173 replies to this topic

[vahe]

I believe you can remove the 2" skirts, which saves weight.

Correct, If I am not mistaken Jon Isaacs showed me how to do it.

.

Vahe

[rowdy388]

I removed the skirt of my 22 Pan, but put it back on after seeing how light it was. In a 2" focuser the adaptor would definitely weigh

a lot more, and I could spare myself fiddling with an adaptor because I often only use 2" eyepieces. Then a couple years later I removed

the skirt again so I could use the Pan in my 1.25" finder scopes and the 6" F/8 which only has a 1.25 focuser. This time I'll leave it off 

for maximum flexibility. It is an awesome eyepiece.

[Vertigo]

Hello,

 

I'd like to throw some salt into the wide-field community: Takahashi TPL 50mm.

 

Andreas

[TayM57]

Welcome back! Easily my most immersive EPs

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by TayM57, 02 April 2025 - 09:44 PM.

[snakehelah]

The "short eye relief fan club" would be happy to subsidize your laser eye surgery if you were ever so inclined to join our side

Thanks for the answer !

Clear skies

Do people that partake in visual astronomy that wear glasses actually opt for those surgeries though? I've had some friends who, while happy with the surgery outcomes had poorer night vision after their surgeries - not that it mattered to them. But I noticed I had no issues around dark environments while they were fumbling to get a light on and it was quite strange.

Edited by snakehelah, 03 April 2025 - 10:13 AM.

[davidgmd]

Do people that partake in visual astronomy that wear glasses actually opt for those surgeries though? I've had some friends who, while happy with the surgery outcomes had poorer night vision after their surgeries - not that it mattered to them. But I noticed I had no issues around dark environments while they were fumbling to get a light on and it was quite strange.

  
The problem with LASIK and PRK for the visual astronomer is that the dark adapted pupil may be larger than the central laser treatment zone. If that happens, some of the light will pass through the transition zone between treated and untreated cornea, resulting in unwanted aberrations. It may affect driving at night more than astronomical observing, but it’s hard to predict if or how much it will affect a given individual. It’s not as simple as comparing treatment zone size to dark adapted pupil size due to variation in healing and in visual processing.

  
I was fairly conservative and never did refractive surgery on visual astronomers, but I know others would.

[TayM57]

  
The problem with LASIK and PRK for the visual astronomer is that the dark adapted pupil may be larger than the central laser treatment zone. If that happens, some of the light will pass through the transition zone between treated and untreated cornea, resulting in unwanted aberrations. It may affect driving at night more than astronomical observing, but it’s hard to predict if or how much it will affect a given individual. It’s not as simple as comparing treatment zone size to dark adapted pupil size due to variation in healing and in visual processing.

  
I was fairly conservative and never did refractive surgery on visual astronomers, but I know others would.

Which is why I've never opted for LASIK or other corrective surgery. The risk to my nighttime hobby is just too great.

[saemark30]

Hello,

 

I'd like to throw some salt into the wide-field community: Takahashi TPL 50mm.

 

Andreas

Ditto. 2" Brandon 48mm.

[Astroman007]

Right now: 21mm Ethos, 17mm Nikon NAV-HW, 13mm Ethos, 48mm Brandon (sensitivity to eye placement aside), 28mm Edmund RKE.

 

Also have 31mm Nagler and 40mm Pentax XW that I haven't used yet. Based off specs they are part of the list, but won't formally add them until I've used them personally.

[25585]

I am still tempted to try an ES100 25mm, now Meade 26mm MWAs have gone. There seem to be no other brands that have the Meade's optics. 

[Starman1]

I am still tempted to try an ES100 25mm, now Meade 26mm MWAs have gone. There seem to be no other brands that have the Meade's optics.

Bear in mind they claimed 100° and delivered 88°.
And the 26mm was panned by every review I've read.
The ES 25mm is not glasses compatible.

Edited by Starman1, 17 April 2025 - 10:53 AM.

[25585]

The Panoramas only go up to 23mm though.

[Starman1]

The Panoramas only go up to 23mm though.

I deleted the Panorama reference. They were Luminos eyepieces in another shell.

[Highburymark]

I’ve just spent a happy hour absorbing the Beehive through my TSA-120 and Nagler 22mm T4. It was, to my eyes, perfect. Perfect stars to the edge, perfectly framed, perfect eye relief adjusted to my needs.

[TicoWiko]

I’ve just spent a happy hour absorbing the Beehive through my TSA-120 and Nagler 22mm T4. It was, to my eyes, perfect. Perfect stars to the edge, perfectly framed, perfect eye relief adjusted to my needs.

I think you're touching on something important here : framing on certain specific objects. That really matters in terms of immersiveness. Not so much the exit pupil, but really just the framing in terms of FOV and how much it draws you into the object. I remember the very specific way switching straight from my 20mm XWA to 5mm XWA when hunting for M11 radically changed the view. The sudden shift from blurry smudge to full blown starfield was mindblowing. And if the 5mm XWA wasn't on a 10" newt with a Paracorr 2, the experience and in particular the immersiveness, mostly due to framing, would've been radically different. Meaning most of the choices here would likely be very different if the night sky were visually differently populated.

Edited by TicoWiko, 18 April 2025 - 05:16 PM.

[Jon Isaacs]

Luckily not all eyepieces need that help.

 

It's not the eyepiece that needs the help . A steady head and upper body go a long way in providing steady views, particularly at high magnifications.

 

Jon

[Dave Mitsky]

The following are the eyepieces that I own that I find to be immersive: the 5mm Pentax XW, the 7mm Pentax XW, the 9mm Astro-Tech XWA 100°, the 12.5mm Baader Morpheus, the 13mm Tele Vue Ethos, the 17.5mm Baader Morpheus, the Astro-Tech 20mm XWA 100°, and the 28mm Astro-Tech UWA 82° and to a somewhat lesser degree, the 6, 8, and 10mm Tele Vue Delos and 35mm Tele Vue Panoptic.
 

At one time, I had a 20mm Tele Vue Type 2 Nagler, which I found to be immersive.

[Dave Mitsky]

I've always enjoyed looking through a friend's 30mm Leitz Planokular 88°.  I don't find the 28mm Edmund RKE particularly immersive, but the floating effect is certainly interesting.

[rowdy388]

I haven't used my 20 APM XWA in over a year and forgot how much I used to enjoy it until reading this thread. I'll have to

slip it into the focuser next time out to get reacquainted.

[Jon Isaacs]

I haven't used my 20 APM XWA in over a year and forgot how much I used to enjoy it until reading this thread. I'll have to

slip it into the focuser next time out to get reacquainted.

 

The 20mm XWA and the 21mm Ethos seem the most immersive.  The bright, near richest field combined with the 100 degree field is a great combination. In my largest scope, that's 140x with a 4mm exit pupil and a 0.71 degree TFoV, stars are really bright and it's enough magnification for globulars to begin to come alive. Eyepieces like the 31mm Nagler and the 28mm UWA are also quite immersive but for me, the 20mm Hyperwides are my favorites.  

 

Jon

[Highburymark]

I think you're touching on something important here : framing on certain specific objects. That really matters in terms of immersiveness. Not so much the exit pupil, but really just the framing in terms of FOV and how much it draws you into the object. I remember the very specific way switching straight from my 20mm XWA to 5mm XWA when hunting for M11 radically changed the view. The sudden shift from blurry smudge to full blown starfield was mindblowing. And if the 5mm XWA wasn't on a 10" newt with a Paracorr 2, the experience and in particular the immersiveness, mostly due to framing, would've been radically different. Meaning most of the choices here would likely be very different if the night sky were visually differently populated.

I bought the Nagler 22 specifically for the few brighter clusters that are visible from my urban location. Definitely think framing’s an important part of immersiveness - though can also appreciate those who prefer hyperwides.

[25585]

It's not the eyepiece that needs the help . A steady head and upper body go a long way in providing steady views, particularly at high magnifications.

 

Jon

Agreed, but its preferable to not be ergonomically restricted, the more latitude and ease the better. 

[Jon Isaacs]

Agreed, but its preferable to not be ergonomically restricted, the more latitude and ease the better. 

 

The basic problem is that the exit pupil has a certain diameter and your pupil has a certain diameter, getting them properly lined up so the exit pupil is centered in your pupil requires millimeter precision. That's best done either seated or standing with some support for the upper body.

 

Jon

[25585]

The basic problem is that the exit pupil has a certain diameter and your pupil has a certain diameter, getting them properly lined up so the exit pupil is centered in your pupil requires millimeter precision. That's best done either seated or standing with some support for the upper body.

 

Jon

OK, but I find eye pupil and exit pupil alignment easier in some eyepieces than others. The eyepieces I own and use, are the easy ones, and I am glad there are enough now, it was an expensive quest! 

Edited by 25585, 21 April 2025 - 08:54 AM.