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

Is the Ethos really the best there is?

  • Please log in to reply
133 replies to this topic

#126 John Huntley

John Huntley

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2042
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2006
  • Loc: South West England

Posted 22 June 2019 - 08:06 PM

Likewise for me. The ES92s are unique eyepieces, I have found no other with such a large FoV, and such easy eye comfort, at 12 & 17mm FL. Neither Nikon or Ethos, great optically though they may be, can match the viewable amount of sky. I paid for 92°, I can see 92°. Wearing glasses. Bang for buck 100%!   

I have no problems seeing the full AFoV of my 21, 13, 8 and 6mm Ethos but I don't wear glasses to observe. I found it harder to see the full AFoV of the ES, WO and Myriad 100's that I've used.

 

From feedback I've had from others who do have to wear glasses when observing I understand that most 100 degree eyepieces don't deliver enough eye relief for them to see the full AFoV.

 

If a 100 degree design comes along that can deliver excellent performance combined with a true 20mm of eye relief then that would be a kind of breakthrough but I suspect the eyepieces would be very large and very heavy - as are the ES 92's.


  • turtle86, 25585 and rkelley8493 like this

#127 25585

25585

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4101
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 23 June 2019 - 09:34 AM

I have no problems seeing the full AFoV of my 21, 13, 8 and 6mm Ethos but I don't wear glasses to observe. I found it harder to see the full AFoV of the ES, WO and Myriad 100's that I've used.

 

From feedback I've had from others who do have to wear glasses when observing I understand that most 100 degree eyepieces don't deliver enough eye relief for them to see the full AFoV.

 

If a 100 degree design comes along that can deliver excellent performance combined with a true 20mm of eye relief then that would be a kind of breakthrough but I suspect the eyepieces would be very large and very heavy - as are the ES 92's.

I think 100° & over is more a magic sales number than really practical span by itself. And because it is a sales driver, the 100° takes predence over practical aspects to different extents, such as eye relief and optical corrections. Cheaper versions show less design thought towards the corrections.

 

For glasses wearers, people like me, the ES92s are game changers. We lose 8° AFoV from Ethos & co, but can now enjoy the same lush very wide views that you lucky better sighted people have been benefiting

 from for a long time. 


  • rkelley8493 likes this

#128 Roragi

Roragi

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 514
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2013
  • Loc: Milky Way, Spain - Madrid

Posted 23 June 2019 - 12:17 PM

 

 

6, 10, 17 for good nights

 

8, 13, 21 for so-so night. . .

 

 

So, at your discretion do I have bad seeing nights? bow.gif

Sometimes you can read really barbarities ...



#129 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 41696
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 23 June 2019 - 01:07 PM

What eyepieces are best for a set of 3 on a particular night is obviously dependent on seeing, and scope focal length, and scope f/ratio, and

a variety of factors.

My focal length after Paracorr is 1826mm, so the sets of 3 mentioned happen to correspond to the use for me in the conditions mentioned.

But if my focal length were the typical 1200mm smaller dob focal length, or the 2800mm focal length of larger dobs, the eyepieces I would use would be different.

 

With a 16" f/4 at my site (figuring 1869mm FL with Paracorr), I'd be using the 17--10--6--3.7 set a bit more simply because the seeing conditions are usually quite good.

But, as a progression goes, the 21--13--8--4.7 is likely to be more appropriate in a larger number of scopes more of the time.

 

Now, if you're lucky enough to have all of them............grin.gif


  • 25585 and rkelley8493 like this

#130 John Huntley

John Huntley

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2042
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2006
  • Loc: South West England

Posted 23 June 2019 - 03:45 PM

I think 100° & over is more a magic sales number than really practical span by itself. And because it is a sales driver, the 100° takes predence over practical aspects to different extents, such as eye relief and optical corrections. Cheaper versions show less design thought towards the corrections...

 

I've owned and used 100 and 110 degree eyepieces from Tele Vue, Explore Scientific, William Optics and Synta and I've found them to be really excellent performers. In most cases a noticable if modest step up in performance from 82 degree eyepieces from the same brands. The feeling that I get is that the manufacturers put a lot of thought into their design and execution and regard them as flagship products for the brand.

 

So no evidence to me that they have cut corners in optical peformance and the eye relief of the 100's is generally better than the 82's as well.

 

Not just gimmicks at all IMHO. I love using them smile.gif


  • turtle86 and 25585 like this

#131 Procyon

Procyon

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6405
  • Joined: 23 Feb 2009
  • Loc: Eastern Canada

Posted 24 June 2019 - 09:28 AM

I swear last night my 20mm TS-Optics XWA 100 w/twist top freaked me out. It was the first time I was trying it in the backyard. This eyepiece showed pin point stars all the way near the edge. I love it! With the eye cup down one cannot even see the edge, the view is huge! 25585, if you never tried the twist top variants they are ultra comfortable and I think they should be useable with eyeglasses, but don't quote me on that lol. Anyhow, for $180 almost brand new, I didn't think it would become my most used ep in the bsckyard! Poor twist-top hyperwides got a bad wrap because of the eyeguard when in fact these work great! I was not able to use 20mm ES/APM 100 clones. I hope OVL brings back the 9mm Myriad 100.

Edited by Procyon, 24 June 2019 - 09:31 AM.

  • rkelley8493 likes this

#132 turtle86

turtle86

    Mr. Coffee

  • *****
  • Posts: 5090
  • Joined: 09 Oct 2006

Posted 24 June 2019 - 10:51 AM

What eyepieces are best for a set of 3 on a particular night is obviously dependent on seeing, and scope focal length, and scope f/ratio, and
a variety of factors.
My focal length after Paracorr is 1826mm, so the sets of 3 mentioned happen to correspond to the use for me in the conditions mentioned.
But if my focal length were the typical 1200mm smaller dob focal length, or the 2800mm focal length of larger dobs, the eyepieces I would use would be different.
 
With a 16" f/4 at my site (figuring 1869mm FL with Paracorr), I'd be using the 17--10--6--3.7 set a bit more simply because the seeing conditions are usually quite good.
But, as a progression goes, the 21--13--8--4.7 is likely to be more appropriate in a larger number of scopes more of the time.
 
Now, if you're lucky enough to have all of them............grin.gif



I have them all and they all get used, though some more than others. Other observers may have different preferences, but for myself, I can't think of another set of eyepieces I'd rather have than the Ethos for all-purpose observing.
  • Kutno, Steve Cox and rkelley8493 like this

#133 dgordontx

dgordontx

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 164
  • Joined: 08 Jan 2018
  • Loc: Central, TX

Posted 24 June 2019 - 11:02 AM

I will be very interested to read your findings on these comparisons. A while back I did something similar myself with the Ethos 3.7 and 4.7SX and the Pentax XW 3.5 and 5mm for around 6 months.

 

Setting aside the field of view, the performance was very, very close I felt.

Personally, I cannot wait to read a detailed EP review :-)


  • John Huntley likes this

#134 rkelley8493

rkelley8493

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 665
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2019
  • Loc: Southeast USA

Posted 24 June 2019 - 11:14 PM

Personally, I cannot wait to read a detailed EP review :-)

I wasn't intending to do another "shootout" tonight, but that's how it played out. Round 2, Ethos-SX 4.7 vs Pentax XW 5.

The 5 XW was better on globular clusters [M4, M10, & M12] with better brightness, sharpness, and contrast. BUT, the Ethos-SX was the winner on Jupiter. The colors were much richer, and I could see several additional cloud bands. The Great Red Spot was a sight crazyeyes.gif  It looked like an Egyptian eye [if that makes sense]. You know.. the way they wore eye makeup. There was the red spot with two well defined red jets streaming from the north & south then encircling it.

The XW had a brighter image with more neutral color, BUT the decreased brightness in the Ethos made it much more tolerable and easier to bring out more detail. The warmer tone also helped by making the reds and oranges more deeper and richer in appearance. I could see very clearly several cloud bands in the northern polar region and white ovals in the north equatorial band. Beautiful applause.gif

Is Ethos really the best there is? Well... it's pretty darn good bow.gif waytogo.gif


  • John Huntley, turtle86, Sarkikos and 1 other like 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