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

30 ES 82 vs the price competition (35 Panoptic, 30 APM UFF, 30 XW, 34 ES 68)

  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 jakecru

jakecru

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 957
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2013
  • Loc: Northern Nevada, USA

Posted 28 February 2020 - 12:32 PM

I know I made a thread about a year or two ago asking for recommendations between the 30 ES 82 and 30 APM UFF for my scope at the time which was an Orion 10" F/4.7 dob. I enjoyed the ES 30 mm 82, but I no longer have that scope, or the eyepiece. 

 

I have recently went on a scope purchasing spree, and now have two pretty fast scopes, both of which will be manual dobs:

 

12.5" F/4.8 Discovery Dobsonian

10.0" F/4.5 Custom Newtonian (will be building a Dobsonian base for this)

 

I am now working on building up my eyepiece kit, and after some homework I have come up with the following plan:

 

Lowest Power Widefield (30 ES 82, 30 APM UFF, 30 XW, 35 Panoptic, ES 34 mm 68)

22 Nagler T4

12.5 Morpheus (currently owned)

9 Morpheus

6.5 Morpheus 

5 Nagler T6 or 5 XW

 

This plan may change depending on what deals come up on the used market, but I will be following it pretty close. The 31 Nagler T5 is above the budget (unless I forget about the 22 Nagler T4 and just go with a 30 mm class eyepiece). I have owned the 22 Nagler T4 and I know it is one of my favorite all time eyepieces. It also provides a very nice 70x power (50x below the 120x provided by the 12.5 mm Morpheus), and will probably be used a lot in my scope, so I am a bit hesitant to skip this to help fund the 31 Nagler. Another cost friendly option would be to skip the 22 Nagler and just go with a 27 Panoptic for my wide field and next step from 12.5 mm. 

 

The 30 XW is a newer offering in this price range since it was just re-introduced, and I know they make very good eyepieces. A 30 mm exit pupil will be just above 6 mm, but the 34 and 35 mm focal lengths would push be above 7 mm until I eventually add a Paracorr. The 30 APM UFF also gets great reviews and is very budget friendly. If I go with 30 mm 70 degree, the 22 Nagler T4 may not make sense due to the small TFOV difference. How do they compare in fast scopes? The ES 30 82 would give me a nice exit pupil and largest TFOV and could complement a 22 Nagler well even though the magnification difference is only 20x. Which would you chose in this price range, and why? 


Edited by jakecru, 28 February 2020 - 01:02 PM.


#2 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 44,562
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 28 February 2020 - 02:38 PM

In terms of correction at f/5 at the edge of the field, with Paracorr II added, f/5.75:

from best to worst:

31mm Nagler

30mm UFF (only in 2nd place because the apparent field is narrower)

35mm Panoptic**

30mm XW** ##

30mm ES 82 ##

34mm ES 68 ## &&

 

** slight field curvature noted. 

## some uncorrected astigmatism in the outer field 

&& not well controlled for light scatter

 

All of them will be really bad at the edges in your scope without coma correction.

With coma correction, they're all decent low power eyepieces


  • russell23, jjack's, areyoukiddingme and 1 other like this

#3 jmiller1001

jmiller1001

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 273
  • Joined: 21 Mar 2016
  • Loc: Bay Area, CA

Posted 28 February 2020 - 02:53 PM

FWIW, I have a ES30 - 82 that I use on my 14.5" Starmaster (f4.3) (with a Parcorr 2).  I've compared it side by side on the same scope to a 31 Nagler (and I have a bunch of Naglers).  To my 55 year-old eyes, I could not see a lot of difference - at least not enough to warrant the extra $.  The Nagler had slightly better contrast and yes, there was some astig - but, not enough to detract from the overall experience of the ES.  And, this is the only ES eyepiece that I own ironically....


Edited by jmiller1001, 28 February 2020 - 02:54 PM.

  • stevew likes this

#4 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 44,562
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 28 February 2020 - 03:01 PM

FWIW, I have a ES30 - 82 that I use on my 14.5" Starmaster (f4.3) (with a Parcorr 2).  I've compared it side by side on the same scope to a 31 Nagler (and I have a bunch of Naglers).  To my 55 year-old eyes, I could not see a lot of difference - at least not enough to warrant the extra $.  The Nagler had slightly better contrast and yes, there was some astig - but, not enough to detract from the overall experience of the ES.  And, this is the only ES eyepiece that I own ironically....

Plus, if you're like me, you don't really use the 30mm all that much anyway.

I always advocate to spend the big bucks on an eyepiece that yields a 2mm exit pupil--you'll use that one a LOT.


  • yowser and BradFran like this

#5 brentknight

brentknight

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,547
  • Joined: 29 Dec 2014
  • Loc: Foley, Alabama

Posted 28 February 2020 - 03:07 PM

jakecru,

 

You've used the ES82/30 so know what it's like.  I prefer the N31T5 mostly for the ease of use and the build quality.  I hated the deep recess of the ES eyepiece and feel that the weight balance on the TV is much better...I always felt like the ES was going to fall out of my hand - field lens first.

 

But Don has a good point, unless you view wide field with fast refractors, you might want to distribute your funds to eyepieces that will get used more often.



#6 Tank

Tank

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,097
  • Joined: 27 Jul 2009
  • Loc: Stoney Creek, Ontario, CANADA

Posted 28 February 2020 - 03:23 PM

I would say

1. 31T5

2. 35 Panoptic

3. 28 UWAN

 

IMHO



#7 25585

25585

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,807
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 28 February 2020 - 03:29 PM

I know I made a thread about a year or two ago asking for recommendations between the 30 ES 82 and 30 APM UFF for my scope at the time which was an Orion 10" F/4.7 dob. I enjoyed the ES 30 mm 82, but I no longer have that scope, or the eyepiece. 

 

I have recently went on a scope purchasing spree, and now have two pretty fast scopes, both of which will be manual dobs:

 

12.5" F/4.8 Discovery Dobsonian

10.0" F/4.5 Custom Newtonian (will be building a Dobsonian base for this)

 

I am now working on building up my eyepiece kit, and after some homework I have come up with the following plan:

 

Lowest Power Widefield (30 ES 82, 30 APM UFF, 30 XW, 35 Panoptic, ES 34 mm 68)

22 Nagler T4

12.5 Morpheus (currently owned)

9 Morpheus

6.5 Morpheus 

5 Nagler T6 or 5 XW

 

This plan may change depending on what deals come up on the used market, but I will be following it pretty close. The 31 Nagler T5 is above the budget (unless I forget about the 22 Nagler T4 and just go with a 30 mm class eyepiece). I have owned the 22 Nagler T4 and I know it is one of my favorite all time eyepieces. It also provides a very nice 70x power (50x below the 120x provided by the 12.5 mm Morpheus), and will probably be used a lot in my scope, so I am a bit hesitant to skip this to help fund the 31 Nagler. Another cost friendly option would be to skip the 22 Nagler and just go with a 27 Panoptic for my wide field and next step from 12.5 mm. 

 

The 30 XW is a newer offering in this price range since it was just re-introduced, and I know they make very good eyepieces. A 30 mm exit pupil will be just above 6 mm, but the 34 and 35 mm focal lengths would push be above 7 mm until I eventually add a Paracorr. The 30 APM UFF also gets great reviews and is very budget friendly. If I go with 30 mm 70 degree, the 22 Nagler T4 may not make sense due to the small TFOV difference. How do they compare in fast scopes? The ES 30 82 would give me a nice exit pupil and largest TFOV and could complement a 22 Nagler well even though the magnification difference is only 20x. Which would you chose in this price range, and why? 

Got them all, the 34 being Meade SWA 5000 version. 

 

If you like Morpheus, I think you will the APM UFF. The Pentax too is comfortable viewing. But the APM is my most used - light, no eye placement, or any kind of blackout. In my opinion its where to start. No undercut on the UFF series, if undercuts bother you.

 

My big heavy 31mm 82° Axiom LX (equal performance to a Nagler 31) gets least use because of its bulk & weight, its specialist uses are great, but Dob re-balancing for changing is a nuisance.



#8 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 82,795
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 28 February 2020 - 08:38 PM

Plus, if you're like me, you don't really use the 30mm all that much anyway.

I always advocate to spend the big bucks on an eyepiece that yields a 2mm exit pupil--you'll use that one a LOT.

 

If you're star hopping, a wide field eyepiece like the 31 mm Nagler just might get a significant amount of use.. These days though I find myself using the 21mm Ethos rather than the 31 mm Nagler.

 

Jon


  • russell23 likes this

#9 aatt

aatt

    Surveyor 1

  • ***--
  • Posts: 1,949
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2012
  • Loc: CT

Posted 28 February 2020 - 09:29 PM

The 34mm ES is fine with a coma corrector at F/5. It is not perfect, but it is far better than "good enough".I really enjoy it and find the eye relief and TFOV to be perfect for what I use it for. I use it for starhopping and the occasional "vista". The total field of view is a tad smaller than it's 82 degree cousin-which is better at the edge. The Nagler is overall slightly better and that, of course, comes at a price. If that little bit of extra performance is "worth it" or necessary and your wallet is deep enough, then by all means buy/cry once and enjoy it for the rest of your time in the hobby.I myself don't see the need to upgrade mine.


  • 25585 likes this

#10 droid

droid

    rocketman

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,702
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2004
  • Loc: Conneaut, Ohio

Posted 28 February 2020 - 10:05 PM

Of the eps listed by the op, I have the 30mm ES and the 35mm Panoptic.

 

I go round and round with the 30ES and the 35 Pan.

 

The 35mm Panoptic has tighter stars ,a blacker back ground.

The 30 ES IS also very good, but has a wider fov.

 

My other go to eps , are the 20mm t2 and 16mm t2, but those aren't on his list.

 

All of them in my f8 and f10 refractors, are outstanding eye pieces.

 

But....if you own a sub f6 telescope , and millions of us do, especially fast dobs, if you do not own a paracor, and I don't , I can not think of an eye piece that going to be flawless.

 

I read many years the Pretoria was supposed to be that eyepiece. But I heard mixed reviews, so I don't know.

 

So I guess bottom line is get a paracor, and a lot of eyepieces will perform very well.

Or don't and a lot of good eyepieces will perform very well, just not as well.



#11 Piero DP

Piero DP

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 504
  • Joined: 28 Jan 2015
  • Loc: Cambridge, UK

Posted 29 February 2020 - 06:36 AM

I currently have a 30mm APM UFF, but in the past I had a 35mm Panoptic and before that a 30mm ES 82 deg.

Every time it was a step up in my opinion. The 35mm Pan is a very good eyepiece, but I just prefer the 30mm APM UFF. The latter is lighter, more comfortable (excellent eye rubber and eye relief for me at least), no undercut. I cannot fault anything with the views it delivers in my telescopes. I agree with Don on his advise about getting a great 2mm exit pupil eyepiece. For me and my tastes, this is the docter, my most used eyepiece. I often star hop with that eyepiece directly (approx 150x). The 30mm is used for targets requiring more field of view.

For the time being I don't use a coma corrector.

With my 4" refractor, the 30mm APM UFF is superb to my eye. I love scanning the milky way with that eyepiece.

Edited by Piero DP, 29 February 2020 - 06:39 AM.

  • russell23, BradFran and 25585 like this

#12 junomike

junomike

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 18,065
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Ontario

Posted 29 February 2020 - 09:12 AM



Lowest Power Widefield (30 ES 82, 30 APM UFF, 30 XW, 35 Panoptic, ES 34 mm 68)

22 Nagler T4

12.5 Morpheus (currently owned)

9 Morpheus

6.5 Morpheus 

5 Nagler T6 or 5 XW

 

Adding the 31T5 completes the set IMO.  Otherwise I'd probably go for the ES 30 82.



#13 russell23

russell23

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10,285
  • Joined: 31 May 2009
  • Loc: Upstate NY

Posted 29 February 2020 - 09:38 AM

Of the eps listed by the op, I have the 30mm ES and the 35mm Panoptic.

 

I go round and round with the 30ES and the 35 Pan.

 

The 35mm Panoptic has tighter stars ,a blacker back ground.

The 30 ES IS also very good, but has a wider fov.

 

That is what I find with the ES eyepieces.  They are very good, but the sky background is not as clean as you get with TV, Pentax, APM, and Morpheus eyepieces.  All other things being equal the 30mm should have a blacker sky background than the 35mm.  Obviously all other things are not equal.

 

On this list I've used the 30mm UFF,  30mm XW, 35mm Pan, and 34mm ES68.  The only one I would say "no" to is the 34mm ES68 - which IMO was the weakest FL in that series.  I have not used them in faster dobs, just mid-F/ratio refractors so I will just say that the 35mm Pan is excellent and the 30mm APM UFF is excellent and my favorite.  As noted, it presents very much like a Morpheus eyepiece so I feel it can be treated as the long FL Morpheus for those that love the Morpheus line. 



#14 coutleef

coutleef

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,593
  • Joined: 21 Feb 2008
  • Loc: Saint-Donat, Quebec, Canada

Posted 29 February 2020 - 06:47 PM

In terms of correction at f/5 at the edge of the field, with Paracorr II added, f/5.75:
from best to worst:
31mm Nagler
30mm UFF (only in 2nd place because the apparent field is narrower)
35mm Panoptic**
30mm XW** ##
30mm ES 82 ##
34mm ES 68 ## &&

** slight field curvature noted.
## some uncorrected astigmatism in the outer field
&& not well controlled for light scatter

All of them will be really bad at the edges in your scope without coma correction.
With coma correction, they're all decent low power eyepieces


i am wondering Don
does this eyepiece accept dioptrix?

#15 russell23

russell23

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10,285
  • Joined: 31 May 2009
  • Loc: Upstate NY

Posted 29 February 2020 - 07:49 PM

i am wondering Don
does this eyepiece accept dioptrix?

The 30mm APM UFF does not accept dioptrx - somewhat annoying considering it would take a slight difference in machining the top of the eyepiece to make it possible. 



#16 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 44,562
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 29 February 2020 - 07:55 PM

It's so close, I'm tempted to take a file to the eyecup ring, but it does not fit a DioptRx.

#17 25585

25585

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,807
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 29 February 2020 - 09:12 PM

The 30mm APM UFF does not accept dioptrx - somewhat annoying considering it would take a slight difference in machining the top of the eyepiece to make it possible. 

Read this for other eyepieces. Dioptrices are made primarily to fit TV eyepieces, which for most they do. Good coincidence if so for other makes models.

 

But other makers should not have to conform to fitting another's accessory. An accessory should be the fit-adaptable part.

 

 Why not suggest to TV making Dioptrices fittings wider ranging, they might welcome the idea?  

 

 


Edited by 25585, 29 February 2020 - 09:21 PM.

  • SteveG likes this

#18 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 82,795
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 01 March 2020 - 07:53 AM

Read this for other eyepieces. Dioptrices are made primarily to fit TV eyepieces, which for most they do. Good coincidence if so for other makes models.

 

But other makers should not have to conform to fitting another's accessory. An accessory should be the fit-adaptable part.

 

 Why not suggest to TV making Dioptrices fittings wider ranging, they might welcome the idea?  

 

That's backwards. TeleVue can't make the Dioptrix fit every eyepiece that someone else manufactures nor should they. If a manufacturer wants their eyepieces to be Dioptrix compatible, they have the specs, it's their choice.

 

Markus could have made the 30 mm UFF Dioptrix compatible. If you want to use the UFF with the Dioptrix, you should ask him why he chose not to make it compatible.

 

Jon



#19 russell23

russell23

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10,285
  • Joined: 31 May 2009
  • Loc: Upstate NY

Posted 01 March 2020 - 09:53 AM

Read this for other eyepieces. Dioptrices are made primarily to fit TV eyepieces, which for most they do. Good coincidence if so for other makes models.

 

But other makers should not have to conform to fitting another's accessory. An accessory should be the fit-adaptable part.

 

 Why not suggest to TV making Dioptrices fittings wider ranging, they might welcome the idea?  

Jon is right about this.  The Dioptrx has been around for a long time.  It has a pretty simple mechanism for attaching to eyepieces.  The diameter of the top of the 30mm APM UFF is just a little to big to attach the Dioptrx.  Given how long Dioptrx has been around it would have been wise for the 30mm APM to have been designed with a slightly smaller top for attaching the eye cup. 

 

Like Don said - it is close enough that you could almost just file the edge down and get it to fit for those brave enough to try it.  But if it had simply been machined a little smaller the Dioptrx would fit.

 

Now there may be some reason that the 30mm APM UFF could not be machined to fit the dioptrx though I cannot imagine what that would be. 

 

From Televue's perspective it would not make business sense to start offering a bunch of different Dioptrx sizes for competing eyepieces.   You want people to buy your eyepieces.  If you make it easier for people to use other brands of eyepieces you cut into your own eyepiece sales.  It is the job of people like Marcus to decide if they want their eyepieces to be compatible with the TV Dioptrx. If Marcus thought that could potentially boost the sales of his eyepieces then he would have been wise to make sure the Dioptrx could fit the APM eyepieces.  But it is not the job of TV to make it easier for APM to sell eyepieces.


Edited by russell23, 01 March 2020 - 09:57 AM.

  • ewave likes this

#20 25585

25585

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,807
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 01 March 2020 - 02:26 PM

Marcus & other makers I expect do not wish to be led by a rival, to thd beat of another's drum. I am glad of that. Think, no ES92s or other large eye lens models by various makers.

 

Indeed TV may have restricted their own designs by keeping to what a Dioptrx would fit.  

 

A Dioptrx Plus range would benefit those who own or want eyepieces too large for the current size, and also give TV more in-house latitude for future designs.



#21 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 44,562
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 01 March 2020 - 05:14 PM

Marcus & other makers I expect do not wish to be led by a rival, to thd beat of another's drum. I am glad of that. Think, no ES92s or other large eye lens models by various makers.

 

Indeed TV may have restricted their own designs by keeping to what a Dioptrx would fit.  

 

A Dioptrx Plus range would benefit those who own or want eyepieces too large for the current size, and also give TV more in-house latitude for future designs.

Maybe.  The 22mm T4 and 31mm T5 have long eye relief, but are compatible with the DioptRx.

Baader Morpheus, Pentax XW, and the 30mm ES 82° are all compatible with the DioptRx (perhaps some would say a "Class B" fit, but at least they fit)

So it isn't strictly necessary to have enormous eye lenses unless you want apparent fields in excess of 85° that also have long eye relief.


  • 25585 likes this

#22 skybsd

skybsd

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,690
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2008

Posted 02 March 2020 - 12:35 PM

Marcus & other makers I expect do not wish to be led by a rival, to thd beat of another's drum. I am glad of that.

 

I too agree with this specific point.., waytogo.gif

 

I own several TV eyepieces, but its never a good idea for a single manufacturer's product (design(s) / specification(s))  to (be allowed to) become (or set) industry standards to which competitors are expected to meet / adhere. 

 

Best.., 

 

skybsd 


  • 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