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

ES 82 Vs. Meade series 5000 Ultra Wide 82 eyepieces

  • Please log in to reply
73 replies to this topic

#1 aeajr

aeajr

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 12343
  • Joined: 26 Jun 2015
  • Loc: Long Island, New York, USA

Posted 13 April 2017 - 01:22 PM

I have read a LOT about the Explore Scientific 82 degree line.  I have the 8.8 and the 6.7 and like them very much.

 

I wanted something around 5 or 5.5 for my XT8i as my 4.5/266X Meade HD60 gets very little use.  I typically don't have conditions to support that high magnification.  So I wanted something closer to 220X but ES doesn't offer an 82 at 5.5.   As my XT8i is manual tracking I prefer the wider AFOV in the higher magnifications.  Above 10mm I typically use a Celestron or Baader Hyperion Zoom.      And my GoTo scopes track so they really don't need the wide AFOV.

 

 

I was at NEAF and saw the Meade Series 5000 ultra wide angle 5.5.   Did a quick look up and it seemed to get very good reviews so I purchase it at a show price 10% discount with tax included.   Not a bad deal.

http://agenaastro.co...f-eyepiece.html

 

Got it home and had 2 opportunities to use this on Jupiter.   I like it a lot.  Seems every bit as good as the ES 82s.

 

 

I am not sufficiently experienced or knowledgeable about eyepieces to provide a detailed review other than to say I am happy with my purchase.  But I would like to see what other people think about the Meade line, especially compared to the ES 82.  

 

The Meade are a bit lower in cost at regular price.  $129 vs $149 typically.  They seem like a better value to me.   But I don't see them mentioned very often.

 

 

What is your opinion?

 

 

And what of the Celestron Luminos 82 degree? They are typically around $100, which is lower than ES or Mead. Do they compare well to these two?   Could they all be the same glass under a different label?  They are all 7 element designs.

 

 

Inquiring minds and a straining wallet want to know.


Edited by aeajr, 13 April 2017 - 01:37 PM.

  • BFaucett, Slashzero and JB103 like this

#2 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 42025
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 13 April 2017 - 03:08 PM

Explore Scientific eyepieces are made by Jing Hua Optical, or JOC.

Meade Series 5000 UWA eyepieces were made by JOC prior to 2011.

Since 2012, they have been made by someone else.  I have an idea who, because their Series 6000 scopes are from KUO, but I am not sure.

There are many companies in China that make eyepieces.

The Celestron Luminos is also not from JOC, but whether it is from the same company Meade is now using, I cannot say.

The optical characteristics and focal lengths are different, as well as pricing, so it's unlikely they are from either JOC or Meade's new company.


  • CeleNoptic, mark379, aeajr and 1 other like this

#3 tony_spina

tony_spina

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2557
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2004
  • Loc: So. Cal.

Posted 13 April 2017 - 03:33 PM

Ed,

I have the Meade 5.5mm and 8.8mm. The 5.5mm is exceptional optically and in comfort. Much better than the ES. If you do a search on the Meade 5.5 you will see many post praising this hidden gem. Truly a bang for your buck.

The 8.8mm is very good also, but not as good as the 5.5mm. I would say it is on par with the ES

 

As for the Luminos. I had the 10mm, and 15mm. They are good in slower scopes. In an f/5 you can tell that these are not premium eyepieces. The ES 82s are better performing, especially at the edges


  • CeleNoptic, BFaucett, aeajr and 2 others like this

#4 rowdy388

rowdy388

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3400
  • Joined: 09 Apr 2013
  • Loc: Saratoga County, NY

Posted 13 April 2017 - 03:46 PM

I have the Meade 5.5 and ES 6.7. Optically they may be of similar quality

but I find the Meade to have a little more eye relief and much more

comfortable. The entire field of view is easier to see in the Meade as

well. I use it much more often than the ES 6.7.


  • BFaucett and aeajr like this

#5 aeajr

aeajr

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 12343
  • Joined: 26 Jun 2015
  • Loc: Long Island, New York, USA

Posted 13 April 2017 - 04:23 PM

Thanks guys.   With only two uses of the Meade 5.5 I was very impressed.   Now I am begining to believe that the eyepiece is as good as I thought.

 

Appreciate the feedback on this and the Celestron.



#6 Tank

Tank

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3921
  • Joined: 27 Jul 2009
  • Loc: Stoney Creek, Ontario, CANADA

Posted 13 April 2017 - 08:23 PM

yes the meade 5.5 is the gem of the 5000 uwa

i think its better than the es 82 4.7 and 6.7

however all the rest of the FLs i prefer the es 82


  • aeajr and nicoledoula like this

#7 Z10junky

Z10junky

    Lift Off

  • *****
  • Posts: 21
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2017

Posted 14 April 2017 - 10:46 PM

My Meade uwa 5.5 and 8.8 are great little eyepieces, very comfortable and sharp. The 14mm however was field curvature disaster and was returned after trying it in my f5 dob.
  • skiiman10, BFaucett and aeajr like this

#8 REC

REC

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11335
  • Joined: 20 Oct 2010
  • Loc: NC

Posted 16 April 2017 - 10:22 AM

Thanks guys.   With only two uses of the Meade 5.5 I was very impressed.   Now I am begining to believe that the eyepiece is as good as I thought.

 

Appreciate the feedback on this and the Celestron.

Hearing great praises on the 5.5mm and need to get one in the future. Right now, the ES 6.7 is the highest power I use in my C102 for 150x for the moon and planets. I haven't tried it in my 10" f/1250 dob yet. Too much power for my 8" SCT, for that I use the ES 8.8.



#9 starbase25

starbase25

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1453
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2014

Posted 16 April 2017 - 01:07 PM

The 5.5mm is in a class all it's own. The others are just the same old ones in waterproof clothing. But, if I had to choose, I would take the 8.8mm in the Meade 5000 over the ES. Both the Meade 5000 14mm and ES 14mm 82's are plagued with field curvature.


Edited by starbase25, 16 April 2017 - 01:10 PM.

  • BFaucett and aeajr like this

#10 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 42025
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 16 April 2017 - 01:10 PM

Since they all come from a different company, now, it is possible the internal designs differ from what Meade offered before 2012.


  • aeajr likes this

#11 EddWar

EddWar

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 8
  • Joined: 22 Feb 2017

Posted 17 April 2017 - 10:46 AM

And what about the Meade 20mm?


  • stargazer193857 likes this

#12 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 42025
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 17 April 2017 - 12:27 PM

All the 82° series comes from a different company than they did back then.

If you mean a review of how the 20mm works, I'll leave that to others.



#13 Tyson M

Tyson M

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3403
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2015
  • Loc: 53 degrees North

Posted 17 April 2017 - 10:38 PM

I have the Meade 20mm SWA and it's very good.

 

22762437818_67d32d27d1_k.jpgIMG_20161112_122749 by SolarT RM, on Flickr

 

A tiny bit of FC I noticed in my 10" ACF F10, which is because it is an SCT.

 

I haven't really noticed FC with the Equinox 80mm F6.25 refractor yet. So that's a good sign. 

 

It is my 3rd most used EP, behind the 13mm and 31 mm Nagler.

 

I am really happy with it overall, and would only replace it to get a quality eyepiece in the 17mm range.

Like the Delos or Ethos, and only because it is too similar to my 31mm nagler and want to go a bit deeper with mag.  

But for the price, I am not complaining and not in any hurry to get rid of it.

It frames the entire full moon with the 10" Meade which is stunning to observe!


  • Slashzero likes this

#14 csrlice12

csrlice12

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 24393
  • Joined: 22 May 2012
  • Loc: Denver, CO

Posted 17 April 2017 - 10:47 PM

Where on the cat do you stick it?


  • Peter Besenbruch and selfo like this

#15 airbleeder

airbleeder

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1410
  • Joined: 04 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Powder Springs, Georgia

Posted 17 April 2017 - 11:23 PM

   I have no experience with the Meade 5000 8.8 but I have no complaints about the ES 8.8 82*. It's a very good ep IMO.



#16 aeajr

aeajr

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 12343
  • Joined: 26 Jun 2015
  • Loc: Long Island, New York, USA

Posted 25 April 2017 - 10:12 PM

Well, I had decided that any new singel FL eyepieces would be ES 68 or 82.  Now I have the Meade 5000 line to consider.  

 

But I don't think I will be buying any more single FL eyepieces.   I like the zooms too much and the Baader Hyperion has really captured my attention.  I am less and less likely to pull out a singe FL eyepiece.   I like the zoom or the barlowed zoom.

 

Again, thanks for your input in this discussion.



#17 Slashzero

Slashzero

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 80
  • Joined: 27 May 2016
  • Loc: USS Defiant

Posted 28 July 2019 - 08:29 AM

Well, I had decided that any new singel FL eyepieces would be ES 68 or 82.  Now I have the Meade 5000 line to consider.  

 

But I don't think I will be buying any more single FL eyepieces.   I like the zooms too much and the Baader Hyperion has really captured my attention.  I am less and less likely to pull out a singe FL eyepiece.   I like the zoom or the barlowed zoom.

 

Again, thanks for your input in this discussion.

Hi aeajr,

 

Are you still enjoying your 2-inch Meade 5000 EPs?

 

I currently own an Orion Deep Sky 28mm, and a 30mm Zhumell that came with my 12 inch Zhumell Dob. Because I bought an LX200 GPS (8 inch) recently, that has a 2-inch Meade Diagonal, I’ve started mainly using my 2-inch eyepieces. I enjoy the views through the Zhumell 30mm more. Unfortunately, to get higher mag, I need to switch to 1.25 inch EPs. 

 

So, I’ve started to fill in my 2-inch EP collection. I ordered 9mm, and 20mm ES 100 degree EPs. I got them used, at what I thought was a good price. I haven’t received them yet, but now I’m wondering if I should have just gone with Meade 5000 UWA EPs, instead? Apparently ones from up to 2011 are even made by the same company that makes the ES EPs. Plus, a 20mm UWA Meade 5000 can be had for less than half the cost of a used ES 100 degree EP. And, will there be any benefit of 100 degree over 82, in the LX200GPS? What about a 12 or 8 inch Dob?

 

The other question is, on an 8 inch LX200GPS, what is a good range of 2-inch EPs to have? It’s f10, 2000mm, as everyone is likely aware.  


Edited by Slashzero, 28 July 2019 - 08:38 AM.

  • aeajr likes this

#18 aeajr

aeajr

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 12343
  • Joined: 26 Jun 2015
  • Loc: Long Island, New York, USA

Posted 28 July 2019 - 08:48 AM

Hi aeajr,
 
Are you still enjoying your 2-inch Meade 5000 EPs? I currently own an Orion Deep Sky 28mm, and a 30mm Zhumell that came with my 12 inch Zhumell Dob. Because I bought an LX200 GPS (8 inch) recently, that has a 2-inch Meade Diagonal, I’ve started mainly using my 2-inch eyepieces. I enjoy the views through the Zhumell 30mm more. Unfortunately, to get higher mag, I need to switch to 1.25 inch EPs. 
 
So, I’ve started to fill in my 2-inch EP collection. I ordered 9mm, and 20mm ES 100 degree EPs. I got them used, at what I thought was a good price. I haven’t received them yet, but now I’m wondering if I should have just gone with Meade 5000 UWA EPs, instead? Apparently ones from up to 2011 are even made by the same company that makes the ES EPs. Plus, a 20mm UWA Meade 5000 can be had for less than half the cost of a used ES 100 degree EP. And, will there be any benefit of 100 degree over 82, in the LX200GPS? What about a 12 or 8 inch Dob?

I have Meade 5000 UWA 82 degree 20 mm.   I like it very much and highly recommend it both for the quality of the view and the price as compared to the ES 82s.    I consider these Meade 82s comparable to the ES 82s. 
 
In addition to my Apertura AD12, I also use a Meade LX200 14" at the Custer Observatory.   I use the 20 mm in that too.  
 
From there I go to a 14 mm, 8.8 and 6.7 mm ES 82 in 1.25"   but I am quite confident I would be happy with the equivalent Meade 82s.   I have the Meade 82 5.5 which I also like and recommend.  ES does not have an 82 in this FL.   I might add an ES 82 4.7 in the future. 
 
I have not found the need for anything wider than 82 degrees in my manual Dob or in the GoTo scopes.


 

The other question is, on an 8 inch LX200GPS, what is a good range of 2-inch EPs to have? It’s f10, 2000mm, as everyone is likely aware.

Rather than tell you what you should do, I will just show you what I have done. I am very happy with the results.  Note that I have a 2" 2X barlow if I care to use that with the 2" eyepieces but I have found that I do this very rarely, preferring to fill in with 1.25" 82s.  

 

I have two 2", a 38/70 and a 20/82, as we discussed above. I don't feel the need for any additional 2" eyepieces as everything else can be done in 82 degree.  And this allows me to use those 1.25" 82 degree eyepieces in my other scopes that only take 1.25".

 

But if you want to go 2" 100 degree, that is your choice. Certainly nice to have, but I don't see it as necessary especially in a GoTo scope.   

 

This is my working set in the AD12 and the LX200 14" listing FL/AFOV, FOV, Exit Pupil.

 

I rarely go over 300X as the atmosphere will not allow it.  Sometimes higher on the Moon. As you can see I have options up to over 500X if I have an extraordinary night. 

 

Aperture AD12 12”/305 mm manual Dob Newtonian, 1520 mm FL F5

In this scope my usual working set is 38/20, BHZ, 6.7, 5.5

38 mm/70  40X and  1.75 degrees FOV   EP 7.6 mm   2"
20 mm/82  76X and  1.07 degrees           EP 4.0           2"

14 mm/82  108X and  .75 degrees          EP 2.8

8.8 mm/82 172X and  .47 degrees          EP 1.7
6.7 mm/82 226X and  .36 degrees          EP 1.3
5.5 mm/82 276X and  .29 degrees          EP 1.1
8.8+2XB     344X and  .24 degrees         ( might add an ES82 4.7 if I find I am using the barlow often)
6.7+2XB     452X and  .18 degrees
5.5+2XB     552X and  .15 degrees
Baader Hyperion 8-24  zoom   63X to 190X and .79 to .35 degrees
Baader Hyperion 8-24+1.5XB  94X to 285X

 

 

Meade LX200 14”/357 mm  3556 FL  F10  Advance Coma Free/SCT GoTo 

This is used mostly for outreach.  Here I use the 38, 20 and 14 most of the time

 

38 mm/70             93.5X and .74 degrees FOV    EP 3.8 mm   2"
20 mm/82           177X and  .46 degrees            EP 2.0 mm      2"

14 mm/82           254X and  .32 degrees            EP 1.4 mm

20 mm/82 2XB   354X and   .23 degrees                                     2"
8.8 mm/82          404X and   .2 degrees              EP   .9
6.7 mm/82          530X and   .15 degrees            EP   .7
Baader Hyperion 8-24 zoom  148X to 444X and .33 to .15 degrees

 

Remember that the moon is 1/2 degree wide and most of your high power targets are likely smaller than that or you are focused in on a detail.

 

Would it be nice to have a full set of 2" 100 degree eyepieces?  Sure, but I have no intention of buying any. I don't feel the need. 



#19 SeattleScott

SeattleScott

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5463
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011

Posted 28 July 2019 - 09:00 AM

Well, I had decided that any new singel FL eyepieces would be ES 68 or 82. Now I have the Meade 5000 line to consider.

But I don't think I will be buying any more single FL eyepieces. I like the zooms too much and the Baader Hyperion has really captured my attention. I am less and less likely to pull out a singe FL eyepiece. I like the zoom or the barlowed zoom.

Again, thanks for your input in this discussion.

Which is easier? Replace zoom with 5.5. Or replace zoom with barlow, and then put zoom back in?

For planetary it is all about contrast for me. I can’t say I was impressed by the contrast of the Baader zoom, and I don’t figure adding a barlow is gonna make it any better. Make sure you do some comparison to see if your barlowed zoom can really deliver the contrast of a Meade or ES UWA . I know you love the convenience of the zoom, but if the contrast isn’t there, you may be better off going fixed. Plus when you start messing with a barlow, it seems to me that it loses its convenience. It’s a lot of glass to look through for planetary use.

FWIW I haven’t compared the Baader Zoom to Meade or ES eyepieces so maybe it is as sharp as those.

Scott
  • aeajr likes this

#20 Slashzero

Slashzero

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 80
  • Joined: 27 May 2016
  • Loc: USS Defiant

Posted 28 July 2019 - 09:13 AM

I have Meade 5000 UWA 82 degree 20 mm.   I like it very much and highly recommend it both for the quality of the view and the price as compared to the ES 82s.    I consider these Meade 82s comparable to the ES 82s
 
I have not found the need for anything wider than 82 degrees in my manual Dob or in the GoTo scopes. 

But if you want to go 2" 100 degree, that is your choice. Certainly nice to have, but I don't see it as necessary especially in a GoTo scope.   

 

Remember that the moon is 1/2 degree wide and most of your high power targets are likely smaller than that or you are focused in on a detail.

 

Would it be nice to have a full set of 2" 100 degree eyepieces?  Sure, but I have no intention of buying any. I don't feel the need. 

Thanks for your detailed response!

 

Is there such a thing as degree fever? Now I’m seriously considering if I should sell the ES 20mm 100 degree, and buy a used Meade 5000 UWA 20mm/82 instead. The 20mm Meade EP is substantially less expensive!  If it offers the same quality view (just not as wide), then the ES 100 degree EP feels like a rip-off!  But then there is also the fact new Meade 5000 EPs are no longer made with the same quality as they were prior to 2011(or at least that was implied in this thread a few posts up). AAAUUUUUGGGHHH!

 

I think that for now I’m going to try the 100 degree EPs in my telescopes, before I make any rash decisions.  I just need to be patient and wait for them to arrive, tomorrow. 


Edited by Slashzero, 28 July 2019 - 10:31 AM.

  • aeajr likes this

#21 csrlice12

csrlice12

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 24393
  • Joined: 22 May 2012
  • Loc: Denver, CO

Posted 28 July 2019 - 10:55 AM

All I know is that in the dob, M13 viewed thru a 4.7 Ethos is jaw dropping....no zoom is going to match that view.  Zooms are nice for grabngo or learning about what fls and mags you like....after that, I passed mine onto another beginner.  My only zoom now is a TV 3-6 zoom for planets and small dsos.  Wait till you see M42 (and you're gonna have to wait till Nov/Dec) in the 20mm 100*.


  • Slashzero likes this

#22 aeajr

aeajr

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 12343
  • Joined: 26 Jun 2015
  • Loc: Long Island, New York, USA

Posted 28 July 2019 - 11:35 AM

Which is easier? Replace zoom with 5.5. Or replace zoom with barlow, and then put zoom back in?

For planetary it is all about contrast for me. I can’t say I was impressed by the contrast of the Baader zoom, and I don’t figure adding a barlow is gonna make it any better. Make sure you do some comparison to see if your barlowed zoom can really deliver the contrast of a Meade or ES UWA . I know you love the convenience of the zoom, but if the contrast isn’t there, you may be better off going fixed. Plus when you start messing with a barlow, it seems to me that it loses its convenience. It’s a lot of glass to look through for planetary use.

FWIW I haven’t compared the Baader Zoom to Meade or ES eyepieces so maybe it is as sharp as those.

Scott

I have done numerous comparisons between the BHZ and the ES 82s and find them very comparable, but you may have a better or more educated eye than I.

 

In the XT8i, I was using the BHZ with the 1.5X barlow most of the time, so there was no switching from BHZ to BHZ + Barlow.   When I barlowed the BHZ I tended to do it using the 2" BHZ Adapter and attach the lens from my GSO 2" 2x barlow which gives me 1.5X and effect 16 mm to 5.33 mm.   Since the BHZ is a 1.25 optic, I am viewing through the center of the GSO 2" barlow lens.  So I may be getting a better result than if I were using a typical 1.25" barlow.

 

To switch to the Meade 5.5 I would need a 1.25 to 2" adapter for the 5.5.  I would be switching the BHZ, already in a dedicated adapter to a 5.5 in an adapter.  No real effort involved in the way I used them.   Only reason to do this would be to go from 68 degree AFOV to 82 degree AFOV.

 

 

The post you quoted is from April 2017, over 2 years ago.  Since then a lot has happened. I have gained experience, expanded my telescope fleet and added eyepieces.   So I have more tools that I can match to the tasks at hand.

 

When my main scope was my Orion XT8i  my most commonly used eyepieces were the 38 mm 2", 20 mm 2" and then I found that I stayed with the BHZ most of the time and that I used it with the 1.5X barlow most of the time which gave me 75X to 225X.   It was rare that I was able to go higher than 225X based on my local conditions.   So the ES 82 8.8, 6.7 and Meade 5.5 were not used often.   From time to time I would switch but typically I would stay with the BHZ. 

 

Then I started using the LX200 14" at the Custer Observatory. This has a much longer FL than any of my other scopes so I added the ES 82 14 mm for wider FOV. This eyepiece gives me 254X.   I don't typically use the BHZ in that scope as I am it using mostly for outreach so I hit a target and stay with it for a long time.  No real value to the zoom and the ES 82 has a wider FOV so if the tracking is not perfect the target stays in the eyepiece longer.

 

I have since replaced the XT8i with an Apertura AD12 12" Dob.   Again I find my use of my eyepieces has shifted somewhat from how I used them in the XT8i.  I have been able to push this one to 275X frequently.   The BHZ is still my main eyepiece up to 190X but I no longer barlow it for higher power.   After that I go to the ES 82 6.7 and Meade 5.5 to take advantage of the wider FOV.  Occasionally I go the ES 82 8.8 for more FOV than the BHZ at that FL, but normally, between 100X and 190X I use the BHZ.  

 

The change was strictly a FOV driven decision for the manual scope, having nothing to do with the quality of the image.

 

I don't know if that helps.


  • SeattleScott likes this

#23 aeajr

aeajr

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 12343
  • Joined: 26 Jun 2015
  • Loc: Long Island, New York, USA

Posted 28 July 2019 - 12:01 PM

Thanks for your detailed response!

 

Is there such a thing as degree fever? Now I’m seriously considering if I should sell the ES 20mm 100 degree, and buy a used Meade 5000 UWA 20mm/82 instead. The 20mm Meade EP is substantially less expensive!  If it offers the same quality view (just not as wide), then the ES 100 degree EP feels like a rip-off!  But then there is also the fact new Meade 5000 EPs are no longer made with the same quality as they were prior to 2011(or at least that was implied in this thread a few posts up). AAAUUUUUGGGHHH!

 

I think that for now I’m going to try the 100 degree EPs in my telescopes, before I make any rash decisions.  I just need to be patient and wait for them to arrive, tomorrow. 

Sure there is FOV fever.  I had it from 50 to 60 to 82, but then stopped.   The zoom contributed to my stopping at 82 as I like the zooms so much. Even my 82s stay in the bag so I can use the zoom, so who needs 100 AFOV?  

 

As for what to keep and what to sell, that is up to you.   You have to decide what you really want.  If 82 is enough, then sell the 100s.   If you just LOVE the 100s, then keep building. 

 

I am very happy with where I am.  Sure I might add something along the way but it will most likely be in the 70 to 82 AFOV range rather than 100.  I have 4 other scopes and the 2" don't work in those scopes.  If all of my scopes took 2" I might have a different direction, but I don't and never expect to have all 2" focusers/diagonals. 


  • Slashzero likes this

#24 Slashzero

Slashzero

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 80
  • Joined: 27 May 2016
  • Loc: USS Defiant

Posted 28 July 2019 - 12:43 PM

Sure there is FOV fever.  I had it from 50 to 60 to 82, but then stopped.   The zoom contributed to my stopping at 82 as I like the zooms so much. Even my 82s stay in the bag so I can use the zoom, so who needs 100 AFOV?  

 

As for what to keep and what to sell, that is up to you.   You have to decide what you really want.  If 82 is enough, then sell the 100s.   If you just LOVE the 100s, then keep building. 

 

I am very happy with where I am.  Sure I might add something along the way but it will most likely be in the 70 to 82 AFOV range rather than 100.  I have 4 other scopes and the 2" don't work in those scopes.  If all of my scopes took 2" I might have a different direction, but I don't and never expect to have all 2" focusers/diagonals. 

You are absolutely right that the I should look through them before doing anything dumb. :-) I have spent a lot of time in SkySafari looking at different targets with varying EPs and my telescopes, but ultimately I should not decide anything until I look through them with my own eyes.  

 

I don’t foresee buying many more scopes, at this point. I have 4, three of which take 2 inch EPs.  I have a pretty wide range of cheap 1.25 EPs and Barlows that I’ve collected over the years, which all work well enough (Meade 4000 Plössl, Orion branded, “no brand” gold line, a 10.5mm TeleVue, etc). I just am really enjoying the 2-inch EPs on the LX200, and figured I would go all out on some “new” 2-inch EPs, and actually have a “complete set” (bought over time, of course). At this point, if I like the views through the ES ones, I think I will continue to keep an eye out for good deals on used ones, and build on that. 

 

My telescopes (nothing impressive):

  • ETX-80
  • LX200GPS 8-inch
  • Orion XT8 (manual Dob, got this one for free!)
  • Zhumell 12 inch (manual Dob, with a custom built Ed Jones EQ platform, which I’ve also used on the XT8)

Also, sorry for digging up this old thread. I did realize it was last active 2 years ago in 2017, but felt it would be better to post my question here instead of starting yet another thread. 


Edited by Slashzero, 28 July 2019 - 12:49 PM.

  • aeajr likes this

#25 aeajr

aeajr

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 12343
  • Joined: 26 Jun 2015
  • Loc: Long Island, New York, USA

Posted 28 July 2019 - 12:50 PM

You were asking about long term experience.  I think that is a good reason to pull up an old thread.


  • BFaucett likes this


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