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

Wide TFOV 1-1/4" Eyepiece

  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#1 Rustler46

Rustler46

    Apollo

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1066
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2018
  • Loc: Coos Bay, Oregon

Posted 23 November 2019 - 10:48 PM

I have been wanting to get away from most of my 2-inch eyepieces. This is because of the off balanced weight on diagonals when pointed to the side for viewing comfort in my SCTs and refractor. My telescopes are:

  1. 10-inch Dob, f/5 to f/5.5 (w/ coma corrector)
  2. Celestron-8, f/10 to f/6.3
  3. Celestron-11, f/10 to f/6.3
  4. AT115EDT APO triplet, f/7

Telescopes 3 and 4 are the most used with the APO riding atop the C-11. Eyepieces under consideration are:

I don't demand the premium performance that the Nagler design would provide at the premium price. Besides I prefer something less than the 82° AFOV. Something around 65° AFOV is just fine for my uses. I am drawn to the Panoptic, based on Televue's established reputation of quality performance. The other two eyepieces have their adherents. I'm looking for widest true FOV with decent edge of field performance with the telescopes I most use.

 

So I would welcome comments and suggestions.

 

Best Regards,

Russ


Edited by Rustler46, 23 November 2019 - 10:51 PM.

  • jwwx and bbqediguana like this

#2 Tyson M

Tyson M

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3831
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2015
  • Loc: Alberta, Canada

Posted 23 November 2019 - 11:02 PM

You will see a bit of FC on the last 10% of the edges in the 20XW (I observed through a TSA102 @ 802mm focal lenghth) but on axis it is an incredible eyepiece. 

I'd go with the TV 32 plossl or 40mm plossl for max true field of view for 1.15".  The 40 for dark sites, the 32 for in town.  The 24 pan would be better than the 32 plossl in town if you can take the whole field (don't wear glasses).


  • 25585 and Rustler46 like this

#3 faackanders2

faackanders2

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6056
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2011

Posted 23 November 2019 - 11:44 PM

Everyone loves 24mm Panoptics especially for binoviewing!


  • shaesavage and Rustler46 like this

#4 csrlice12

csrlice12

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 25003
  • Joined: 22 May 2012
  • Loc: Denver, CO

Posted 24 November 2019 - 12:02 AM

Just a little old school...22 Panoptic...use it in 1.25" or 2" mode.


  • Procyon and Rustler46 like this

#5 Rustler46

Rustler46

    Apollo

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1066
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2018
  • Loc: Coos Bay, Oregon

Posted 24 November 2019 - 12:02 AM

Everyone loves 24mm Panoptics especially for binoviewing!

That's something to keep in mind since I have a WO binoviewer. The only eyepiece pairs I have are WO 20mm and Celestron Silvertop 26mm Plossls. Two Panoptics would be spendy, but likely worth it.


  • bbqediguana likes this

#6 gezak22

gezak22

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3084
  • Joined: 15 Aug 2004
  • Loc: On far side of moon. Send help.

Posted 24 November 2019 - 12:29 AM

Everyone loves 24mm Panoptics especially for binoviewing!

For binoviewing, the 24 Pan is indeed the way to go. But I would not say that i love it. For cyclops viewing, I strongly preferred the 24 mm APM UFF as it had sharper stars to the edge and less barrel distortion than the 24 mm Pan.


  • 25585 and Rustler46 like this

#7 Rustler46

Rustler46

    Apollo

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1066
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2018
  • Loc: Coos Bay, Oregon

Posted 24 November 2019 - 01:47 AM

I have been wanting to get away from most of my 2-inch eyepieces. This is because of the off balanced weight on diagonals when pointed to the side for viewing comfort in my SCTs and refractor. My telescopes are:

  1. 10-inch Dob, f/5 to f/5.5 (w/ coma corrector)
  2. Celestron-8, f/10 to f/6.3
  3. Celestron-11, f/10 to f/6.3
  4. AT115EDT APO triplet, f/7

Telescopes 3 and 4 are the most used with the APO riding atop the C-11. Eyepieces under consideration are:

I don't demand the premium performance that the Nagler design would provide at the premium price. Besides I prefer something less than the 82° AFOV. Something around 65° AFOV is just fine for my uses. I am drawn to the Panoptic, based on Televue's established reputation of quality performance. The other two eyepieces have their adherents. I'm looking for widest true FOV with decent edge of field performance with the telescopes I most use.

 

So I would welcome comments and suggestions.

Don Pensack gives some useful information on the Baader 31mm in the following link (#4):

This information is having me shy away from the 31mm. Maybe the 24mm Hyperion eyepiece would be better to consider:

Don's concerns about vignetting in the 31mm may also be the case with this one if used in a 1-1/4 inch focuser. But it is considerably lighter (11 oz). Also the inexpensive price might indicate "you get what you pay for" with this one. I'm still leaning heavily toward the 24mm Panoptic.


Edited by Rustler46, 24 November 2019 - 01:58 AM.


#8 Rustler46

Rustler46

    Apollo

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1066
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2018
  • Loc: Coos Bay, Oregon

Posted 24 November 2019 - 02:09 AM

You will see a bit of FC on the last 10% of the edges in the 20XW (I observed through a TSA102 @ 802mm focal lenghth) but on axis it is an incredible eyepiece. 

I'd go with the TV 32 plossl or 40mm plossl for max true field of view for 1.15".  The 40 for dark sites, the 32 for in town.  The 24 pan would be better than the 32 plossl in town if you can take the whole field (don't wear glasses).

My experience with the 32mm Celestron Plossl is not very good in my C-11. Perhaps there have been several versions of this eyepiece over the years. I observe mostly from within town. But even there I much prefer the MaxView-40, despite its narrow AFOV.

Your take on the Panoptic 24 in town is most useful, since I don't wear glasses while observing. Thanks for your comments, Tyson



#9 rkelley8493

rkelley8493

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1189
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2019
  • Loc: Southeast USA

Posted 24 November 2019 - 02:16 AM

First one that comes to mind when you say 1.25" Wide TFOV is the 24 Panoptic, then the Explore Sci 24/68º. The Panoptic has an excellent reputation, and I haven't heard a single thing bad about it. I wouldn't recommend binoviewing with them in the William Optics binoviewer though. You would probably get some vignetting because of the clear aperture vs field stop diameter. Also, it would defeat the purpose of going for something lighter than 2" to keep your scope balanced. 


Edited by rkelley8493, 24 November 2019 - 01:55 PM.

  • Procyon and Rustler46 like this

#10 stevenrjanssens

stevenrjanssens

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 69
  • Joined: 24 May 2018

Posted 24 November 2019 - 03:19 AM

Another vote for the 24 Pan. It provides the widest true FOV possible in a 1.25" eyepiece, it's as compact as a T6 (just a little stouter) and weighs only 0.5 lbs. I similarly wanted a 1.25" set for their convenience, and settled on the 24 Pan for the maximum TFOV, size, weight, reputation and being parfocal with other TV 1.25" eyepieces. I don't have the others to make a comparison, but the 24 Pan is popular and there are many threads on it here going back 15 years. It feels like I'm at the cutting edge of eyepieces... circa 2005. grin.gif


  • Rustler46 and rkelley8493 like this

#11 F.Meiresonne

F.Meiresonne

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5020
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2003
  • Loc: Eeklo,Belgium

Posted 24 November 2019 - 04:01 AM

I would opt for the pan 24. It has premium performance and is tack sharp and not too big.Only has big pincushion distortion so for daylight panning maybe not the best idea but for astronomical purpose just a great thing.

You probably cannot go wrong with the Pentax XW either but it is allready bigger then a pan 24 and heavier so if weight really is the issue here ...i would go for the pan


  • Rustler46 likes this

#12 izar187

izar187

    Soyuz

  • -----
  • Posts: 3956
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2006
  • Loc: 43N

Posted 24 November 2019 - 04:49 AM

Well, I too was going to suggest a 32mm plossl.

But that is because I wish for it's glasses on eye relief, modest cost, exit pupil with UHC and Olll filters.

Perhaps it, plus one alternative for the C11?

 

BTW, how much actual difference is there between a 26mm silver top, and 24mm pan?


Edited by izar187, 24 November 2019 - 04:51 AM.

  • bbqediguana and Rustler46 like this

#13 LDW47

LDW47

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2515
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 24 November 2019 - 09:07 AM

I have been wanting to get away from most of my 2-inch eyepieces. This is because of the off balanced weight on diagonals when pointed to the side for viewing comfort in my SCTs and refractor. My telescopes are:

  1. 10-inch Dob, f/5 to f/5.5 (w/ coma corrector)
  2. Celestron-8, f/10 to f/6.3
  3. Celestron-11, f/10 to f/6.3
  4. AT115EDT APO triplet, f/7

Telescopes 3 and 4 are the most used with the APO riding atop the C-11. Eyepieces under consideration are:

I don't demand the premium performance that the Nagler design would provide at the premium price. Besides I prefer something less than the 82° AFOV. Something around 65° AFOV is just fine for my uses. I am drawn to the Panoptic, based on Televue's established reputation of quality performance. The other two eyepieces have their adherents. I'm looking for widest true FOV with decent edge of field performance with the telescopes I most use.

 

So I would welcome comments and suggestions.

 

Best Regards,

Russ

If you want to get rid of your 2” eps for that reason, you really do have a problem ! Get rid of them and fast, lol !



#14 SeattleScott

SeattleScott

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6225
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011

Posted 24 November 2019 - 09:51 AM

A 35mm Ultima/Elite Gold Series etc will give the widest FOV (yes more than a 24 Panoptic) with a very reasonable 5-6mm exit pupil in your scopes. However many find the eye relief excessive leading to blackouts, so often people prefer the 30mm, especially the Tak 30LE. This would also give a slightly smaller exit pupil. And cost slightly less than a 24 Panoptic.

The 24 Panoptic is great no doubt and gives you some AFOV but it would also be a fairly small exit pupil for low power use with the Apo. The Meade 25 HD-60 is close to Panoptic correction and FOV at a much lower cost, and you would probably have trouble telling them apart at F6-F7 other than the slight difference in AFOV and FOV. I got one for my grab and I set, and have been impressed that it performs similarly to my $250 eyepieces other than a bit less AFOV.

The Hyperion 24 is not one of the better ones in the series. Better off with ES 24/68 for similar money, unless you wear glasses. You are leaning towards a 24 Panoptic so I assume you don’t wear glasses.

Scott
  • Rustler46 likes this

#15 25585

25585

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6223
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 24 November 2019 - 09:51 AM

ES62 26mm & Takahashi 28mm 60° Erfle have similar TFoV to 24mm 68° eyepieces.

 

Not quite at the max is the very good 22mm Vixen LVW 65°, but only pre-owned now.


  • rkelley8493 likes this

#16 F.Meiresonne

F.Meiresonne

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5020
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2003
  • Loc: Eeklo,Belgium

Posted 24 November 2019 - 11:28 AM

 

 

BTW, how much actual difference is there between a 26mm silver top, and 24mm pan?

quite a lot imo


  • izar187 and rkelley8493 like this

#17 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 43206
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 24 November 2019 - 06:49 PM

For binoviewing, the 24 Pan is indeed the way to go. But I would not say that i love it. For cyclops viewing, I strongly preferred the 24 mm APM UFF as it had sharper stars to the edge and less barrel distortion than the 24 mm Pan.

The 24mm Panoptic has zero barrel distortion (negative rectilinear distortion).

It does, however, have a lot of pincushion distortion (positive rectilinear distortion).

Total distortion is around + 5.5%.  This is because of vanishingly low angular magnification distortion.

 

The APM UFF 24mm is another possible, with -0.27% distortion (a very tiny amount of barrel distortion).  With such low rectilinear distortion, however,

it does have noticeable angular magnification distortion you can see when panning.

 

Another possibility is the 24mm 68° Explore Scientific, with +4.7%, slightly less than the Panoptic.  It gets good reviews.

 

 

The Baader 31 should not be considered a 1.25" eyepiece, regardless of the adapter they come with.

It introduces quite serious and obtrusive vignetting.


Edited by Starman1, 24 November 2019 - 06:51 PM.

  • Jon Isaacs, SteveG, faackanders2 and 3 others like this

#18 Rustler46

Rustler46

    Apollo

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1066
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2018
  • Loc: Coos Bay, Oregon

Posted 24 November 2019 - 09:47 PM

If you want to get rid of your 2” eps for that reason, you really do have a problem ! Get rid of them and fast, lol !

The worst offender I have in 2-inch eyepieces is my Explore Scientific 20mm 100°, which weighs in at .965 kg, 2.1 lbs. While it is an awesome eyepiece visually, it's a big piece of hardware. The only other 2-inch eyepiece I have  is a GSO 42mm, 68° AFOV. This one weighs in at 0.37 kg, 0.81 lb. Both of these, but especially the ES 20mm, provide a lot of torque when rotated away from vertical on the diagonal. Since most of my eyepieces are 1-1/4 inch, I would rather be using my Baader-Zeiss prism diagonal rather than my AstroTech 2-inch dielectric mirror diagonal.

 

So that is the story of wanting to get a maximum true field 1-1/4 inch eyepiece for my telescopes. With something like a 27mm field stop, the actual field of view with each of my telescopes would be as follows:

  • AT115EDT triplet refractor - 1.9°
  • Celestron-8 @ f/6.3 - 1.2°
  • Celestron-8 @ f/10 - 0.76°
  • 10-inch Newtonian @ f/5.5 - 1.1°
  • Celestron-11 @ f/6.3 - 0.88°
  • Celestron-11 @ f/10 - 0.55°

Yes the 24mm Panoptic would no doubt be nice. But I'm open to other suggestions. But I do plan to sell my Explore Scientific 20mm 100° eyepiece on Cloudy Nights classifieds to help fund what is spent on a wide field 1-1/4 inch eyepiece. Since the GSO 42mm isn't worth trying to sell, I will be keeping that one. It will make a worthy addition to my loaner telescope and eyepiece combo.

 

When it is employed on my most used telescopes the actual fields of view are:

  • AT115EDT triplet refractor - 3.2°
  • Celestron-8 @ f/6.3 - 2.0°
  • Celestron-8 @ f/10 - 1.3°
  • 10-inch Newtonian @ f/5.5 - 1.9°
  • Celestron-11 @ f/6.3 - 1.5°
  • Celestron-11 @ f/10 - 0.92°

 

For the GSO 42mm, I've discovered that if I take the lens set from an Astrola (GSO) 2X 2-inch Barlow, screwing it into the filter threads, it performs like a 31mm eyepiece. The Barlow is then amplifying at 1.35X. It also greatly improves the edge of field performance will all my telescopes. So eventually that will be my only 2-inch eyepiece.


Edited by Rustler46, 24 November 2019 - 10:44 PM.

  • LDW47 likes this

#19 Rustler46

Rustler46

    Apollo

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1066
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2018
  • Loc: Coos Bay, Oregon

Posted 24 November 2019 - 11:06 PM

For binoviewing, the 24 Pan is indeed the way to go. But I would not say that i love it. For cyclops viewing, I strongly preferred the 24 mm APM UFF as it had sharper stars to the edge and less barrel distortion than the 24 mm Pan.

Thanks for the tip. I'll look into the APM UFF 24mm as another possibility along with the Panoptic. Any others used this one?



#20 Rustler46

Rustler46

    Apollo

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1066
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2018
  • Loc: Coos Bay, Oregon

Posted 24 November 2019 - 11:35 PM

Well, I too was going to suggest a 32mm plossl.

But that is because I wish for it's glasses on eye relief, modest cost, exit pupil with UHC and Olll filters.

Perhaps it, plus one alternative for the C11?

 

BTW, how much actual difference is there between a 26mm silver top, and 24mm pan?

My Celestron 26mm Silvertop Plossl is one of my favorite eyepieces - very sharp in the central 3/4 of the FOV. It does have a 22mm field stop versus a 27mm field stop for the Panoptic. So actual FOV will be increased 23% (versus the Panoptic) even at a bit lower power. I now have two of the 26mm Silvertops for use in my William Optics Binoviewer. 



#21 Rustler46

Rustler46

    Apollo

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1066
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2018
  • Loc: Coos Bay, Oregon

Posted 25 November 2019 - 01:11 AM

The 24mm Panoptic has zero barrel distortion (negative rectilinear distortion).

It does, however, have a lot of pincushion distortion (positive rectilinear distortion).

Total distortion is around + 5.5%.  This is because of vanishingly low angular magnification distortion.

 

The APM UFF 24mm is another possible, with -0.27% distortion (a very tiny amount of barrel distortion).  With such low rectilinear distortion, however,

it does have noticeable angular magnification distortion you can see when panning.

 

Another possibility is the 24mm 68° Explore Scientific, with +4.7%, slightly less than the Panoptic.  It gets good reviews.

 

 

The Baader 31 should not be considered a 1.25" eyepiece, regardless of the adapter they come with.

It introduces quite serious and obtrusive vignetting.

Don thanks so much for the insight. I have been exploring what has been shared on this thread as well as this thread from 2017:

Lots of good discussion now and over the years. The quality of the 24mm Panoptic for tack sharp to the edge performance is what one gets for the premium price. Here are some factors with my own situation that figure in to the decision I will eventually make:

  • My eyepiece collection is a diverse set acquired over 56 years. Except for a set of cheap Celestron Plossls no two of my most used eyepieces are of the same manufacturer or design. There are among these a Brandon, military surplus Erfle, University Optics Konig, MaxView-40, Olivion 58°, Plossl, Explore Scientific 100° and a TeleVue 11mm Nagler T6.
  • While I am quite tolerant of less than perfect performance, particularly on the edge, my most used eyepiece on all different types of telescopes is the Nagler.
  • While I wear glasses or contact lenses when at the telescope the glasses are not needed.

So with this as background and with the kind advice given in this thread and others I've narrowed my choices down to these:

From what I have gathered the two less expensive ones may not have the same extreme edge performance of the Panoptic. But $100+ may be a high price for that improvement. Yet my experience with the Nagler tells me I'll get what I pay for with the Panoptic. The advantage of the two others is there will be some extra money available for other useful accessories. I need to get another (expensive) Losmandy counterweight to replace the "pieces of junk" hanging on the G-11's counterweight shaft:

 

C-11-AT115EDT-G11-00966.jpg

The "pieces of junk" mentioned are the black front crankshaft pulley off a 1956 Ford V8 and green drill-press vise. The latter has been replaced by an even less photogenic trailer tow ball/hitch. But without the extra funds available for a nicer looking counterweight, I can get by with the junk at hand. 

 

Back on topic I would really appreciate more real world reports on the performance of the APM UFF eyepiece. I'm not familiar with that brand or its offerings. Can any of you help in this regard?

 

I note the APM eyepiece is much larger and significantly heavier (8 oz versus ~12 oz). I used Google translate on this report:

 

APM 24 vs 24 Panoptic - The pictures tell the story regarding size.

 

Getting the APM would not only save money, but enable adding the 9th or 10th different design/manufacturer to my set. lol.gif

I just need to know how it is rated by others. I'm getting close to ordering my new 1-1/4 inch wide field eyepiece.jump.gif

 

All the Best,
Russ


Edited by Rustler46, 25 November 2019 - 02:39 AM.


#22 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 43206
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 25 November 2019 - 11:13 AM

Russ, I've used all 3 in an f/5 scope, coma-corrected to f/5.75.

The 24mm Panoptic is the sharpest of the 3, with no caveats on my part.

The APM had good contrast, and was very sharp in the center 50%, but displayed astigmatism in the outer field, as did the ES.

All 3 of them behaved similarly in my 4" triplet apo, but outer field astigmatism was reduced.


  • Jon Isaacs and Rustler46 like this

#23 BillP

BillP

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 18829
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2006
  • Loc: Spotsylvania, VA

Posted 25 November 2019 - 11:52 AM

I don't demand the premium performance that the Nagler design would provide at the premium price. Besides I prefer something less than the 82° AFOV. Something around 65° AFOV is just fine for my uses. I am drawn to the Panoptic, based on Televue's established reputation of quality performance. The other two eyepieces have their adherents. I'm looking for widest true FOV with decent edge of field performance with the telescopes I most use.

 

So I would welcome comments and suggestions.

 

Given the AFOV preferences you like, the 24 Pan or 24 ES68 would probably be the way to go.  Also, considering you have f/5 instruments in the mix, not letting the eyepiece focal length get too long so the exit pupil stays less than 6mm so sky backgrounds stay darker will be a plus for the 24mms.  I've had both of these, sold the Pan and kept the ES as they were close enough in performance that I could make productive use from the saved funds - ES is generally $159 vs. $289 for Pan.  https://www.cloudyni...omparison-r2651


Edited by BillP, 25 November 2019 - 11:52 AM.

  • Jon Isaacs, 25585 and Rustler46 like this

#24 Don H

Don H

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 992
  • Joined: 28 Dec 2006
  • Loc: Desert SW

Posted 25 November 2019 - 01:14 PM

The 24 Pan is also one of my favorites. It is probably very close to parfocal with the 11mm Nagler and very similar in weight. No muss, no fuss for very nice views. You could fill in the difference someday with a 16mm Nagler T6 or 18.2 DeLite...


  • Rustler46 likes this

#25 25585

25585

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6223
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 25 November 2019 - 03:55 PM

A mid 20s Delite would be great! idea.gif




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