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

University Optics

  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#26 george tatsis

george tatsis

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,513
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2008
  • Loc: Flushing, NY

Posted 20 July 2021 - 03:47 PM

OK. So far I have UO volcano top 5,6 and 9mm Abbe Orthos, and a 7mm circle T Abbe Ortho. I also now have a UO 16mm Konig. My primary interests are the moon, planets and double stars. My scopes are 6” F/7, 8” F/9 and 10” F/9 refractors. Because of my astigmatism I tend to stay away from Widefield low power eyepieces although I do have a Dioptrix.

JiimP

Most folks will claim that top of the line orthos and the like will beat the mundane UO orthos. However, most people don't have the refractors that you own. So, I expect superb performance from the humble UO orthos because 99% of the job is done by the telescope, despite the splitting hairs" expertise" we have developed regarding the performance of an eyepiece.

 

George


Edited by george tatsis, 20 July 2021 - 03:50 PM.

  • JimP and George N like this

#27 Chucky

Chucky

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,368
  • Joined: 16 Apr 2010

Posted 21 July 2021 - 06:35 AM

<<  So, I expect superb performance from the humble UO orthos because 99% of the job is done by the telescope  >>

 

If true, can someone reasonably be expected to see the 1% difference a non UO ortho apparently would make?


Edited by Chucky, 21 July 2021 - 06:39 AM.


#28 george tatsis

george tatsis

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,513
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2008
  • Loc: Flushing, NY

Posted 21 July 2021 - 11:35 AM

<<  So, I expect superb performance from the humble UO orthos because 99% of the job is done by the telescope  >>

 

If true, can someone reasonably be expected to see the 1% difference a non UO ortho apparently would make?

On axis I doubt it, even though sometimes we try to convince ourselves that we do, especially when we have paid a lot for some premium ones.

 

The same amount of details will most likely be seen in all good eyepieces. One may pay for a used Zeiss ten times the amount of that of a UO ortho for improvements mostly in scatter and contrast.

 

However, Jim's telescopes are high end refractors which are not plagued by the notorious light scattering properties found in reflectors. Worst case scenario,slightly lower performance ( 1% -2%) than his Zeiss and Brandons. Some folks come up with a 10% difference or so  in performance without even realizing how much this one is in information and details.

 

Reports of that kind cannot be taken seriously, unless of course one is talking to a layman who has no clue what the topic of the conversation is.My reference to percentage differences is made for those who prefer numbers  to adjectives. Nothing proven of course as it is just a personal opinion. Jim will eventually give us the verdict !

 

George



#29 ausastronomer

ausastronomer

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,270
  • Joined: 30 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Shoalhaven Heads NSW (Australia)

Posted 22 July 2021 - 07:22 AM

Most folks will claim that top of the line orthos and the like will beat the mundane UO orthos. However, most people don't have the refractors that you own. So, I expect superb performance from the humble UO orthos because 99% of the job is done by the telescope, despite the splitting hairs" expertise" we have developed regarding the performance of an eyepiece.

 

George

This is why I continually ponder the sanity of people who spend a small fortune on small refractors, then a slightly smaller fortune on premium eyepieces to jam down it's throat.  They could see a whole lot more with a $100 eyepiece in a $500 10" Newtonian.  Of course the ergonomics and transportability are a whole lot different.

 

Cheers

John B


  • george tatsis likes this

#30 csrlice12

csrlice12

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 28,410
  • Joined: 22 May 2012
  • Loc: Denver, CO

Posted 22 July 2021 - 09:20 AM

This is why I continually ponder the sanity of people who spend a small fortune on small refractors, then a slightly smaller fortune on premium eyepieces to jam down it's throat.  They could see a whole lot more with a $100 eyepiece in a $500 10" Newtonian.  Of course the ergonomics and transportability are a whole lot different.

 

Cheers

John B

Have both a small decent refractor and a 10" dob....both get premium Eyepieces.  Sometimes it isn't what you see, it's how you're seeing it.  On faint DSOs the dob wins hands down, on solar system objects or splitting doubles or just quick grabngo give me my refractor.  Kinda like cars...You can have a beater work truck for the heavy stuff, and a Bentley for when you go to a car show.




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