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

AFOV of 32mm Celestron Omni Plossl?

  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#1 HellsKitchen

HellsKitchen

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2,220
  • Joined: 05 Sep 2008
  • Loc: Renmark, Australia

Posted 14 July 2019 - 03:51 AM

I'm in the market for a 32mm plossl and have considered picking up a Celestron Omni. I've been seeing 44* as the quoted AFOV on Celestron's website, but I've also read forum reports suggesting it is 50*. I've even seen a picture of the box from an ebay seller clearly marked as 50*. What is the actual AFOV of this eyepiece? 



#2 beggarly

beggarly

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 914
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2015
  • Loc: Belgium

Posted 14 July 2019 - 04:35 AM

48° according to the 2019 Buyers Guide.

https://www.cloudyni...de#entry9488663


Edited by beggarly, 14 July 2019 - 04:35 AM.


#3 HellsKitchen

HellsKitchen

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2,220
  • Joined: 05 Sep 2008
  • Loc: Renmark, Australia

Posted 14 July 2019 - 06:04 AM

Awesome link, thanks! Looks like I'll be going for the GSO 32mm. 



#4 M11Mike

M11Mike

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,108
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2016
  • Loc: Ballston Lake, NY

Posted 14 July 2019 - 06:19 AM

That's an error on the Celestron site.  

 

Eyepiece is 52 degrees.  

 

See High Point / Agena / etc., etc. websites.

 

I personally have side by sided this against a Televue 32mm PL and the field of view is exactly the same and the TV which is 52 degrees.

 

BTW - I sold the my TV 32 as the views in the Celestron Omni 32 were as good or better for less than 1/2 the $$$ (least in my F10 SE8).

 

It's a excellent EP (IMHO - a "sleeper") - I think many pass it up as it's a lower priced Celestron EP thinking it can't be all that good.  Well, (at least in my F10 SCT) it's excellent.  MATCHES the actual FOV put up in my scope as a TV 24mm Panoptic - which is well known to provide the largest actual FOV possible in a 1.25" EP.

 

While I have owned at least 25-50 EP's in the last 20 years - MOST costing considerably more - MOST sold - not this.  IMO worth MORE than the $45 NEW that they sell for.  Try it - I bet you will be impressed.

 

M11Mike

 

I suggest 


  • izar187, HellsKitchen, eros312 and 2 others like this

#5 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 94,575
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 14 July 2019 - 06:59 AM

Awesome link, thanks! Looks like I'll be going for the GSO 32mm. 

The Omni Plossl and the GSO Plossl are very likely the same eyepiece.  

 

Regarding the 32mm TV Plossl, it is spec'd at 50 degrees.

 

http://www.televue.c...page.asp?id=214

 

Over the years, I have learned to suspect the manufacturers AFoV ratings and this is particularly true with 32mm Plossls, there's not a lot of room in the barrel for the field stop.  A 27.0mm field stop probably won't provide a 52 degree AFoV in a Plossl.

 

I have a 32mm Celestron "Halloween" Plossl that I purchased in 1996, it was made in Taiwan and I assume it was made by GSO.  It has a 27.5mm field stop, that's barely anything.. 

 

Jon


  • BFaucett likes this

#6 HellsKitchen

HellsKitchen

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2,220
  • Joined: 05 Sep 2008
  • Loc: Renmark, Australia

Posted 14 July 2019 - 07:01 AM

Thanks for the feedback Mike. Good to hear a first hand account from someone who's actually used and compared one to other eyepieces. 

 

Ordered one on ebay just now, with a 20% discount coupon which expires in about 2 hours and with free shipping! Just under A$39 total. Got a 15mm aswell with the discount, could not resist. Might even grab the other focal lengths on offer from ebay, they are going for good prices, and build up a low cost grab n go set. 


  • Voyager 3 likes this

#7 sg6

sg6

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10,184
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2010
  • Loc: Norfolk, UK.

Posted 14 July 2019 - 07:40 AM

Like Jon I have always been a little suspect of the claims on assorted plossl's, especially as so many are the same items from likely the same source with a different name on them.

 

I have eventually come to the simple approach that I treat both 30mm and 32mm focal lengths as 30mm and any field of view I assume to be 50 degrees. Nice(ish) round numbers so makes the maths easier. Especially as any maths I do is outside at night, in my head and trying to deciding what to try next.



#8 Allanbarth1

Allanbarth1

    Skylab

  • -----
  • Posts: 4,080
  • Joined: 29 Apr 2016
  • Loc: Central New Jersey

Posted 14 July 2019 - 07:46 AM

I own the Omni 32mm plossl. My box says 50° fov. I have not compared it to any other 32mm ep because I don't have on to compare it to. What I can say is it a keeper for me. I have a ES 24mm 68° that gets as much use as the Omni 32  and thought of replacing the Omni with an ES but for me, the view that I get out of my Omni 32 plossl is quite nice and I have no intention of replacing it. A definite sleeper ep in my opinion. When I picked it up a 3 years age on Amazon it was $39. No way I can replace the views that I get out of that Omni 32 mm plossl for that price. I love mine.


Edited by Allanbarth1, 14 July 2019 - 07:47 AM.

  • Jon Isaacs, izar187, ww321q and 1 other like this

#9 M11Mike

M11Mike

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,108
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2016
  • Loc: Ballston Lake, NY

Posted 14 July 2019 - 08:58 AM

Jon - 50 it is....just dug out my box and it IS marked "50 Degree FOV".  

 

Jon - I compared the 32 Omni to the TV 24/68 (field stop 27mm) --- and found exactly the same actual FOV in my SE8.  

 

Both crystal clear / sharp to the edge / high contrast images.  The TV obviously providing some additional power and a slight darkening the sky for fainter DSO's.  Did also find the T/V 24/68 little easier on the eye for full view eye placement due to the shorter eye relief. 

 

Jon - FWIW, I am a T/V believer (IMHO the very best there are in telescope EP's) - I love T/V EP and products - but kid you not - when I side by side compared the T/V 32 PL to the Celestron Omni 32 PL the views were pretty much identical - with a possible slight edge to the Omni (which I found hard to believe) but THAT is MY EXPERIENCE.   Immediately sold the T/V.  BTW that T/V 32 PL was bought NEW from High Point as well as the Celestron Omni. So I was comparing NEW to NEW.   

 

Mike 


  • ww321q and eblanken like this

#10 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 51,995
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 14 July 2019 - 09:30 AM

A 27mm field stop translates to a 49.5° afov with the normal amount of distortion found in a 4-element 32mm "Plössl"

If there were Zero distortion, the afov would be 45.75°

One thing you can rely on, though, is that you cannot achieve >50° at 32mm unless there is no field stop and then the outer edge would not be sharp.

 

Likewise, a 40mm Plössl with a 27mm feld stop would be 37.3° with no distortion, but most of them are around 40-41° afov.

 

People who argue about whether one Plössl or another has this afov or that afov should understand that it is customary for a manufacturer to claim all the line is

50° or 52° if just one focal length in the line is.  A typical line of 7 to 9 focal lengths will vary from 45° to maybe 51°, but the manufacturer will call them all 50°.

 

The purpose for even knowing an AFOV on this type of eyepiece is for figuring out how much true field (TFOV) you will see.

Just be aware the TFOV = AFOV/M formula can be in error by more than 10%.

 

A far more accurate formula is

TFOV = (EPFS/TFL) x 57.296, where EPFS is eyepiece field stop, and TFL = telescope focal length

 

Here is an illustration:

A 32mm Plössl has a 27mm field stop.

Let's use it in a dob with a 1200mm focal length, so M=37.5x

 

Using TFOV = AFOV/M and the manufacturer's claim of 50°, then TFOV = 1.333°

Using TFOV = (EPFS/TFL) x 57.296 and a 27mm field stop, then TFOV = 1.289°

In this case, the first formula only exaggerates the TFOV by 3.4%

 

If we use 49.5° as the AFOV, the discrepancy drops to 2.4%, a likely figure for distortion in this narrow a field eyepiece.

 

But a recent example of another brand of 32mm Plössl, where the mfr claims 50°, the TFOV was different by >7%

 

I would suggest using field stop when and where possible to compute TFOV, and obtaining that on a Plössl is as simple as flipping the eyepiece over and measuring the I.D. of the iris with calipers.

 

P.S. no 32mm Plössl is 52°.  I haven't seen one in 56 years of observing, and I don't expect I will.  Even 50° is a rounded-off "maybe".

But it doesn't matter.  What matters are the other characteristics of the eyepiece, like internal light scatter, good coatings, superior polish, spot size, good control of exit pupil aberrations, a sharply focused field stop.


  • Jon Isaacs, eros312, BFaucett and 3 others like this

#11 M11Mike

M11Mike

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,108
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2016
  • Loc: Ballston Lake, NY

Posted 14 July 2019 - 02:34 PM

Don - I use the TV formula myself (where the field stop is known) --- EP FS diameter divided by the scope FL x 57.3.

 

Looking at my 32 Omni just now --- it appears that the field stop is just a very bit smaller than the internal EP diameter - less than 1mm smaller.  Given the outer diameter of 31.7 - my guess a field stop diameter of 27mm for the Omni is probably right.  

 

Note as previously stated in a direct side by side comparison one night with a Televue 24mm Panoptic (field stop 27mm) - which T/V insists offers the widest possible actual FOV of ANY 1.25" EP --- I saw exactly the same FOV as the 32 Omni in my F10 Celestron SCT 8.    

 

Doing the math with manufacture specified FOV (in this case 68 degrees for the T/V Panoptic 24mm) - a FOV of 50 degrees should be theoretically possible with a 32mm EP...that being the absolute maximum if you believe TV.

 

And as you say --- all this MATH really doesn't matter all that much IF you're happy with what you're seeing.

 

And in this case - I mentioned that the 32mm Omni and the 32mm T/V PL --- put up the exact same actual FOV in my SE8.  And T/V (as you mentioned) says their 32PL is 50 degree.  So I figured the Omni to be 50 degrees - and that is what is marked in the Omni box as well.  (to answer the original question of this thread)

 

If the true fields are off by 2,3,4% --- it's almost irrelevant as the human brain has difficulty detecting differences that slight.

 

Don - I have been observing 61 years but admit I know a lot less than you when it comes to astro gear - you're the expert!!!  In this case it simply means "I'm probably older than you"!!!  :-)     

 

 

Mike    


  • eblanken likes this

#12 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 51,995
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 14 July 2019 - 03:20 PM

Mike,

There have been eyepieces in 1.25" with field stops that are larger:

24mm Hyperion--28.5mm

35mm "pseudo-Masuyama", i.e. Orion Ultrascopic/Parks gold Series/Baader Eudiascopic/Celestron Ultima--29mm

32mm University Optics König--28.5mm

etc.

What they all had/have in common is that the field stops are above the 1.25" barrel (1.25" filters are 28.5mm in O.D., which is a hair larger than the inside edge of the filter threads in a 1.25" eyepiece)

and require(d) a lot of in-travel of the focuser to get them to focus.  Also, of course, they all add a little more vignetting to the edge of the field.

The widest field stop I've measured in the 1.25" barrel itself is a couple eyepieces from 40+ years ago with the inside of the barrel acting as the field stop (about 28mm or a tad more),

but today, the Explore Scientific 24mm 68° with a (per ES) 27.2mm field stop is the largest field stop with the field stop inside the barrel.

 

The Celestron Omni is a rebadged GSO, just as the older Parks silver Series were.  GSOs are also available under their own label.

They've always been bargains.


Edited by Starman1, 14 July 2019 - 03:21 PM.

  • izar187, BFaucett and eblanken like this

#13 Peter Besenbruch

Peter Besenbruch

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,528
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2014
  • Loc: Oahu

Posted 15 July 2019 - 07:42 PM

That's an error on the Celestron site.  

 

Eyepiece is 52 degrees.  

 

See High Point / Agena / etc., etc. websites.

 

I personally have side by sided this against a Televue 32mm PL and the field of view is exactly the same and the TV which is 52 degrees.

OK, I don't believe the 52° claims, either. I DO believe your claim that the Televue and the Omni/GSO/whatever Plössls have the same apparent field. Televue claims 50°. That may be closer to the truth than the 52° nonsense. I'd even believe something like 48°. I own a decent Meade 56mm, 52° Plössl, but it's apparent field is more like 47°.

 

I treat field of view claims much like I treat claims of "all natural," and "more doctors recommend Camels."


  • Starman1 and eblanken like this

#14 M11Mike

M11Mike

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,108
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2016
  • Loc: Ballston Lake, NY

Posted 12 October 2020 - 04:16 PM

T/V states the 24 Panoptic has a 27mm field stop and I side by sided it with my 32mm Celestron Omni.  When it came to total field of view - the 32mm Celestron Omni was exactly the same as the 24mm Panoptic.  This comparison was done in my Celestron F10 SCT. 

 

Stars were pin-point to the edge in BOTH eyepieces....exactly the same edge stars when I centered on a particular star.   

 

Ignoring completely what the manufacturers say - that's what I saw when I compared the two eyepieces.

 

Obviously the Panoptic is a superior EP as it yields the same field of view with HIGHER magnification, thus a darker sky background and superior contrast.  However it's like $300 vs. $50. 

 

That's why I'm so high on the Celestron 32 Omni ---- same "widest field possible with a 1.25" EP" - per Televue / the 24 Panoptic - at 1/6th the price.

 

Not everyone can afford the TV.

 

M11Mike         


  • ww321q and eblanken like this

#15 M11Mike

M11Mike

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,108
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2016
  • Loc: Ballston Lake, NY

Posted 12 October 2020 - 04:19 PM

Don - for what it's worth - I also side by sided it against a Televue 32mm Plossl.  I saw NO difference.  I'm no where's near the EP expert you are - but I have been star gazing since 1958 - so it's not a newbee or a "rookie" making the comment.

 

M11Mike  


  • eblanken likes this

#16 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 51,995
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 12 October 2020 - 06:58 PM

Don - for what it's worth - I also side by sided it against a Televue 32mm Plossl.  I saw NO difference.  I'm no where's near the EP expert you are - but I have been star gazing since 1958 - so it's not a newbie or a "rookie" making the comment.

 

M11Mike  

Not unexpected.  The Celestron Omni Plössl is from GSO and they make some good eyepieces.

I used to sell the same eyepiece from Parks, called the "Silver Series".  It, too, was a GSO.

 

Likewise, your finding of field width corresponds to the claims of both companies.

Current eyepieces with the same true field:

40mm Plössl

32mm Plössl

24mm Widefield

But, they are 40°, ~50°, and ~68° respectively.


  • eblanken likes this

#17 SeattleScott

SeattleScott

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,817
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011

Posted 12 October 2020 - 07:32 PM

From my understanding a 32 Plossl can only be 49 AFOV and fit in a 1.25” barrel.

Scott
  • eblanken likes this

#18 M11Mike

M11Mike

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,108
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2016
  • Loc: Ballston Lake, NY

Posted 12 October 2020 - 07:37 PM

Don - for the most part - I like GSO stuff and feel that most of their products are "worth their price" (and then some in some instances).

 

However - my experience with their 2" SuperViews --- 30, 42 and 50mm is less than stellar.

 

While I feel they are worth $65 --- their edge performance falls FAR short of T/V Panoptics, E/S 68 Series, etc.   IMO - what good is a WIDE field eyepiece if only the center 2/3rds of what you're looking at is sharp and in focus.  So what's the EFFECTIVE true field of view???  Something far less than the "advertised" FOV.   Another case of you "get what you pay for".    

 

Mike        



#19 SeattleScott

SeattleScott

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,817
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011

Posted 12 October 2020 - 07:45 PM

Don - for the most part - I like GSO stuff and feel that most of their products are "worth their price" (and then some in some instances).

However - my experience with their 2" SuperViews --- 30, 42 and 50mm is less than stellar.

While I feel they are worth $65 --- their edge performance falls FAR short of T/V Panoptics, E/S 68 Series, etc. IMO - what good is a WIDE field eyepiece if only the center 2/3rds of what you're looking at is sharp and in focus. So what's the EFFECTIVE true field of view??? Something far less than the "advertised" FOV. Another case of you "get what you pay for".

Mike

I agree, why pay $65 for a 2” 30mm eyepiece with 50 usable AFOV when you can get a 30mm Plossl for $40?

Scott
  • eblanken likes this

#20 Peter Besenbruch

Peter Besenbruch

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,528
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2014
  • Loc: Oahu

Posted 12 October 2020 - 10:34 PM

Awesome link, thanks! Looks like I'll be going for the GSO 32mm. 

The GSO isn't bad. It's like every other 32mm Plössl that lacks a field stop. It has a 50° apparent field. Claims of 52° are basically lies, trying to get you to think that theirs is different, or better. The one that is different is the Baader BCO 32mm. Without the field stop it has a 50° apparent field of view. With it, it is closer to 45°. In exchange you get a more comfortable eyepiece to look through, with perhaps a smidge more contrast.


  • eblanken likes this

#21 HellsKitchen

HellsKitchen

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2,220
  • Joined: 05 Sep 2008
  • Loc: Renmark, Australia

Posted 13 October 2020 - 05:45 PM

Ended up getting a 32mm Omni. Unfortunately I find it tricky to use, eye placement just doesn't agree with me especially using a filter. Infact it is just about unusable (for me) with a filter so it'll probably get sold. Just didn't work out for me.  



#22 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 94,575
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 13 October 2020 - 06:45 PM

Don - for the most part - I like GSO stuff and feel that most of their products are "worth their price" (and then some in some instances).

 

However - my experience with their 2" SuperViews --- 30, 42 and 50mm is less than stellar.

 

While I feel they are worth $65 --- their edge performance falls FAR short of T/V Panoptics, E/S 68 Series, etc.   IMO - what good is a WIDE field eyepiece if only the center 2/3rds of what you're looking at is sharp and in focus.  So what's the EFFECTIVE true field of view???  Something far less than the "advertised" FOV.   Another case of you "get what you pay for".    

 

Mike        

 

I own a 30 mm GSO Superview. I measured the AFoV, it's around 65 degrees.

 

I consider the 65 degrees usable. It's not the 31 mm Nagler, the 35 mm Panoptic or even the 32 mm Wide Field.

 

But as a finder, there's stuff to see out there near the edge. And if it's what you got and youre thinking positive, the views can be enjoyable. It's not TeleVue pretty but I ain't what you'd call pretty so I don't hold that against it.

 

40 years ago, there weren't a lot of eyepieces much better.

 

Jon



#23 M11Mike

M11Mike

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,108
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2016
  • Loc: Ballston Lake, NY

Posted 13 October 2020 - 07:42 PM

Jon - don't get me wrong - I think they (Superviews) are "worth the money"....$65.   I think for that price they deliver your monies worth. 

 

I still have the 42mm SuperView - however the stars are not sharp last 25% to the edge.  I use mine mostly as a "finder" - like yourself. 

 

It's sharp and has good contrast in the center 2/3rds.  The FOV on the 42 is not 65 degrees as advertised by GSO --- I think they are stretching it a bit there.  I like it also as it's lightweight and I don't worry if I drop it, etc.  $65!!!   :-)   

 

Mike    



#24 ed_turco

ed_turco

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • In Memoriam
  • Posts: 2,879
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2009
  • Loc: Lincoln, RI

Posted 13 October 2020 - 07:55 PM

Like Jon I have always been a little suspect of the claims on assorted plossl's, especially as so many are the same items from likely the same source with a different name on them.

 

I have eventually come to the simple approach that I treat both 30mm and 32mm focal lengths as 30mm and any field of view I assume to be 50 degrees. Nice(ish) round numbers so makes the maths easier. Especially as any maths I do is outside at night, in my head and trying to deciding what to try next.

Oh, you sure have that right!
 



#25 LDW47

LDW47

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,110
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 13 October 2020 - 08:05 PM

I have the 40 and 32mm Omni’s both are excellent performers in any of my f4.8 - f15 scopes ( refractors ) !




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