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

Shootout at the S.T.A.R.R.Y Corral: TeleVue Apollo 11 vs. Explore Scientific 92° 12

  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#26 Ihtegla Sar

Ihtegla Sar

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,000
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2019
  • Loc: Pacific Northwest

Posted 22 July 2021 - 06:21 PM

I've never seen the HH in my 10", even under the dark skies of Trout Lake in November, during new moon. I knew I was looking right at it, and I also know it's a larger object than most people realize. Still, I could not see it. I could see the Flame nebula quite easily as it was obvious, but not the HH. I didn't have a H-beta filter though. It was an exercise in futility, trying to spot the HH on that night even though I knew it was in the FOV of the EP. Just wasn't at all visible.

When the BIL saw the central star, he said there is dot in the middle of smoky ring. What was surprising to me, is that I didn't tell him about a central star. I told him to look for a smoky ring. I can't see the central star at home. But in the skies of North ML, I could. It was extremely faint and did not resemble a pinpoint star but more a ghostly dot.

Also, M57 was right at zenith on the nights I observed it in ML which helps mitigate seeing conditions some.

Novice when it comes to observing astronomical objects, but not when it comes using scopes. He lived in Alaska and often used spotting scopes on top of rifles for hunting so he is well practiced in using optics to look at objects. That said, out of my two BILs that looked through my scope that night, he was only one to notice the central star in M57. My other BIL (and my BIL's brother) could not see it.


Where do you set up in Trout Lake? Private land, or is there a good place to set up open to the public? I've set up on the Conboy Lake wildlife refuge east of Trout Lake a few times but it's always windy there and technically I don't think it's open after dark.

Had I read your review back when the A11 first came out I may have bought one but the price has gone up nearly $400 since then and that's all I paid for my ES 12mm 92 in 2019 on a 20% off sale before the price of those went up. I have seen the HH with it though, but in a 20" with an Astronomik h-beta filter. The h-beta filter makes a lot of difference on the HH. I've never seen M57 central star but seeing is rarely great under the jet stream and I have trouble getting the 20" mirror to cool down in the summer.

#27 TayM57

TayM57

    Messenger

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 411
  • Joined: 15 Nov 2012

Posted 22 July 2021 - 06:44 PM

This is not the focus of the topic, but do you find the DeLite 11 still gets used since the A11 made its way into your eyepiece case?

Oh absolutely, it does. On nights of OK seeing, the DeLite 11 gets used on the planets and Luna instead of the shorter FL DeLites. Not so much for DSOs though. There is most definitely a place in my EP case for the DeLites. Fantastic eyepieces.

 

Where do you set up in Trout Lake? Private land, or is there a good place to set up open to the public? I've set up on the Conboy Lake wildlife refuge east of Trout Lake a few times but it's always windy there and technically I don't think it's open after dark.

Had I read your review back when the A11 first came out I may have bought one but the price has gone up nearly $400 since then and that's all I paid for my ES 12mm 92 in 2019 on a 20% off sale before the price of those went up. I have seen the HH with it though, but in a 20" with an Astronomik h-beta filter. The h-beta filter makes a lot of difference on the HH. I've never seen M57 central star but seeing is rarely great under the jet stream and I have trouble getting the 20" mirror to cool down in the summer.

On that night when I tried to observe the HH, it was behind the Trout Lake Valley Inn, where it was completely dark from all the lights. That was before I bought my RV.

 

Since then, I do all of my Trout Lake observing at the park across from site #54 at the Elk Meadow RV park, about 2.5 miles Northwest of Trout Lake Vally Inn.

 

There is also the sno-park up the road, about 10 miles northeast of Trout Lake which is where the Rose City Astronomers club holds their star party but I find the tree line in all directions to be much too high for me.

 

 


  • thecelloronin likes this

#28 Dave Mitsky

Dave Mitsky

    ISS

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 98,991
  • Joined: 08 Apr 2002
  • Loc: PA, USA, Planet Earth

Posted 22 July 2021 - 06:46 PM

I've seen the Horsehead Nebula in a 6" pair of binoculars, but never in anything smaller than 12.5" with monocular vision.

But given how easily visible it was on certain nights, I can believe people's reports of seeing it in 10" and even 8".

I saw B33 on one occasion using my 8" f/6 Starsplitter Tube Dob equipped with a Zambuto mirror but it was a very difficult observation.  I've been able to log the Horsehead Nebula twice with my 10" f/4.7 Star-Watcher Collapsible Dob.  I used an H-beta filter each time.


  • Voyager 3 likes this

#29 Ihtegla Sar

Ihtegla Sar

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,000
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2019
  • Loc: Pacific Northwest

Posted 22 July 2021 - 08:49 PM

On that night when I tried to observe the HH, it was behind the Trout Lake Valley Inn, where it was completely dark from all the lights. That was before I bought my RV.

Since then, I do all of my Trout Lake observing at the park across from site #54 at the Elk Meadow RV park, about 2.5 miles Northwest of Trout Lake Vally Inn.

There is also the sno-park up the road, about 10 miles northeast of Trout Lake which is where the Rose City Astronomers club holds their star party but I find the tree line in all directions to be much too high for me.

Thanks. I have been to that sno park during the day and always felt that there would be major thermal issues from all that parking area and no where else to set up because of the trees. Guess you would need to be staying at the Inn or RV park to set up there.

I do have a question about the difference between the 11A and the ES12. Does the A11 require more inward travel in your focuser to reach focus than the ES12?

There are a number of eyepieces that I can't use with my myopia (like the 31 Nagler and 21 Ethos) because they would bottom out on my SIPS. I'm wondering how much inward travel the A11 needs. Televue publishes the position of the field stop for it's other eyepieces but I don't see it for the A11.

Edited by Ihtegla Sar, 22 July 2021 - 08:50 PM.


#30 russell23

russell23

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12,126
  • Joined: 31 May 2009
  • Loc: Upstate NY

Posted 22 July 2021 - 09:16 PM

Great review Tay!  

 

I never seriously considered the A11 because the price was more than I could justify.  The way I look at it the 14mm Delos (field stop 17.3mm) is my equivalent of the A11 (16.2mm field stop). 

 

Dave


  • Tyson M likes this

#31 Voyager 3

Voyager 3

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,497
  • Joined: 20 Jul 2020
  • Loc: Near Bangalore, India

Posted 22 July 2021 - 10:15 PM

I've never seen the HH in my 10", even under the dark skies of Trout Lake in November, during new moon. I knew I was looking right at it, and I also know it's a larger object than most people realize. Still, I could not see it. I could see the Flame nebula quite easily as it was obvious, but not the HH. I didn't have a H-beta filter though. It was an exercise in futility, trying to spot the HH on that night even though I knew it was in the FOV of the EP. Just wasn't at all visible.

When the BIL saw the central star, he said there is dot in the middle of smoky ring. What was surprising to me, is that I didn't tell him about a central star. I told him to look for a smoky ring. I can't see the central star at home. But in the skies of North ML, I could. It was extremely faint and did not resemble a pinpoint star but more a ghostly dot.

Also, M57 was right at zenith on the nights I observed it in ML which helps mitigate seeing conditions some.

Novice when it comes to observing astronomical objects, but not when it comes using scopes. He lived in Alaska and often used spotting scopes on top of rifles for hunting so he is well practiced in using optics to look at objects. That said, out of my two BILs that looked through my scope that night, he was only one to notice the central star in M57. My other BIL (and my BIL's brother) could not see it.

Tay a brief clearcut review !
I'm happy that you are having fun with the A11 .

Were you seeing the central star 100% of the time or was it blinking on and off ? If the seeing was quite steady , it is possible to see it 100% of the time . If not , and visible only for 10% of the time , I will not be surprised . If your BIL (nice acro!) was able to see it , then it must be quite prominent .

#32 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 52,058
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 23 July 2021 - 12:10 AM

Thanks. I have been to that sno park during the day and always felt that there would be major thermal issues from all that parking area and no where else to set up because of the trees. Guess you would need to be staying at the Inn or RV park to set up there.

I do have a question about the difference between the 11A and the ES12. Does the A11 require more inward travel in your focuser to reach focus than the ES12?

There are a number of eyepieces that I can't use with my myopia (like the 31 Nagler and 21 Ethos) because they would bottom out on my SIPS. I'm wondering how much inward travel the A11 needs. Televue publishes the position of the field stop for it's other eyepieces but I don't see it for the A11.

Setting C when used as a 2" eyepiece.  That is 0.2" outward from the in-most setting, or ~5mm.
 



#33 25585

25585

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 14,039
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the SW UK. Dark end of the street.

Posted 23 July 2021 - 05:42 AM

Given most amateur astronomers walk the "aesthetic path", I'd say subjective reviews are part of the charm of hanging out on an eyepiece forum. 

I must read his books again waytogo.gif


  • j.gardavsky and thecelloronin like this

#34 25585

25585

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 14,039
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the SW UK. Dark end of the street.

Posted 23 July 2021 - 05:45 AM

A11 v Doclex 12.5 would be an interesting competition.


  • j.gardavsky likes this

#35 RichA

RichA

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,317
  • Joined: 03 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Toronto, Canada

Posted 23 July 2021 - 06:20 PM

Introduction:

 

A couple months ago, my wife decided to buy me the TeleVue Apollo 11

Very good review.  Thank you.



#36 teashea

teashea

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,818
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2020
  • Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

Posted 23 July 2021 - 07:47 PM

I very fine report - well done.



#37 darkandstormynight

darkandstormynight

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 202
  • Joined: 24 Dec 2020
  • Loc: Maryland

Posted 24 July 2021 - 07:23 AM

A couple months ago, my wife decided to buy me the TeleVue Apollo 11


Wonderful eyepiece.
Great review (thank you!).
Even better wife.

#38 Tyson M

Tyson M

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,070
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2015
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 24 July 2021 - 07:52 AM

As the reviewer noted, the difference in magnification results in the difference of contrast.  A difference in field of view and size and weights results in a slight difference of abberations on the edge (flaring, coma).

 

I'd like to think the A11 has the better optical profile give the price, and the reviewer thinks the slight nod goes to the A11- which would make sense as well.

 

All in all, good thorough review.  I don't see anything egregious with the 12ES92 results from this review, or with my experiences under the stars. 

 

I found it to be a fantastic performer on lunar and planetary even though I have smaller quality glass for that task. The presentation in larger scopes is just outstanding though and really comes alive, especially in my 9" refractor.

 

Thx for sharing.


  • RAKing, 25585 and Ihtegla Sar like this

#39 Ihtegla Sar

Ihtegla Sar

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,000
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2019
  • Loc: Pacific Northwest

Posted 24 July 2021 - 11:16 AM

Setting C when used as a 2" eyepiece. That is 0.2" outward from the in-most setting, or ~5mm.


Thanks Don. So the A11 would work fine with a SIPS for people with perfect vision or those who wore glasses when observing.

It sounds like it might work for someone like me who is extremely nearsighted and doesn't wear glasses when observing, but it could be cutting it close. Most eyepieces need .125 inch or less of inward travel to reach focus without my glasses but my ES 30 needs an additional .375 inches. The ES 12 uses a Parrcorr setting that is further out than C and only requires an additional 1/16 inch inward travel for me to reach focus without my glasses.

I've tried wearing glasses to observe and I do it occasionally, when I want to sketch (I can't see a sketch without my glasses unless I put the paper three inches from my face) or sometimes with very large exit pupils (6mm or greater) because I get some field curvature and some astigmatism at the edge of the field when viewing at large exit pupils without my glasses.

But with normal exit pupils (5mm and smaller) the views without my glasses is much sharper and seems to have more contrast. I can see fine details and pick up faint contrast without my glasses that I can't always see with them.

The loss of sharpness and contrast on axis when I wear my glasses seems greater than the difference between the A12 and the ES 12 as described in this thread.

Given the price of an A11, I would only want to consider buying an A11 if I knew for certain there would be enough infocus for me to reach focus in my SIPS equipped scope without my glasses. If I ever get serious about spending $1,400 on an eyepiece I will have to go observing with someone who already owns one first. The reported improvement in on axis sharpness and contrast is enticing. I've seen the central star in the Helix and the Dumbell but never come close to seeing it in the Ring.
  • 25585 likes this

#40 25585

25585

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 14,039
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the SW UK. Dark end of the street.

Posted 24 July 2021 - 01:34 PM

I too would need to try one out first.


  • oldphysics likes this

#41 lookoutmtn17

lookoutmtn17

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 65
  • Joined: 21 Dec 2010
  • Loc: SE TN

Posted 24 July 2021 - 03:42 PM

Thanks Tay, I enjoyed the review. I do miss the night skies of the Grand Coulee area.



#42 oldphysics

oldphysics

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 65
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2015
  • Loc: East Coast, USA

Posted 24 July 2021 - 04:03 PM

I too would need to try one out first.

That’s good, solid common sense.


  • 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