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

New Meade 26mm MWA

equipment eyepieces Meade optics
  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#26 Mitrovarr

Mitrovarr

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,855
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Boise, Idaho

Posted 23 November 2019 - 07:15 PM

Eh. I've heard too much about problems with the Meade MWAs. I don't think the issues are worth the extra 8 degrees of AFOV, to say nothing of the issues + $100 or so.
  • Ronofthedead07 likes this

#27 stargazer193857

stargazer193857

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,193
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2013
  • Loc: Southern Idaho

Posted 24 November 2019 - 03:28 PM

How much was the 24mm when it was available? Did it perform as well as the 20mm?

I'm guessing they stopped selling the big ones because their was not enough profit margin on the big heavy eyepiece. They should have sold a decloaked version of the 24mm with the eye guard bevelled deep all around.

#28 Mitrovarr

Mitrovarr

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,855
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Boise, Idaho

Posted 25 November 2019 - 01:39 PM

I don't remember the price. I think it was pretty competitive. I don't have one so no idea about the performance.

If I remember correctly, the 24 and 30mm Meade UWAs (and maybe also the SWA series although that might have been earlier) went away around the same time as the manufacturer changed. I would guess the new manufacturer just didn't want to pursue those sizes anymore.

I'm pretty sure the ES82 24mm is a direct descendant of the old Meade 24mm UWA, if you miss it. No need to decloak it either.

Edited by Mitrovarr, 25 November 2019 - 01:40 PM.


#29 Ronofthedead07

Ronofthedead07

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 221
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2018
  • Loc: New Hampshire

Posted 25 November 2019 - 08:48 PM

If I remember correctly, the 24 and 30mm Meade UWAs (and maybe also the SWA series although that might have been earlier) went away around the same time as the manufacturer changed. I would guess the new manufacturer just didn't want to pursue those sizes anymore.

I'm pretty sure the ES82 24mm is a direct descendant of the old Meade 24mm UWA, if you miss it. No need to decloak it either.

The current ES 68 and 82 degree lines are in the exact same focal lengths as the discontinued Meade Series 5000 SWA (16, 20, 24, 28, 34, 40) and the first version of the Series 5000 UWAs (4.7, 6.7, 8.8, 14, 18, 24, 30) so I believe you are right. ES added an 11mm 82 to fill the gap between 8.8 and 14. Consensus seems to be that the optics are pretty similar between those Meade and ES lines.

 

Personally, I found the ES offerings more comfortable to use than the Meades. I never really warmed up to Meade’s chunky adjustable eye guards. Fortunately, they seem to have shifted to regular rubber eye cups for their current lines.


Edited by Ronofthedead07, 25 November 2019 - 08:55 PM.


#30 Mitrovarr

Mitrovarr

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,855
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Boise, Idaho

Posted 26 November 2019 - 02:13 AM

Yeah, I didn't like the old Meade eye guards either (did literally anyone?) I think the extra money for the ES is worth not having it.

 

Interesting the Delos uses a similar concept but the superior execution makes it much better.


  • Neptune likes this

#31 25585

25585

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,959
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 26 November 2019 - 04:19 AM

The current ES 68 and 82 degree lines are in the exact same focal lengths as the discontinued Meade Series 5000 SWA (16, 20, 24, 28, 34, 40) and the first version of the Series 5000 UWAs (4.7, 6.7, 8.8, 14, 18, 24, 30) so I believe you are right. ES added an 11mm 82 to fill the gap between 8.8 and 14. Consensus seems to be that the optics are pretty similar between those Meade and ES lines.

 

Personally, I found the ES offerings more comfortable to use than the Meades. I never really warmed up to Meade’s chunky adjustable eye guards. Fortunately, they seem to have shifted to regular rubber eye cups for their current lines.

I prefer the ES form factor, except that their eye lenses are recessed refucing effective eye relief, while the UWAs have their lens at top with eyecup fully down.

 

A variation of the Meade form factor was used by Celestron on their Axiom LX range. There you twist the cup, but only the centre part with padded rim raises, not the whole bulb. Axiom LXs were made by JOC, but  may have been different to UWAs. When were T5 Naglers introduced?



#32 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 46,210
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 26 November 2019 - 09:43 AM

I prefer the ES form factor, except that their eye lenses are recessed refucing effective eye relief, while the UWAs have their lens at top with eyecup fully down.

 

A variation of the Meade form factor was used by Celestron on their Axiom LX range. There you twist the cup, but only the centre part with padded rim raises, not the whole bulb. Axiom LXs were made by JOC, but  may have been different to UWAs. When were T5 Naglers introduced?

T5 Naglers were introduced in 1999.


  • 25585 likes this

#33 rowdy388

rowdy388

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,829
  • Joined: 09 Apr 2013
  • Loc: Saratoga County, NY

Posted 26 November 2019 - 11:51 AM

Funny how the ES92's are raved on about and the Meade's with similar FOV and eye relief

are shunned. I agree the ES versions are fantastic. Haven't tried the Meade's or even know

anyone who has. I did used to own both the Meade UWA 24 and 30. Sold the 30 to a friend

and kept the 24. Those were highly regarded. As much as the UWA's are criticized for the wide 

tops, (my 24 is decloaked) I find the newer MWA eyepieces unappealing...even ugly..


  • Starman1 and Neptune like this

#34 nicoledoula

nicoledoula

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,180
  • Joined: 31 Jan 2018

Posted 26 November 2019 - 06:58 PM

I believe they've been shunned because of poor edge performance, EOFB and not meeting advertised specs. Besides being heavy and not that much cheaper.



#35 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 46,210
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 06 June 2020 - 01:08 PM

Here is an in-depth review of the 26mm Meade MWA.

Only a 79-83° eyepiece, I'm afraid.

Details:

https://stargazerslo...wa-26mm-report/




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





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: equipment, eyepieces, Meade, optics



Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics