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

32mm Plossl alternatives for C6/C8

  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 dusty99

dusty99

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 567
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2009

Posted 09 July 2020 - 07:03 PM

Yes, the 32mm Plossl produces the max FOV in the C6 and C8, but it's like looking through a toilet paper tube.  Besides the HD-60 25mm and similar Xcel LX 25, what are my wide(er) field options at under $150?


Edited by dusty99, 09 July 2020 - 07:04 PM.


#2 Thomas Marshall

Thomas Marshall

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 657
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2015
  • Loc: Spring Valley AZ.

Posted 09 July 2020 - 07:42 PM

I bought an Orion Q70-26mm 2", and an Arcturus 2" 32mm, and a 2" visual back for the C8, and I love them. I can use them and my Baader 8-24mm zoom without changing from 2" to 1 1/4". They give a nice wide view on my AT102ED also, so much so, that I don't even use my finder to align anymore. Almost lucked out to get a 8mm SWA XL "Russell" a couple of days ago for $50, but someone bought his whole package, and I missed out. 



#3 deepwoods1

deepwoods1

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,954
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Connecticut

Posted 09 July 2020 - 08:24 PM

I’ve read that the C6 will vignette with a 2” back, depending on the eyepiece. I don’t own one, so I don’t really know. I do enjoy a 2” on the C8. The ES 24/68* can be picked up used in your price range. It’s cheaper than a Tele Vue and has about the widest FOV currently available. Have you picked up a .63 reduce yet? It would allow you to keep using 1.25” eyepieces if you’re trying to keep things light in weight. Clear and steady skies....



#4 deepwoods1

deepwoods1

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,954
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Connecticut

Posted 09 July 2020 - 09:05 PM

And I see that the one ES24/68 just sold for $115. Put up a want ad perhaps?



#5 dusty99

dusty99

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 567
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2009

Posted 09 July 2020 - 09:55 PM

I might do that.  I ran my C8 as a 2” system for around three years, but it’s better w/ a 1.25” and lighter eyepieces, IMO.  The C6 is definitely nicer at 1.25”, and the whole setup is easier to handle as a travel scope.

 

I didn’t like the reducer due to the focal length reduction.  I like getting either side of 200x with three of my favorite EPs: HD-60 12mm, Delos 10mm & Meade UWA 8.8mm


  • Thomas Marshall likes this

#6 Hesiod

Hesiod

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,153
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2013

Posted 09 July 2020 - 10:23 PM

Get a 20mm/70° SWA, though TFOV will be slightly smaller.



#7 stevew

stevew

    Now I've done it

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,493
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2006
  • Loc: British Columbia Canada

Posted 09 July 2020 - 11:32 PM

The Explore Scientific 24mm 68* is a nice eyepiece.  

Not sure how much they go for these days.

Attached Thumbnails

  • 20190703_194608.jpg

  • ShaulaB likes this

#8 bdcmd

bdcmd

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 460
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2008
  • Loc: Glen Rose, Texas

Posted 10 July 2020 - 12:26 AM

The 26mm ES62 would be another alternative; $129.99 new from Astronomics.  Almost anything else wider/better is a lot more expensive.  Stay with the 1.25" and use the focal reducer.  It works a lot better on the C6.  You don't really gain much by going to 2" in my experience.  My C8 is 1.25" with the reducer on and one of my friends uses his C6 the same way.  Another uses her C6 with the stock 1.25" visual back, no focal reducer and uses a (long discontinued, but available used) Celestron Ultima 35 mm eyepiece for widest field.  bdc


  • deepwoods1 likes this

#9 deepwoods1

deepwoods1

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,954
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Connecticut

Posted 10 July 2020 - 12:52 AM

I didn’t want to mention the 35mm Ultima as that and it variations are hard to find, but it is a nice piece of glass and does have a slightly wider view. And will work with a reducer! I will say that the Axiom 50mm listed in your vast collection is an underrated eyepiece. It’s consistently sharp to the edge regardless of the scope I’m using, which includes several f/5’s. But it is a 2” eyepiece, very hard to find, and out of the OP’s price range. 


Edited by deepwoods1, 10 July 2020 - 12:53 AM.

  • Volvonium likes this

#10 dusty99

dusty99

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 567
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2009

Posted 10 July 2020 - 10:08 AM

Yes, I’ve been happy going back to a 1.25” diagonal on my C8.  I treated it (me) to a Takahashi diagonal, and it does seem to produce slightly sharper star images, but the stock Celestron was fine too, and that’s what I use on my C6.

 

The 26mm ES62 would be another alternative; $129.99 new from Astronomics.  Almost anything else wider/better is a lot more expensive.  Stay with the 1.25" and use the focal reducer.  It works a lot better on the C6.  You don't really gain much by going to 2" in my experience.  My C8 is 1.25" with the reducer on and one of my friends uses his C6 the same way.  Another uses her C6 with the stock 1.25" visual back, no focal reducer and uses a (long discontinued, but available used) Celestron Ultima 35 mm eyepiece for widest field.  bdc



#11 SeattleScott

SeattleScott

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,442
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011

Posted 10 July 2020 - 11:18 AM

The Meade/Xcel LX 25 is very sharp for its price point. An ES 26/62 will go a little wider but doesn’t get the rave reviews of the Meade/Celestron, and costs close to twice as much for less than 10% wider view.

Or a used ES 24/68.

Those are pretty much your options.

Scott

#12 dusty99

dusty99

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 567
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2009

Posted 10 July 2020 - 11:47 AM

Thanks, everybody.  The combination of physical size and eye relief has pushed me to try the ES62 26mm.  I'll try to remember to post something after I try it out in at least two scopes (900mm f/7.5 & C8), although I'm really buying it for the C8.



#13 SeattleScott

SeattleScott

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,442
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011

Posted 10 July 2020 - 11:58 AM

The only problem is you are paying $130 for a 5 element eyepiece with the usual edge distortion issues. Instead of the $70 I paid for my HD-60 that is almost as well corrected as my LVWs. But at F10 you might be fine.

#14 cmkaste

cmkaste

    Lift Off

  • *****
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2020
  • Loc: Shakopee, MN

Posted 10 July 2020 - 12:13 PM

A Baader Hyperion 24/68 would also seem to fit your criteria.



#15 dusty99

dusty99

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 567
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2009

Posted 10 July 2020 - 12:30 PM

Yes, and I wish I hadn't sold my HD-60 25mm (still have 12, 6.5 and 4.5).  But since I'm buying a new eyepiece, I'll see how the ES62 is with 19mm of eye relief.  The Meade 25mm seemed to have a few millimeters less ER than its rated 18mm, plus I'd need to find a used one.  I could get an Xcel LX 25mm (supposedly the same as the Meades), but the ER spec on those is 16mm (probably more accurate), and they're over $90 in the places that show them in stock, so not a big price difference.  I do wish the Synta/Ningbo Sunny cartel had kept the HD-60 line and cancelled the Xcel, but that's not what happened.

 

 

The only problem is you are paying $130 for a 5 element eyepiece with the usual edge distortion issues. Instead of the $70 I paid for my HD-60 that is almost as well corrected as my LVWs. But at F10 you might be fine.


  • BFaucett likes this

#16 25585

25585

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,400
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 10 July 2020 - 12:38 PM

This is one I have https://www.firstlig...iece-28mm.html 



#17 SeattleScott

SeattleScott

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,442
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011

Posted 10 July 2020 - 12:49 PM

Yes, and I wish I hadn't sold my HD-60 25mm (still have 12, 6.5 and 4.5). But since I'm buying a new eyepiece, I'll see how the ES62 is with 19mm of eye relief. The Meade 25mm seemed to have a few millimeters less ER than its rated 18mm, plus I'd need to find a used one. I could get an Xcel LX 25mm (supposedly the same as the Meades), but the ER spec on those is 16mm (probably more accurate), and they're over $90 in the places that show them in stock, so not a big price difference. I do wish the Synta/Ningbo Sunny cartel had kept the HD-60 line and cancelled the Xcel, but that's not what happened.

I am able to use glasses with my 25 HD-60 and I typically require at least 16mm ER. Seems like 17-18mm to me, so the ES has probably a couple mm more and nearly 10% wider view, although the outer portion might be distorted. It is interesting how the price has gone up on these.

When you can get a 38mm Agena 70 AFOV five elements eyepiece for under $100 the ES 26/62 feels like a little bit of a ripoff. But I realize it probably has better build quality, coatings, etc.

Scott

#18 SeattleScott

SeattleScott

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,442
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011

Posted 10 July 2020 - 12:51 PM

This is one I have https://www.firstlig...iece-28mm.html

Link doesn’t work for me, but I doubt a Tak erfle is under $150.

Scott

#19 25585

25585

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,400
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 10 July 2020 - 01:18 PM

Link doesn’t work for me, but I doubt a Tak erfle is under $150.

Scott

https://www.firstlig...iece-28mm.html  strange comes up going into the site & using their search scratchhead2.gif

 

It is more than $150

 

Through here https://www.firstlig...-eyepieces.html


Edited by 25585, 10 July 2020 - 01:25 PM.

  • dusty99 likes this

#20 SeattleScott

SeattleScott

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,442
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011

Posted 10 July 2020 - 03:46 PM

Second link works for me.

#21 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 46,815
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 10 July 2020 - 05:33 PM

Yes, the 32mm Plossl produces the max FOV in the C6 and C8, but it's like looking through a toilet paper tube.  Besides the HD-60 25mm and similar Xcel LX 25, what are my wide(er) field options at under $150?

  1. Add an f/6.3 focal reducer and your 32mm Plössl will have a wider true field.  Around $150
  2. Add a 2" star diagonal and go to a large 2" eyepiece and you can get a wider true field AND a wider apparent field--More than $150
  3. Buy a 24mm 68° eyepiece, which has the same true field as the 32mm Plössl, but a much wider apparent field--around $150-$170

With a C8, I'd opt for one of the first 2 alternatives to get 1.2° instead of the maximum 0.76° with 1.25".

With a C6, I'd opt for #1 or #3.


  • dusty99 likes this

#22 n2dpsky

n2dpsky

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 343
  • Joined: 01 May 2012
  • Loc: Orange, CA

Posted 10 July 2020 - 08:19 PM

Yes, the 32mm Plossl produces the max FOV in the C6 and C8, but it's like looking through a toilet paper tube.  Besides the HD-60 25mm and similar Xcel LX 25, what are my wide(er) field options at under $150?

I just bought a ES 24mm 68 deg for $159.00.  It's very close to the 32mm plossl field but 15x more in the C6.  Feels pretty luxurious and it works well in my 10" f/4.7 so it should be great in your scope.


  • stevew and dusty99 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