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

Lowly Vite Aspheric better than old Meade Super Plossl

  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#1 RichA

RichA

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 931
  • Joined: 03 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Toronto, Canada

Posted 25 February 2018 - 01:20 AM

Well, with qualifiers.  Two eyepieces, a Vite 23mm with 62 degree field, the Meade a Super Plossl LP 26mm with a 50 degree FOV.  The scope was a small, 90mm Meade ETX with an f/15 focal ratio, very forgiving of eyepiece sins.  Also, we know that the Vites are pretty horrific at the edge in fast f-ratio telescopes.  But centrally, considerably better resolution than the Meade showed.  At the edge at f/15, very little to distinguish the two, the usual simple eyepiece issues.  In my opinion, if you are looking at planets, you could do notably worse than the Vites.  Currently, they only make a 23mm, 10mm and 4mm but at about $28.00 for THREE of them they are a good deal, with a longer f.ratio scope.  Plus, they are very light (plastic and aluminum construction) so are less prone to fogging when cold.  As to why they are good centrally, it could be that optical engineers have refined some aspect of production so that molded plastic or hybrid (fused plastic-glass elements) are easier to make than griding and polishing glass.  Advancements in camera lenses show this as well.

Attached Thumbnails

  • Vite 23mm.jpg

Edited by RichA, 25 February 2018 - 01:28 AM.

  • Astrojensen, Crow Haven, clearwaterdave and 3 others like this

#2 lylver

lylver

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 399
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2017
  • Loc: near Geneva but in France

Posted 25 February 2018 - 08:04 AM

As usual, there is Meade and Meade : depends on where they were made and controlled. The drawbacks of mass-production at low cost.

But as you say, aspheric lenses are more and more used.

A bit loss in transmission, OK, not much so do with it. When plastic made, there is also a loss in precision, but it doesn't matter either in big exit pupil.

But for the moment, I am suspicious about the small FL one.

To conclude, nowadays, when you design an eyepiece not good at f/15 (center) : push it to the trash can. If not sharp (astigmatism) at edge, reduce the field stop or trash it too.



#3 starcanoe

starcanoe

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1514
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2013

Posted 25 February 2018 - 09:55 AM

Awhile back I posted comparing a Vite 23 and 10 using a 6 inch F8 with a TV 1.8x barlow...so also working f15 ish....and working at native F8 as well.

 

They were both impressive eyepieces to me...even ignoring the price. I have a couple and some spares too. Might even get some more spares :)


  • Crow Haven, lylver and nicoledoula like this

#4 aeajr

aeajr

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8782
  • Joined: 26 Jun 2015
  • Loc: Long Island, New York, USA

Posted 25 February 2018 - 01:52 PM

Listening in.



#5 RichA

RichA

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 931
  • Joined: 03 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Toronto, Canada

Posted 25 February 2018 - 05:04 PM

Awhile back I posted comparing a Vite 23 and 10 using a 6 inch F8 with a TV 1.8x barlow...so also working f15 ish....and working at native F8 as well.

 

They were both impressive eyepieces to me...even ignoring the price. I have a couple and some spares too. Might even get some more spares smile.gif

Down to $23.00/set of three under the name, "SvBony" on Ebay.

https://www.ebay.com...t4AAOSwjghZ3EBL



#6 starcanoe

starcanoe

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1514
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2013

Posted 25 February 2018 - 07:27 PM

The 4mm ones are worthless...but the 10 and 23 are darn good...at least in slower scopes.

 

I normally hate chinese made stuff...mainly because it often seems to be made as cheaply as possible and not only that....the people who designed it seem to have little idea of what it made to do...I've meet more one than "made in China" product in which it was obvious that whoever designed it had not actually ever tried to use it. That and the whole pinko commie thing.

 

So, when it comes to super cheap plastic eyepieces....lets just say I was going in biased.

 

Buttt....they are good...and IMO not just "good for 10 dollar eyepieces" good....but good in general.

 

Now, I suspect they may not hold up well....coatings may well come off...and well with plastic stuff....you gotta be careful with it...hence my spares.

 

Having said that....in this particular case...whoever designed and oversaw the overall production of these things knew what they where doing....



#7 Peter Besenbruch

Peter Besenbruch

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6214
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2014
  • Loc: Oahu

Posted 25 February 2018 - 07:29 PM

The consensus on previous threads is the 23mm is remarkably good at medium to long focal ratios. The 10mm is perhaps the best in the series, and the 4mm is a "colorful" mess. In the end you get two usable eyepieces for the $23, plus one focuser plug.



#8 KarlL

KarlL

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1151
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2012
  • Loc: Northern Illinois

Posted 25 February 2018 - 07:55 PM

I tried the 10 in my C90 and hated it. It was mediocre. Worth a try, though. It did weigh virtually nothing.


Edited by KarlL, 25 February 2018 - 07:56 PM.


#9 starcanoe

starcanoe

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1514
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2013

Posted 25 February 2018 - 09:58 PM

Ohh....let us not forget the Vites have the terribly useful undercut that all the other premium eyepieces have....that has got to be worth at least 5 dollars an eyepiece all by itself....


  • Peter Besenbruch likes this

#10 MartinPond

MartinPond

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3857
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2014

Posted 26 February 2018 - 12:19 AM

  • Plossls, especially the (current) "Super-Plossl" type, are designed with the best F5 performance possible.   
  • (what's up with these carazy bulletpoints??)
  •  
  •  You can make thick-doublet Plossls that produce a sharp 60-65 degrees at ~F8 and above, but the implicit requirement for decent F5 means they are not manufactured.

     An aspheric  field lens with a thick doublet is almost always made to produce a sharp point

      with incoming rays from infinity, so they just go from OK to great to excellent as the barrel lengthens.

      Tweaking for F5 would wreck longer performance, whereas tweaking a Plossl for F5 still yields

       greatness (albeit, narrower) in a long barrel.

 

Sorry to hear about the undercut thing.

 I have so many all-glass aspherics I don't need the Vite. 

 I swap to a thick Plossl over 55 degrees for planetary....a little more contrast.    

 If you apply a 55-d field stop to the Vite 23 , there should be some intense contrast. 

 

 

Great F5 perfomance is something that doesn't get mentioned enough for the 

4-element Meade Super-Plossl.    It is a positive point.   


Edited by MartinPond, 26 February 2018 - 12:22 AM.


#11 CrazyPanda

CrazyPanda

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2012

Posted 26 February 2018 - 01:18 AM

These aspherics are a great value as long as your criteria are that they bring the view to some semblance of focus with reasonably comfortable eye relief.

 

My 23 shows significantly more bloated stars throughout the field than my Meade 26 series 4000, and any other eyepiece I own.

 

The 10, and 23 all show a strange half circle of light out to about 80% of the field when looking at the moon at certain positions.

 

The 10 has a crooked field stop whereby one edge is in focus and it gets progressively blurry as you look towards the other side. The 10 is also quite soft.

 

The 4 I haven't used much because it's too much magnification for most objects.

 

All three have worse contrast than any other eyepiece I own, including my series 3000 and series 4000 Plossls. 

 

I suppose they're good for the price if you are indeed constrained to a super tight budget, or if your alternative is a 10mm Plossl with poor eye relief, but I would pick any mid-grade Plossl over the 23 aspheric.


Edited by CrazyPanda, 26 February 2018 - 01:19 AM.


#12 MartinPond

MartinPond

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3857
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2014

Posted 26 February 2018 - 01:40 AM

The half-circle of light with the Moon  is not rare,

   but it does suggest a 'veiling glare'...hmm..

The 'worse contrast' can be a consequence of veiling...

  that is, nearby stars would throw faint veils that would combine for a grey background..

Of course, the Meade 4000s have some veiling glare too....but maybe less than the Vite 23..?

 

Are the bloated stars with a short or medium barrel?

If I had a Vite 23 I could sweep it with an artificial star and look for a trouble source...

 

THe context of the OP is long barrels.....is that your context?



#13 CrazyPanda

CrazyPanda

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2012

Posted 26 February 2018 - 01:51 AM

The half-circle of light with the Moon  is not rare,

   but it does suggest a 'veiling glare'...hmm..

The 'worse contrast' can be a consequence of veiling...

  that is, nearby stars would throw faint veils that would combine for a grey background..

Of course, the Meade 4000s have some veiling glare too....but maybe less than the Vite 23..?

 

Are the bloated stars with a short or medium barrel?

If I had a Vite 23 I could sweep it with an artificial star and look for a trouble source...

 

THe context of the OP is long barrels.....is that your context?

F10. Long enough that the stars should be as sharp as a typical Plossl, but they're about 2-3x the size. 

 

Imagine the difference between a scope that hasn't acclimated yet, and one that has.

 

That is the difference in star size between the two eyepieces OP has compared in his post, at F/10, across the whole field (not just the edges).



#14 Jeff B

Jeff B

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4603
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2006

Posted 26 February 2018 - 10:20 AM

These aspherics are a great value as long as your criteria are that they bring the view to some semblance of focus with reasonably comfortable eye relief.

 

My 23 shows significantly more bloated stars throughout the field than my Meade 26 series 4000, and any other eyepiece I own.

 

The 10, and 23 all show a strange half circle of light out to about 80% of the field when looking at the moon at certain positions.

 

The 10 has a crooked field stop whereby one edge is in focus and it gets progressively blurry as you look towards the other side. The 10 is also quite soft.

 

The 4 I haven't used much because it's too much magnification for most objects.

 

All three have worse contrast than any other eyepiece I own, including my series 3000 and series 4000 Plossls. 

 

I suppose they're good for the price if you are indeed constrained to a super tight budget, or if your alternative is a 10mm Plossl with poor eye relief, but I would pick any mid-grade Plossl over the 23 aspheric.

Throw then at the neighbor's cat and order a new set.


  • Peter Besenbruch likes this

#15 MartinPond

MartinPond

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3857
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2014

Posted 27 February 2018 - 01:26 PM

I found a fair number of salvaged plastic-field-lens aspherics  at 22mm......

 

And tried them against some 23mm all-glass aspherics, a 20mm thick-Plossl,

   and a 23mm 1,2-Konig I made.

 

And.....a few ~20mm plastic-aspheric-Ramsdens, and a 25mm all-glass Aspheric.

 

At first, it's hard to see the differences, but I blew up the image with a 6x16 vortex

monocular resting where the eye would be...

 

On lines and across small surfaces, there is a sort of "pebbling" that also

fattens the artifical star a bit.     The effect is on the order of 32 arc-seconds at 35 ft.

It's a lot less for any of the all-glass EPs.  On center, the all-glass aspheric was tops, actually.

 

It should be pointed out, though, that this a bit below the eye's typical acuity.

At high power on a night with fair 'seeing', the effect would be lost.

 

If I Barlow for 6x, the results are a bit better than the pebbling I see in the 6x monocular.

The contrast is very good, whatever the case...

 

So...there is some 'star-bloating', but for most people, it would only bother you

    if you blew up the image after it was formed...

Thing about  individual stars:  they are so teeeeeeeeeeny!

 

The 23mm VITE should still be an awesome EP for scanning about or looking at nebulae/nebula, etc..



#16 CrazyPanda

CrazyPanda

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2012

Posted 27 February 2018 - 01:56 PM

Decided to compare my 10 aspheric to my 10 delos on Jupiter this morning. The aspheric looked reasonable......... until I put the Delos in grin.gif



#17 nicoledoula

nicoledoula

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 203
  • Joined: 31 Jan 2018

Posted 27 February 2018 - 05:46 PM

Which scope did you compare them in crazypanda?



#18 CrazyPanda

CrazyPanda

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2012

Posted 27 February 2018 - 06:10 PM

This morning, my 12" dob. When I first got them, my 8" SCT.


Edited by CrazyPanda, 27 February 2018 - 06:11 PM.


#19 Starjedi

Starjedi

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 73
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2017

Posted 27 February 2018 - 07:37 PM

Decided to compare my 10 aspheric to my 10 delos on Jupiter this morning. The aspheric looked reasonable......... until I put the Delos in grin.gif


Yeah. Basically Delos is worthy what we pay for, those aspheric also are worthy what we pay for!!!
  • drneilmb likes this

#20 Adun

Adun

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1749
  • Joined: 02 Dec 2016

Posted 27 February 2018 - 10:14 PM

The consensus on previous threads is the 23mm is remarkably good at medium to long focal ratios. The 10mm is perhaps the best in the series, and the 4mm is a "colorful" mess. In the end you get two usable eyepieces for the $23, plus one focuser plug.

 

Surprisingly, despite the CA of the 4mm VITE, I kind of liked it as a "highest magnification eyepiece" for my Z114 F4 at 112x. 

 

With my F13.9 C90, the 23mm was definitely better than my Celestron zoom at it's 24mm end (the zoom being my first eyepiece purchase). It's a great outreach eyepiece: ideal for letting kids grab it at their leisure.


  • nicoledoula likes this

#21 nicoledoula

nicoledoula

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 203
  • Joined: 31 Jan 2018

Posted 28 February 2018 - 08:01 PM

So they work reasonably well in a fast dob....that's quite an admission CrazyPanda.     And we're talking about sub $10 EP's here. I sure hope your $350 Delos did better...... I'm reasonably sure it's extra 10* of field is well corrected.                  "Reasonably well" in a fast dob means it would be a steal at $60 like certain A.T. Paradigms.  OTOH If any EP looks reasonable in a fast dob it's one heck of an EP. Period.                                                                                                                          Starjedi, at 35X the price I'M not so sure the Delos is worthy (in my maks and fracs), but for a fast dob it's the price YOU must pay if you want better edge performance.    Was it Bill P that said the on-axis performance of the 10mm Vite pretty much equalled anything out there?   
If Vite/Svbony claimed perfect edges in fast dobs and charged 100's of dollars it would be a different story. But we're talking about a $10 EP here.   Shall we have some unbiased researcher(s) test them head to head? 62* vs 62* forget the extra 10*...in all kinds of different scopes for transmission, sharpness, scatter, contrast etc. etc. Throw in the BCO and Pentax 10, might as well. I've floated this idea before and heard crickets. I know why. No one wants to find out their $100, $200, $300 and up EP is only a little better, in some areas, in some scopes,  than a $10 EP. They already know, that's why no head to heads exist.  These EP's are impressive $10 or not.  


  • clearwaterdave likes this

#22 alex_d

alex_d

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 407
  • Joined: 29 Apr 2016
  • Loc: kaysville utah

Posted 28 February 2018 - 08:53 PM

So they work reasonably well in a fast dob....that's quite an admission CrazyPanda.     And we're talking about sub $10 EP's here. I sure hope your $350 Delos did better...... I'm reasonably sure it's extra 10* of field is well corrected.                  "Reasonably well" in a fast dob means it would be a steal at $60 like certain A.T. Paradigms.  OTOH If any EP looks reasonable in a fast dob it's one heck of an EP. Period.                                                                                                                          Starjedi, at 35X the price I'M not so sure the Delos is worthy (in my maks and fracs), but for a fast dob it's the price YOU must pay if you want better edge performance.    Was it Bill P that said the on-axis performance of the 10mm Vite pretty much equalled anything out there?   
If Vite/Svbony claimed perfect edges in fast dobs and charged 100's of dollars it would be a different story. But we're talking about a $10 EP here.   Shall we have some unbiased researcher(s) test them head to head? 62* vs 62* forget the extra 10*...in all kinds of different scopes for transmission, sharpness, scatter, contrast etc. etc. Throw in the BCO and Pentax 10, might as well. I've floated this idea before and heard crickets. I know why. No one wants to find out their $100, $200, $300 and up EP is only a little better, in some areas, in some scopes,  than a $10 EP. They already know, that's why no head to heads exist.  These EP's are impressive $10 or not.  

Great points, ive really been toying hard lately with my 9mm HD60 VS my TV Delite 11mm, splitting doubles, scanning nebula, cluster observation etc... And to be honest, the TV is just that... ( a little better, and not by much) Very little can be seen in the Delite that cannot in the HD60. And to make matters even more interesting, now im getting into the UO ortho/konig game and these really give the Delite some serious competition as well, especially on axis.


  • nicoledoula likes this

#23 CrazyPanda

CrazyPanda

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2012

Posted 28 February 2018 - 10:29 PM

So they work reasonably well in a fast dob....that's quite an admission CrazyPanda.     And we're talking about sub $10 EP's here. I sure hope your $350 Delos did better...... I'm reasonably sure it's extra 10* of field is well corrected.                  "Reasonably well" in a fast dob means it would be a steal at $60 like certain A.T. Paradigms.  OTOH If any EP looks reasonable in a fast dob it's one heck of an EP. Period.                                                                                                                          Starjedi, at 35X the price I'M not so sure the Delos is worthy (in my maks and fracs), but for a fast dob it's the price YOU must pay if you want better edge performance.    Was it Bill P that said the on-axis performance of the 10mm Vite pretty much equalled anything out there?   
If Vite/Svbony claimed perfect edges in fast dobs and charged 100's of dollars it would be a different story. But we're talking about a $10 EP here.   Shall we have some unbiased researcher(s) test them head to head? 62* vs 62* forget the extra 10*...in all kinds of different scopes for transmission, sharpness, scatter, contrast etc. etc. Throw in the BCO and Pentax 10, might as well. I've floated this idea before and heard crickets. I know why. No one wants to find out their $100, $200, $300 and up EP is only a little better, in some areas, in some scopes,  than a $10 EP. They already know, that's why no head to heads exist.  These EP's are impressive $10 or not.  

Well my "reasonable" comment was just for Jupiter.

 

They are absolutely horrible on the moon in any scope. The level of scatter and contrast loss when the moon saturates those plastic lenses and bounces all around inside the eyepiece is the worst I've ever seen, except for my dusty MA that I'm using as focuser cap in my 4.5" newt. 

 

But when it came to Jupiter, one could be forgiven for thinking the noticeable scatter was just due the telescope itself, and view softness was just due to atmospheric seeing. You could still make out the major cloud belts, and Europa's shadow as an indistinct dark spot. 

 

But then you pop in the 10 Delos (or really, *any* eyepiece) and it's like upgrading from 480p DVD to 1080p Blu Ray while simultaneously upgrading your TV from a first gen LCD to a modern OLED. Contrast and on-axis sharpness go way up, scatter goes way down. 

 

Here's a simulation of what I saw in each eyepiece using an image I took last April as my "sketch". 10mm Aspheric on the left, and 10 Delos on the right (AFOV not to scale).

 

jupiter2.jpg

 

You can roughly see the same basic details in the aspheric: the moon's shadow, the major cloud bands etc. This is what I mean by "reasonable". But the view in the 10 Delos on the right is head and shoulders better. It doesn't take a keen eye to notice the difference like it would between a Delos and another premium EP. The moon's shadow isn't just a blob, it's a speck so sharp and distinct you'd think someone drilled a hole right through Jupiter. Lots more texture is visible in the clouds etc. That view in the Delos was closely followed by my ~$30 9.5mm series 3000 Plossl, almost matched by my $100 9mm Fuji ortho, and bested by my $100 11mm TV Plossl.

 

Yes, for $10 it's not bad, but it's below my personal minimum threshold for quality, at which point you couldn't even pay me to use it.


Edited by CrazyPanda, 01 March 2018 - 02:55 AM.

  • Peter Besenbruch likes this

#24 Peter Besenbruch

Peter Besenbruch

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6214
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2014
  • Loc: Oahu

Posted 01 March 2018 - 12:25 AM

attachicon.gif jupiter.jpg

 

You can roughly see the same basic details in the aspheric: the moon's shadow, the major cloud bands etc. This is what I mean by "reasonable". But the view in the 10 Delos on the right is head and shoulders better. It doesn't take a keen eye to notice the difference like it would between a Delos and another premium EP. The moon's shadow isn't just a blob, it's a speck so sharp and distinct you'd think someone drilled a hole right through Jupiter. Lots more texture is visible in the clouds etc. That view in the Delos was closely followed by my ~$30 9.5mm series 3000 Plossl, almost matched by my $100 9mm Fuji ortho, and bested by my $100 11mm TV Plossl.

 

Yes, for $10 it's not bad, but it's below my personal minimum threshold for quality, at which point you couldn't even pay me to use it.

Nice illustration. Yes, that would be below my threshold as well.



#25 clearwaterdave

clearwaterdave

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2121
  • Joined: 27 May 2014
  • Loc: Western Maine

Posted 01 March 2018 - 07:48 AM

In the very long thread about these EP's there were very few who thought they were junk as CrazyPanda seems to think.,Comparing the least expensive EP on the market to one of the most expensive EP's out there.,well it's not surprising there's a noticeable difference.,I compared the 23 to my TV.25mm plossl and if there was a difference in the overall view it was little enough that I couldn't see it.,YMMV.,:).
  • nicoledoula 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