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

Do you Ortho?

equipment eyepieces observing optics
  • Please log in to reply
178 replies to this topic

#26 BradFran

BradFran

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 532
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2017
  • Loc: Mars

Posted 10 April 2020 - 12:59 PM

I was waiting for the SMC to make an appearance! Very nice glass. How much of a step up would you rate them over the U.O. HDs?


Edited by BradFran, 10 April 2020 - 12:59 PM.


#27 payner

payner

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,041
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2007
  • Loc: Bluegrass & Cumberland Valley Regions, Kentucky

Posted 10 April 2020 - 01:50 PM

I Mono!

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

  • 65419B3B-FBAB-4EEA-A046-1023B0779D83_1_201_a.jpeg
  • 7A82D625-1903-4E92-A7F8-A27F4288D736_1_201_a.jpeg

  • Jaimo!, Astrojensen, Cliff C and 10 others like this

#28 j.gardavsky

j.gardavsky

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,308
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2019
  • Loc: Germany

Posted 10 April 2020 - 02:29 PM

Re: Are you a fan of Orthoscopic eyepieces?

 

Hello Mark,

 

yes, I am!

But I take the 6mm up to 18mm Abbe orthos for the low surface brightness nebulae and galaxies, when the small FOV does not matter, and when I want to see the spiral arms more clearly.

For the Moon and planets, I take the Pentax SMC XO 2.5, the Baader Symmetric Diascope edition 3.6, and the Tele Vue Nagler Zoom 3 - 6.

 

The KK Fujiyama Abbe orthos are a very good choice, and so are the Tak Abbe orthos.

Some people say, they both have the same lens cell with the same optics inside, just the decoration differs.

 

None of my Abbe orthos sets is complete, I have purchased the eyepieces individually for the intended observing "projects", and of course, watching the costs.

 

Best,

JG


  • eros312, SandyHouTex and MarkGregory like this

#29 Paul Morow

Paul Morow

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 266
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2011
  • Loc: Indianapolis

Posted 10 April 2020 - 02:32 PM

I have been DeLited for several years now too!

I still keep a nice set of orthos around as a good reference and the older orthos are something special. If you find a good clean example of a vintage ortho it might be worth a look. Some of those old orthos have really surprised me with their stunning optics and impressive build quality.

I just acquired a pair 25mm Takahashi Abbes for the binoviewer and they are wonderful performers!

Attached Thumbnails

  • Orthos_2020a.jpg

  • payner, Jaimo!, eros312 and 6 others like this

#30 MarkGregory

MarkGregory

    Apollo

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1,234
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2012
  • Loc: Advance, North Carolina

Posted 10 April 2020 - 03:22 PM

Re: Are you a fan of Orthoscopic eyepieces?

 

Hello Mark,

 

yes, I am!

But I take the 6mm up to 18mm Abbe orthos for the low surface brightness nebulae and galaxies, when the small FOV does not matter, and when I want to see the spiral arms more clearly.

For the Moon and planets, I take the Pentax SMC XO 2.5, the Baader Symmetric Diascope edition 3.6, and the Tele Vue Nagler Zoom 3 - 6.

 

The KK Fujiyama Abbe orthos are a very good choice, and so are the Tak Abbe orthos.

Some people say, they both have the same lens cell with the same optics inside, just the decoration differs.

 

None of my Abbe orthos sets is complete, I have purchased the eyepieces individually for the intended observing "projects", and of course, watching the costs.

 

Best,

JG

JG, I am happy to hear you say the KK Fujiama Orthos are good. I feel the same way but it is nice to hear you say it because I trust your judgement. 


  • j.gardavsky likes this

#31 noisejammer

noisejammer

    Fish Slapper

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,777
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2007
  • Loc: The Uncanny Valley

Posted 10 April 2020 - 05:24 PM

Yep - a set of ZAO II's. I also have pairs of BGO 6 & 7 and I think UO 25's. My largest is a multi-coated Tak 40mm.

 

All are pretty good but the 10 & 16 ZAO pairs are probably my most used eyepieces when the seeing warrants it.


  • SandyHouTex, bbqediguana and j.gardavsky like this

#32 Sasa

Sasa

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,521
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2010
  • Loc: Ricany, Czech Republic

Posted 10 April 2020 - 05:52 PM

Yes, just yesterday, I was observing Venus with orthos only

 

https://www.fzu.cz/~...0409_1750UT.jpg

 

Vintage 15mm ortho (bottom left) is one of my favorites. Otherwise, I observe regularly with ZAO-I 16mm, 10mm and 6mm ones + CZJ 0.965" O-12.5

 

zeiss_old_eyepieces.jpg


  • L. Regira, payner, Astrojensen and 6 others like this

#33 N3p

N3p

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,304
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2018

Posted 10 April 2020 - 05:55 PM

These are my observation comparing my 6mm Fujiyama with my 6mm Delos.

 

I recently got a Delos 6mm so I was able to compare it directly against my orthoscopic 6mm Fujiyama. I used the orthoscopic for a couple of years before the Delos and I wanted to find a comfort solution to complement it or even to replace the ortho.

 

Now after a couple of months, I really can't say I could live without any of the 2 eyepieces, they are not the same thing and both are very nice and unique.  I used the Delos a couple of months after I receive it, and I thought it was much more comfortable then the Ortho first.

 

Then I tried the ortho again and what I found interesting, it's much easier for my eye to look through it's simple optics,  it's much easier for my eye to stay focused and for a longer period of time. For planetary work, that's major, I would say the Fujiyama beats the Delos.  The Delos or my large ES eyepieces share a similar kind of thing, it's like looking through .. the wrong pair of glass and there is a power struggle in my eye, it gets tired. This is happening much less with my orthos.

 

Then another day, I will use the Delos and I'll be impress by the overall comfort and sharpness even on such a huge field of view. When I spend time using a 42d FOV eyepiece, 68 degrees and 72 degrees appears huge, it's a real money saver.. after a session with my orthos, I even appreciate and enjoy a 60 degree eyepiece.

 

On the moon I prefer the Delos over the ortho, it,s winning hands down because of it's wide and well corrected 72 degrees field of view, it's incredible. I think the fact that I look at the moon with lights open all around makes it easier for my eye to keep the focus without getting tired.


Edited by N3p, 10 April 2020 - 05:56 PM.

  • payner, Jaimo!, Sasa and 3 others like this

#34 Sol Robbins

Sol Robbins

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,211
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2003

Posted 10 April 2020 - 06:23 PM

Yes. 18mm, 12.5mm, 9mm and 6mm. Tak Orthos. All get a lot observing time.


  • payner likes this

#35 Steve Harris

Steve Harris

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 44
  • Joined: 21 May 2010

Posted 10 April 2020 - 06:50 PM

Would love to hear experiences of anyone with fast scopes, let's say under f/5 with orthos.

 

Edit: With and without tracking is another variable, with tracking in my case so just wondering about performance right around the center.


Edited by Steve Harris, 10 April 2020 - 06:54 PM.


#36 Terra Nova

Terra Nova

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 22,250
  • Joined: 29 May 2012
  • Loc: Under the Blue Moon of Kentucky

Posted 10 April 2020 - 07:10 PM

i love my Zeiss CZJ orthoscopic eyepieces!

Attached Thumbnails

  • 5EC9ADCB-2C81-4C04-8AD7-F13E11E57A90.jpeg

  • L. Regira, payner, Jaimo! and 5 others like this

#37 Terra Nova

Terra Nova

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 22,250
  • Joined: 29 May 2012
  • Loc: Under the Blue Moon of Kentucky

Posted 10 April 2020 - 07:12 PM

And my assorted volcano-tops, most or which are circle T (Tani) orthos

Attached Thumbnails

  • 49C3AE03-8B71-449E-8BA7-D415E94F0997.jpeg

  • L. Regira, payner, eros312 and 4 others like this

#38 Terra Nova

Terra Nova

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 22,250
  • Joined: 29 May 2012
  • Loc: Under the Blue Moon of Kentucky

Posted 10 April 2020 - 07:13 PM

Do Brandons count? wink.gif

Attached Thumbnails

  • 4E0F6B4A-6F47-459A-9AE6-8A36BB6BF546.jpeg

  • L. Regira, payner, Edrow10 and 7 others like this

#39 bbqediguana

bbqediguana

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,238
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2015
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 10 April 2020 - 07:25 PM

Do Brandons count? wink.gif

Why not? :)


  • Terra Nova likes this

#40 BDS316

BDS316

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,616
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Sol 3

Posted 10 April 2020 - 08:20 PM

I ortho responsibly. My observing buddy has a full set of Zeiss orthos. He also has a TEC 200...

I own a 6mm circle-T ortho. 200x in my XT8. Used on double stars and planets and moon.

#41 SandyHouTex

SandyHouTex

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,657
  • Joined: 02 Jun 2009
  • Loc: Houston, Texas, USA

Posted 10 April 2020 - 08:31 PM

i love my Zeiss CZJ orthoscopic eyepieces!

Is that a 25mm, 16mm, 10mm, and 6mm?

 

One of the things I like, other than Zeiss made them, is that two of them are unusual focal lengths.  I don’t think any of the other zillion eyepieces I have are 16mm or 10mm, and the 10mm makes calculating the magnification easy, peasy.

 

Nice case too.  Do you make those?


Edited by SandyHouTex, 10 April 2020 - 08:33 PM.

  • Terra Nova likes this

#42 N3p

N3p

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,304
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2018

Posted 10 April 2020 - 09:05 PM

Would love to hear experiences of anyone with fast scopes, let's say under f/5 with orthos.

 

Edit: With and without tracking is another variable, with tracking in my case so just wondering about performance right around the center.

 

In my previous testimonial, my observations came from a F5 Newtonian 200x1000.  At higher power.. my Fujiyamas 7mm, 6mm, 5mm, I am not really able to say that the field is not well corrected from center to the edge, especially for the 6mm and 5mm, they are pretty good both of them. The 7mm, the outer edge is a tiny bit blurry when I reach focus in the center, but nothing that worries me too much.

 

I use tracking all the time with my telescope,  when I use my manual Dobson.. usually, I don't use the Orthos because it's a difficult combination to handle. The bearings on my dobson are not smooth and precise enough for high power observation with orthoscopic.. the object will get out of the FOV too easily and it costs me too much energy to correct that problem all the time.


Edited by N3p, 10 April 2020 - 09:06 PM.

  • Steve Harris and Sasa like this

#43 Jaimo!

Jaimo!

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 3,784
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2007
  • Loc: 3rd Stone from the Sun

Posted 10 April 2020 - 09:10 PM

 

One of the things I like, other than Zeiss made them, is that two of them are unusual focal lengths.  I don’t think any of the other zillion eyepieces I have are 16mm or 10mm, and the 10mm makes calculating the magnification easy, peasy.

 

I have always thought & felt the same way, but I based opinion based on the MRGs, as they have a 10.5mm and 16.8mm.

 

Jaimo!


  • SandyHouTex and Terra Nova like this

#44 desertlens

desertlens

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,658
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2010
  • Loc: 36°N 105°W

Posted 10 April 2020 - 09:18 PM

Yes, I ortho: full sets of UO VTs and Fujiyamas.



#45 deepwoods1

deepwoods1

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,895
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Connecticut

Posted 10 April 2020 - 09:19 PM

While I do love my Orthos (UO Tani Volcano Tops), I save them for what I perceive as the best nights of seeing. What I love about them is that they’re SHARP to the edge of the field and don’t ghost on the moon and bright planets as many of the multi elemented eyepieces do. 


  • Jaimo! likes this

#46 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 85,012
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 10 April 2020 - 11:05 PM

Would love to hear experiences of anyone with fast scopes, let's say under f/5 with orthos.

 

Edit: With and without tracking is another variable, with tracking in my case so just wondering about performance right around the center.

 

My scopes are fast, I prefer to track manually and I'm a star hopper.  Early on, I had some orthos I used with my 12.5 inch F/4.06 but soon enough I found them impractical for obvious reasons, too w a field, not enough eye relief in commonly used focal lengths and not well corrected despite the narrow field.

 

 Consider viewing the planet's at 410x with an ortho. The field of view is about 6 arc minutes and sweet spot is less than that. In my 10 inch, that's a 3.5 mm.. super short eye relief. Compare that to a 3.5 mm Nagler with the Paracorr. The sweet spot is the entire 12 arcminute field.  For double stars, I'll use 820x in that scope. 

 

In my larger scopes, the problems are exacerbated. In the 22 inch, 350x is a 1.6 mm exit pupil, a reasonable magnification for galaxies and many DSOs.  That's a 7.2 arcminute field, too small for many objects. It also mkes star hopping difficult. With that scope, 560x is a 1mm exit pupil, definitely a common magnification. I'll go to 1000x or more for planetary nebulae, orthos are just not practical. It's doable with a Nagler, with an ortho, it would take less than 10 seconds to drift across the field.

 

In my NP-101, it's F/5.4. Orthos are counter-productive in that scope. It's a scope designed to provide very wide, flat fields of view. A ortho is the wrong eyepiece for that. A 21 mm Ortho would provide a 1.6 degree field at about 26x. I can do 1.6 degrees with the 12.5 inch at 48x. The 21mm Ethos provides a 3.84 degree field.  

 

With fast scopes, particularly manually tracked, it's a different equation. The view across the field is important and with larger scopes, magnifications are high.  Generally eeking out an object means it's tiny and faint but i have a lot of aperture working in my favor, the eyepiece needs to help with the FOV, with the eye relief. 

 

I know some large Dob folks use orthos but they have driven mounts and are not star hopping. That's not how I like to do things.

 

Jon


  • CollinofAlabama, izar187, Astrojensen and 1 other like this

#47 Ohmless

Ohmless

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 436
  • Joined: 05 Jun 2017
  • Loc: Flint, Michigan USA

Posted 10 April 2020 - 11:44 PM

I am definitely on the Ortho train.  People on the forums often slam their performance at f/5 and I have no idea why this is.  Maybe it is due to them not having enough green lettering or 100 degree field of view?  I spend my time looking at faint fuzzies and SLaP targets, not at the extreme edge of the field of view.  I find them more than acceptable.  The 40 degree field is probably an advantage in that you can't see much of the coma that is inherent in the scope design.

 

My go to eyepieces are 25mm HD Orthos(bino at 2x and cyclops) as they are equal in optical crispness to the 25mm Sterling that I sold off(native and barlowed).  I would own more of them if the shorter focal lengths were useable with my glasses on.


  • izar187, Corcaroli78 and Sasa like this

#48 Allan Wade

Allan Wade

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,554
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2013
  • Loc: Newcastle, Australia

Posted 11 April 2020 - 12:02 AM

I use my Abbe Ortho's a lot for DSO in the 32". The 6 ZAO II more than any other, but regularly the 4 ZAO II, 5 XO and 9 Tak Abbe. The transmission and scatter control in the orthos are significantly better than my Delos. I don't see that difference personally in smaller scopes, say under 12". But in the 32" it's obvious. Those eyepieces are very important to me for the observing I do and I use them a lot.

 

I also have some pairs I use in the Denk binoviewer. My philosophy is, if it's in the solar system, it looks best with the binoviewer and ortho combination.

 

1.jpg

 

2.jpg


  • payner, Jaimo!, Starman81 and 8 others like this

#49 Tourneciel

Tourneciel

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 186
  • Joined: 24 Mar 2013
  • Loc: Vannes - France

Posted 11 April 2020 - 12:33 AM

I do. I have a set of 0.965 Vixen eyepieces and a 6mm from Mizar, all giving great images.



#50 izar187

izar187

    Skylab

  • -----
  • Posts: 4,175
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2006
  • Loc: 43N

Posted 11 April 2020 - 01:03 AM

Another vote for orthos at and below f/5.

They certainly work optically just fine IMHO+E.

 

However, they are indeed less fun in the short focal lengths particularly, in a manual tracking scope.

Things longer eye relief and larger field of view can be more relaxing when nudging along.


  • Ohmless 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





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: equipment, eyepieces, observing, optics



Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics