94 replies to this topic

[Miranda2525]

I just spent 2 hours with the 17.5mm and 12.5mm Baader Mopheus.

 

So far, in the 12" F/5, the 17.5mm Morpheus did not impress me. Coma from the mirror starts at around the 50% mark and I could see some EOFB. This is to be expected. Looks like the 17.5mm would be nice in a coma corrector. The 12.5mm would benefit from one as well, but I really see it more in the 17.5mm.

 

Prob a lot better in my 8" F/6, which I might drag out later tonight...

 

Zero EOFB seen in the 12.5mm Morpheus, but quite noticeable in the 17.5mm.

 

Will need to get it out to dark skies as one night isn't enough....

Edited by Miranda2525, 21 June 2018 - 11:04 PM.

[Miranda2525]

Just got back inside from the second observing session in my backyard. This time I took out the 8" F/6 and tried the 17.5mm Baader Morpheus on it. 

 

Much better at F/6!  Stars were sharp out to about the 80% mark this time. Very pleasing views in the 8".

 

I just wanted to point that out.

 

In the 12", the 17.5mm Baader Morpheus would be perfect in a coma corrector. 

Edited by Miranda2525, 22 June 2018 - 02:03 AM.

[Olle Eriksson]

Since come is not an attribute of the eyepiece but rather the primary mirror and the focal length of the mirror and more visible at lower magnification I would say it almost speaks in favor of the Morpheus and the 17.5mm in particular. Though in reality it is as you say something that should be considered, that perhaps a coma corrector is needed. A lesser eyepiece might not have shown the coma. EOFB though can be attributed to the eyepiece and speaks against the 17.5mm.

Sent from my SM-A530F using Tapatalk

[russell23]

I have seen only a very slight trace of EOFB with the 17.5mm Morpheus in my 120ED.  However, I have noticed over the years that EOFB can be enhanced by low transparency, high humidity sky conditions.   So the amount of EOFB you see with an eyepiece that has it will vary with the sky conditions.  I have also noticed that if an eyepiece loses sharpness in the outer field, then typically the EOFB will stop inward at exactly the point where the loss of sharpness stops.

 

At any rate, the very slight trace of EOFB I have seen in the 17.5mm Morpheus has not been a problem for me and I hate EOFB.

Edited by russell23, 22 June 2018 - 05:57 AM.

[Miranda2525]

I have seen only a very slight trace of EOFB with the 17.5mm Morpheus in my 120ED.  However, I have noticed over the years that EOFB can be enhanced by low transparency, high humidity sky conditions.   So the amount of EOFB you see with an eyepiece that has it will vary with the sky conditions.  I have also noticed that if an eyepiece loses sharpness in the outer field, then typically the EOFB will stop inward at exactly the point where the loss of sharpness stops.

 

At any rate, the very slight trace of EOFB I have seen in the 17.5mm Morpheus has not been a problem for me and I hate EOFB.

You are correct. After going back out the second time and looking again, the EOFB was hardly there. Humidity was very high last night, so that must have contributed to it as you mentioned.

Edited by Miranda2525, 22 June 2018 - 07:28 AM.

[CounterWeight]

Very good!  I think it's a mistake to evaluate anything from a single use, even multiple if someone is not acutely aware of their specific seeing conditions.  And even then having seeing good enough for critical evaluation may not co-operate.  I remember trying to compare several ep's against the ZAO II's... relative scatter and background I needed best possible conditions for here.  When those conditions arrived I was finally able to evaluate - and yes the ZAO II are everything you've read about. At 4mm the Barlowed Brandon 8mm came pretty darn close with a little more eye relief from the Barlow.

[Miranda2525]

Very good!  I think it's a mistake to evaluate anything from a single use, even multiple if someone is not acutely aware of their specific seeing conditions.  And even then having seeing good enough for critical evaluation may not co-operate.  I remember trying to compare several ep's against the ZAO II's... relative scatter and background I needed best possible conditions for here.  When those conditions arrived I was finally able to evaluate - and yes the ZAO II are everything you've read about. At 4mm the Barlowed Brandon 8mm came pretty darn close with a little more eye relief from the Barlow.

Going to take the telescope out to darker skies on better nights to re-evaluate the 17.5mm Morpheus. 

 

Correction wise, it was much better in the 8" F/6 compared to the 12" F/5 from what I saw, even though the skies were not best. I can't take both telescopes at once though, and I think I pulled a muscle in my back from moving the 12" around. Going to have to wait a good month to even go near the 12" now, lol.

[CounterWeight]

Sorry to hear about the back issue, all the best with that.

 

For me, I do notice the difference in the ~76* afov of the Morpheus from the Delos, PXW, then at my widest comfortable the ~82* of the Tele Vue Naglers.  This plays differently with the usual objects I observe intermittently over the observing year (for me highly constrained) when possible.  And by that the relative importance of the edge of field varies. Depending on my weather (Pacific Northwest) and the conditions when clear it can take a very long time to really complete the list.

 

I am relatively new to the Dob world, after a few years I bought a ParaCorr, and now love almost any eyepiece I put in it.

[Messyone]

Miranda I take it you don’t have a coma corrector for your dob?

 

When I had sub f5 Newts I always used a coma corrector, which cleaned up coma and field curvature too, so it seemed to my eyes. 

[Miranda2525]

Miranda I take it you don’t have a coma corrector for your dob?

 

When I had sub f5 Newts I always used a coma corrector, which cleaned up coma and field curvature too, so it seemed to my eyes. 

Yes, I do have one. I tried it without one just to see what it was like. I had it in my scope tonight with the coma corrector.

 

I agree at F/5 a coma corrector is mandatory for any eyepiece! In the coma corrector the 17.5mm Morpheus is perfect! 

Edited by Miranda2525, 25 June 2018 - 02:37 AM.

[25585]

Just a note on glasses wearing while observing. No rubber eye guard/ring/cushion can result in scratched lenses, any contact with anything can result in smeared lenses.

 

The latter is only temporary, but try cleaning and drying spectacles in the dark damp foggy night. No contact may not have a comforting feel but it's better that than blurry views. 

 

Using a rifle scope is an interesting comparison for eye training.  

[25585]

With the extender, you have 4 heights of eyecup:

1) with extender, eyecup rolled UP

2) with extender, eyecup rolled DOWN

3) Without extender, eyecup rolled UP

4) Without extender, eyecup rolled DOWN.

 

I would guess either 3 or 4 would be close to perfect with glasses on.

#1 is close to perfect for me, without glasses.

Been using the whole Morpheus range. It is my staple 1.25" set up to 17.5mm. 

 

There are more options. Extender + M43, eyecup up & same eyecup down. Also cup on the barrel up or down.

 

The screw on eyecup and M43 extender that came as standard with 17.5s and hopefully now do with all focal lengths, can be bought independently from Baader sellers.

 

https://www.baader-p...aubgewinde.html

 

https://www.baader-p...rlängerung.html

 

For bino viewing, I prefer the Nikon NAV SW 17.5mm. It has more eye relief & easier eye comfort. Smaller & lighter than either Delos or Morpheus.

 

Owning both ES92s, they are like super-Morpheus, and cost as much as 2 of the Baaders. But IME the Morphei are better than Delos for comfort wearing glasses, the ES92s beat both Nagler and Ethos. And 92° is easy-see more than I imagined. 

[Spacefreak1974]

The clarity of the Morpheus is nice and crisp. For me the eye placement was a learning curve. ES 82's in my opinion have less learning curve on eye placement

 

Jon

[25585]

The clarity of the Morpheus is nice and crisp. For me the eye placement was a learning curve. ES 82's in my opinion have less learning curve on eye placement

 

Jon

I guess wearing glasses, they take care of eye placement, distance. Trying a Morpheus without, I can understand your learning curve need more, but found it did not take any longer than a Pentax XW.

 

Eyelashes, eyebrows, eyeball reflections, hair, sweat - those were my learning issues without glasses 

[Spacefreak1974]

I guess wearing glasses, they take care of eye placement, distance. Trying a Morpheus without, I can understand your learning curve need more, but found it did not take any longer than a Pentax XW.

 

Eyelashes, eyebrows, eyeball reflections, hair, sweat - those were my learning issues without glasses 

I wear glasses. It still was an issue with eye centering, etc. Blackouts were minimal after some use of the eyepiece

[Starman1]

Been using the whole Morpheus range. It is my staple 1.25" set up to 17.5mm. 

 

There are more options. Extender + M43, eyecup up & same eyecup down. Also cup on the barrel up or down.

 

The screw on eyecup and M43 extender that came as standard with 17.5s and hopefully now do with all focal lengths, can be bought independently from Baader sellers.

 

https://www.baader-p...aubgewinde.html

 

https://www.baader-p...rlängerung.html

 

For bino viewing, I prefer the Nikon NAV SW 17.5mm. It has more eye relief & easier eye comfort. Smaller & lighter than either Delos or Morpheus.

 

Owning both ES92s, they are like super-Morpheus, and cost as much as 2 of the Baaders. But IME the Morphei are better than Delos for comfort wearing glasses, the ES92s beat both Nagler and Ethos. And 92° is easy-see more than I imagined. 

Your second line is the same as my #1 and #2.  All eyecups are thread-on, now.

[Spacefreak1974]

Your second line is the same as my #1 and #2.  All eyecups are thread-on, now.

I participated in the Baader voluntary eyecup replacement and they sent me the new one that is stiffer and deeper. So much better than the paper thin one they originally shipped with it

[rogeriomagellan]

Yes, I do have one. I tried it without one just to see what it was like. I had it in my scope tonight with the coma corrector.

 

I agree at F/5 a coma corrector is mandatory for any eyepiece! In the coma corrector the 17.5mm Morpheus is perfect! 

[25585]

Your second line is the same as my #1 and #2.  All eyecups are thread-on, now.

On my 17.5mm, the ep came with a cup on the barrel direct. The screw on eyecup was a separate item in the box. So 3 height choices, each with a cup up or down. 

[Piero DP]

I compared a 9mm Morpheus against a 9mm Nagler T6. Using a PC2, at f6 stars were undistinguishable to the edge, whereas at f4 stars were a bit tighter in the nagler. Nothing major though and if my fastest dob were f4.5-5, I would have kept the Morpheus.

In terms of presentation, to my eye, stars were a bit more vibrant/alive in TV EPs.

I do find the Morpheus/Nagler T6 spacing of focal lengths better to the spacing of Delos/Ethos though.
In particolar, I find 12.5/9/6.5 and 13/9/7 to be great combos. In contrast, I feel like in Ethos/Delos the pairs 13/8 and 10/6 are quite large jumps, whereas adding an eyepiece in between makes the jumps too small, unless the telescope has a long focal length (e.g. above 2m). The Delos 12/8 works okay though.

Edited by Piero DP, 31 July 2022 - 03:25 AM.