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
15 replies to this topic

#1 aeajr

aeajr

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 11805
  • 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 and JB103 like this

#2 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 41085
  • 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 and aeajr like this

#3 tony_spina

tony_spina

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2266
  • 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 and aeajr like this

#4 rowdy388

rowdy388

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3261
  • 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

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 11805
  • 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: 3891
  • 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 likes this

#7 Z10junky

Z10junky

    Lift Off

  • *****
  • Posts: 13
  • 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.
  • BFaucett and aeajr like this

#8 REC

REC

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11048
  • 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: 41085
  • 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?



#12 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 41085
  • 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: 3121
  • 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!



#14 csrlice12

csrlice12

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 23873
  • 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: 1365
  • 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

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 11805
  • 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.




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