66 replies to this topic

[Dave Bush]

For an admittedly narrow audience but hopefully it'll be helpful.

 

I've been using the following configuration since July and I've found it to be absolutely perfect.  I've tried just about every eyepiece there is (of the mid to high end range) in 1.25" and, after having been surprised at how poor some of the usual high end suspects performed, I've settled on the following...

 

• Diagonal - Baader T-2 Maxbright Dielectric Mirror Body with the Baader Deluxe Short (15mm) SCT Female to T2 Male T-Adapter for attachment to the scope.  Then the Baader 1.25" Click-Lock Eyepiece Adapter/Visual Back with T-2 Thread with one Baader T2 Extension Tube - 15mm.   This gives me a solid, high quality diagonal with no vignetting (full 34mm clear aperture) and importantly, the total optical length is 105mm which, since I use the f/6.3 reducer/corrector, is just right as that is the backfocus the r/c was designed for.   The twist lock is wonderful and it even has a helical focuser should you want to do fine focus (I've not needed to as the C6 on the Evolution mount is rock solid so focusing using the stock focuser even at high powers is not a problem).
• Eyepieces - As I mentioned, I went through just about all the mid to high end 1.25" options and none provided me with the edge correction (field flatness primarily but coma/astigmatism as well) as good as the ubiquitous UFFs.  I've got the 24, 18, 15, and 10, all Celestron's versions.  They are absolutely superb.  They are extremely comfortable and very sharp.  Focus seems to snap to without a lot of hunting.   If I look really hard for it, and really close to the very edge, I can maybe see a bit of FC showing up but it's far better than anything else I've tried and essentially reminds me of the C8 Edge I had some time back.
• Barlow - I'm using the Astro-Tech Telecentric.  At $60 this thing is a steal!  And, when I stick one of the above mentioned UFFs into it, what little issues there may have been at the edge are gone.  

So this setup gives me focal lengths of 24, 18, 15, 12, 9, 7.5, 10.5, 5.25 and magnifications ranging from about 44x up to around 200x.  If I happen to have a night of exceptional seeing (rare) I have that little Svbony 3-8mm zoom which, by the way, is a pretty impressive little guy.   My widest real field of view with the 24mm is about 1.5º.   That's good enough for me.

 

In case you're wondering, I've chosen to stick with 1.25" eyepieces for size/weight reasons but also because the C6 has a baffle size of around 27mm and I didn't want to exceed that.  Also, once you go the 2" route even with an SCT diagonal, you end up where you start to loose aperture (credit to EdZ's work on this from years ago).

 

So there it is.  If you have or are considering a C6, I hope this might be of some help.

[wachuko]

Great information to have as I just bought a C6 for my first OTA.  I was struggling to decide on what eyepieces to get.  This post answers a lot of questions I had.

[wachuko]

On the eye pieces, is it possible to share model/part numbers to make it easier for me to find and purchase these? Celestron has different lines of eyepieces (Omni, X-Cel, Luminos)... 

 

These are the links I have managed to gather so far:

 

Baader T-2 Maxbright Dielectric Mirror Body: Link

Baader Deluxe Short (15mm) SCT Female to T2 Male T-Adapter: Link

Baader 1.25" Click-Lock Eyepiece Adapter/Visual Back with T-2 Thread: Link

Baader T2 Extension Tube - 15mm: Link

Barlow Astro-Tech Telecentric: Link

 

Thank you!

[Dave Bush]

On the eye pieces, is it possible to share model/part numbers to make it easier for me to find and purchase these? Celestron has different lines of eyepieces (Omni, X-Cel, Luminos)... 

 

These are the links I have managed to gather so far:

 

Baader T-2 Maxbright Dielectric Mirror Body: Link

Baader Deluxe Short (15mm) SCT Female to T2 Male T-Adapter: Link

Baader 1.25" Click-Lock Eyepiece Adapter/Visual Back with T-2 Thread: Link

Baader T2 Extension Tube - 15mm: Link

Barlow Astro-Tech Telecentric: Link

 

Thank you!

You've got all the diagonal items and the Barlow right so for the eyepieces, they are the Celestron Ultima Edge.  Here's the 24mm from High Point...

 

https://www.highpoin...inch-24mm-93453

 

Know that the Celestron versions are more expensive.  For example, the 24mm is $249 whereas the APM UFF 24mm is $179.  So to save money you could go with the APM versions (same eyepiece) and I would recommend that if you do you get them from Don's site (Don being Starman1 here on CN).  www.eyepeicesetc.com.  Unfortunately he's showing some of the as being out of stock.  

[wachuko]

You've got all the diagonal items and the Barlow right so for the eyepieces, they are the Celestron Ultima Edge.  Here's the 24mm from High Point...

 

https://www.highpoin...inch-24mm-93453

 

Know that the Celestron versions are more expensive.  For example, the 24mm is $249 whereas the APM UFF 24mm is $179.  So to save money you could go with the APM versions (same eyepiece) and I would recommend that if you do you get them from Don's site (Don being Starman1 here on CN).  https://www.eyepiecesetc.com/.  Unfortunately he's showing some of the as being out of stock.  

 

Will do.  Thank you!

Edited by wachuko, 02 October 2023 - 11:47 AM.

[wachuko]

Just documenting for future reference:

 

24 - Celestron / APM Ultra Flat Field

18 - Celestron / APM Ultra Flat Field

15 - Celestron / APM Ultra Flat Field

10 - Celestron / APM Ultra Flat Field

 

Can't buy them all at once.  Need to determine which one I should buy first.

[SeattleScott]

Just documenting for future reference:

24 - Celestron / APM Ultra Flat Field
18 - Celestron / APM Ultra Flat Field
15 - Celestron / APM Ultra Flat Field
10 - Celestron / APM Ultra Flat Field

Can't buy them all at once. Need to determine which one I should buy first.

Depends on what you already have. Assuming just a 25mm Plossl, I would wait on the 24mm and get the 15 first, followed by the 10mm, then the 24mm. I might skip the 18 altogether.
You will want something below 10mm, whether another eyepiece or a barlow with an existing eyepiece.

Also consider the OP is using the Celestron reducer, and seems to have found that the UFFs pair particularly well with the reducer. Based on a previous thread it seems as though the reducer compromises the view somewhat in the C6, but the field curvature of the UFFs seem to compensate for the field curvature of the reducer, correcting this issue. So if you don’t use the reducer, there is not the same field curvature to offset, so UFFs may not perform as well as other brands. You should really view this recommendation as sort of a complete recipe where a certain magic is achieved by including all the ingredients, but excluding a single ingredient (like a reducer) could lead to subpar results. Like when my parents gave me some pumpkin meat and told me to buy a pie crust and make a pumpkin pie but didn’t inform me that I needed other stuff like eggs, sugar and so forth.

Edited by SeattleScott, 02 October 2023 - 12:49 PM.

[wachuko]

Depends on what you already have. Assuming just a 25mm Plossl, I would wait on the 24mm and get the 15 first, followed by the 10mm, then the 24mm. I might skip the 18 altogether.
You will want something below 10mm, whether another eyepiece or a barlow with an existing eyepiece.

I have nothing...    Ordered the Celestron C6-A SCT OTA last Friday - that is it. I don't even have a mount... starting the journey...

 

Thank you for the suggestion 

[SeattleScott]

I have nothing... Ordered the Celestron C6-A SCT OTA last Friday - that is it. I don't even have a mount... starting the journey...

Thank you for the suggestion

Well then start with the 24mm. Low power first.

[Dave Bush]

SeattleScott makes a good point.  The ideal (well, for me at least) results are due do the "recipe" that I detailed in my original post.  That includes the reducer/corrector.

 

I did find that without the r/c the UFFs still provided the best edge correction, even better than the Naglers, Delos, etc.  

 

I value edge sharpness so to get the best out of this scope, for me, it required the r/c.  

 

Also, even without the r/c if I could find eyepieces that gave me the edge correction that I desire, in order to get a field as wide as I desire would require a 2" eyepiece but, that then runs into the problem of field illumination (vignetting) so that is not an option (again, for me).

[wachuko]

SeattleScott makes a good point.  The ideal (well, for me at least) results are due do the "recipe" that I detailed in my original post.  That includes the reducer/corrector.

 

I did find that without the r/c the UFFs still provided the best edge correction, even better than the Naglers, Delos, etc.  

 

I value edge sharpness so to get the best out of this scope, for me, it required the r/c.  

 

Also, even without the r/c if I could find eyepieces that gave me the edge correction that I desire, in order to get a field as wide as I desire would require a 2" eyepiece but, that then runs into the problem of field illumination (vignetting) so that is not an option (again, for me).

I did order the reducer/corrector with my OTA.  Should be good there.  I will order the rest as the wife allows it  

Edited by wachuko, 02 October 2023 - 04:21 PM.

[SeattleScott]

SeattleScott makes a good point. The ideal (well, for me at least) results are due do the "recipe" that I detailed in my original post. That includes the reducer/corrector.

I did find that without the r/c the UFFs still provided the best edge correction, even better than the Naglers, Delos, etc.

I value edge sharpness so to get the best out of this scope, for me, it required the r/c.

Also, even without the r/c if I could find eyepieces that gave me the edge correction that I desire, in order to get a field as wide as I desire would require a 2" eyepiece but, that then runs into the problem of field illumination (vignetting) so that is not an option (again, for me).

So the UFFs were better without corrector too; good to know.

[Dave Bush]

So the UFFs were better without corrector too; good to know.

Yes and that surprised me.  In the past, with C8s and even a C9.25 without the r/c I got very good results with TV Naglers.  Between those scopes and my current C6 (Evolution 6 specifically) I was in the Newtonian world and was primarily using Naglers.  When I sold my Dob and picked up the C6, I figured my T6 Naglers would be just dandy with it.  I'd just add the 16 T5 and I'd be all set.

 

Much to my surprise the correction was no-bueno.  With or without the r/c I just couldn't get the performance that I had with my SCTs in the past.  It was very puzzling.  So, with heavy reliance on Amazon and the classifieds, I started searching.  I went through Delos, DeLite, Morpheus, Pentax XL/XW Agena Starguiders/Celestron X-Cel LX, etc.  None were any good.  I mean they were not horrible but not what I was used to seeing.  In the midst of all this I found someone selling all the 1.25" Celestron Ultima Edge eyepieces (UFFs) and grabbed them up (lower price than the APM ones new).  I was quite shocked to see how well they performed.  

 

And yes, even without the r/c they are better than any of the others.

 

I don't know if it's just me or something unique about the C6 but there it is.  I'm thrilled as I don't have a lot of $$ invested.

[RCLARK28]

So the UFFs were better without corrector too; good to know.

On my C5 and my granddaughters Celestron DX5 SCT I did find that without the r/c the UFFs still provided good edge correction. I am going to install the R/C latter in the fall to compare personally. She uses the APM's and Celestron UFF's for her club classes and they do a real nice job. After her classes are done, we will test out the R/C.

*With or without the R/C they seem to be as good as any to the edge. This is just my opinion not an expert but just in testing EP's with our SCT's. EP's are a personal thing so test and use what works for you.

*This is a good thread. Member echolight recommended the R/C when we got the scope and I can see why. 

[RCLARK28]

"For an admittedly narrow audience but hopefully it'll be helpful."

I just caught this now after re-reading the thread! A very narrow audience indeed...Rick

[rguasto]

I've had a C6 for 12 years. This is what I've settled on:

32 TV Plossl
17.5 Morpheus
11 Delite
9 Delite
8 Delos

I have a f6.3 R//C but only use it when traveling with the C6. The C6 is mounted on an ioptron az mount pro with an AT 102EDL which gives me fantastic wide views.
Prefer the 32 Plossl over 24 pan or ES 24 68°due to the larger exit pupil.

Rob

Attached Thumbnails

• 

Edited by rguasto, 03 October 2023 - 06:26 AM.

[wachuko]

I've had a C6 for 12 years. This is what I've settled on:

32 TV Plossl
17.5 Morpheus
11 Delite
9 Delite
8 Delos

I have a f6.3 R//C but only use it when traveling with the C6. The C6 is mounted on an ioptron az mount pro with an AT 102EDL which gives me fantastic wide views.
Prefer the 32 Plossl over 24 pan or ES 24 68°due to the larger exit pupil.

Rob

Interesting mount.  Had not seen one like that.  You can tell that I am completely new to the hobby... And with two setups.  Let me search on that and watch some videos before asking questions.  I started a thread asking for mount recommendations and was not even considering something like that... 

 

Reading threads on the Tele Vue 32mm Plossl 1.25" Eyepiece to learn more about it.

[SeattleScott]

IOptron Alt Az Pro. A buddy has one. Nice mount.

Twilight II is a more affordable option although no GoTo.

[rguasto]

IOptron Alt Az Pro. A buddy has one. Nice mount.

Twilight II is a more affordable option although no GoTo.

And the goto works well. I was skeptical at first. Level the mount using the built-in bubble level. Face the mount south with both OTA's pointing straight up, (there's no polar alignmen) turn it on, spins around and points to a bright "object ". Center the object left or right, press enter then center up or down, press enter. Finished. Any object you pick will be in the field of view. About 2 minutes is all it takes.

Rob

[Dave Bush]

I've had a C6 for 12 years. This is what I've settled on:

32 TV Plossl
17.5 Morpheus
11 Delite
9 Delite
8 Delos

I have a f6.3 R//C but only use it when traveling with the C6. The C6 is mounted on an ioptron az mount pro with an AT 102EDL which gives me fantastic wide views.
Prefer the 32 Plossl over 24 pan or ES 24 68°due to the larger exit pupil.

This is what makes me think that it often comes down to an individual's ability to see things.  I've tried the 32 TV Plossl, the 17.5 Morpheus, and a couple DeLites.  With or without the r/c the field curvature was too bad for my tastes.  I could neither ignore it or accommodate it.  

[25585]

How would prism diagonals, like the Baader Zeiss, affect things?

[wachuko]

For an admittedly narrow audience but hopefully it'll be helpful.

 

I've been using the following configuration since July and I've found it to be absolutely perfect.  I've tried just about every eyepiece there is (of the mid to high end range) in 1.25" and, after having been surprised at how poor some of the usual high end suspects performed, I've settled on the following...

 

• Diagonal - Baader T-2 Maxbright Dielectric Mirror Body with the Baader Deluxe Short (15mm) SCT Female to T2 Male T-Adapter for attachment to the scope.  Then the Baader 1.25" Click-Lock Eyepiece Adapter/Visual Back with T-2 Thread with one Baader T2 Extension Tube - 15mm.   This gives me a solid, high quality diagonal with no vignetting (full 34mm clear aperture) and importantly, the total optical length is 105mm which, since I use the f/6.3 reducer/corrector, is just right as that is the backfocus the r/c was designed for.   The twist lock is wonderful and it even has a helical focuser should you want to do fine focus (I've not needed to as the C6 on the Evolution mount is rock solid so focusing using the stock focuser even at high powers is not a problem).
• Eyepieces - As I mentioned, I went through just about all the mid to high end 1.25" options and none provided me with the edge correction (field flatness primarily but coma/astigmatism as well) as good as the ubiquitous UFFs.  I've got the 24, 18, 15, and 10, all Celestron's versions.  They are absolutely superb.  They are extremely comfortable and very sharp.  Focus seems to snap to without a lot of hunting.   If I look really hard for it, and really close to the very edge, I can maybe see a bit of FC showing up but it's far better than anything else I've tried and essentially reminds me of the C8 Edge I had some time back.
• Barlow - I'm using the Astro-Tech Telecentric.  At $60 this thing is a steal!  And, when I stick one of the above mentioned UFFs into it, what little issues there may have been at the edge are gone.  

So this setup gives me focal lengths of 24, 18, 15, 12, 9, 7.5, 10.5, 5.25 and magnifications ranging from about 44x up to around 200x.  If I happen to have a night of exceptional seeing (rare) I have that little Svbony 3-8mm zoom which, by the way, is a pretty impressive little guy.   My widest real field of view with the 24mm is about 1.5º.   That's good enough for me.

 

In case you're wondering, I've chosen to stick with 1.25" eyepieces for size/weight reasons but also because the C6 has a baffle size of around 27mm and I didn't want to exceed that.  Also, once you go the 2" route even with an SCT diagonal, you end up where you start to loose aperture (credit to EdZ's work on this from years ago).

 

So there it is.  If you have or are considering a C6, I hope this might be of some help.

Dave,

 

Do I need it all at once?  Or can I get the CELESTRON Ultima Edge - 24mm Flat Field Eyepiece - 1.25" first and use that with the stock setup?  Will that yield any improvement?

 

Or this really needs to be done all at once? Baader T-2 Maxbright Dielectric Mirror Body with the Baader Deluxe Short (15mm) SCT Female to T2 Male T-Adapter + Baader 1.25" Click-Lock Eyepiece Adapter/Visual Back with T-2 Thread with one Baader T2 + Ultima Edge 24mm Flat Field Eyepiece

 

Just wondering if it makes sense ordering the eyepiece first or just wait until the Baader T2 Maxbright is back in stock to order it all...

 

And one more ask, if possible.  Can you share a photo of all this setup in your C6?  Just for me to see that is all looks like installed... 

[wachuko]

Well... one more question... should I add a UV-IR cut filter somewhere in there as well?

 

EDIT:  Found the answer to this one... not needed for visual.

 

"Infrared or IR light is invisible to the human eye, and so blocking the infrared with a filter is not important if you are using your telescope visually. However, when you add a camera to the mix, it's a whole other story! Unlike the human eye, a silicon sensor is very sensitive to light in the infrared portion of the spectrum and left unfiltered, your images will not be as sharp as you would like. This problem can easily be solved by blocking the infrared."

Edited by wachuko, 05 October 2023 - 08:56 AM.

[Dave Bush]

Dave,

 

Do I need it all at once?  Or can I get the CELESTRON Ultima Edge - 24mm Flat Field Eyepiece - 1.25" first and use that with the stock setup?  Will that yield any improvement?

 

Or this really needs to be done all at once? Baader T-2 Maxbright Dielectric Mirror Body with the Baader Deluxe Short (15mm) SCT Female to T2 Male T-Adapter + Baader 1.25" Click-Lock Eyepiece Adapter/Visual Back with T-2 Thread with one Baader T2 + Ultima Edge 24mm Flat Field Eyepiece

 

Just wondering if it makes sense ordering the eyepiece first or just wait until the Baader T2 Maxbright is back in stock to order it all...

 

And one more ask, if possible.  Can you share a photo of all this setup in your C6?  Just for me to see that is all looks like installed... 

No, you certainly don't need to get all this at once.  I do see that the diagonal body seems to be out of stock just about everywhere.  You could buy it directly from Baader but I don't know how much shipping would be.   See here...  

 

https://www.baader-p...__from_store=en

 

You most certainly can get the 24mm and use it with the stock diagonal.  I actually though would recommend starting with the 18mm.  It's my most used of all the eyepieces.  If you get it and add that Barlow, you've now got 18mm and 9mm which would keep you happy for a long time actually.

 

As for photos well, my scope is at Celestron having some work done so I won't be able to share any photos until I get it back.  I do have this photos though from another CN user who gave me the idea for the diagonal.  It's the same setup that I have.  Here...

 

[wachuko]

Thank you.