294 replies to this topic

[Princess Leah]

And most people find the “good” AT UWAs very pleasing. The ES 82 series is good enough that even the “weak link” is quite respectable.

In this case, weak link means it is detectably worse than a TV Nagler in something like a F5 Dob. But if you aren’t spoiled by Naglers, the ES 14 will likely seem just dandy. As long as you are fine with the somewhat tight ER.

Dandy is a great word.

If this is the case I may save for the other 82s in shorter focal lengths.

I seem to get on very well with ES eyepieces. Very friendly little fellows.

[saemark30]

Meade series 5000 UWA used to be from JOC and now they are from KUO?

My understanding is the JOC ones are better.

 

And if the AT XWA > UWA then that is relevant too.

One should strive for the best eyepieces one can afford IMO.

Edited by saemark30, 26 April 2024 - 12:12 PM.

[Starman1]

Meade series 5000 UWA used to be from JOC and now they are from KUO?

My understanding is the JOC ones are better.

 

And if the AT XWA > UWA then that is relevant too.

One should strive for the best eyepieces one can afford IMO.

Meade S5000 from JOC till 2011.

All from KUO since 2012, even the 82° UWA.

New UHD and PWA are also KUO.

The reviews are that the best 82° were the 2012-2022 ones.

 

Personally, I rate the XWAs above the UWAs/PWAs.

[Princess Leah]

I thought Meade no longer make 5000 82 degrees EPs?

[Starman1]

They don't do the ones called "UWA", but they do do the ones labeled "PWA".

https://www.telescop...ieces/e/453.uts

[Princess Leah]

I had no idea. Is that a recent revival?

[Starman1]

I had no idea. Is that a recent revival?

Meade merely became one of 12 brand names the United Optics 82° eyepieces are being sold under (see post 43).

They're a different external appearance, but the same internals as the AT UWAs.

United Optics has made these for close to 20 years.  The first company to sell them was William Optics.

Meade only sells 4 focal lengths, but AT sells 6.

Meade has had them for 2-3 years at least.

[Princess Leah]

Meade S5000 from JOC till 2011.

All from KUO since 2012, even the 82° UWA.

New UHD and PWA are also KUO.

The reviews are that the best 82° were the 2012-2022 ones.

 

Personally, I rate the XWAs above the UWAs/PWAs.

Im puzzled.

 

Are these UWA?

 

https://www.firstlig...-eyepieces.html

[Starman1]

Im puzzled.

 

Are these UWA?

 

https://www.firstlig...-eyepieces.html

Yes, those are the same internals as the Astrotech and the others I list in post #43, including the Meade PWA.

[Princess Leah]

Yes, those are the same internals as the Astrotech and the others I list in post #43, including the Meade PWA.

I think I get it now. Thanks 

Meades are comparably expensive.

Edited by Princess Leah, 27 April 2024 - 11:00 AM.

[RLK1]

I recall reading a post regarding how many lens elements are in the astrotech 82s and other UWA re-labels and one guess was six. It's actually 7.

[Starman1]

I recall reading a post regarding how many lens elements are in the astrotech 82s and other UWA re-labels and one guess was six. It's actually 7.

It's 7 on the 1.25" ones, but, I believe, 6 on the 28mm, for the KUO 82s.

The first brand to introduce them was William Optics in 2005(?) and they listed them all as 7 elements and the 28mm as 6.

I don't think KUO has added an element to the 28mm since then.

Meade also shows 6 elements in the 28mm, but 7 elements in the 1.25" sizes.

[RLK1]

It's 7 on the 1.25" ones, but, I believe, 6 on the 28mm, for the KUO 82s.

The first brand to introduce them was William Optics in 2005(?) and they listed them all as 7 elements and the 28mm as 6.

I don't think KUO has added an element to the 28mm since then.

Meade also shows 6 elements in the 28mm, but 7 elements in the 1.25" sizes.

I was referring to the 1.25" models as discussed in the thread. Astronomics does, however, list 7 lens elements for the 28mm model as well but that may be an error, or, conversely, the meade count may be in error.

Edited by RLK1, 27 April 2024 - 01:26 PM.

[Starman1]

Since the 28mm was patterned, all those years ago, after the 31mm Nagler (it even has the same CAEP), and the Nagler has 6 elements,

I think it likely that WO and Meade are correct.

[RLK1]

Since the 28mm was patterned, all those years ago, after the 31mm Nagler (it even has the same CAEP), and the Nagler has 6 elements,

I think it likely that WO and Meade are correct.

That may be although in addition to astronomics, the following also list 7 elements for it: TS, Agena, SkyhunterLV, Astro Technology Today.

[Starman1]

That may be although in addition to astronomics, the following also list 7 elements for it: TS, Agena, SkyhunterLV, Astro Technology Today.

I think they are all copying the specs from one focal length to the next.

I think William Optics, who introduced the 28mm, knew what KUO made, and they said 6 elements on the 28mm and 7 on the others.

See the spec chart here:

https://www.cloudyni...eyepieces-r1444

[Princess Leah]

I always thought the ES 82s were the same as the old Meade 5000 82s. However the focal lengths are very different.

 

Starman how do you rate the ES 82s in comparison to the UWA/PWA EPs?

Edited by Princess Leah, 28 April 2024 - 04:24 AM.

[Starman1]

I always thought the ES 82s were the same as the old Meade 5000 82s. However the focal lengths are very different.

 

Starman how do you rate the ES 82s in comparison to the UWA/PWA EPs?

JOC, the owner/manufacturer of Explore Scientific, was the maker of Meade Series 5000 eyepieces until 2012..

In 2011, Meade and Celestron left JOC because ES was competing directly.

Meade went to KUO and the focal lengths changed on the S5000 UWAs.

Focal lengths prior to 2012:

4.7, 6.7, 8.8, 14, 18, 24, 30

which were identical to the ES.

After that, the focal lengths changed, with a 20mm the longest and 5.5mm the shortest.

Those were discontinued a while ago and the Meade S5000 PWAs are their current 82° eyepieces, in 28, 16, 7, and 4mm.

Meade doesn't sell the 13mm or 10mm focal lengths in the series, as Astrotech and other companies do.

 

I have not directly compared the KUO 82s to the JOC 82s--too many years in between them.

But Ernest Maratovich has:

https://astro-talks....2&t=1483#p41976

He tested the ES as ES 82s and tested the PWAs in William Optics UWAN labels.

As you can see, the JOC 24mm and the KUO 16mm get "Poor Image Quality" marks (blue highlight), and the JOC 18, 8.8, and 4.7 get "Excellent Image Quality" yellow highlighting.

Judging from the figures, it seems the ES are generally better, as they should be, given the prices.

On axis sharpness, which seems to be what most people ask about, is virtually identical for all the 82° from both makers.

 

Ernest doesn't seem to have tested the Barsta 82° eyepieces (See Astromania), but they might be the same as Celestron Luminos, but in a smaller format.

They, too, are available from several companies.  Here is one example:

https://astromaniaop...ariantsId=10078

Ernest did test the Luminos eyepieces.

Edited by Starman1, 28 April 2024 - 11:45 AM.

[Princess Leah]

Brilliant. Thanks  

[saemark30]

What do the Meade 5000 series  2012+ KUO 82 deg eyepieces look like?

The pre-2012 eyepieces were mushroom shaped and had a metallic blue label.

Edited by saemark30, 29 April 2024 - 02:17 PM.

[Starman1]

What do the Meade 5000 series  2012+ JOC 82 deg eyepieces look like?

The pre-2012 eyepieces were mushroom shaped and had a metallic blue label.

You mean 2012+ KUO 82s.

They kept the large rubber mushroom with blue ring look:

https://www.bhphotov...5000_Ultra.html

https://astropolis.p...mm-88mm-i-inne/

 

The PWAs have a new, but somewhat similar, look:

https://agenaastro.c...phoCKKAQAvD_BwE

[Princess Leah]

Am I right in thinking the old Meade UWAs are different to the modern ES 82? Or are these very similar?

 

Some of the focal lengths are the same, but some are different. For example the Meade UWA used to do a 20mm.

[Jon Isaacs]

Am I right in thinking the old Meade UWAs are different to the modern ES 82? Or are these very similar?

 

Some of the focal lengths are the same, but some are different. For example the Meade UWA used to do a 20mm.

 

In my mind, the "old" Meade UWAs are the Series 4000's that were essentially copied off the original Naglers.  14mm, 8.8mm, 6.7 mm and 4.7mm.. 

 

Jon

[Princess Leah]

Thanks Jon.

The Meade 5000 UWA used to contain a 20mm and a 24mm....  I think?

There is no 20mm ES 82

Edited by Princess Leah, 29 April 2024 - 06:42 AM.

[SeattleScott]

Thanks Jon.
The Meade 5000 UWA used to contain a 20mm and a 24mm.... I think?
There is no 20mm ES 82

Correct