tammy

[Sarkikos]

Or add a 2X 2" PowerMate to the ensemble.

That turns the 3.7mm into a 1.85mm.

(assuming the 3.7 is actually 3.7 and not something else just rounded off).

Since my lifetime best image of Jupiter was with a PowerMate and an 8mm Ethos, I can assure you it's quite transparent in use.

Doubles your eyepiece collection, too.

 

Long heavy cantilever.  I try to avoid them.  https://www.google.c...ever structures

 

In general, I don't like fiddling with Barlows.  I'd rather have a separate eyepiece with the native focal length  - or range of focal lengths for a zoom - that I want.  Yes, I know that the shorter focal length eyepieces often have the equivalent of a Barlow built-in.  But at least I don't have to fiddle with a Barlow.

 

On the other hand, I have two Baader Zooms.  I keep a Baader 2.25x Barlow on one of them all the time.  It's so small, though, that it doesn't add much to the length.  I put a 2" format extension over it as a protective cover, which also allows use in 2" focusers without an adapter.  The 2" extension goes literally over the 2.25x Barlow, so only adds few more millimeters to the length.

 

Of course the easiest way to double or trouble your effective eyepiece collection, without doubling or tripling your actual eyepieces, is to use zooms.

 

Mike

Edited by Sarkikos, 20 March 2016 - 01:55 PM.

[Sasa]

I've used my 63mm Zeiss at 380x on more than a few occasions. Not for lunar-planetary, but for double stars and bright planetary nebulae. There floaters don't matter. In the case of doubles, the image is still plenty bright, unless you've chosen a dim star. On planetary nebulae, you use averted vision anyway. 

 

One thing bugs me with these new Vixen eyepieces, though: Their narrow field of view. I've found that at ultra high magnification, a pretty wide apparent field of view is a huge advantage, as you're not as likely to lose the object, if you bump the scope slightly. It's also easier to look through the eyepiece at very high magnification, if it has a decent size eye lens and eye relief. I find my 4.7mm ES82 to be an utterly amazing eyepiece for ultra high magnifications on long focal ratio scopes, also barlowed. They should make 3.5mm and 2.5mm versions as well. I'd totally buy them. 

 

 

Clear skies!

Thomas, Denmark

 

 

I'm using Pentax XO2.5 regularly even with my 82mm f/20 refractor (for planetary nebulae as well), here it provides 650x. It has similar FOV as new Vixen line. Add non-existing eye relief to the list of pleasures. Completely agree with Thomas. Using such eyepiece with narrow FOV is not easy, especially if you are using alt-az mount. I don't know how many times I lost target simply because there were no stars and it was not easy even to know if I was looking into the eyepiece or not (as the field is too dark and eye lens too small). Greater FOV definitely helps, to get to high mags on alt-az mount or undriven equatorial mount, I used more often Pentax XF8.5 (60deg, 20mm eye relief) combined with one or two barlows (on planetary nebulae at this magnification it is not about the optical quality of the chain, it is about getting right scale to notice something with averted vision).

 

Using such eyepiece on driven equatorial mount is not easy neither but much more doable. It is pain if I put this long refractor on my Zeiss 1b Mount on backyard. Much easier, if I mount the refractor on Fornax50 in my observatory...

 

For more regular view, I see this eyepieces as very special and dedicated basically to observing Mars (and Moon) in small and short, f/5-f/6 apochromats, where you can push the observation up to 3D magnification still with some benefit (at least for my seeing in 80mm diameter). Four days ago, I was watching Moon with Pentax XO2.5, the views through Baader 95/560mm were still very beautiful. For larger telescopes (Dobson, large apochromats, etc.), I don't really experience a seeing that would allow to push such telescope to 3D with benefit.

Edited by Sasa, 21 March 2016 - 04:37 AM.

[junomike]

 

The Field Stop is very "Pentax XO" like!

 

Mike

 

I came across an interesting post in Japanese web site.  The person speculated that Vixen HR was designed by ex-Pentax engineer(s) who joined Vixen (after Ricoh took over Pentax), and designed to work well with Vixen astrograph VSD 100 f/3.8.  It could be true but I don't know how the person knows that.  I haven't found any first light report yet but it seems that build quality is very high from the report who bought HR 2.4mm eyepiece.  It would need super stable seeing...

 

From Japanese Vixen web site, it implies that HR eyepiece is designed to be fast Newtonian coma correcting eyepiece.  I don't know how it works well for refractor.

 

2.0mm and 1.6mm are too short for me but it is interesting to see how it compares HR 2.4 to XO 2.58.

 

Tammy

 

Now that is interesting!

If you're gonna do the comparison be sure to report back ASAP..

 

Mike

[Sarkikos]

 

I'm using Pentax XO2.5 regularly even with my 82mm f/20 refractor (for planetary nebulae as well), here it provides 650x. It has similar FOV as new Vixen line. Add non-existing eye relief to the list of pleasures. Completely agree with Thomas. Using such eyepiece with narrow FOV is not easy, especially if you are using alt-az mount. I don't know how many times I lost target simply because there were no stars and it was not easy even to know if I was looking into the eyepiece or not (as the field is too dark and eye lens too small). Greater FOV definitely helps

 

This is a primary reason why I was thinking of using the 1.6mm Vixen HR in tandem with other eyepieces in a turret, besides having a selection of focal lengths to accommodate the seeing.  If you lose the object in the 1.6mm, just turn the turret to a wide field eyepiece so you can reposition the object.  It would probably be a good idea to include a small, low power eyepiece with crosshairs.   That would make it even easier to regain the target.

 

Mike

Edited by Sarkikos, 21 March 2016 - 04:39 PM.

[skullpin]

If you lose the object in the 1.6mm, just turn the turret to a wide field eyepiece so you can reposition the object.  It would probably be a good idea to include a small, low power eyepiece with crosshairs.   That would make it even easier to regain the target.

 

Mike

 

 

YES.... a turret actually makes my Pentax 2.5 XO useable on a manual alt-az mount. I hardly used that eyepiece before I got a Tak Turret as the object would be long gone within the time to change eyepieces. Now, I center with a Nagler 3.5 and then switch in the XO in an instant and it is worth it (sometimes, seeing admitting).

 

Keith

[Sasa]

For me, it helps that XO2.5 is parfocal with XO5 (well almost...)