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

What is still missing in eyepiece offerings?

  • Please log in to reply
238 replies to this topic

#226 25585

25585

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,345
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 09 February 2020 - 08:18 PM

An optical accessory that enables projection/magnification of an entire exit pupil image with no loss of image or creating extra viewing issues would be great. Enhancement fine of course. 


Edited by 25585, 09 February 2020 - 08:19 PM.


#227 ed_turco

ed_turco

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,483
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2009
  • Loc: Lincoln, RI

Posted 11 February 2020 - 01:52 PM

. . . Why in this age of 2" minimum focusers are most telescope eyepiece designers still sticking in the antiquated 1.25" rut? Why in the amateur boom, are so many eyepieces still designed for lab or observatory perfect conditions and eyesight? And why do so many people buy on brand before any other consideration?    

Shorter fl eyepieces have to be made with short fl lenses.  You can't make a 1" lens with a focal length of .25".   Think about it.



#228 Astrojensen

Astrojensen

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12,609
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Bornholm, Denmark

Posted 11 February 2020 - 02:00 PM

The Morphies are sweet.  I have some of them.  Isnt the issue with the ES 92's that they are HUGE?  We need smaller EPs with the super wide field s and eye relief. smile.gif

The thing is, that if you want both super wide field AND good eye relief, the eye lens of the eyepiece MUST be large. There is no way around it. And if you want a medium focal length AND a large apparent field of view AND a long eye relief, both the field lens AND the eye lens of the eyepiece will by necessity be large. 

 

And so what you wind up with, if you want the "forbidden trio" of both large apparent field of view, long focal length and long eye relief, is the ES 92 line, basically. 

 

 

Clear skies!
Thomas, Denmark


  • Mr. Mike and 25585 like this

#229 Mr. Mike

Mr. Mike

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,941
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2005
  • Loc: Churchville, NY

Posted 11 February 2020 - 02:22 PM

The thing is, that if you want both super wide field AND good eye relief, the eye lens of the eyepiece MUST be large. There is no way around it. And if you want a medium focal length AND a large apparent field of view AND a long eye relief, both the field lens AND the eye lens of the eyepiece will by necessity be large. 

 

And so what you wind up with, if you want the "forbidden trio" of both large apparent field of view, long focal length and long eye relief, is the ES 92 line, basically. 

 

 

Clear skies!
Thomas, Denmark

Yes - you're right.  Its what I want but know I cant have it ;)
 


  • Astrojensen likes this

#230 mikeDnight

mikeDnight

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 903
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2015
  • Loc: Lancashire, UK

Posted 11 February 2020 - 05:11 PM

.....and now Vixen HRs are all discontinued.

 

 I did wonder how long something so good would last. Thankfully I bought them all and love them, but its still abombdrop.gif



#231 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 44,121
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 11 February 2020 - 11:01 PM

the demise of the HRs is a bit premature.  They have periodic productions,so some focal lengths go out of production.

but Vixen says "not yet" when asked about discontinuance.


  • mikeDnight likes this

#232 SandyHouTex

SandyHouTex

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,327
  • Joined: 02 Jun 2009
  • Loc: Houston, Texas, USA

Posted 12 February 2020 - 10:13 AM

Is everyone out there satisfied with all that the market is currently provided in terms of eyepieces, or is there something more not being addressed? 

 

With the advent of wide fields the market became wide field crazy so not we have all kinds of 70, 80, 100, and even 120 offerings.  These along with the Paracorr concept sure made all the Dob owners happy as the off-axis finally was not such a mess.  But is this it?  Is everyone satisfied and feeling that no more significant innovation or product customization needed?

 

I personally think there is plenty of room for some eyepieces that address special needs for certain classes of observers.  Things that come to mind is what would dedicated double star observers wish was available from eyepieces that is not, or variable star observers, or lunar/planetary observers, etc.  So what do observers who spend most of their time in those pursuits feel is missing in the market from an eyepiece that would make their pursuits as amateur astronomers more effective?

 

Or is all that is wanted is a bigger AFOV with a little more eye relief and that is it...all we want is more wow-ness and nothing more?  Or what is the innovative need you feel would feed your observing pursuit like variables, doubles, lunar/planetary, etc., that the vendors in the market are simply missing the boat on? 

 

Tell us what you cannot find in the market that you really want from an eyepiece that is just not there.

 

ps - please try to keep price points out of the discussion and focus just on features/capabilities.

Easy answer - A ZAO II successor.  For some reason no one seems inclined to produce a high quality Ortho with a Zeiss polish.  A shame really.  For folks wanting the best possible planetary eyepiece set, you can’t get them


  • j.gardavsky likes this

#233 mikeDnight

mikeDnight

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 903
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2015
  • Loc: Lancashire, UK

Posted 12 February 2020 - 10:16 AM

Thanks for that Don. I may still make a velvet lined case for mine, as I imagine that eventually those who really want them would have bought them, and continued production may become too costly. Im determined mine will be going nowhere though, as even the rediculously short 1.6mm is a really nice eyepiece to use at a bonkers 463X in my 100mm. 



#234 vahe

vahe

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,689
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2005
  • Loc: Houston, Texas

Posted 12 February 2020 - 04:16 PM

Easy answer - A ZAO II successor.  For some reason no one seems inclined to produce a high quality Ortho with a Zeiss polish.  A shame really.  For folks wanting the best possible planetary eyepiece set, you can’t get them

 

What about Brandons, I have only one pair of 24mm and have compared them to my 25mm ZAO-I many times, they are just as good including scatter free polish, I use them both as my main planetary eyepieces with my f/20 Mak and binoviewer.

As for ZAO eyepieces, prices doubled when Zeiss introduced the second version, I am sure that they will double again if a third version is offered, the market will be very awfully small for a new set.

.

Vahe


  • j.gardavsky likes this

#235 BillP

BillP

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 19,116
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2006
  • Loc: Spotsylvania, VA

Posted 12 February 2020 - 07:49 PM

What about Brandons, I have only one pair of 24mm and have compared them to my 25mm ZAO-I many times, they are just as good including scatter free polish, I use them both as my main planetary eyepieces with my f/20 Mak and binoviewer.

When I compared the 25 ZAO-I to the 24 Brandon I also found them very close in performance.  But the ZAO still edged the Brandon.  But I was using f/8 Apos and a 10" f/4.7 so not testing high magnification performance like in your f/20.  But at the shorter focal lengths, even at f/8, the off-axis in the Abbe was much superior to the Brandon.  But on-axis they were mighty close with similar low scatter.



#236 SandyHouTex

SandyHouTex

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,327
  • Joined: 02 Jun 2009
  • Loc: Houston, Texas, USA

Posted 12 February 2020 - 08:56 PM

I do have a complete set of Brandons, and I agree that they have an super polish, but they aren’t very good at fast f/ratios.

 

ZAO IIs were designed to be excellent with the faster f/ratios along with having a great polish.  And while BillP asked us not to bring up cost, the ZAO IIs were only $1653 USD for all 4 eyepieces and the walnut case when available for purchase.  See here:

 

http://www.alpineast...bbeBroch_Lg.jpg

 

I think that certain manufacturers would be able to do it again for $2000.  There is obviously a demand or “collector” prices wouldn’t be so high.

 

(Apologies to BillP.)


Edited by SandyHouTex, 12 February 2020 - 09:10 PM.


#237 SandyHouTex

SandyHouTex

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,327
  • Joined: 02 Jun 2009
  • Loc: Houston, Texas, USA

Posted 12 February 2020 - 09:00 PM

I do have a question for any of our eyepiece gurus.  Is the polish on the Tak Orthos equal to the ZAO IIs?  How about the CZJ Orthos?  I have both of those, but no ZAOIIs to compare them to.



#238 vahe

vahe

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,689
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2005
  • Loc: Houston, Texas

Posted 12 February 2020 - 09:33 PM

When I compared the 25 ZAO-I to the 24 Brandon I also found them very close in performance.  But the ZAO still edged the Brandon.  But I was using f/8 Apos and a 10" f/4.7 so not testing high magnification performance like in your f/20.  But at the shorter focal lengths, even at f/8, the off-axis in the Abbe was much superior to the Brandon.  But on-axis they were mighty close with similar low scatter.

Brandons have the reputation of less than satisfactory edge performance, in my case and at f/20 the problem goes away. The 24mm Brandon has one distinct advantage over 25mm ZAO-I which makes the comparison a bit tricky, the advantage of this particular 24mm Brandon is its wider angle, I believe that it covers 53 degrees, The ZAO has a narrower coverage, typical Ortho or roughly 8 degrees less.

.
As for ZAO-I vs ZAO-II, I asked Roland if in his opinion these are optically the same? He replied:

“They are optically the same, mechanically a bit different. The newer ones have smaller field stops because a few (picky) people complained in the past that the outer part of the field was not sharp in the version 1, so Baader had them made with smaller field stops.”

.
Anyway if we are comparing Brandon 24mm edge performance to any ZAO we need to compare the Brandon’s inner 45 degree field, and not the entire 53 degree field, to the ZAO-I and 43 degree field to ZAO-II .

.

Vahe


  • SandyHouTex and j.gardavsky like this

#239 Phillip Creed

Phillip Creed

    Idiot Seeking Village

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,316
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2006
  • Loc: Canal Fulton, OH

Posted 13 February 2020 - 10:07 AM

I'll throw another vote onto the pile for a 2"-zoom, or at least a Baader "Mark-V" or a "Morpheus Zoom" with larger AFOV vs. current offerings.

I have a Kowa TE11-WZ zoom that has a focal length span of roughly 20.4mm down to 8.5mm.  It is quite sharp and has high contrast, as well as a generous AFOV, starting at 57°-AFOV at the lowest power.

But it was only designed for Kowa Prominar spotting scopes, which means it was probably designed to be used in tandem with its prism housings.  I notice that the AFOV increases to around 70° around 12mm, but then there's vignetting that prevents it from going out much beyond that at the highest power.  Also, like many spotting scope zooms converted to astro use, it has EOFB, which I'm guessing is from not blackening the lens edges.

I don't mind these shortcomings, because it's VERY sharp on the edges even in fast Newts, and it's VERY sharp on-axis as well.  Lunar/planetary are great with it, despite all the glass surfaces.  The coatings on it are phenomenal.

But I'm using one with a homemade 2"-adapter.  It's not something you can just order.

So here's an eyepiece design I'd like to see designed and marketed, and this seems doable--

20mm - 8mm, as a 2.5X range is easier to engineer than a 3X range
AFOV of 60-65° @ 20mm and 75-80° at 8mm w/o vignetting.  2"-barrel if necessary.
Blackened lens edges
Good edge performance and coatings
Price ~ $600 (especially if optics are Chinese-sourced)

That's doable.

Somebody do this.

Seriously.

SOMEBODY DO THIS.

Clear Skies,
Phil


  • eros312 and Thonolan like 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