49 replies to this topic

[Mike B]

Periodically checking back with the forums on the long-awaited (and oft-doubted) final focal length in Baader’s dream-binoviewer-ocular series, the enigmatic 17.5mm Morpheus, the chatter has waxed & waned as announcement after announcement of their imminent arrival rolled off onto the shoulder of time’s highway, non-operative. Even so, recently the chatter’s enthusiasm had once again peaked- but this time there were eye-witness accounts (Europe?). There did indeed seem to be a Baader 17.5mm Morpheus or two on the loose, fulfilling dreams… somewhere.

 

Having been on Eyepiece Etc.’s Morpheus 17.5 “waiting list” since the War Between the States, more than one email arriving to verify that I did indeed intend to remain on “the list”, suddenly an email of a different tone landed- the new Baader ocular was in fact shipping to retailers, and expected the following week! Time had slipped by in greater proportion than I’d realized… it had been about THREE YEARS since I joined that list! Certainly the longest I’d ever waited for ANY piece of gear. Would the wait be worth it? Did I still even want the eyepiece (two, actually- a BVer set!). Sure… why not, after all this time… may as well see what’s up!

 

Quick back-story: having been equipped from the factory with astigmatic eyeballs, I’ve been an eyeglass wearer all of my adult life. Those who calculate such contrivances would determine that, with my 2.x astig, I’d need correction down to around 1mm exit-pupil, or a shade less, before my eyes could focus stars to points without assistance. Hardly deepsky territory, and using a Dob with 381mm’s aperture, 1mm ExP is frequently just too much horsie for the atmo I’m gazing thru! So for the past decade or so I’ve been engaged in an ongoing & consistently maddening search for those longish FL oculars in the high teens or low 20’s, 1-1/4” std. format, and having at least 17mm of eye-relief & hopefully upwards of 80 degrees of AFoV. The trail has always gone dead in at least one of those parameters… and generally more than just one.

 

Nagler’s 16mm uwa was always a temptation, but it’s 10mm of ER was a total non-starter for me, and even for many bare-eyed observers! Speers Waler had a 17.2mm 80° EP, but somewhat short on ER in that FL. Kokusai Kohki had a ‘Widescan’ 20mm with 84°, but also short on ER, and less-good of correction for fast optics, too. On and on it went. Finally, after buying & selling nearly every potentially compliant option offered in both the new & “used” markets, the ideal compromise materialized as Vixen’s LVWs, 65° AFoV & 20mm ER. And thus it was for many years that pairs of 17mm & 22mm LVWs dwelt contentedly in my BVer kit.

 

Yet in time the Ethos revolution seriously dented my compromised enthusiasm for 65° fields. And while it’s true that the bino view’s power to awe the viewer resides not so much in the apparent w-i-d-e-n-e-s-s of the view-circle, and most folks’ eyes/brain assemblage can’t really “take in” 100° while paired, it’s also true that 65° of field really ain’t quite “there” for many widefield junkies in today’s binoviewing realm!

 

Pentax’s 20mm XW with its 70° AFoV would’ve been a nice kick in the right direction, and many have taken that road… but my beloved 22mm LVWs were a sufficient inoculation for me to not succumb to that burn. But an EP having yet another 5° bump in AFoV, plus scads of ER… the astro world was really & seriously ready for this! Aging eyeballs & boomers with cash may explain some of the phenomenon, as well. Such might handily account for TeleVue’s subsequent “Delos” line of Eps, sporting notably more ER than their Ethos predecessors, and certainly more than practically ANY of their EP lines below 30mm FL & not designated as “T4”. Yet with the Delos line, as most folks have discovered, they are really Pentax XW contenders, even working hand-in-hand with several of the XW’s FL spacing. Yes, excellent Eps in any & every sense, including ample ER & a marvelous design for adjusting it to personal fit!

 

But 72° AFoV is still 4° shy of the Morpheus line’s pinnacle of development. And when the first FLs of the Morpheus did arrive, they created no small stir, and a very enthusiastic following developed therewith! But… they topped out at 14mm… so far… and would that paltry 4° of AFoV beyond the Delos really make a perceptible & meaningful difference in the 17.5mm iteration? Would that additional AFoV even be “usable” field, or would it be aberrated beyond useful function? Baader’s earlier attempts in that FL would seem to indicate “no,” or at least “not yet”. So questions persisted, as did the doubts… my own included.

 

So I persevered with my LVWs, and my Ethoi in “cyclops mode, and simply continued waiting…. waiting….

 

Finally growing weary of the wait, I jumped in- nabbed a couple of Delos 17.3mm’s from folks in the CNC. Yes! These turned out to be excellent replacements for the 17mm LVWs in every way, yet still fell shy of the 22mm LVWs for total field- but at the 17mm spot in the Denks+PxS they yielded 146x, 205x, and 247x magnifications- a near perfect operating range for the Dob! And that 72° was a VERY impressive & notably upward bump from the LVW’s 65° AFoV, netting just shy of ½° at the low-x end. And so it has been for about a year, while Baader continued to work on their mythical 17.5mm dream, that the 17.3mm Delos functioned as my go-to BVer pair.

 

Fast-forward to a couple of weeks ago, when that fateful email arrived; the 17.5mm Morpheus pair would soon be arriving on my doorstep. And arrive they did! So, how do they stack up, compared to the TeleVue Delos 17.3’s?

 

Read on…

Edited by Mike B, 25 February 2018 - 06:27 PM.

[Mike B]

The M17.5 & D17.3 are very similar in size, girth, & height, the D’s being slightly heavier. Double that for binoviewer applications, but it’s a minor difference. Both have immense eye-lenses; if you’re looking for a true picture-window on space, these will each do nicely! Both have loads of ER, each notably more than my eyeglass needs dictate- I’d estimate them at a Pentax XW level in this regard. And the short version is that, for my use in the BVer & in the Dob, these two EPs are FAR more similar than different optically, and I’m pretty sure most folks could be thrilled with either. There ARE some differences, but personally I’ve found such differences to typically be modest at most, and after decades of squinting thru Eps, I’m quite adaptable… perhaps to a fault?

 

And now having pairs of both, I AM thrilled with each! Actually just a wee bit conflicted, as I now have to decide which to let go of (I’ll keep a single of that pair, for my ‘cyclops’ use in another scope).

 

After two nights of extended A-B use of these two pairs, the first nite more on deepsky & the second divided between stars & a first quarter Moon, I’m quite confident that depth of magnitude reach is NOT one of their differences. In carefully searching nebulae & starfields, every time I’d spot an additional faint star, hiding on the fringes of averted vision, I’d say “Aha- the brand X has slightly better grasp than brand Y!”… until I’d swap EPs in the BVer and, lo & behold, there was that same faint star, and at about the same percentage of visibility. I suspect that variations in seeing above & user-focus below may’ve been responsible for most of these who-saw-it-first comparisons, and any actual differences in depth-of-grasp (transmission?) between the two EP designs may’ve fallen beneath my ability to determine them… if they even existed.

 

Likewise, for edge-of-field correction, I was NOT able to discern any meaningful differences between these two EPs. The Denk BVer utilizes their proprietary coma-corrective Newtonian nosepiece, and combined with the requisite focal extenders (to even reach focus in a fast Newtonian!), the steepest cone any EP will “see” in my rig would be ~F6.6 (F4.55 native x 1.46). As such, observing M42’s “Trapezium” drift across the field-stop & into view, both EPs show a very brief (~2%?) edge of chromatic & focus aberration (fairly normal for most any widefield EP), followed immediately by a sharp rendition the four primary stars, plus the ‘E’ star. There appears to be no outer “zone” of less-good image in either EP- both get down to biz very quickly, and maintain the same focus & image across ~95% of the field. (I find M42’s ‘F’ star is readily visible in cyclops mode, unless the seeing is mediocre or worse; part of the reason mono-viewing with Ethoi has bumped some of my BVing, but this is another story, for another day).

 

So instead of similarities, I’ll flip to the other end of the beast- and describe what I DID see as differences.

 

First, the two EPs can actually be used in the BVer to view, as a mismatch set. The Morpheus requires pulling out of the sleeve a bit in order to match focus; so if you have a D17.3, the M17.5 will require a bit of out-travel in your scope to reach focus… and vice-versa. If you find your scope requires a to-the-hilt focal position with the one, be careful if considering the investment involved in switching!

 

Both EPs have loads of ER, which is certainly a good thing. But here I noticed some rather odd behavior. The Delos’ solution to adjusting the eyeguard for the desired ER is truly beautiful! Mine are set at about 25% up from their bottom (flush) setting, and with a simple twist of the upper barrel there they stay. Period. And the cap fits nicely, no matter the eyeguard’s position. Nice! OTOH, the Morpheus is similar to Vixen’s LVWs- the eyecaps only fit with the eyeguard in one position (LVW it’s up, Morpheus requires it folded down), and as it turns out, like with my use of the LVWs, I have to manipulate the eyeguard to its opposite setting to best utilize the view. A saving grace here for the Morpheus is its eyeguard is notably easier to manipulate than the LVW’s.

 

But the eyeguard is where things got a bit odd with the Morpheus, optically; with the much-vaunted ER of the Morpheus, getting MORE than you need might present a problem with holding the view! If I leave the eyeguards down, I have to “float” my eyes above the EPs to view, and any slight miss-positioning- especially too close to the glass- and the exit-pupil suddenly goes bye-bye. Perhaps some folks can do the “float” maneuver while viewing, but as adaptable as I may be, this is not my idea of a comfortable arrangement! Even weirder, when I flip the eyeguards up (and they’re very short guards, very thin & flexy so this is actually easy), my eyeglasses come to rest gently against the upturned rubber, and the view position suddenly becomes perfect! Natural, easy, stable, relaxed! Maybe some of this comfort comes from years & years of my needing to “press-in” to the eyeguards to see the whole view-circle of minimal ER oculars? So I find this light touching to be natural- and in the Morpheus’ case, with MY eyes it’s a perfect match!

 

Now it’s worth mentioning the obvious- this is not an adjustable eyeguard; it’s either up, or it’s down. Even so, I’d estimate that my ER need is probably around 16-17mm, so the M17.5 should accommodate eyeglass ER down into the low/mid teens (pressing in a bit more than me), up to 20mm… perhaps a skosh more (guard folded down). Darn… didn’t think to try it bare-eyed.

 

So… what about that 76° AFoV you may ask. Good question… this was a significant one for me. Can you actually “feel” the 4° difference in the view-circle between the Morpheus & the Delos? For me, my eyes, I’d have to answer with a resounding YES! In fact, the Morpheus with its long ER & 76° AFoV “feels” to my eyes very much like the Nagler T4 experience- which I liked! Whereas the Delos ‘feels” more Pentax XW-like. Viewing starfields I had to visually establish field references & mentally map out stars & patterns between swapping EP pairs to tell with certainty that the Morpheus was displaying more sky, and by roughly how much. I didn’t (at this point) drift-time, but my visual estimate is that the M17.5 was showing a ~5-6% larger swath of stars, more than its 1.2% longer FL would contribute toward. And as mentioned before, that additional field was quite tight for focus & entirely usable- no, definitely not filled with “planetary nebulae” as in poorer quality Eps in days of yore.

 

However, turning my gaze onto Luna, the AFoV difference between the two Eps really jumped out & hit me! Yes, i could visually map craters, as with starfield patterns- and this I did. But woah, it was also clearly obvious- the Moon just rose up to meet your gaze in the Morpheus! Whereas in the Delos the view of Luna was perceptibly less-wide, kinda like it was a bit farther beneath your window. The Morpheus was more like pressing your face into the glass of the picture window… and especially for Luna, the Morpheus really pulled off the ‘disappearing eyepiece’ affect quite well!

 

That stated, both EPs rendered Luna wonderfully & equally sharp, both what I’d call “neutral” of tone, both pointing up detail quite well. I enjoy surfing up/down the terminator, trying to get that first glimpse of a mountain peak first poking up into sunlight- and both EP designs rendered such pinpricks of light equally sharp. For features lying in subdued grey tones, illuminated only by scattered/reflected light from nearby sunlit terrain, both EPs depicted such in like manner- neither able to show any distinct advantage over the other. Even surfing the earthshine regions of Luna, and off into space beyond, both EPs displayed similar tones, similar control of glare & scatter… at least as far as my eyes & scope could discern. And this really a testament to Baader, as TeleVue is a known benchmark of high standard, and the Delos line is currently their top-drawer offering!

 

One more Lunar aspect worth mentioning: the weirdness with holding the exit-pupil in the Morpheus reversed when viewing Luna! There it was the Delos that did some weird eyeball things! Perhaps it was the added brightness playing havoc with my pupil dilation? I’ve since scooched the eyeguards up a bit higher, as it was a bean-out deal from nudging in too close to the field lens. But for whatever reasons, the Morpheus eyeguard in the “up” position just worked wonderfully for my eyes & glasses, and did so all nite, viewing anything & everything.

 

Possibly an addendum to this, with the Morpheus pair in the BVer viewing Luna I could back away from the EP & the view remained equally sharp & free of aberrations/oddities- just gradually truncating around the periphery as my eyes came farther off the exit pupil. However, with the Delos onboard the exit pupil exhibited weird & distracting effects while pulling away- image ghosts, floaters, & difficulty in holding the view. Some of that may be attributed to the eyeball-eyepiece combination? Oddly, tho, these seemed to all be entirely missing in the Morpheus, where the eye-placement issues seem to be limited to inside the exit-pupil. Even so, I only noticed this while viewing Luna, where the brightness & its effect on pupil dilation may be the culprit.

 

Also worthy of mention is this new Morpheus eyeguard. The M14 acquired a few months ago has the older (original) rubber eyeguard- a poor design as it easily becomes dislodged from the EP’s top during use- particularly while fiddling with removing the cap. Trying to fumble in the dark to re-install a thin rubber guard, with an EP that’s almost entirely glass at its top puts way too many fingers way too close for comfort to things fingers aren’t s’posed to come into contact with! But true to form, Baader has come out with a redesign on this eyeguard- new Morphei shipping to dealers, and included with ALL the 17.5’s, have this new eyeguard. It’s the same thin, flexy rubber as the previous, but now it’s attached to a thin metal ring which threads onto the EP’s top. A clean & elegant solution! Waytogo Baader! I’d hazard a guess to say that, in a few short years, all Eps worth a boo will come equipped with thread-on/off rubber eyeguards. It’s just too good of an idea, whose time has come.

 

Baader does indeed seem to have gotten it right with this FL of Morpheus! Home run, outta the park Baader! Definitely worth the wait! Perhaps it was all the design, redesign, & refining spent on the 17.5 that resulted in this? I couldn’t say, as I’ve only seen & used the 14mm of this series, and that only recently, and in limited mono-view use in a much smaller F12 scope where optics are far less taxing. But I’m personally sold on this 17.5mm Baader Morpheus eyepiece!

 

So I s’pose its only fitting that I eat my share of crow for having, once or twice, dropped the “vaporware” term out of frustration (and, well, experience) for waiting for so long, and thru several “false alarm” announcements. But I’m glad I waited! And thanks, Don P., for faithfully watching & managing that list. Your occasional notes to those of us waiting was likely part of what encouraged us to hang on thru Baader’s R&D/QC efforts.

 

Edited by Mike B, 25 February 2018 - 06:25 PM.

[Starjedi]

Thanks very much for sharing your experience. My order will arrive tomorrow. And tomorrow also is expected to have clear sky , which will be the first after one-whole-week raining days. Just cannot wait

[vkhastro1]

Awesome review !!

The Baader Morpheus 17.5mm is a winner.

[Crow Haven]

Great review (I'm awaiting arrival of my second 17.5 Morpheus)!

[junomike]

Nice review.  I'm sure these (17.5M) will be making an appearance in quite a few OTA's in the upcoming months!

[CounterWeight]

Very nice report!, much appreciate the effort you put into it.  I do not own the M14(mm) but several of the others, to me the fov is my personal favorite.  Weather here.... well don't expect a report from me anytime soon. 

[epee]

Thanks for all your effort to supply us with this information.

[BillP]

After two nights of extended A-B use of these two pairs, the first nite more on deepsky & the second divided between stars & a first quarter Moon, I’m quite confident that depth of magnitude reach is NOT one of their differences. In carefully searching nebulae & starfields, every time I’d spot an additional faint star, hiding on the fringes of averted vision, I’d say “Aha- the brand X has slightly better grasp than brand Y!”… until I’d swap EPs in the BVer and, lo & behold, there was that same faint star, and at about the same percentage of visibility.

 

Nice review    At this point I really think that as long as astronomy eyepieces are limited to largely spherical fixed index glass components, that we've seen about as far as the technology can take us.  Most of the premium eyepieces perform within a gnat's hair of each other really.  So we are IMO at the end of the line and as far as we can go.  To move forward we'll be needing some more exotic things inside the housing.  As usual though, the camera market is quite further advanced than astronomy products as my Fuji lenses contain ED elements, super ED elements, aspheric elements, gradient nano coatings, have multiple seals throughout the housing for dust supression, MTF curves are published for each lens, etc.  Star Trek next to astronomy products.

Edited by BillP, 25 February 2018 - 09:26 PM.

[Mike B]

Thanks for all your effort to supply us with this information.

Yeah, i could sense the hunger for such info, and i'm all-too-familiar with this hunger... and the reviews have been slow in coming in. With some notable exceptions:

 

BillP said:

 

I'm getting a nice uniform FOV...with superb contrast.  In many ways, the character of the view through the 17.5 Morpheus is reminding me of how I react to the 30XW, which is my favorite eyepiece.  Just something about the view that impresses me enough to consider it one of those "special" eyepieces.  So now, for me, the 17.5 gets added to the 30XW.  If I had to go minimalist, I would use 30XW, 17.5 Morpheus, 10XW, 2.5x Powermate.  I've been doing that with recent outings and quite satisfying.

I thoroughly enjoyed & appreciated Bill's report, and he has the abilty to deliver tech info & analysis like few do- 'tis why mine's entitled "user impressions".  That my M17.5's came so quickly... i really wanted to offer a response.

 

Yet for Bill to make a statement like the above, classifying the Baader M17.5 in such stratospheric company, even numbering it with such EPs in his own personal "minimalist" set... 

 

Baader indeed got it right with this one 

Edited by Mike B, 25 February 2018 - 09:34 PM.

[epee]

Does this hold true for the rest of the Morpheus line?

[Mike B]

That i could'nt say. My own experience is limited to the M14mm (cyclops only) & the M17.5mm (bino only).

 

What i *can* add is that, last nite before pulling everything in for oncoming rain, i managed to check on a couple of details:

 

* The outfocus position in the BVer was roughly ~1/8" for the M17.5 relative to the D17.3

 

* The optical oddities experienced in the D17.3 on Luna in backing away from the EP were still there- but i should emphasize that these are very minor, certainly not overwhelming, or indicative of some kind of "defect" in design or build. The D17.3's were entirely functional (excellent, really) in viewing Luna... for me, my eyes, the M17.5's were just a touch easier, with a cleaner exit-pupil.

 

* The M17.5 used bare-eyed, eyeguard up, is indeed a bit skittish for bean-outs from too-close eye placement; I couldn't press or firmly nestle the eyeguard into my face without getting the 'kidney-bean' problem. For my face/eyes, just lite touching of the guard-to-face was the deal. It worked... just barely, tho. But was within the range of what i can easily learn to accomodate (that "adaptable" thing ). 

 

Just thinkin'.... perhaps Baader, with the newly redesigned thread-on eyeguard, could consider offering a second eyeguard of taller profile?

[BillP]

Does this hold true for the rest of the Morpheus line?

 

The 4.5mm is weaker than the rest in some respects, but only because I find the background FOV less uniform in that one vs. the others.  As a widefield for planetary observing I find it quite excellently crisp and defined.  All the other focal lengths IMO are quite uniform in their behavior and all have really comfortable eye placement behavior.  The 14mm is much superior to my 14 XW, like the 17.5mm is superior to the 20XW having really nice performance right to the field stop whereas those two XWs have FC.  I've gotten used to the 5, 7, 10 sequence over the years so am enamored with that.  But if the Morpheus had those same focal lengths, I would probably let go of my XWs, excepting the 2" ones.  Today I keep both lines together so when I need a bit more umpf than the 7XW or 5XW is giving me, then I turn to the 6.5 and 4.5 Morpheus.  I've stopped using the 14XW since the 14 Morpheus is clearly better.  With the 17.5 Morpheus I will probably not use the 20XW much either, especially since the TFOV difference between the two is only a scant 1/10th of a degree.  I think that change to having an M43 threaded eye guard also makes a nice ergonomic difference, so will be ordering those if I can since my other focal lengths have the friction-based eye guard.  One thing IMO is for sure...given their current sale pricing they are an unbelievable steal.  When XWs had a stint of special sale pricing way back, that's when I got them.  Nothing like sale pricing, especially when it is significant.

Edited by BillP, 26 February 2018 - 11:09 AM.

[BillP]

Just thinkin'.... perhaps Baader, with the newly redesigned thread-on eyeguard, could consider offering a second eyeguard of taller profile?

 

Didn't yours come with the M43 extension ring for the eye guard?  Mine had it in the box.  Here it is attached.

 

Edited by BillP, 26 February 2018 - 11:13 AM.

[Olle Eriksson]

That i could'nt say. My own experience is limited to the M14mm (cyclops only) & the M17.5mm (bino only).

 

What i *can* add is that, last nite before pulling everything in for oncoming rain, i managed to check on a couple of details:

 

* The outfocus position in the BVer was roughly ~1/8" for the M17.5 relative to the D17.3

 

* The optical oddities experienced in the D17.3 on Luna in backing away from the EP were still there- but i should emphasize that these are very minor, certainly not overwhelming, or indicative of some kind of "defect" in design or build. The D17.3's were entirely functional (excellent, really) in viewing Luna... for me, my eyes, the M17.5's were just a touch easier, with a cleaner exit-pupil.

 

* The M17.5 used bare-eyed, eyeguard up, is indeed a bit skittish for bean-outs from too-close eye placement; I couldn't press or firmly nestle the eyeguard into my face without getting the 'kidney-bean' problem. For my face/eyes, just lite touching of the guard-to-face was the deal. It worked... just barely, tho. But was within the range of what i can easily learn to accomodate (that "adaptable" thing ). 

 

Just thinkin'.... perhaps Baader, with the newly redesigned thread-on eyeguard, could consider offering a second eyeguard of taller profile?

 

Great review first of all! I enjoyed reading that!

 

You beat me to it about the M43 extension Bill!

 

And about the out focus, I would have expected the Morpheus to require in-focus instead of out-focus. Can you confirm that you actually had to pull the eyepiece *back* (as in away from the primary optics) compared to the Delos 17.3? Maybe I've completely misunderstood things, the reference plane on the Morpheus 17.5 is shown to be *above* the shoulder of the eyepiece by 2.5mm, requiring lowering / focusing inwards / closer to the primary optics to reach focus compared to another eyepiece with the focal plane *at* the shoulder. And from how I interpret the TeleVue web site Visual use page the Delos 14 and 17.3 has the focal plane *at* the shoulder. Care to shine any light on this? Anyone?

[BillP]

I don't have the Delos, but for my 17.5mm Morpheus it requires a slight bit of in-travel of the focuser to reach focus compared to the other Morpheus focal lengths.

 

The EP specifications page on the TV Website shows that the field stop in the 17.3mm Delos is -0.23" which means it is also above the shoulder, but by more, 5.8mm.  So that Delos should require more in-travel than the 17.5 Morpheus.

Edited by BillP, 26 February 2018 - 11:28 AM.

[Chopin]

Mr. Mikey B, thank you so much for the fab write up! Like many others 'round these parts, I've been holding out for this ep specifically for its use in "double your pleasure, double your fun" mode. Birthday is coming soon, and that sale is amazing. This thread puts the nail in the coffin for me!

[Olle Eriksson]

I don't have the Delos, but for my 17.5mm Morpheus it requires a slight bit of in-travel of the focuser to reach focus compared to the other Morpheus focal lengths.

 

The EP specifications page on the TV Website shows that the field stop in the 17.3mm Delos is -0.23" which means it is also above the shoulder, but by more, 5.8mm.  So that Delos should require more in-travel than the 17.5 Morpheus.

Aha.. I had been mistaken all along. I took the the "Dist. from Ref." on the Paracorr Visual Use page to mean the focal plane position from the shoulder of the eyepiece. Thanks for clearing that up. A bit weird though how the Paracorr page says it's 0.3" between the Delos 14/17 and the rest of the Delos while the Specifications page gives -0.23 and +0.25 which is 0.48", almost 0.5"apart. I know the Paracorr steps are approximate, but still. Anyhow.. thanks, and sorry for hijacking this thread.

Edited by Olle Eriksson, 26 February 2018 - 03:39 PM.

[Starman1]

Morpheus 17.5 field stop is 2.5mm above the shoulder.

Delos 17.3 is 5.84mm above the shoulder

The difference is 3.34mm, with the 17.3 Delos requiring 3.34mm additional in-travel to focus.

 

 

Possibly an addendum to this, with the Morpheus pair in the BVer viewing Luna I could back away from the EP & the view remained equally sharp & free of aberrations/oddities- just gradually truncating around the periphery as my eyes came farther off the exit pupil. However, with the Delos onboard the exit pupil exhibited weird & distracting effects while pulling away- image ghosts, floaters, & difficulty in holding the view. Some of that may be attributed to the eyeball-eyepiece combination? Oddly, tho, these seemed to all be entirely missing in the Morpheus, where the eye-placement issues seem to be limited to inside the exit-pupil. Even so, I only noticed this while viewing Luna, where the brightness & its effect on pupil dilation may be the culprit.

The Delos top (eye) lens is a slightly different shape than the Morpheus.

As a result, peripheral light reflection and eyeball bounce-back reflections of bright targets are slightly different between the two.

I noticed this on the 14mm comparison (I haven't had any of the 17.5mm long enough to compare).

It helps to play with the Delos eyecup--I view without glasses and found that when the eyecup was high enough to touch my face all such issues disappeared.

If lower, I had to cup my hands around the eyepiece to prevent it.

[I have this issue with nearly every long eye relief eyepiece having a large eye lens.  The exception is the Delites, where the iris in the eycup blocks all peripheral light

and the top lens is not concave].

The Morpheus is the same for me--it works best with the eyecup in the UP position and my hands cupped around the eyepiece.

Since the 17.5mm comes with the eyecup extender, that would be a great addition to the other focal lengths, I think.

As an aside, the TeleVue eyeguard extender also fits the Morpheus, but it does not thread on--it locks in place with a compression ring.

I didn't try the Morpheus with the eyeguard extender.  I should have.

 

It sounds like there's another excellent eyepiece to add to the superb widefield eyepieces already out there.

I'm glad Baader got it together after all.

[Mike B]

Mr. Mikey B, thank you so much for the fab write up! Like many others 'round these parts, I've been holding out for this ep specifically for its use in "double your pleasure, double your fun" mode. Birthday is coming soon, and that sale is amazing. This thread puts the nail in the coffin for me!

Mr. Jason! You are very welcome, sir.

 

But it looks like time to adjust the ol' bio:

 

Several scopes, several cameras, several bicycles, several animals...and several hours short on sleep.

... to include several birthdays by now, as well!

Only take it from me.... mentioning more birthdays & nails-in-coffins in the same breath might be construed as poor form.

 

But the worst form of all would be to MISS THE SALE!   

 

Thanks, all, for the tip on the ring... will dig thru the boxes for any "spare parts" layin' around. Sounds like exactly what i need!

[Mike B]

 

...with the 17.3 Delos requiring 3.34mm additional in-travel to focus.

Wow, good info & analysis guys!-- and that comes to exactly 1.052 eights of an inch!

 

Not a bad number for a an old wood ruler held up in the dark with wobbly hands, viewed with a weak flashlight, and the value later recalled thru a fuzzy memory.

 

 

The Delos top (eye) lens is a slightly different shape than the Morpheus.

As a result, peripheral light reflection and eyeball bounce-back reflections of bright targets are slightly different between the two.

Also a good insight as to what might be goin' on between these two designs. My use of eyeglasses (a natural aspect of these new long-ER designs coming to market) may well have contributed, as well. Is why these evals take on such "personal" flavors... and why not everyone sees the same things, or sees them the same way.

[Mike B]

 

Just thinkin'.... perhaps Baader, with the newly redesigned thread-on eyeguard, could consider offering a second eyeguard of taller profile?

 

Didn't yours come with the M43 extension ring for the eye guard?  Mine had it in the box.  Here it is attached.

 

Front View 2.jpg

 

Boom! There they were, hidin' with the batwing & the Baader-baggie. Perfect solution, too, at least from initial trials (EP held up to & viewing bright 'puter screen)- no more kidney beans!

 

Thanks for the heads-up! 

 

Now all i need is some fresh COFFEE beans, and i'm set...

[Starjedi]

Thanks very much for sharing your experience. My order will arrive tomorrow. And tomorrow also is expected to have clear sky , which will be the first after one-whole-week raining days. Just cannot wait

Update: received 17.5mm and 6.5mm yesterday and took out for about 2-hour observation. My main focus was to test DSO objects in URSA Major and Virgo Cluster. Also checked again 2018pv supernova for a while. Mainly used 17.5mm. My first impression for 17.5mm is:
1). solid build and easy to grasp/handle
2). No EOFB
3). Excellent contrasting.
4). No apparent chromatic abberration and flares for Luna and bright stars view
5). No blockout/kidney beaning effect. Very wide but comfortable view without extra eyeball movement.
It is my DSO killer! Overall, I was sold by this masterpiece too. What? Yes. I want to call it a masteepiece

Edited by Starjedi, 27 February 2018 - 08:10 PM.

[Mike B]

Any time with the 6.5mm? Also, what scope was this in?

 

Glad to hear it was a hit!

[Starjedi]

Any time with the 6.5mm? Also, what scope was this in?

Glad to hear it was a hit!

It is 8” F6 dob. For 6.5mm, I will try to use more but there has a lot of reports on this item in this forum. I do not find EOFB either which seems to be very good property nowadays. And 17.5mm is not par focal with 6.5mm as stated by others.

One more thing I found (read) is that Morpheus eyepieces are actually waterproof. It is not advertised but stated in instruction page. It is a nice property as this Monday, I had to stop my observation as I found my findscope and eyepieces are full of dew! Knowing they are waterproof, I was not in panic mode.

Edited by Starjedi, 28 February 2018 - 07:16 AM.