368 replies to this topic

[GOLGO13]

Nice but the price!

Yeah. It's tough to save money in night vision land.

[johncmcd]

40mm is fine for stars and globulars. Ha filter dims view considerably, but nebula is usually bigger and needs less magnification. NV image is bright. Your eyes can pick up extreme details even if they are small.

67mm needs 1” extra extension over 55mm. 55mm also needs more travel. You can stack extension tubes to get focus. Not a big deal. The lens is not heavy.

40mm Plossl is like any regular 1.25” eyepiece. No special focus travel requirement. 2” Ha filter is very expensive. That’s why people likes to start with 1.25” lens.

For globulars the 40mm works beautifully, but don't forget with globulars (and also planetary nebulas) you can really push the power with NV.  I regularly use my 10mm Delos on globulars and sometimes I find myself wishing I had a 6    Even the core of the Orion nebula is crazy in my 12.5" F/4 with the 10mm Delos, as it is really bright and the dimming doesn't really kill it much even in strong LP.  Another memorable view with the 10mm was NGC 2392 (often called the Eskimo or Lion nebula).  Even in the city I could see sharp detail between the central core and the outer ring of the nebula.  

 

John

[patindaytona]

For globulars the 40mm works beautifully, but don't forget with globulars (and also planetary nebulas) you can really push the power with NV.  I regularly use my 10mm Delos on globulars and sometimes I find myself wishing I had a 6    Even the core of the Orion nebula is crazy in my 12.5" F/4 with the 10mm Delos, as it is really bright and the dimming doesn't really kill it much even in strong LP.  Another memorable view with the 10mm was NGC 2392 (often called the Eskimo or Lion nebula).  Even in the city I could see sharp detail between the central core and the outer ring of the nebula.  

 

John

I see alot use the 40mm Plossl. I'm sure that maintains good brightness levels, but I don't want to fall to short on magnification if I'm only getting the 55mm Plossl and one other eyepiece. Their's a Televue 32mm Plossl also. Might be a good comprimise. The 10mm or a 12mm could make thing pretty dark for me. I'm in a Bortle 7 or 8 looking north. And about 6 looking south of me.(most DSO's are south)
 

[GOLGO13]

I see alot use the 40mm Plossl. I'm sure that maintains good brightness levels, but I don't want to fall to short on magnification if I'm only getting the 55mm Plossl and one other eyepiece. Their's a Televue 32mm Plossl also. Might be a good comprimise. The 10mm or a 12mm could make thing pretty dark for me. I'm in a Bortle 7 or 8 looking north. And about 6 looking south of me.(most DSO's are south)
 

One problem with this situation is; if you are getting the 55 plossl, you are already in the 2 inch format for filters. So it would probably be wise to stick to 2 inch for your second eyepiece. Otherwise, you'll be buying double the amount of filters. And the filters are pretty expensive.

 

I would suggest you should also consider getting the 67mm adapter that screws into the 55 plossl. You can take it in and out as needed. From what I understand the 67mm not only reduces the setup more, but also cleans up the edges when using Afocal.

 

See below:

 

[patindaytona]

One problem with this situation is; if you are getting the 55 plossl, you are already in the 2 inch format for filters. So it would probably be wise to stick to 2 inch for your second eyepiece. Otherwise, you'll be buying double the amount of filters. And the filters are pretty expensive.

 

I would suggest you should also consider getting the 67mm adapter that screws into the 55 plossl. You can take it in and out as needed. From what I understand the 67mm not only reduces the setup more, but also cleans up the edges when using Afocal.

 

See below:

 

Yes, I was planning on the 67mm.
 

[StarAlert]

You can put the 2” filter on the front side of the diagonal and use any eyepiece you like. 

[GOLGO13]

You can put the 2” filter on the front side of the diagonal and use any eyepiece you like.

That's true I think. Not sure if placement matters, but I can test that sometime.

Assuming a diagonal is in place. I do have some 2 inch to 1.25 adapters with threading. However, you'd have to be very careful to not bust the filter. So probably not a good idea to use that way.

Edited by GOLGO13, 26 April 2022 - 02:35 PM.

[johncmcd]

One problem with this situation is; if you are getting the 55 plossl, you are already in the 2 inch format for filters. So it would probably be wise to stick to 2 inch for your second eyepiece. Otherwise, you'll be buying double the amount of filters. And the filters are pretty expensive.

 

I would suggest you should also consider getting the 67mm adapter that screws into the 55 plossl. You can take it in and out as needed. From what I understand the 67mm not only reduces the setup more, but also cleans up the edges when using Afocal.

 

See below:

 

I always put my filters on the bottom of the Paracorr, or on the diagonal as someone else said, or if your 1 1/4" adapter has threads you can do it there with possibly a short extension tube to keep the eyepiece from contacting it.  It is true that diagonals are a bit tricker in that way, but there is enough futzing around with taking the NV device off one eyepiece and tightening it on another, that I don't really like having to change the filter as well   

 

What I really want to add is a filter slide for my Newtonian once I get past the shock of this purchase

 

John

[patindaytona]

There is no single one eyepiece for use with NV just like the same is true for regular visual telescope use.

 

One of the best things that NV is good at are emission nebula and they are some of the largest features that are easily visible to it.  So yes that is a good eyepiece for it. 

 

I use the 55 with NV and 10F3 telescope Afocal and enjoy seeing clusters of galaxies.  The Leo triplet becomes the Leo quartet and quintet with that combinations field of view.

 

The down side to higher power shorter focal length eyepieces is the view gets dimmer for the NV device so in general I usually stay with the 55mm.  However I sometimes use a 20 or even a 10mm.    But I find the 55 the most satisfying.

 

Dale

I'm getting way ahead of myself because I haven't even ordered things yet. But as for magnification increase, is it better to get a different telescope rather than higher power eyepieces with my current scope? If so, can you explain why? Are their cheap scopes for this, can you suggest any? CHEAP!!

 

[GOLGO13]

I'm getting way ahead of myself because I haven't even ordered things yet. But as for magnification increase, is it better to get a different telescope rather than higher power eyepieces with my current scope? If so, can you explain why? Are their cheap scopes for this, can you suggest any? CHEAP!!

Absolutely there are low cost scopes. But honestly I think your scope will do great by itself. Only thing really missing is very low power for things like North American nebula and all the stuff in Cygnus. A low cost 102mm F5 refractor would work great. Check used market.

1500 focal length is going to be pretty good for globulars with a 27mm or something a little higher like the 18.2mm delite.

[patindaytona]

Absolutely there are low cost scopes. But honestly I think your scope will do great by itself. Only thing really missing is very low power for things like North American nebula and all the stuff in Cygnus. A low cost 102mm F5 refractor would work great. Check used market.

1500 focal length is going to be pretty good for globulars with a 27mm or something a little higher like the 18.2mm delite.

So you think the way to go with my scope is using other eyepieces and not getting a different scope? I can see getting one for the wider yet views, but right now I;m more interested in getting closer views for clusters. Looking at the Televue eyepieces the work with the NV I think that I have two low cost eyepieces that might fit with that adapter. One is a 35mm Orion wide Deep View. Other is a Zhummel 9mm 100 degree wide angle. Might be pretty dim with that one, but will try them before i go ahead and buy any other eyepiece.
 

[GOLGO13]

So you think the way to go with my scope is using other eyepieces and not getting a different scope? I can see getting one for the wider yet views, but right now I;m more interested in getting closer views for clusters. Looking at the Televue eyepieces the work with the NV I think that I have two low cost eyepieces that might fit with that adapter. One is a 35mm Orion wide Deep View. Other is a Zhummel 9mm 100 degree wide angle. Might be pretty dim with that one, but will try them before i go ahead and buy any other eyepiece.
 

Yeah...I think 1500 focal length is very nice for just about everything. My best scope for globulars is my C8 with a 2032 focal length. But I think your 1500 is close enough to be quite good.

 

I had a chance to use a 16 inch recently in prime focus (equivalent to using the 27mm eyepiece afocal). It was very good, but I felt my C8 gave a very good view also. And I'm sure your 1500 focal length would be quite good. I'd say in the future something like an 18mm would do well. I sometimes use a 2x barlow in mine and that does well, but usually it's best at the native focal length.

 

The only other consideration is getting a cheap old SCT such as a 10 inch or 9.25. I'm thinking your scope will be good though. 

 

You would need that second eyepiece because the 67mm will make the globs too small in my opinion. But with the 27mm it should be very nice.

[patindaytona]

Yeah...I think 1500 focal length is very nice for just about everything. My best scope for globulars is my C8 with a 2032 focal length. But I think your 1500 is close enough to be quite good.

 

I had a chance to use a 16 inch recently in prime focus (equivalent to using the 27mm eyepiece afocal). It was very good, but I felt my C8 gave a very good view also. And I'm sure your 1500 focal length would be quite good. I'd say in the future something like an 18mm would do well. I sometimes use a 2x barlow in mine and that does well, but usually it's best at the native focal length.

 

The only other consideration is getting a cheap old SCT such as a 10 inch or 9.25. I'm thinking your scope will be good though. 

 

You would need that second eyepiece because the 67mm will make the globs too small in my opinion. But with the 27mm it should be very nice.

Alot of this is still overwhelming to me. When I use the 67mm reducer with the 55mm Televue Plossl, is it making it essentially converting that 55mm eyepiece to a 67mm eyepiece?

27mm (same as prime focus) is really just saying that anything BELOW 27mm is reducing my scope's aperture (brighter and wider field) right? Their is no other special significance to 27mm other than that. Or is that an eyepiece I would benefit from for some reason I'm not fully aware of?
 

Edited by patindaytona, 27 April 2022 - 03:43 PM.

[GOLGO13]

Alot of this is still overwhelming to me. When I use the 67mm reducer with the 55mm Televue Plossl, is it making it essentially converting that 55mm eyepiece to a 67mm eyepiece?
If i use a 27mm eyepiece does it mean that it is getting the max. aperture of my 12" telescope? I hope it;s that simple.

Pretty much what your said. 67mm eyepiece creates an effective .4 reduction in focal length and focal ratio. Smaller but brighter nebulas. 27mm would be operating at you native focal length and focal ratio. F5 and 1500 focal length. Not as bright for nebulas, but larger images. Perfect for globulars.

[patindaytona]

Pretty much what your said. 67mm eyepiece creates an effective .4 reduction in focal length and focal ratio. Smaller but brighter nebulas. 27mm would be operating at you native focal length and focal ratio. F5 and 1500 focal length. Not as bright for nebulas, but larger images. Perfect for globulars.

I tend to overthink everything first before i understand it well. So a 24mm eyepiece is an ideal eyepiece i should be using, right?
 

[GOLGO13]

I tend to overthink everything first before i understand it well. So a 24mm eyepiece is an ideal eyepiece i should be using, right?

Well, I don't see a 24mm on TeleVues listing. Which makes me think there's something with the eye relief on the 24 Panoptic that isn't optimal. So the 27mm pan or 18.2mm delite are probably the way to go there. 27mm pan should be quite good. Good for visual also.

[patindaytona]

Well, I don't see a 24mm on TeleVues listing. Which makes me think there's something with the eye relief on the 24 Panoptic that isn't optimal. So the 27mm pan or 18.2mm delite are probably the way to go there. 27mm pan should be quite good. Good for visual also.

$380 27mm pan. Pretty expensive.

After tons of questions and reviewing on this, here are the eyepieces that others suggested (most are strong opinioned)

40mm Plossl (1.25") 40mm is fine for stars and globulars

32mm Televue (1;25")
18.2mm Delite

Quite are range of opinions for things like globulars

Their is a 25mm Televue for $122 also

Edited by patindaytona, 27 April 2022 - 05:44 PM.

[sunrag]

Alot of this is still overwhelming to me. When I use the 67mm reducer with the 55mm Televue Plossl, is it making it essentially converting that 55mm eyepiece to a 67mm eyepiece?

27mm (same as prime focus) is really just saying that anything BELOW 27mm is reducing my scope's aperture (brighter and wider field) right? Their is no other special significance to 27mm other than that. Or is that an eyepiece I would benefit from for some reason I'm not fully aware of?
 

The Televue 67mm converter with 55mm Plossl will act as a 0.4X focal reducer with the 27mm FL Objective on the PVS-14 (27/67 = .4). So you will see a much smaller magnification than you normally used to in your 12”/F5.

The exit pupil (i.e., size of illuminated disc falling on the PVS-14’s 22mm objective is 67/5 = 13.4mm, so not going to fill the 22mm). It will work fully only if you have a F3 telescope.

 

But don’t concern yourself too much with this. I only have the 40mm Plossl, but i was able to resolve M3 Globular cluster in my 4”, 6”, 8”, and 12”. Saw M51 easily as well. The main issue i have with the 12” is that i need a step stool at any declination over 50 degrees because of the tall stack created by the Afocal attachments.

[patindaytona]

The Televue 67mm converter with 55mm Plossl will act as a 0.4X focal reducer with the 27mm FL Objective on the PVS-14 (27/67 = .4). So you will see a much smaller magnification than you normally used to in your 12”/F5.

The exit pupil (i.e., size of illuminated disc falling on the PVS-14’s 22mm objective is 67/5 = 13.4mm, so not going to fill the 22mm). It will work fully only if you have a F3 telescope.

 

But don’t concern yourself too much with this. I only have the 40mm Plossl, but i was able to resolve M3 Globular cluster in my 4”, 6”, 8”, and 12”. Saw M51 easily as well. The main issue i have with the 12” is that i need a step stool at any declination over 50 degrees because of the tall stack created by the Afocal attachments.

So it's the objective lens of the NV device itself that is 24mm?? If so, that's what was throwing me off. No need to go further with this but giving it one last shot here...I  have a 24mm eyepiece and I know that it's magnification is 62.5x     I has 82 degree field (Pleadies just tightly fits in). A 40mm eyepiece just sounds like such a super wide FOV to me. I believe what you're telling me though. Tough to understand this stuff.
 

[GOLGO13]

So it's the objective lens of the NV device itself that is 24mm?? If so, that's what was throwing me off. No need to go further with this but giving it one last shot here...I have a 24mm eyepiece and I know that it's magnification is 62.5x I has 82 degree field (Pleadies just tightly fits in). A 40mm eyepiece just sounds like such a super wide FOV to me. I believe what you're telling me though. Tough to understand this stuff.

I believe the objective of these is 27mm

It's a little confusing no doubt. But shouldn't be much an issue

[25585]

How does a Meade 56mm Plossl do?

[pwang99]

I used to use the Panoptic 41 as my main afocal eyepiece, in my scopes, which have f={1000mm, 1800mm, 2800mm}.  I recently switched over to using the TV 55mm Plossl as my main eyepiece, just because it's a bit smaller/lighter, and it makes finding things easier.  I will then either barlow it up with a 2x powermate, or switch to the 41mm Pan to make the objects a little bigger.

 

I will point out that in my 16" f/4 dob, there isn't quite enough backfocus for the TV 55mm.  So keep in mind that you might need a short eyepiece barrel extender.

[GOLGO13]

A very important thing to realize with NV, especially for Globulars, is if you wear glasses...make sure you use them for NV. I take the eyepiece guard off and use my glasses. There is a ton of eye relief in my unit...like a really large amount.

 

I don't use glasses for visual with glass, but with NV the difference is quite dramatic. I'd estimate the benefit is 25-35 percent sharper for me. 

 

Probably just something to do with the design of the thing.

 

I always like to remind people because it's quite a big difference from what I have experienced. Just had that today looking at globulars.

[Speedy1985]

A very important thing to realize with NV, especially for Globulars, is if you wear glasses...make sure you use them for NV. I take the eyepiece guard off and use my glasses. There is a ton of eye relief in my unit...like a really large amount.

 

I don't use glasses for visual with glass, but with NV the difference is quite dramatic. I'd estimate the benefit is 25-35 percent sharper for me. 

 

Probably just something to do with the design of the thing.

 

I always like to remind people because it's quite a big difference from what I have experienced. Just had that today looking at globulars.

Wouldn’t the built in diopter adjustment help with that?

[patindaytona]

I used to use the Panoptic 41 as my main afocal eyepiece, in my scopes, which have f={1000mm, 1800mm, 2800mm}.  I recently switched over to using the TV 55mm Plossl as my main eyepiece, just because it's a bit smaller/lighter, and it makes finding things easier.  I will then either barlow it up with a 2x powermate, or switch to the 41mm Pan to make the objects a little bigger.

 

I will point out that in my 16" f/4 dob, there isn't quite enough backfocus for the TV 55mm.  So keep in mind that you might need a short eyepiece barrel extender.

Yes, televue has the barrel extention for the 55mm