107 replies to this topic

[Sarkikos]

Brandon are exceptional eyepieces when used with longer F ratio refractors (>F10).  With faster F ratios, they are no better than the other eyepieces.   

That's if you are comparing outer field performance.  The same could be said - even more so!  - for Masuyama eyepieces. 

 

One of the worst outer fields I have ever seen in any eyepiece was from a 32mm 85-Degree Masuyama in an f/5 scope.  But put it in an f/10 or slower scope, and the overall performance is exceptional. 

 

For both Brandons and Masuyama, center of field will perform well at all speeds.

 

Mike

Edited by Sarkikos, 05 April 2025 - 07:25 AM.

[azure1961p]

I have a 40mm Celestron 1.25 plossl.  This isn't Televue level at all ofcourse, but it's the only ocular in my F9 newt that has what looks like a curved field.  It's certainly is narrow field too.  In some ways it's a failed ocular in 1.25 but nothing else I have will concentrate large low surface brightness objects, ie; Th Helix etc.

 

Pete

[Procyon]

Do you guys have a preferred eyepiece pair for binoviewing Saturn?

 

I'm thinking Brandons, RKE's, Zeiss Microscopics and TPL's would excel here. Or am I wrong?

 

Also ordered 2x 20mm TV Plossls and a Baader MS&G to try with the Zeiss Microscopics I have on hand for Jupiter. How did the TV Plossls get a warm rep when they are so high in transmission % in the blues?

 

http://www.amateuras.../tips/tips3.htm

Edited by Procyon, 05 April 2025 - 11:16 AM.

[Tropobob]

That's if you are comparing outer field performance.  The same could be said - even more so!  - for Masuyama eyepieces. 

 

One of the worst outer fields I have ever seen in any eyepiece was from a 32mm 85-Degree Masuyama in an f/5 scope.  But put it in an f/10 or slower scope, and the overall performance is exceptional. 

 

For both Brandons and Masuyama, center of field will perform well at all speeds.

 

Mike

When I use my Brandons, I feel the center of the field to have really exceptional contrast with my F11 scope.  I tend to only use the Brandons with this scope as other eyepieces do just as well at faster F ratios.   

[Sarkikos]

Do you guys have a preferred eyepiece pair for binoviewing Saturn?

 

I'm thinking Brandons, RKE's, Zeiss Microscopics and TPL's would excel here. Or am I wrong?

 

Also ordered 2x 20mm TV Plossls and a Baader MS&G to try with the Zeiss Microscopics I have on hand for Jupiter. How did the TV Plossls get a warm rep when they are so high in transmission % in the blues?

 

http://www.amateuras.../tips/tips3.htm

Older version TV Plossls were warm tone.  Apparently, more recent TV eyepieces have cooled down. 

 

Mike

[Procyon]

Older version TV Plossls were warm tone.  Apparently, more recent TV eyepieces have cooled down. 

 

Mike

Not too much I hope, got them specifically for this binoviewing shootout. I think I'm going to get a pair of 21.5mm RKE's also and have fun with these 2 and the Zeiss. But those 18mm TPL's are tempting me too. Ok 4 pairs than. 

Edited by Procyon, 05 April 2025 - 06:57 PM.

[GSwaim]

I only do visual observations these days and only on solar, lunar, and planets.

I find TV plossls to be very good for that task, same as UO ortho. Brandon is better in contrast & color than both of the previous mentioned eyepieces for my visual observations. I have a TV55 that I use for lunar and solar observations once in a while. Just my opinions & observations.

[Scott99]

Claves, Brandons, and UO orthos all had several different periods of manufacturing with different coatings and glass.   And likely TV as well.  For example UO HD orthos were a big step up over the regular UO orthos IMO.  The recent Brandons with the darker amber-colored coatings are likewise improved over the many decades of the blue-colored coatings. 

 

With Clave the range and difference are ever greater...for the last decade or two another company bought the brand and from what I've read even used imported lenses at the end.   For me the best ones are early-mid 80's.   My point is that you really need to get these oculars in hand and experiment yourself.  

 

There's no equation or formula for assessing why they work better, it can't be computed from the number of lenses or surfaces or whatnot.  I've never thought much about those technical aspects since I just want the best views for myself with the scope I use.  Once I'm out there it's quickly evident which I prefer

Edited by Scott99, 21 April 2025 - 11:45 AM.