21 replies to this topic

[patindaytona]

Just would like a few opinions on this. He's selling it and also the HD-9MM for $47

I read in a review on amazon that it had specks of dust that was annoying and it was inside the lens.

The seller is claiming also.............a few specks of dust.

Should..shouldn't buy these two eye pieces??

[cst4]

Think you just missed them either way.  Ad says sold.  I have only used the HD-60 25mm but from my experience with that eyepiece and from what I have read on the others, they are all good eyepieces for the price, especially used.  I have read several times that the 6.5mm is a real gem. 

[Jond105]

Yeah, looks like they were sold. If you see them again, try to snag them up quick. They were my first set of real eyepieces. For the price they were rather good, and used is even a better price. I never had specs of dust in any of mine. 6.5mm in my opinion was the best with a 900 focal length refractor, and looked good in the 10” dob as well. 

[nicoledoula]

No dust in my 6.5 either. The best budget 6-7mm EP by far IMO. From that $75 new you have to go to a Delite or an ES 82* to best it. And I'm not so sure a 7mm Delite is almost $200 better. At least the ES 6.7 has a much larger field, if less ER. What a steal that would have been for someone not afraid to take them apart and clean them. Or even use them as is. 

[Bean614]

For what it's worth, as the seller of those exceptional eyepieces today, I need to mention that the 'dust' mentioned in my listing was a particle or two (maybe) that might be found ON the lens, not IN the lens!  I have received brand new EP'S from all the 'premium' companies, and quite a few had a bit of dust ON the lens, which can simply be blown off.  And on EVERY eyepiece listing of mine I mention that one may find a dust particle or two.

   Additionally I don't continually clean my eyepieces, rather just use a bulb blower.  When they get too many eyelashes, they get blown off, and then I use some of Don's (eyepiecesetc.com) ROR cleaner.

   Fussing over whether you're going to find some dust on a used EP can deprive you of some excellent deals on superb eyepieces.

  If you find another 6.5, just grab it!

[CeleNoptic]

The 6.5mm Meade HD-60 is incredible good for the money new or used. Some time ago I compared it to orthos and plossls on my Dob and it was a tie ( I posted my results somewhere in this forum). I'm not sure weather the 6.7mm ES82 can beat it especially in light scatter department. No any particles I can see in my sample and I clean my optics as frequent as necessary.

[patindaytona]

I only mentioned about the dust because of a bad review of the eye piece in Amazon. A buyer claimed it caused black spots to be seen whenever he used it. He in fact was returning it for that reason. He said it was dust in between the lens'. That's why I was so hesitant. I'm not regretting anything. I'm still considering others.

[Frisky]

The 6.5 is very good in my 120mm, f8.3 refractor. However, in my scope the 25mm is hard to beat! The two are my favorite eyepieces overall.

 

Joe

[Ernest_SPB]

All tested by me 6.5 mm HD-60 performed well: mechanics,  quality of lens polishing, coating and correction of field aberration

[CollinofAlabama]

I had dust within two of my Celestron XCel 25mm XL's, and returned them both back to Celestron, settling on a 32mm Omni Plossl from Celestron, ultimately, since they couldn't seem to provide me with a good one (without internal dust specs).  I've heard these two lines, the Celestron XCel LX and Meade HD-60's, are from the same OEM.  Ironically, later I purchased a new Meade 25mm HD-60 and have found that particular eyepiece dust-free, and literally, a "poor man's Pan 24".  I also own the TV Pan 24, and, yes, for those who demand the absolute best, it is the better eyepiece, but I purchased the Pan 24 over 11 years ago, before the HD-60 series was even introduced.  I have found the Meade HD-60 SO close in performance to the Pan 24 that knowing what I know now, I'd probably settle on the 25mm HD-60 if I hadn't already spent all that money on the Pan 24.  It's the better eyepiece, but honestly, with the Meade 25mm HD-60 (assuming you get one without internal dust specs like mine), is 90% of the performance of the Pan 24 for 3.5x less cost.  That's my honest assessment.  Now the TV Nagler 16mm T5, that's a different story, and there is no Meade, ES, or any other eyepiece I've ever seen like it.  That's one of Tele Vue's absolute best, without serious competition, but the Meade 25mm HD-60 is loaded with value.  Get one if you want nice, expansive wide views.  Besides, it and the ES 28mm 68* are both definitely better than just the Pan 24, and you can easily afford both, with about $50 to spare, for the cost of one Pan 24. The Meade 25mm HD-60 also weighs less than the Pan 24.  Another important, added bonus.

Edited by CollinofAlabama, 04 September 2019 - 08:47 AM.

[patindaytona]

The 6.5mm Meade HD-60 is incredible good for the money new or used. Some time ago I compared it to orthos and plossls on my Dob and it was a tie ( I posted my results somewhere in this forum). I'm not sure weather the 6.7mm ES82 can beat it especially in light scatter department. No any particles I can see in my sample and I clean my optics as frequent as necessary.

Cele...what's your opinion on the 6.5mm vrs a higher mag. eye piece? I have the XT10i.   When i buy one (mostly it'll be for planet viewing), that's it. It will not be buying any more higher mag. eye pieces.

I know I have to account for the seeing also. Is 6.5mm kind of low mag?

[cst4]

Seeing conditions often dictate what magnification you can use.  I find I view Saturn and Jupiter between about 120x to 250x most of the time.  Seeing conditions have only allowed me to enjoy 300x a time or two in the past year or so.  My experience is with a 8" cass on a manual alt-az mount, but at that mag the image gets dimmer, tracking manually gets frustrating, focusing gets shakier, and turbulence gets very obvious.  So I find I actually prefer keeping it under 250x no matter how clear the night is because the image stays bright and crisp and it's just less frustrating / more enjoyable.  My suggestion is to first put money towards eyepieces that will be used the most rather than attempt to max out your scopes capability.  I like having my high powered EP's but they do get used the least.

[CeleNoptic]

Cele...what's your opinion on the 6.5mm vrs a higher mag. eye piece? I have the XT10i.   When i buy one (mostly it'll be for planet viewing), that's it. It will not be buying any more higher mag. eye pieces.

I know I have to account for the seeing also. Is 6.5mm kind of low mag?

 

I, personally, prefer a Zoom + Barlow for planetary observations. A Zoom allows to tune up magnification according to the seeing (which fluctuates) just in seconds which is most important, especially for larger apertures, IMO. No one premium fixed FL eyepiece can compete with that... except only premium Zooms like TVZ 3-6mm or so   . I sometimes use the 6.5mm HD-60 + 2x Barlow also on Mars but that is where I feel its FOV is really narrow.

 

Frankly, for Mars and other high magnification targets like e.g. Planetary Nebulae, Globular Clusters etc. I'd prefer wider field eyepieces since my Dob is manually driven. I'm considering a 6.5mm Baader Morpheus or  5.5mm Meade 5K UWA for those type of objects. The 4.7mm ES82 (255x; exit pupil 0.78mm) is frequently too much for Mid-Atlantic sky for my f/6 scope. So you see, there is no *one size fits all* solution, each type of objects may require appropriate tools. As for the 6.5mm HD-60 it usually showed me on my Dob contrast and light scatter pretty much on par with Orthos and Plossls vs. other my wide field eyepieces. I didn't compare it directly to the 4.7mm ES82 so take my assumption with a grain of salt. Maybe somebody who did such A-B comparison will chime in.

 

IMO, for f/5 Dob the 6.5mm eyepiece provides exit pupil/magnification a little bit lower than optimal for typical high magnifications under average and better seeing conditions. If you don't have/don't plan to have a Zoom than the pair 4.7mm + 6.7mm ES82 would be good for all kind of situations. And if to own one, than the 5.5mm Meade UWA should be fine. Even though I like the 6.5mm Meade HD-60 for high magnifications, I'd prefer to have ultra wide angle eyepiece(s) instead. I sometimes when the seeing allows (very rare) 2x Barlow my 8.8mm Meade UWA  with good results. So, from my perspective, all pluses of ultra wide FOV on a manual Dob  overpowering other benefits unless you are a dedicated planet observer. But we have to wait for good views of planets (Jupiter and Saturn) when they will be high enough in the sky for at least 2 years so take your time

[patindaytona]

I, personally, prefer a Zoom + Barlow for planetary observations. A Zoom allows to tune up magnification according to the seeing (which fluctuates) just in seconds which is most important, especially for larger apertures, IMO. No one premium fixed FL eyepiece can compete with that... except only premium Zooms like TVZ 3-6mm or so   . I sometimes use the 6.5mm HD-60 + 2x Barlow also on Mars but that is where I feel its FOV is really narrow.

 

Frankly, for Mars and other high magnification targets like e.g. Planetary Nebulae, Globular Clusters etc. I'd prefer wider field eyepieces since my Dob is manually driven. I'm considering a 6.5mm Baader Morpheus or  5.5mm Meade 5K UWA for those type of objects. The 4.7mm ES82 (255x; exit pupil 0.78mm) is frequently too much for Mid-Atlantic sky for my f/6 scope. So you see, there is no *one size fits all* solution, each type of objects may require appropriate tools. As for the 6.5mm HD-60 it usually showed me on my Dob contrast and light scatter pretty much on par with Orthos and Plossls vs. other my wide field eyepieces. I didn't compare it directly to the 4.7mm ES82 so take my assumption with a grain of salt. Maybe somebody who did such A-B comparison will chime in.

 

IMO, for f/5 Dob the 6.5mm eyepiece provides exit pupil/magnification a little bit lower than optimal for typical high magnifications under average and better seeing conditions. If you don't have/don't plan to have a Zoom than the pair 4.7mm + 6.7mm ES82 would be good for all kind of situations. And if to own one, than the 5.5mm Meade UWA should be fine. Even though I like the 6.5mm Meade HD-60 for high magnifications, I'd prefer to have ultra wide angle eyepiece(s) instead. I sometimes when the seeing allows (very rare) 2x Barlow my 8.8mm Meade UWA  with good results. So, from my perspective, all pluses of ultra wide FOV on a manual Dob  overpowering other benefits unless you are a dedicated planet observer. But we have to wait for good views of planets (Jupiter and Saturn) when they will be high enough in the sky for at least 2 years so take your time

WHEN...........i can sell my Coulter 10" telescope, I'll get the 5.5mm 5000 Extreme Wide Angle. I can double it possibly with my Barlow if needed. The ES 4.7mm would be a bit too much mag.if i did that.

Mid-Atlantic sky?   I'm in Daytona

[nicoledoula]

The 5mm Paradigm/ED is no slouch for $60

[nicoledoula]

WHEN...........i can sell my Coulter 10" telescope, I'll get the 5.5mm 5000 Extreme Wide Angle. I can double it possibly with my Barlow if needed. The ES 4.7mm would be a bit too much mag.if i did that.

Mid-Atlantic sky?   I'm in Daytona

Their 5.5mm 82* is a MUCH better EP. Nothing but raves but "only" 82*

[patindaytona]

Their 5.5mm 82* is a MUCH better EP. Nothing but raves but "only" 82*

 https://www.amazon.c...customerReviews

What about this one? I see a couple used ones for $120

I don't see the paridigm 5.5mm. I'll look some more on that.

[patindaytona]

Their 5.5mm 82* is a MUCH better EP. Nothing but raves but "only" 82*

Not sure what you're saying. 82 is good right?

Edited by patindaytona, 04 September 2019 - 09:06 PM.

[penguinx64]

Here's what Meade support says about cleaning the HD-60 if there is dust inside:

 

"We actually import all our eyepieces, and have since the earliest days of the company. As a result we do not have schematics,manuals or information on internal construction, since they are not intended to ever be dismantled or serviced except for external cleaning."

Edited by penguinx64, 09 August 2022 - 05:03 PM.

[CeleNoptic]

Here's what Meade support says about cleaning the HD-60 if there is dust inside:

 

"We actually import all our eyepieces, and have since the earliest days of the company. As a result we do not have schematics,manuals or information on internal construction, since they are not intended to ever be dismantled or serviced except for external cleaning."

 

If you look at the HD-60s boxes carefully you can see the labels 'WP' that means 'waterproof'. Most probably, they're just sealed. Of course, waterproof eyepieces are not intended to be dismantled by non-professionals, IMO.

[salt2001]

I see 2 black specs when using my HD60 6.5mm.  Notice them when looking at the moon and in the daytime.  I have cleaned the eyepieces and cannot remove the specs so they must be inside.  I am glad I read this topic and won't attempt to disassemble the eyepiece.  

[rgk901]

I have the 25mm... had some stuff on inside too... took it apart and cleaned it, all good now.

*** please don't do if it seems out of your comfort level

* if you do clean it, wear latex gloves

* if its only specs and not smudges, dont use wipes, solvents etc... just a blower bulb and right back inside.

* if you do clean it, try to set up away from dust.. yeah that's the hardest part

*** if you do clean it, memorize/take photos of how lenses are oriented

Edited by rgk901, 16 March 2025 - 08:08 AM.