19 replies to this topic

[Starcraft231]

Ok everyone, I'm at paralysis from analysis point in my decision process here. Which would YOU choose if TFOV is important you??? (I do not wear glasses BTW).  Thanks in advance!  

 

1. Baader Morpheus 12.5mm 76°
2. APM 12.5 Hi-FW ULTRA-WIDE 84°
3. APM XWA HDC Hyperwide 13mm 100°

Edited by Starcraft231, 24 January 2021 - 11:29 AM.

[Hesiod]

To me would be not hard at all: if want to maximize the tfov the 13mm/100° is quite obvious.

[Starcraft231]

I should have been more specific. I’m looking for more detail and opinion on USEFUL FOV. That’s a loose term I’m just using for lack of a better term. For example, is 100 degrees that usable in a 13mm EP? Or is there a point in FOV ranges per magnification level where it’s a technically accurate claim, but then there are drawbacks that need to be considered? Yes, 100 is greater than 76. I’m looking for a more technical analysis - I should have been more specific. Thanks! -James

Edited by Starcraft231, 24 January 2021 - 11:30 AM.

[PPPPPP42]

I love my 100 and 120 degree eyepieces but if someone was asking me and cost and size were of any real importance the 80ish degree eyepieces from various manufacturers are probably the most you can really effectively use.  It gets a little awkward to use the outer edges on the stuff I have because you are tilting your head around like looking out a window and the super concave lens makes everything you aren't looking directly at seem more distorted.  I'm not sure quite how to explain it.

You really need to see a picture of the 9mm 120 degree in someones hand to get an idea of how absurdly massive it is.  I call it the holy hand grenade of astronomy.

 

It is super handy to have that extra 20-40 degrees of view around the outside however because I can find most things with just my red dot scope to get me close super easy with my 5.5mm eyepiece.

Its also nice that my 20mm eye piece is the lowest magnification I will ever need in my refractor and about the widest I can use in my SCT.

Edited by PPPPPP42, 24 January 2021 - 09:07 AM.

[junomike]

At the same F/L the larger the AFOV usually means more to "take in".  At the 13mm F/L the 100° isn't an issue (for most), however the smaller AFOV will be easier to use and see the total FOV.

[Migwan]

What a tough question.    In my C11, the field curvature becomes more apparent with an E13 compared to a Morpheus 12.5.  Focusing on a star midway outside of axis with the Ethos helps, but the edges aren't that useful to my peripheral vision and if I move my eye position to have a better look, I still need to refocus just a bit. 

 

Now when it comes to using the 100° vs 78° on an ST120 with a field flattener, that extra field of view seems to hold much more value.  I can see that last 10-15% of the field well enough to actually spot targets out there and don't need to refocus it if I do.

 

So I am wondering if you might need a Paracorr to really see the benefit of the extra FOV. 

 

Ultimately, I find the Ethos is slightly brighter than the Morpheus, but in some situations, the Morpheus showed slightly more detail.   Really a tough pick for me, but at that power the 100° has won the day for me.  

 

jd

[russell23]

 

Ok everyone, I'm at paralysis from analysis point in my decision process here. Which would YOU choose if TFOV is important you??? Thanks in advance!  

 

1. Baader Morpheus 12.5mm 76°
2. APM 12.5 Hi-FW ULTRA-WIDE 84°
3. APM XWA HDC Hyperwide 13mm 100°

 

I’ve used all three of these eyepieces.   One important aspect is whether or not you need glasses while observing.  If you do then the 13mm APM is out and the 12.5mm Morpheus is the clear favorite as the 12.5mm APM is borderline for glasses.

 

Assuming you do not need glasses then in order I would recommend:

 

1.  APM 13mm.  This eyepiece is super-sharp and comfortable to use.  I found the entire field accessible, but a smaller field is easier.  I don’t have one because I really need glasses to correct for astigmatism at the exit pupil this eyepiece provides.  But if not for that I would have kept it.

 

2.  12.5mm Morpheus.  Very comfortable and the 76 deg AFOV is possibly the ideal combination of wide field and easy to take in.  This eyepiece provides a very engaging view that is highly immersive.  

 

3.  12.5mm APM.   Actually a very good eyepiece except for one performance flaw that is a deal breaker for me.  This eyepiece has one of the worst cases of “edge of field brightening” I have seen.   EOFB is when the sky background is not uniform from center to edge and the outer field has a brighter sky background than the central field.   You can see this with a lot of wide field eyepieces and some narrow field eyepieces.   Sometimes it can be ignored.  I find with the 12.5mm APM it is impossible to ignore.  If you are limiting the use to lunar/planetary then it may not be an issue, but if you are looking for deep sky the EOFB seriously detracts from the quality of the view.

Edited by russell23, 24 January 2021 - 10:30 AM.

[cloudypatio]

I should have been more specific. I’m looking for more detail and opinion on USEFUL FOV. That’s a loose term I’m just using for lack of a better term. For example, is
100 degrees that usable in a 13mm EP? Or is there a point in FOV ranges per magnification level where it’s a technically accurate claim, but then there are drawbacks that need to be considered? Yes, 100 is greater than 76. I’m looking for a more technical analysis - I should have been more specific. Thanks! -James

I've got the APM 12.5 and a 9 Baader Morpheus, for me It is posible to adquire the whole field o view in both but it's easier in the Morpheus, besides this I don't think I use more than 40-50 degrees when looking for details, may be 84º-90 it's the upper limit for me, but 76º it's a nice place to be.

 

I have tried 100º eyepieces but I preffer a more relaxed view which for me implies less AFOV and more eye relief. All of this are personal preferences so there will be lots of different tastes

Edited by cloudypatio, 24 January 2021 - 10:34 AM.

[Echolight]

I'd be tempted to pick the middle option. It just looks to have a better build quality than the others.

Plus I like the ease of access to the field of view with the 80-82 degree eyepieces better than the 100 that I have. A third note, and I don't know that this would definitely be an advantage to the particular eyepieces in the12.5 Hi-FW or the HDC 13, but my 14 LHD 80 degree and 28mm PWA 82 degree eyepieces both seem to have more vivid colors than my APM 20mm 100 degree.

 

But this is all subjective and speculative since I've never tried the exact eyepieces in question. And I doubt you could go too wrong with any of the three.

 

Ideally, with an f5, or for any scope really, I'd love to have an Apollo 11 85 degree. I think I might give a  n ES93 12mm a try as a second option, or a 10mm Ethos a try as third. But would probably never buy any of the three.

Edited by Echolight, 24 January 2021 - 10:47 AM.

[PJBilotta]

Personally, I have found the 76 degrees of the Morphies (some are a little wider) hit the sweet spot for me. Easy on the eyes, comfortable, and the whole field is right there. Every 82+ I have tried requires eye movement to take in the full field and suffers greater edge distortions. I have actually backed off on wider FOV's for this reason. Your mileage may vary.

[faackanders2]

I love my 100 and 120 degree eyepieces but if someone was asking me and cost and size were of any real importance the 80ish degree eyepieces from various manufacturers are probably the most you can really effectively use.  It gets a little awkward to use the outer edges on the stuff I have because you are tilting your head around like looking out a window and the super concave lens makes everything you aren't looking directly at seem more distorted.  I'm not sure quite how to explain it.

You really need to see a picture of the 9mm 120 degree in someones hand to get an idea of how absurdly massive it is.  I call it the holy hand grenade of astronomy.

 

It is super handy to have that extra 20-40 degrees of view around the outside however because I can find most things with just my red dot scope to get me close super easy with my 5.5mm eyepiece.

Its also nice that my 20mm eye piece is the lowest magnification I will ever need in my refractor and about the widest I can use in my SCT.

He was not asking about th 9mm 120AFOV ES eyepiece, but it really is massive and heavy for a 2".

[SeattleScott]

The hyperwides are wider but it is harder to take in the whole view, you can’t focus on the whole view at once even if you do get it in, and they are big and heavy. They do give more drift time with a manual mount though as you can just move your head a bit instead of moving the scope as much.

Unfortunately you almost need to try hyperwides to see if they really are for you. Personally I don’t really like having to get so close to the glass to see the whole view. I start getting nervous about blinking and getting eyelash oil on the lens. So normally it is nice to hang back and maybe use 80 AFOV of the 100 but it is nice to be able to get in close to frame something when needed.

Scott

[faackanders2]

To me would be not hard at all: if want to maximize the tfov the 13mm/100° is quite obvious.

I rarely use eyepieces below 82 AFOV anymore (except fo my 40mm 70AFOV 2in "finder" eyepiece).  All my last purchases have been 100+ AFOV.  I do wear glasses, mostly for reading, but not for observing.

Edited by faackanders2, 24 January 2021 - 12:34 PM.

[Hesiod]

I should have been more specific. I’m looking for more detail and opinion on USEFUL FOV. That’s a loose term I’m just using for lack of a better term. For example, is 100 degrees that usable in a 13mm EP? Or is there a point in FOV ranges per magnification level where it’s a technically accurate claim, but then there are drawbacks that need to be considered? Yes, 100 is greater than 76. I’m looking for a more technical analysis - I should have been more specific. Thanks! -James

The tfov depends on the field stop, and among the listed EPs it is the 13mm/100° to have the largest one.

Said so, what truly changes between 70°, 80° and 100° afov is the experience and the ergonomics. Wider the afov, more you may exploit your peripheral vision; also, more the afov, more are allowed to rotate your eye before noticing the dark ring of the field stop.

100° EPs tend to have less eye relief than some lines which are indeed designed to provide a very large eye relief (these are usually in the 70° class, examples are XWs, Delos, Morpheus).

 

As a personal note I tend to avoid either too low and too much eye relief (I prefer to stay around 1 cm) and prefer the ergonomics of 40°-50° afov but find 80°one perfectly enjoyable

[faackanders2]

The hyperwides are wider but it is harder to take in the whole view, you can’t focus on the whole view at once even if you do get it in, and they are big and heavy. They do give more drift time with a manual mount though as you can just move your head a bit instead of moving the scope as much.

Unfortunately you almost need to try hyperwides to see if they really are for you. Personally I don’t really like having to get so close to the glass to see the whole view. I start getting nervous about blinking and getting eyelash oil on the lens. So normally it is nice to hang back and maybe use 80 AFOV of the 100 but it is nice to be able to get in close to frame something when needed.

Scott

The only eyepiece I have that does not focus across entire view is 20mm 100AFOV ES (outer 10%), but the Paracorr II reduces that to outer 5%.  My scope is a 17.5" f4.1 Dob.  I am a value seeker, so I may never upgrade to 21mm 100AFOV TV Ethos which does not have this issue.

[25585]

 

Ok everyone, I'm at paralysis from analysis point in my decision process here. Which would YOU choose if TFOV is important you??? (I do not wear glasses BTW).  Thanks in advance!  

 

1. Baader Morpheus 12.5mm 76°
2. APM 12.5 Hi-FW ULTRA-WIDE 84°
3. APM XWA HDC Hyperwide 13mm 100°

 

Either #1 or #2. Both good for binoviewing, neither has an undercut. #1 1st choice, #2 2nd.

[SeattleScott]

The only eyepiece I have that does not focus across entire view is 20mm 100AFOV ES (outer 10%), but the Paracorr II reduces that to outer 5%. My scope is a 17.5" f4.1 Dob. I am a value seeker, so I may never upgrade to 21mm 100AFOV TV Ethos which does not have this issue.

It’s not the eyepiece I was referring to. The human eye cannot focus on a 100 degrees field all at once. You can look at different parts of it and those parts will be in focus. But when you get to 100 AFOV, part of the view will be in peripheral vision and out of focus.

That being said, a lot of people like the feeling of not being able to see the field stop, and the stars just gradually fade away into the blur of peripheral vision, just as if they were floating in space.

Scott

Edited by SeattleScott, 24 January 2021 - 12:48 PM.

[25585]

I’ve used all three of these eyepieces.   One important aspect is whether or not you need glasses while observing.  If you do then the 13mm APM is out and the 12.5mm Morpheus is the clear favorite as the 12.5mm APM is borderline for glasses.

 

Assuming you do not need glasses then in order I would recommend:

 

1.  APM 13mm.  This eyepiece is super-sharp and comfortable to use.  I found the entire field accessible, but a smaller field is easier.  I don’t have one because I really need glasses to correct for astigmatism at the exit pupil this eyepiece provides.  But if not for that I would have kept it.

 

2.  12.5mm Morpheus.  Very comfortable and the 76 deg AFOV is possibly the ideal combination of wide field and easy to take in.  This eyepiece provides a very engaging view that is highly immersive.  

 

3.  12.5mm APM.   Actually a very good eyepiece except for one performance flaw that is a deal breaker for me.  This eyepiece has one of the worst cases of “edge of field brightening” I have seen.   EOFB is when the sky background is not uniform from center to edge and the outer field has a brighter sky background than the central field.   You can see this with a lot of wide field eyepieces and some narrow field eyepieces.   Sometimes it can be ignored.  I find with the 12.5mm APM it is impossible to ignore.  If you are limiting the use to lunar/planetary then it may not be an issue, but if you are looking for deep sky the EOFB seriously detracts from the quality of the view.

In its own right, the Baader Morpheus range is excellent optically. It should not be regarded as just a cheaper alternative to certain other brands for AFOV, or for those who want longer eye relief (ditto for ES92s).

 

To the OP, if you want usable AFOV, any Morpheus, will easily give you access to its full edge-to-edge view, and an immersive experience.

 

I decided against an APM 12.5 based on the reported EOFB, and bought a Noblex 12.5 instead, so glad I did! 

[Jon Isaacs]

It’s not the eyepiece I was referring to. The human eye cannot focus on a 100 degrees field all at once. You can look at different parts of it and those parts will be in focus. But when you get to 100 AFOV, part of the view will be in peripheral vision and out of focus.

That being said, a lot of people like the feeling of not being able to see the field stop, and the stars just gradually fade away into the blur of peripheral vision, just as if they were floating in space.

Scott

 

My take:

 

Your peripheral vision is not out of focus in the sense that it's blurred, it's just not as well resolved. 

 

Of the three, my preference would be the 13 mm 100 degree APM.  That choice would only be based on my preference for the 13mm Ethos over the 13 mm Nagler Type 6. Optically both are excellent but the wider field of the 13 mm Ethos is accessible and seemingly unrestricted.

 

Jon

[faackanders2]

It’s not the eyepiece I was referring to. The human eye cannot focus on a 100 degrees field all at once. You can look at different parts of it and those parts will be in focus. But when you get to 100 AFOV, part of the view will be in peripheral vision and out of focus.

That being said, a lot of people like the feeling of not being able to see the field stop, and the stars just gradually fade away into the blur of peripheral vision, just as if they were floating in space.

Scott

Yes you can only read and see detail with your fovea centralis vision, but you can still see and drive/fly or watch sports with your periferal vision.  I like looking at a full moon and have it appear as a 6 foot diameter 3 feet away from me, and I can choose to rotate my eye to see all the detail anywhere I look while seeing the whole moon.  Not much different from talking to a person 3 feet away and noticing their hands and body language while they talk.  I certainly would not want to drive nor fly with toilet paper rolls blocking my periferial vision, and I would never just take it for granted.  PS,  Our scotopic nigh vision is mostly periferial vision and only the bright moon and planets and a few colored stars/DSOs trigger our color scotopic vision.

Edited by faackanders2, 24 January 2021 - 04:59 PM.