738 replies to this topic

[oldmanrick]

As a "binoculars only" user at present, I too must add my cheers for the Morpheii.

 

They are light, they fit solidly in the eyepiece holders, eye placement is less critical than most others I have tried, and optical performance is very good.

 

I have pairs of the 17.5, 9, 6.5, and 4.5.  I bought them all fairly early after they became aavailable, before prices went up much, and sure glad I did!  I don't have the 12.5 or 14 Morpheus, as I already had a pair of the Docter 12,5, which I also love dearly.  I also use the APM 2" 30 mm UFF pair a lot.

 

In the APM 150 ED binocular the follwing magnifications are presented:

 

30 UFF            28X

17.5 Morph     48X

12.5 Docter     67X

9 Morph          93X

6.5 Morph       129X

4.5 Morph       187X

 

There seems little need to go above 187X, as seeing, movement of targets through the field, and vibrations from moving the instrument become problematic.

 

Rick

[JoeBlow]

Yeah. The EOFB I consider significant, I mean it really stood out compared to the others. So did the Kidney beaning. I'll try it on some DSOs with the M43 adapter, but as it is, this eyepiece is not likely to see a permanent home in my case. 

 

I now remember I did initially have eye placement issues but replaced the eyecup which fixed the problem. 

[Dr Arnheim]

I'm using the following eyepieces in my double refractor:

 

Morpheus 4.5mm, 6.5mm, 12.5mm, 17.5mm

XWA 3.5mm

Siebert Optics 35mm

Denkmeier LOA 21mm, 3d

 

For me, the easiest eye placement has the XWA. Second best are the Morpheus 12.5mm and 17.5mm. Yes, the eye placement is trickier with the 4.5mm but so is the 6.5mm - I don't see a difference there. That the 4.5mm scatters more light hasn't come to my attention so far but I will look for it the next time. 

Btw, is scatter and glow the same phenomenon?

[Starman1]

I'm using the following eyepieces in my double refractor:

 

Morpheus 4.5mm, 6.5mm, 12.5mm, 17.5mm

XWA 3.5mm

Siebert Optics 35mm

Denkmeier LOA 21mm, 3d

 

For me, the easiest eye placement has the XWA. Second best are the Morpheus 12.5mm and 17.5mm. Yes, the eye placement is trickier with the 4.5mm but so is the 6.5mm - I don't see a difference there. That the 4.5mm scatters more light hasn't come to my attention so far but I will look for it the next time. 

Btw, is scatter and glow the same phenomenon?

A lot of glow around a bright object is a type of light scatter.

Careful, though, as it can easily be atmospheric in origin.

[Jon Isaacs]

A lot of glow around a bright object is a type of light scatter.

Careful, though, as it can easily be atmospheric in origin.

 

Or even one's own eye..

 

Jon

Edited by Jon Isaacs, 22 May 2025 - 11:51 AM.

[sanbai]

Not to say the eyepiece may not be that clean. Even if it was cleaned before observing, it's not that difficult to smear some fat during the same session.

Sometimes, I've noticed in the views that an eyepiece had a clear layer of fat/fingerprint/sweat... all lower levels, it may not be directly perceived but can influence accurate quality testing/comparisons.

About the atmospheric contribution, it was a common issue in planetary observations when I was in humid Louisiana, even if the sky was apparently clean.

[Jon Isaacs]

Good call on the cleanliness of the eyepiece. Abnormal scatter is a sign of a dirty eye lens.

 

Jon

[saemark30]

So the Morpheus 4.5 shows some scatter on the Moon. Does the rest of the line also have the same problem?

[HellsKitchen]

So the Morpheus 4.5 shows some scatter on the Moon. Does the rest of the line also have the same problem?

 

The 6.5 and 9 do atleast. Haven't tried the 12.5 and 17.5. 

[vrodriguez2324]

I think they may all have some light scatter. I never checked the 12.5, 14, or 17.5 because I didn't use those on the Moon. The 4.5, 6.5, and 9 definitely showed it. 

 

I found that the light scatter problem on the moon decreased with increasing focal length. The higher magnification of the 4.5 inevitably puts some of the moon outside of the field of view.  For some reason when the moon is outside of the field it reflects distracting arcs of light + an obtrusive soft glow across the visible field. Since the 6.5 is of lower magnification more of the moon fits in the FOV and is less likely to be positioned where it can create the distracting scatter. The 9 never caused me any issues but when I let it drift or purposefully panned so that the moon was partially outside the field, the light scatter was there.

 

I don't think this is a problem at all on DSOs and barely a problem on bright stars or planets because one typically keeps them within the inner 2/3s of the FOV. 

 

I observe the moon often and got the 4.5 to complete my Morphie set and potentially replace my long time eyepiece case resident 5mm Pentax XW. The arrival of the 4.5 informed me of how excellent the light scatter is controlled in the 5mm XW. 

 

The Morphies are great in every other category: transmission, tack sharp star images, ultrawide AFOV, long eye relief for that comfortable sit back relax and enjoy the view type experience, etc. 

 

-Victor

Edited by vrodriguez2324, 23 May 2025 - 05:06 PM.

[RichD]

I use my 14mm morph on the moon with a barlow in good seeing. Can't say I've noticed any problems other the well known brownish ring of CA near the field stop. I've been very impressed with it used that way, as sharp as my 8mm Radian and as comfortable.

Used at 14mm, it's one of my all time favourites. Very sharp and contrasty, outstanding field correction (though this is with an f12 maksutov) and a great dso eyepiece.

In general impressions of the image, I find it is very similar to my old 16mm T5 Nagler which i sold due to lack of ER but had kept for nearly 20 years because I loved the image so much.

[Princess Leah]

It's possible it's my sample.

I've had this impression through 3 different eyeglasses prescriptions, while at the same time the 18.2mm Delite was as sharp as an eyepiece can get.

 

Ernest's measurements don't seem to agree with what I see.

Perhaps I should acquire another sample.

 

What keeps me from doing so is that the 17.5mm (17.2mm) is only 106x in my scope, not a high enough magnification for most DSOs and not a low enough magnification for the really large ones,

so it doesn't get used very much.  I found the same thing with the 17mm Ethos and the 17.3mm Delos.  The 3mm exit pupil position is just a bit too small and too large at the same time.

It's 42x in my 4" refractor and that's the same--not a big enough field for the larger objects, and not a high enough power for the smaller ones.

I don't think it's your sample.

I initially thought the same.

When I compared it with the 17mm Hyperion I found little difference with on-axis sharpness.

At that point I thought of selling it pronto.

 

However there was something I liked about it and I realised it was as you say contrast.

It's possibly the highest contrast EP I've looked through.

Over time my eyes seem to have tuned into this positive aspect of this EP, which at low magnification gives an impression of sharpness (or at least clarity).

 

Curiously I see little difference in impression regarding the AFOV when comparing it to 80-82 degrees EPs. Anyone else noticed this? Seems just as immersive to me.

[HellsKitchen]

I think they may all have some light scatter. I never checked the 12.5, 14, or 17.5 because I didn't use those on the Moon. The 4.5, 6.5, and 9 definitely showed it. 

 

I found that the light scatter problem on the moon decreased with increasing focal length. The higher magnification of the 4.5 inevitably puts some of the moon outside of the field of view.  For some reason when the moon is outside of the field it reflects distracting arcs of light + an obtrusive soft glow across the visible field. Since the 6.5 is of lower magnification more of the moon fits in the FOV and is less likely to be positioned where it can create the distracting scatter. The 9 never caused me any issues but when I let it drift or purposefully panned so that the moon was partially outside the field, the light scatter was there.

 

I don't think this is a problem at all on DSOs and barely a problem on bright stars or planets because one typically keeps them within the inner 2/3s of the FOV. 

 

I observe the moon often and got the 4.5 to complete my Morphie set and potentially replace my long time eyepiece case resident 5mm Pentax XW. The arrival of the 4.5 informed me of how excellent the light scatter is controlled in the 5mm XW. 

 

The Morphies are great in every other category: transmission, tack sharp star images, ultrawide AFOV, long eye relief for that comfortable sit back relax and enjoy the view type experience, etc. 

 

-Victor

 

Yep that is my experience to a T. I failed to mention those arcs , but yes they were definitely there in the 4.5mm. A lunar eyepiece it ain't. I love the 12.5 and 17.5 for deep sky, it really is that "big easy" view with a beautiful fine quality to the view. I haven't tried the 6.5 and 9 on DSO yet, but I expect the same experience. 

 

As as lunar goes, I have my Delites, but I'd like a bigger FOV and a natural extension at the short end for the Morphs. I put out a wanted ad for a 4.5mm Delos. I don't see myself keeping the 4.5 M at this stage.

[Princess Leah]

I think they may all have some light scatter. I never checked the 12.5, 14, or 17.5 because I didn't use those on the Moon. The 4.5, 6.5, and 9 definitely showed it. 

 

I found that the light scatter problem on the moon decreased with increasing focal length. The higher magnification of the 4.5 inevitably puts some of the moon outside of the field of view.  For some reason when the moon is outside of the field it reflects distracting arcs of light + an obtrusive soft glow across the visible field. Since the 6.5 is of lower magnification more of the moon fits in the FOV and is less likely to be positioned where it can create the distracting scatter. The 9 never caused me any issues but when I let it drift or purposefully panned so that the moon was partially outside the field, the light scatter was there.

 

I don't think this is a problem at all on DSOs and barely a problem on bright stars or planets because one typically keeps them within the inner 2/3s of the FOV. 

 

I observe the moon often and got the 4.5 to complete my Morphie set and potentially replace my long time eyepiece case resident 5mm Pentax XW. The arrival of the 4.5 informed me of how excellent the light scatter is controlled in the 5mm XW. 

 

The Morphies are great in every other category: transmission, tack sharp star images, ultrawide AFOV, long eye relief for that comfortable sit back relax and enjoy the view type experience, etc. 

 

-Victor

My experience exactly. I retained the 12.5 and 17.5.

Prefer the Celestron XCel 6mm/9mm (and Barlowed) on the moon.

 

The 17.5 has plenty of scatter if used near a rising sun or full moon