44 replies to this topic

[Skyfisher]

Last summer I started my journey in astronomy and after a few observing sessions I was hooked.   I now have eye piece focal lengths covering a range from 3.5mm to 24mm using DeLites, a Panoptic and a TV 2X Barlow.  I am wondering if I should add either a 27mm or 35mm Panoptic as a mate for my 24mm Panoptic.   One more is the most my budget will bear for the foreseeable future.   So, 27mm or 35mm Panoptic?

Edited by Skyfisher, 30 January 2023 - 04:18 PM.

[TOMDEY]

Eyepieces are like potato chips.    Tom

[KWB]

Last summer I started my journey in astronomy and after a few observing sessions I was hooked.   I now have eye piece focal lengths covering a range from 3.5mm to 24mm using DeLites, a Panoptic and a TV 2X Barlow.  I am wondering if I should add either a 27mm or 35mm Panoptic as a mate for my 24mm Panoptic.   One more is the most my budget will bear for the foreseeable future.   Thoughts?

Are you looking to to enhance the performance of a single telescope or all your scopes?

 

I would want a lower power, wider field of view of what you have listed in your inventory. This is probably what you don't want to hear because the this astronomical hobby can exist without every eyepiece in one's collection being  made by TeleVue. If you don't wear eyeglasses, I would choose the AT 28mm UWA. For eyeglasses, the 30mm UFF. These two are cost effective and excellent performing eyepieces.

[Dave Mitsky]

I agree with Kenny.

 

I own a 35mm Tele Vue Panoptic and rarely use it since purchasing a 28mm Astro-Tech UWA.

 

https://www.astronom...2-eyepiece.html

[Skyfisher]

Eyepieces are like potato chips.    Tom

Well, yes they are.  I can afford one more chip even though I can think of about 20 more I would enjoy 

[Skyfisher]

Are you looking to to enhance the performance of a single telescope or all your scopes?

 

I would want a lower power, wider field of view of what you have listed in your inventory. This is probably what you don't want to hear because the this astronomical hobby can exist without every eyepiece in one's collection being  made by TeleVue. If you don't wear eyeglasses, I would choose the AT 28mm UWA. For eyeglasses, the 30mm UFF. These two are cost effective and excellent performing eyepieces.

All three scopes.  The 503 80ED may eventually be replaced by a slightly larger f7ish refractor. I have read about people going for other brands and then coming back to Televue.  I started with the long FL Possels and DeLite series for ER/glasses and have been pleased with them and the quality but not the cost.  Have decided to stick with TV and one more will probably be my limit.  

 

The question regards 27mm vs 35mm in the Pan range of EP.   

[NeroStar]

As some have already mentioned, there are cheaper options. Ive had great results with my high-end EPs, but if I had it to do over, and had access to the current selection of quality budget-friendly options, I'd probably purchase some of the cheaper UWA EPs and pocket the savings. For your focal length, the aforementioned Astrotech UWAs, or the Omegon SWA (sometimes called 'SWAN') wide-angles come in 26, 32 and 38mm, I believe. I think those should perform really well, as long as you enjoy more wide-angle (70 degree) views. The Explore Scientific 82 degree Argon-purged are also excellent, but a bit higher in price.  [Shameless plug coming] Like the in-house brand 'AstroTech, those are also sold by Astronomics, the owner and operator of Cloudy Nights.  I wouldnt recommend them if I didn't think they'd work well with your current setup. - My thoughts.  

Edited by NeroStar, 30 January 2023 - 03:52 PM.

[KWB]

All three scopes.  The 503 80ED may eventually be replaced by a slightly larger f7ish refractor. I have read about people going for other brands and then coming back to Televue.  I started with the long FL Possels and DeLite series for ER/glasses and have been pleased with them and the quality but not the cost.  Have decided to stick with TV and one more will probably be my limit.  

 

The question regards 27mm vs 35mm in the Pan range of EP.   

You asked for thoughts?

 

You didn't state in your original post that you are only entertaining opinions as to these TV eyepieces options only. Perhaps you should edit your original post to reflect that.

[Skyfisher]

You asked for thoughts?

 

You didn't state in your original post that you are only entertaining opinions as to these TV eyepieces options only. Perhaps you should edit your original post to reflect that.

Edited!     "I am wondering if I should add either a 27mm or 35mm Panoptic" was in the original post.   Do you dislike Televue EPs ?

[KWB]

Edited!     "I am wondering if I should add either a 27mm or 35mm Panoptic" was in the original post.   Do you dislike Televue EPs ?

These images are from my camera of my very own eyepieces. Nothing to suggest I dislike TV eyepieces. Far from it it, they are excellent. 

 

Televue eyepieces are costly and don't provide the biggest bang for the buck in my experience. 20 years ago they were trend setters and the standard by which I judged all other eypieces. In 2023 they have a lot more competition as to performance and value for the astro dollar. 

 

I presently own a couple of ES eyepieces and half a set of AT UWA eyepieces. They work pretty well for me and I haven't lost interest in this hobby.

 

 

 

 

[Skyfisher]

These images are from my camera of my very own eyepieces. Nothing to suggest I dislike TV eyepieces. Far from it it, they are escellent.

 

Televue eyepieces are costly and don't provide the biggest bang for the buck in my experience. 20 years ago there were trend setters and the standard by which I judged all other eypieces. In 2023 they have a lot more competition as to performance and value for the astro dollar. 

 

I presently own a couple of ES eyepieces and half a set of AT UWA eyepieces. They work pretty well for me and I haven't lost interest in this hobby.

 

 

 

 

OK, would you care to help me choose between the 27mm and 35mm Panoptics ?

[aeajr]

An eyepiece is a tool that is intended to perform a task.  What is the task of this new eyepiece?

 

If you want to maximize your field of view then you go for the 35. No question about it.

 

If you are trying to hit a certain exit pupil, well, what is it and which one is closest.

 

Do you have a target or a task that you can't do with your current eyepieces?  What is it?

 

You pick the right tool for the task and the right task for the tool.

 

 

My approach?

 

I always have an eyepiece that will maximize the field of view in each of my scopes.   In my 2" focusers it is a 38mm/70 degree.  In my 1.25" focusers it is a 32 mm Plossl.

 

What is the use for this eyepiece?

• finder eyepiece
• large DSO eyepiece
• sky sweeper.

I also have a 20 mm 82 degree.  Really nice view but it can't replace the 38/70.

 

 

Sooooo, what is the task for this tool?

[KWB]

OK, would you care to help me choose between the 27mm and 35mm Panoptics ?

The 27mm Panoptic is $380 and the eyepieces I recommended are roughly half the price, probably as nearly well corrected across the entire field of view. The UFF goes wider and the AT goes considerably wider as to a TFOV. I don't recommend you purchase either TV eyepiece versus the aforementioned non-TV eyepieces.

 

You have a very nice eyepiece collection. You will not contaminate it by choosing another eyepiece design. No one is keeping book on what eyepiece you use in your telescopes

[Jack72]

Hi.

35 mm. Very good eyepiece. Big field.

27mm too close to 24mm

Edited by Jack72, 30 January 2023 - 05:00 PM.

[Skyfisher]

An eyepiece is a tool that is intended to perform a task.  What is the task of this new eyepiece?

 

If you want to maximize your field of view then you go for the 35. No question about it.

 

If you are trying to hit a certain exit pupil, well, what is it and which one is closest.

 

Do you have a target or a task that you can't do with your current eyepieces?  What is it?

 

You pick the right tool for the task and the right task for the tool.

 

 

My approach?

 

I always have an eyepiece that will maximize the field of view in each of my scopes.   In my 2" focusers it is a 38mm/70 degree.  In my 1.25" focusers it is a 32 mm Plossl.

 

What is the use for this eyepiece?

• finder eyepiece
• large DSO eyepiece
• sky sweeper.

I also have a 20 mm 82 degree.  Really nice view but it can't replace the 38/70.

 

 

Sooooo, what is the task for this tool?

PM sent

[tony_spina]

The 27 Pan is to close to your 24 Pan. I would go with the 35 Pan

[WillR]

PM sent

This is a good topic. Always assumed if I couldn't afford Televue eyepieces ( I can't), I might be missing a lot. From a number of these posts by experienced observers like Dave Mitsky and Kenny, it seems the other brands have closed the gap considerably.

 

If your PM to Ed is in the general vein of the topic and not about something else, I love to get that perspective in posts here.

[Tkall]

I love my 35 mm panoptic.  I use it more than any of the others.

[Jon Isaacs]

All three scopes.  The 503 80ED may eventually be replaced by a slightly larger f7ish refractor. I have read about people going for other brands and then coming back to Televue.  I started with the long FL Possels and DeLite series for ER/glasses and have been pleased with them and the quality but not the cost.  Have decided to stick with TV and one more will probably be my limit.  

 

The question regards 27mm vs 35mm in the Pan range of EP.   

 

I have the 31 mm Nagler as well as the 35 mm and 41 mm Panoptics. I also have the 28 mm UWA and the 30 mm UFF. 

 

 

I'm not collector  I spend a lot of time observing, 180 nights a year on average.. I'm not bragging, I trying to provide you with some perspective. 

 

TeleVue makes excellent eyepieces but they're not the only ones. Both the 28 mm UWA and the 30 mm UFF are also top notch and when the time comes each night to choose the eyepieces I will be using, it's rarely the 35 mm Panoptic, it's nearly always either the 28 mm UWA or the 30 mm UFF.

 

The 28 mm UFF offers 25% more magnification and a 5% wider true field of view, that's why a long time observer like Dave Mitsky prefers the 28 mm over the 35 mm Panoptic.

 

The 30 mm UFF has a true field that's 6% narrower than the 35 mm Panoptic but provides 17% greater magnification.

 

All I'm saying is don't be dismissive when people suggest eyepieces that are not TeleVue.The TeleVue 35 mm Panoptic was a revolutionary eyepieces when it was introduced, it was a long focal length 2 inch wide field that provided pinpoint stars right up the edge of the field.

 

But it was introduced in 1992, 31 years ago. It's been copied, new designs have been developed. 

 

You might have read about people who have tried other eyepiece and gone back to TeleVue. Right you're reading about someone who has the choice between TeleVue and something else and at least in this case,  most often chooses something else.

 

Jon

[aeajr]

This is a good topic. Always assumed if I couldn't afford Televue eyepieces ( I can't), I might be missing a lot. From a number of these posts by experienced observers like Dave Mitsky and Kenny, it seems the other brands have closed the gap considerably.

 

If your PM to Ed is in the general vein of the topic and not about something else, I love to get that perspective in posts here.

Here is what I shared via the PM.

 

===================

I am 69 and sure that the exit pupil of my 38/70 exceeds my pupil in my f5 Dob at 7.6 mm. But the image is full and bright so I don't care.

My goal is to max out the field of view. That trumps exit pupil for me.

 

==============================

 

In my opinion the 27 and 24 are too close to add value unless you have a VERY long FL scope.

=========================

 

FL scope / FL eyepiece = mag

AFOV eyepiece / mag.  =Approx true FOV.

So run the numbers for any eyepiece to get the Mag and the approximate FOV.

 

==================================

 

I have 5 scopes today, a 6th that I sold, and a 7th at an observatory where I have use privledges.

 

I have the same set of eyepieces that I use in all of them.  So I have made a table like the ones below for each one. 

 

As I was building out my eyepiece set I looked at each purchase to see where I wanted to fill a gap so that I had the magnifications I wanted.  The OP focused on Panoptics.  I focused on Explore Scientific 82s.

 

Below is my full active set.  I have Plossls and Kellners sitting in the "unused" box in addition to these.

 

I suggest you should work up a table like this.  Include all of the eyepieces you actively use and/or might use.  Then run your numbers to see what your mags are, your field of view and, if you wish, your exit pupils. Then your next eyepiece purchase will become obvious.  If you want set it up in a spreadsheet. 

 

Then decide which ones you might retire due to duplication, because you want something better in that slot, or which gaps you just want to fill

 

Here are the tables for my two most actively used scopes.   The bolded ones are the ones I use most often in this scope.

 

Astro Tech AT102ED Refractor 102 mm/714mm F7
Resolving power -  1.1 arc seconds

 

AA SWA 38 mm/70         19X and   3.7 degrees FOV   EP 5.4 mm  2”
Meade  20 mm/82           36X and   2.2 degrees            EP 2.8      2”

 

ES       14 mm/82     51X and   1.6 degrees        
ES       11 mm/82      65x and   1.2 degrees
ES       8.8 mm/82    81X and   1.0 degrees 
ES       6.7 mm/82   106X and    .7 degrees        
Meade 5.5 mm/82   129X and    .6 degrees        
ES       4.7 mm/82   152X and    .5 degrees         
ES       8.8+2.5XB   202X and    .4 degrees
ES       6.7+2.5XB   265X and    .3 degrees

 

Baader Hyperion   8-24  zoom   30X to 90X
Baader Hyperion   8-24+1.5XB  45C to 135X
Badder Hyperion   8-24+2XB     60X to 180X
Baader Hyperion   8-24+2.5XB  75X to 225X

 

 

Apertura AD12 12”/305 mm Dobsonian/Newtonian, 1520 mm FL F5 FR
Resolving power -   .4 arc seconds

 

AA SWA        38 mm/70   40X and   1.75 degrees FOV   EP 7.6 mm  2”
Meade UWA  20 mm/82   76X and   1.07 degrees            EP 4.0         2”

 

ES       14 mm/82                  108X and   .75 degrees          EP 2.8
ES       11 mm/82                  138X and   .59 degrees             EP 2.2
ES       8.8 mm/82                 172X and   .47 degrees          EP 1.7
ES       6.7 mm/82                 226X and   .36 degrees          EP 1.3
Meade 5.5 mm/82                 276X and  .29 degrees           EP 1.1
ES       4.7 mm/82                 323x and   .25 degrees           EP   .94
ES       8.8+2.5XB                 430X and   .18 degrees          EP   .74
ES       6.7+2.5XB                 565X and   .14 degrees          EP   .48

 

Baader Hyperion 8-24  zoom 63X to 190X and .79 to .35 degrees
Baader Hyperion 8-24+1.5XB   94X to 285X
Badder Hyperion 8-24+2XB     126X to 378X
Baader Hyperion 8-24+2.5XB  157X to 472X

Edited by aeajr, 30 January 2023 - 09:40 PM.

[Philip Jodry]

The more eyepieces you buy, the more, the builders make. Their kids get braces. Bills get paid. Unused eyepieces are just inventory, but they are trying to find new purposes and owners. You're not creating shortages or hardships. Some people buy TV channels. We buy stuff.

[Keith Rivich]

Edited!     "I am wondering if I should add either a 27mm or 35mm Panoptic" was in the original post.   Do you dislike Televue EPs ?

What a bunch buzz kills. Get the Televue!

 

I have a 6" f/4 finder and I find the 35 Pan, while nice, is just a little to low power. I prefer my 20 Nag. Seems to present just a bit better. So I would say go with the 27. In reality, though, I think you will be pleased with either eyepiece. 

Edited by Keith Rivich, 30 January 2023 - 10:36 PM.

[edify]

Well, yes they are.  I can afford one more chip even though I can think of about 20 more I would enjoy 

As long as the wife don't know your good to go.

[Dave Mitsky]

If you're dead set on going "green", the 35mm Panoptic would be a better choice, as Tony mentioned, given that you already have a 24mm Panoptic.

[Jon Isaacs]

What a bunch buzz kills. Get the Televue!
 
I have a 6" f/4 finder and I find the 35 Pan, while nice, is just a little to low power. I prefer my 20 Nag. Seems to present just a bit better. So I would say go with the 27. In reality, though, I think you will be pleased with either eyepiece.

 
Have you actually looked through the 28 mm UWA?  It provides a 34% wider field than then 27mm Panoptic and is well corrected.  Think of the 27mm Panoptic but with the nearly the field of view of the 31mm Nagler, it's only 3% narrower. 
 
I like my TeleVue eyepieces but there are some wonderful eyepieces out there that aren't made by TeleVue.
 
Other than that, I agree with Dave, if one are dead set on going green, the 35 mm Panoptic makes more sense.  But if one decides on the 35mm Panoptic, I recommend never, never ever looking through either the 30mm UFF or the 28mm UWA.  What you don't know won't bother you.  
 
Jon