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

Going to be trying Explore Scientific 92's

  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 John Huntley

John Huntley

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2156
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2006
  • Loc: Portishead, SW England - mentioned in the Domesday Book.

Posted 10 November 2019 - 04:56 PM

Having read so much about the ES 92 degree eyepieces, I could not pass up a chance to get hold of the 12mm and the 17mm pre-owned for a pretty good price for the pair. Reading about eyepieces is one thing but trying them for yourself is even better smile.gif

 

My mainstay eyepieces in my 12 inch F/5.3 dob have been my 21, 13, 8 and 6mm Ethos for the past 3-4 years but I'm happy to see what the ES 92's are all about for a few months before deciding what stays and what goes.

 

I'm not expecting the ES 92's to beat the Ethos in pure optical performance but I'm interested to see how their overall presentation, as it's often termed, compares. As a confirmed "occularholic" I have to say that the prospect of gazing into those expansive ES eye lenses is very intriguing smile.gif

 

Anyone else been though a similar process recently with these hyper wide giants ?


Edited by John Huntley, 10 November 2019 - 04:57 PM.

  • eros312, Procyon, areyoukiddingme and 4 others like this

#2 Neptune

Neptune

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1190
  • Joined: 16 Apr 2007
  • Loc: Georgia

Posted 10 November 2019 - 05:11 PM

I have been tempted, but still have my Ethos 21mm, 17mm, 13mm and 10mm, plus a 31mm Nagler.   I don't need the extra eye relief. I find 10mm to 15mm of eye relief to be just fine.  Please give a full report on these 2 eyepieces when compared against he Ethos!


  • John Huntley likes this

#3 Tyson M

Tyson M

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3740
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2015
  • Loc: 53 degrees North

Posted 10 November 2019 - 06:04 PM

You wont be disappointed John!  I sold them but want them back. The 92 deg are equal to the Ethos, just more eye relief.

 

They are heavy, but the 31N, ES17, ES12 make a great team weight-wise. 

There really is a hole in the market for the shorter range for a hyperwide, long ER eyepiece like these.  Either a 6Ethos (a bit too short on ER) and the 6 Delos are your basic options.  Or perhaps the 6.5 Morpheus but they might be a tad behind the 6mm Delos?   I dunno.

 

Regardless, I am sure you will be very happy, if your focusers are up for the challenge (they should be- you have a 31N already).


  • John Huntley and 25585 like this

#4 PirateMike

PirateMike

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2767
  • Joined: 27 Sep 2013
  • Loc: A Green Dot On A Blue Sea

Posted 10 November 2019 - 06:04 PM

Yes, please report back. I'm very interested in the ES 92's also.

 

 

Miguel   80-)

 

.


  • John Huntley likes this

#5 areyoukiddingme

areyoukiddingme

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4448
  • Joined: 18 Nov 2012

Posted 10 November 2019 - 06:54 PM

I also had the same bug, and tried the 17mm 92 when it was on sale awhile ago.

 

I compared it multiple nights with Ethos 17 and Nikon HW 17. Tried it in Televue 101 and 12.5" F5 with paracorr mostly.

 

As far as a strictly optical comparison goes (sharpness/contrast being the prime concern), the Nikon won for me, with ethos very close, and then the ES just behind again.

 

If you factor in the immersiveness and comfort of the ES, I can very much see why people like these so much. 

 

Ultimately, the 17 was too heavy for me, which is saying something. My main scope is a 12.5" Portaball, which are a bit notorious for balance issues. The 17 ES + paracorr was just a tiny bit too heavy, and the scope started to fall from about 40 degrees or so.

 

The Nikon is very comfortable for me, more so than the ethos, but not as easy as the ES. 

 

So ergonomically/fun to use, I'd put the ES first, the Nikon 2nd, and Ethos 3rd.


  • John Huntley, Neptune, Procyon and 1 other like this

#6 Neptune

Neptune

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1190
  • Joined: 16 Apr 2007
  • Loc: Georgia

Posted 10 November 2019 - 07:24 PM

I also had the same bug, and tried the 17mm 92 when it was on sale awhile ago.

 

I compared it multiple nights with Ethos 17 and Nikon HW 17. Tried it in Televue 101 and 12.5" F5 with paracorr mostly.

 

As far as a strictly optical comparison goes (sharpness/contrast being the prime concern), the Nikon won for me, with ethos very close, and then the ES just behind again.

 

If you factor in the immersiveness and comfort of the ES, I can very much see why people like these so much. 

 

Ultimately, the 17 was too heavy for me, which is saying something. My main scope is a 12.5" Portaball, which are a bit notorious for balance issues. The 17 ES + paracorr was just a tiny bit too heavy, and the scope started to fall from about 40 degrees or so.

 

The Nikon is very comfortable for me, more so than the ethos, but not as easy as the ES. 

 

So ergonomically/fun to use, I'd put the ES first, the Nikon 2nd, and Ethos 3rd.

Now if Uncle Al would only come out with a COMPLETE line of new (insert name here) series of 92 deg's.


  • Procyon likes this

#7 25585

25585

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5869
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 11 November 2019 - 09:17 AM

waytogo.gif applause.gif popcorn.gif


  • John Huntley and Procyon like this

#8 Ronofthedead07

Ronofthedead07

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 152
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2018
  • Loc: New Hampshire

Posted 11 November 2019 - 09:28 AM

The 17mm ES92 is fantastic. I had one a while back and used it in an 80mm f/6 APO and an 8" SCT. It was sharp to the edge as far as I could tell and does feel like a 100-degree eyepiece but without the need to smush into the eye lens. In the small refractor it worked nicely as a finder eyepiece with a nice dark sky background. In the 8" SCT it was an ideal mid-power eyepiece. Compared to the 17mm Nagler, the only difference I could see was in the AFOV, and the ES92's AFOV seemed significantly larger than that of the Nagler.

 

I only had two real issues with it. The first was obviously the weight...it is massive and heavy. The 35mm Panoptic and T4 Naglers I had at the time paled in comparison. The other is the massive eye lens. While it ensures the eyepiece has that nice long eye relief, it can end up reflecting stray light. I would recommend an observing hood if you have stray light sources around.

 

I ultimately sold it because I wasn't a huge fan of the massive AFOV. Personally I like 68-72 degrees better, and 82 is OK if the eyepiece has enough eye relief.

Looks like they are currently on sale for $450 new...although they do occasionally come up on the used market as well (usually in the $300-350 range).

 

What it really comes down to...if you want or need the eye relief, there aren't really any comparable options.


Edited by Ronofthedead07, 11 November 2019 - 09:30 AM.

  • John Huntley and Procyon like this

#9 Tank

Tank

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3948
  • Joined: 27 Jul 2009
  • Loc: Stoney Creek, Ontario, CANADA

Posted 11 November 2019 - 11:11 AM

For me the ES 92s are my favorite to date

20ish ER does it for me and i dont even need it

but

basically i can take a full glance at the ENTIRE FOV drool.gif

with other 100s your eye is SWIMMING to see the entire FOV

but it comes down to preference at this level of EP


  • John Huntley, Procyon and 25585 like this

#10 25585

25585

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5869
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 11 November 2019 - 11:27 AM

I only have 5 eyepieces of 80° AFOV or over, 2 of those are the 92s, the other 3 80° 31mm Axiom LX  14 & 20 Orion LHDs. My 92s show the whole FoV with greater ease than any of the others. Kudos to the JOC opticians, & to Scott Roberts of ES if he envisioned the ES92s as to what they are. 


  • John Huntley likes this

#11 rowdy388

rowdy388

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3532
  • Joined: 09 Apr 2013
  • Loc: Saratoga County, NY

Posted 11 November 2019 - 01:28 PM

Your question was about overall presentation differences between the ES 92's and Ethos.

I have both in my collection. The presentation is definitely different. I don't need the eye

relief but I love the comfort and immersion of the 17mm 92. The 92's seem to present much

more like a super Morpheus than an Ethos. if you haven't tried the Morpheus, they present 

like a slightly more immersive Pentax XW.


  • John Huntley likes this

#12 John Huntley

John Huntley

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2156
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2006
  • Loc: Portishead, SW England - mentioned in the Domesday Book.

Posted 11 November 2019 - 03:28 PM

Your question was about overall presentation differences between the ES 92's and Ethos.

I have both in my collection. The presentation is definitely different. I don't need the eye

relief but I love the comfort and immersion of the 17mm 92. The 92's seem to present much

more like a super Morpheus than an Ethos. if you haven't tried the Morpheus, they present 

like a slightly more immersive Pentax XW.

Thanks Dave - I think you have summed up exactly why I want to try these eyepieces for myself smile.gif


  • rowdy388 likes this

#13 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 42934
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 11 November 2019 - 03:37 PM

I also had the same bug, and tried the 17mm 92 when it was on sale awhile ago.

 

I compared it multiple nights with Ethos 17 and Nikon HW 17. Tried it in Televue 101 and 12.5" F5 with paracorr mostly.

 

As far as a strictly optical comparison goes (sharpness/contrast being the prime concern), the Nikon won for me, with ethos very close, and then the ES just behind again.

 

If you factor in the immersiveness and comfort of the ES, I can very much see why people like these so much. 

 

Ultimately, the 17 was too heavy for me, which is saying something. My main scope is a 12.5" Portaball, which are a bit notorious for balance issues. The 17 ES + paracorr was just a tiny bit too heavy, and the scope started to fall from about 40 degrees or so.

 

The Nikon is very comfortable for me, more so than the ethos, but not as easy as the ES. 

 

So ergonomically/fun to use, I'd put the ES first, the Nikon 2nd, and Ethos 3rd.

I've seen a PortaBall that overcame the balance issue with a Bungee cord attached to the base and the top of the "mirror ball".

As the scope went lower, the bungee stretched and provided resistance to falling.

I use something similar to that on my dob at low pointing altitudes.


  • areyoukiddingme likes this

#14 CrazyPanda

CrazyPanda

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1933
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2012

Posted 11 November 2019 - 05:17 PM

Having read so much about the ES 92 degree eyepieces, I could not pass up a chance to get hold of the 12mm and the 17mm pre-owned for a pretty good price for the pair. Reading about eyepieces is one thing but trying them for yourself is even better smile.gif

 

My mainstay eyepieces in my 12 inch F/5.3 dob have been my 21, 13, 8 and 6mm Ethos for the past 3-4 years but I'm happy to see what the ES 92's are all about for a few months before deciding what stays and what goes.

 

I'm not expecting the ES 92's to beat the Ethos in pure optical performance but I'm interested to see how their overall presentation, as it's often termed, compares. As a confirmed "occularholic" I have to say that the prospect of gazing into those expansive ES eye lenses is very intriguing smile.gif

 

Anyone else been though a similar process recently with these hyper wide giants ?

I've found myself reaching more for the 17 ES92 these days than the 21E. Just way more comfortable to look through, and despite the narrower AFOV, it feels more immersive because of that extra comfort.

 

For a while I was gung-ho about building out my Ethos set, but my experiences with the Docter and ES92 series threw a wrench in that because of comfort considerations alone. I just wish *someone* executed on a full line of long eye relief ultrawides. Nobody does. The closest we get is Morpheus, but even then, that's not the same spread of focal lengths as Delos, and 76 degrees is not wide enough for my tastes compared to the ES92.

 

What I really want is a full line of ES92s in the same focal length options as Ethos. But sadly, only TeleVue seems to understand the need for tight focal length spacing, so even when ES rolls out their new 92 focal lengths, I bet the set will not be as comprehensive as Ethos.

 

There is currently a major missing piece of the eyepiece marketing that nobody, not even TeleVue, is taking advantage of properly.


Edited by CrazyPanda, 11 November 2019 - 05:24 PM.

  • John Huntley, Neptune, Procyon and 1 other like this

#15 Tyson M

Tyson M

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3740
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2015
  • Loc: 53 degrees North

Posted 11 November 2019 - 05:30 PM

I've found myself reaching more for the 17 ES92 these days than the 21E. Just way more comfortable to look through, and despite the narrower AFOV, it feels more immersive because of that extra comfort.

 

For a while I was gung-ho about building out my Ethos set, but my experiences with the Docter and ES92 series threw a wrench in that because of comfort considerations alone. I just wish *someone* executed on a full line of long eye relief ultrawides. Nobody does. The closest we get is Morpheus, but even then, that's not the same spread of focal lengths as Delos, and 76 degrees is not wide enough for my tastes compared to the ES92.

 

What I really want is a full line of ES92s in the same focal length options as Ethos. But sadly, only TeleVue seems to understand the need for tight focal length spacing, so even when ES rolls out their new 92 focal lengths, I bet the set will not be as comprehensive as Ethos.

 

There is currently a major missing piece of the eyepiece marketing that nobody, not even TeleVue, is taking advantage of properly.

Agreed, we need a 4-6mm ES 92 deg to go along with their 12mm 92 deg.


  • John Huntley and Tank like this

#16 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 42934
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 11 November 2019 - 05:56 PM

ES previous sales manager said 5 focal lengths were planned.

What they were has been fluid.

ES isn't saying except I heard 2020 for the next focal length.


  • vkhastro1, John Huntley, Illinois and 3 others like this

#17 John Huntley

John Huntley

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2156
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2006
  • Loc: Portishead, SW England - mentioned in the Domesday Book.

Posted 11 November 2019 - 06:25 PM

If I take a liking to the 12mm and 17mm 92's then I have time to raise some funds for another one in 2020 grin.gif

 

I ought to say that I'm in no way unhappy with my Ethos set but I've had "an itch that I needed to scratch" with the ES 92's for a while now.

 

The last ES eyepieces that I owned were the 20mm / 100 and the 24mm / 68. Both very nice eyepieces but eventually replaced by the Ethos 21 and Panoptic 24 with no particular regrets, apart from needing to find quite a few more £'s / $'s to move to the black and green varieties.


Edited by John Huntley, 11 November 2019 - 06:26 PM.


#18 StevenYood

StevenYood

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 84
  • Joined: 29 Jan 2010
  • Loc: Suwanee, GA

Posted 12 November 2019 - 04:57 AM

I found the transparency and presentation of the 92s to be second to none. I haven’t seen the Nikon, but I preferred the 92s to the Lunts and TVs.
  • John Huntley and 25585 like this

#19 Rock22

Rock22

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 360
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2017
  • Loc: Diamond Bar, California

Posted 12 November 2019 - 02:12 PM

I like the ES 92-deg EPs, too.  I am seriously considering offering up my 13mm Ethos because I use the 12mm 92-deg so often.  The 17mm is especially heavy.  I am not having difficulty balancing my scope with the 17mm in the focuser of my 180mm mak or 127mm achro, but I've had to find solutions to balance my smaller 80mm refractors when using such heavy eyepieces.  I typically use 1.25" eyepieces for the smaller scopes.

 

I used the 17mm in my 180mm mak for a small outreach yesterday morning to view the Mercury transit.  Very, very good.

 

I'm very curious how the 92-deg eyepieces will work in your Tak FC100-DL, my dream scope.  I use a 102mm achro, and the views are good.  I used the 12mm 92-deg and the 102mm achro at a cub scout event to see Saturn.  It was a hit with the crowd, so I wonder how the response would have been in a scope with better optics.

 

Hope you have enjoy the eyepieces!


  • John Huntley and 25585 like this

#20 DRodrigues

DRodrigues

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 345
  • Joined: 08 Aug 2011

Posted 13 November 2019 - 06:44 PM

Agreed, we need a 4-6mm ES 92 deg to go along with their 12mm 92 deg.

I have mentioned this before but have a look at the end of the text of http://www.pt-ducks....f 5mm eyepieces to see how to obtain a "5mm ES92"...cool.gif



#21 25585

25585

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5869
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 13 November 2019 - 07:02 PM

I have mentioned this before but have a look at the end of the text of http://www.pt-ducks....f 5mm eyepieces to see how to obtain a "5mm ES92"...cool.gif

Excellent site & research! bow.gif

 

Now I have an AP BARADV Barlow, I will be experimenting with my ES92s. 



#22 John Huntley

John Huntley

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2156
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2006
  • Loc: Portishead, SW England - mentioned in the Domesday Book.

Posted 13 November 2019 - 08:44 PM

I've given up telextending big eyepieces !:

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

  • bigeps.jpg

  • havasman and MikeMiller like this

#23 areyoukiddingme

areyoukiddingme

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4448
  • Joined: 18 Nov 2012

Posted 13 November 2019 - 08:52 PM

Excellent site & research! bow.gif

 

Now I have an AP BARADV Barlow, I will be experimenting with my ES92s. 

Expect magnification closer to 1.8x than 2. Possibly lower.

 

I've only found close to 2x when I have an eyepiece fitted in a high-hat style 1.25" adapter.

 

A 2" eyepiece inserted directly will almost certainly be less than 2x, and will of course depend on the specific eyepiece.


  • 25585 likes this

#24 Tyson M

Tyson M

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3740
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2015
  • Loc: 53 degrees North

Posted 13 November 2019 - 11:23 PM

I just took out the ES 17mm 92 deg.  Overall it is just an epic eyepiece.  I do not use that word often, but it is truly epic in every way.   

In my AT92 f5.5 it sings.  Perfectly corrected with huge swaths of sky that it swallows up, and it actually is fairly good on the 98.1% full moon. 

I did not like these ES 92 deg eyepieces for solar very much (with the 2" lunt wedge), but I am not sure if that was just poor seeing with my NP127 that time, but on the moon today it was actually tolerable. 

Not quite as the clarity of the Brandons, but that could have been an exit pupil thing, as the moon can be fickle that way.  You really need to match exit pupils exactly otherwise it is very difficult to discern differences. Larger exit pupil especially typically pops more, looks better than a smaller exit pupil IME.


  • John Huntley and 25585 like this

#25 John Huntley

John Huntley

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2156
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2006
  • Loc: Portishead, SW England - mentioned in the Domesday Book.

Posted Yesterday, 05:00 PM

My ES 17mm and 12mm 92's have arrived along with very cloudy and rainy conditions. 1st light will have to wait but I'm impressed by their build quality. Not quite as daunting in terms of size and weight as I expected but I guess I'm used to the Ethos 21 and Nagler 31.

 

The eye lenses of the 92's look like they could suck you right in ! smile.gif


  • 25585 likes 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