34 replies to this topic

[Nucleophile]

I just picked up a 0.965" to 1.25" eyepiece adapter for another project and that got me to thinking about if I was missing out on some high end eyepiece views because I didn't have one of these older, narrow barrel eyepieces.  Literally, all of my current eyepieces are 1.25 inch.

 

In your opinion, what are some of the better 0.965" eyepieces I should look out for in the after market in the 3 to 10 mm focal length range?

 

I am a hard-core double star observer and I am constantly seeking eyepieces that give me ever sharper views at modest to high power in my 8 inch f/6.8 reflector.  Tiny FOV and ridiculously small ER is no object! 

 

Thanks for any and all suggestions!!!

[SeattleScott]

Hard to go wrong with the old Tak Orthos. I don’t have the old format ones but generally like Tak for contrast.

That being said people rave about the new TPLs and TOEs. I certainly don’t get the impression the old format ones are better than the new stuff. But no doubt cheaper.

[Nucleophile]

Hard to go wrong with the old Tak Orthos. I don’t have the old format ones but generally like Tak for contrast.

That being said people rave about the new TPLs and TOEs. I certainly don’t get the impression the old format ones are better than the new stuff. But no doubt cheaper.

I love the new TPLs and TOEs.  Just curious about older gems...I'll give any ep a try!  I love Takahashi eyepieces.

 

(Hmm: Rick F has a set for sale....)  Uh-oh...

Edited by Nucleophile, 27 February 2024 - 01:52 AM.

[rob1986]

Meade had a set of orthos. The MA's i understand were not of the same quality.

Celestron vixen kelners.

Btw, the odd size is because that was the standard inch in the area were zeiss was founded. Ypu could, idiomatically, refer to them as the 1" standard.

Edited by rob1986, 27 February 2024 - 02:12 AM.

[Avgvstvs]

Unitron Ortho's were great in their day. I remember the 6mm well.

[vahe]

 

In your opinion, what are some of the better 0.965" eyepieces I should look out for in the after market in the 3 to 10 mm focal length range?

 

I am a hard-core double star observer and I am constantly seeking eyepieces that give me ever sharper views at modest to high power in my 8 inch f/6.8 reflector.  Tiny FOV and ridiculously small ER is no object! 

 

 

 

0.965" Pentax SMC Orthos are some of the finest, discontinued a long time ago but they do show up for sale occasionally in $250 to $300 range, according to BillP the 6mm has less scatter than ZAO-II, that tells you something about their quality. Those are ideal for double star work if you want the finest regardless of barrel size.

.

Vahe

[Jim4321]

I have one Unitron 12mm that I got when I found an old Unitron scope in a 2nd hand shop.  Yep, it's a keeper.

 

 

 

Jim H.

[Echolight]

I wouldn't be looking for any .965 eyepieces on purpose.

[rob1986]

I'd think they would be good for middle Fratio casses and smaller long newts.

In any case econdary size puts a strong limit of field illumination making these scopes best for small high mag targets, and not premium EPs at this range have short eye relief, the smaller working diameter would allow focal planes closer to the tube (smaller diagonal), helping to ease illumination of the smaller field and without unduly expanding CO.

Anyway shorter plossls, orthos, and widefields (i think both the 4.7 and the 6.7mm 82° designs could work this way, as well as the 13.8 and 18mm 68° examples) could be offered in the smaller size and a standard barrel swapp used to accomodate those whos' scopes use 1.25".

Edited by rob1986, 27 February 2024 - 10:52 AM.

[Nucleophile]

Meade had a set of orthos. The MA's i understand were not of the same quality.

Celestron vixen kelners.

Btw, the odd size is because that was the standard inch in the area were zeiss was founded. Ypu could, idiomatically, refer to them as the 1" standard.

I have a few Ebay Kellners on the way--keen to give them a shot.

[Nucleophile]

0.965" Pentax SMC Orthos are some of the finest, discontinued a long time ago but they do show up for sale occasionally in $250 to $300 range, according to BillP the 6mm has less scatter than ZAO-II, that tells you something about their quality. Those are ideal for double star work if you want the finest regardless of barrel size.

.

Vahe

Good to know.   

 

Will keep an eye out...

[Sarkikos]

0.965" eyepieces are mostly good for nostalgia.

 

Mike

[Nucleophile]

Unitron Ortho's were great in their day. I remember the 6mm well.

I just got a Unitron 18mm (Unbranded) Kellner from Ebay today.  Keen to give it a whirl when these clouds vamoose. 

[luxo II]

what are some of the better 0.965" eyepieces I should look out for in the after market in the 3 to 10 mm focal length range?

1. Anything Zeiss.

2. Nikon 0.965 orthoscopics, I have a 7mm and it's a keeper. Rare.

 

Anything else - including Unitron, Polarex, Meade or Celestron - would be for nostalgia only.

 

See also this older thread https://www.cloudyni...ry-and-quality/

Edited by luxo II, 27 February 2024 - 06:59 PM.

[Nucleophile]

1. Anything Zeiss.

2. Nikon 0.965 orthoscopics, I have a 7mm and it's a keeper. Rare.

 

Anything else - including Unitron, Polarex, Meade or Celestron - would be for nostalgia only.

 

See also this older thread https://www.cloudyni...ry-and-quality/

Many thx for the info.

 

In addn to 1 and 2, sounds like the Pentax SMC are also worth a look.

[luxo II]

My benchmark is a couple of TMB Supermonocentrics, and a set of Brandons (with a couple of Barlows, optional).

If an eyepiece doesn't match or exceed the contrast and clarity of these for planets/moon then it was "put out to pasture".

 

The 8 and 12 Brandons with their Barlows so far have beat all comers in my stable. The Nikon 7mm is very good, but it doesn't hold a spot in my hex turret.

 

The only eyepieces I haven't had the pleasure of trying are ZAO, and the real Steinheil monocentrics. Hopefully Mr Gadarvski will chime in.

 

As I mentioned before I have been active since the 1970's and there is nothing special from that era that I would keep. Nothing.

Edited by luxo II, 27 February 2024 - 09:24 PM.

[izar187]

Not a recommendation here.

Shared as an FYI for any folks with vintage scopes who may be interested.

Just somewhat more modern ep's types, with good glass in an old school size.

 

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

[BRCoz]

I have a few.

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 

[Nucleophile]

My benchmark is a couple of TMB Supermonocentrics, and a set of Brandons (with a couple of Barlows, optional).

If an eyepiece doesn't match or exceed the contrast and clarity of these for planets/moon then it was "put out to pasture".

 

The 8 and 12 Brandons with their Barlows so far have beat all comers in my stable. The Nikon 7mm is very good, but it doesn't hold a spot in my hex turret.

 

The only eyepieces I haven't had the pleasure of trying are ZAO, and the real Steinheil monocentrics. Hopefully Mr Gadarvski will chime in.

 

As I mentioned before I have been active since the 1970's and there is nothing special from that era that I would keep. Nothing.

Luxo II:  thanks for the information; can you pls tell me what scope you were using for these assessments?

[Nucleophile]

I have a few.

Thanks for the information.  5, 6 and 7 mm are focal lengths I use a lot.  if I see a Zeiss Jena I may snag one if it came up (it wouid be my first Zeiss....)

 

I am going to make a concerted effort to acquire the exact SMCs shown in your photo--they do seem to surface from time to time.on CN classified and Astromart.  

 

I want to move past the curious stage to active exploration...

[luxo II]

Umm... you do need a scope with really good optics for these to be worthwhile, otherwise might be pointless.

[Nucleophile]

Umm... you do need a scope with really good optics for these to be worthwhile, otherwise might be pointless.

You really posted that?

 

OK.

 

Check my sig line.  What are you talking about?

Edited by Nucleophile, 28 February 2024 - 01:33 AM.

[Fabricius]

Why would you buy a 0.965" eyepiece if all of your scopes accept 1.25" eyepieces?

[Nucleophile]

Why would you buy a 0.965" eyepiece if all of your scopes accept 1.25" eyepieces?

Carefully re-read post #1.

 

Thanks to all who posted suggestions;  looks like it is time to close up shop on this thread.  

Edited by Nucleophile, 28 February 2024 - 02:10 AM.

[davidmcgo]

My Takahashi MC Ortho 5mm has a darker sky right next to Jupiter and higher perceived contrast and sharpness than my Pentax XO 5.1mm  The 4 and 2.8 MC Hi-Orthos are really superb as well, maybe on par to the XO for contrast.

 

Dave