95 replies to this topic

[MrsM75]

Sir Starman1, I'm sorry another question Sir.

 

Do you know if this Astromania 1.25"/2"- 17mm 70 deg SWA, is clone of which? Here a pic. It looks like some AngelEyes?

 

[Starman1]

The names that eyepiece is sold under:

Arcturus Ebony
Astromania SWA

Omegon Redline
Skywatcher 70° Super Wide Angle (same eyepiece, but different housing)
TecnoSky Superwide HD
Telescope Service Expanse ED

I just looked.  They're $119 at CCTS, but $128.99 at Astromania, and $140.99 at Amazon.

I'm familiar with the eyepiece.  It'll be too heavy for your small scopes and mounts.

It's actually a bit larger and heavier than the Baader Hyperion 17mm, even with the 2" skirt removed.

[Oldfracguy]

The names that eyepiece is sold under:

Arcturus Ebony
Astromania SWA

Omegon Redline
Skywatcher 70° Super Wide Angle (same eyepiece, but different housing)
TecnoSky Superwide HD
Telescope Service Expanse ED

I just looked.  They're $119 at CCTS, but $128.99 at Astromania, and $140.99 at Amazon.

I'm familiar with the eyepiece.  It'll be too heavy for your small scopes and mounts.

It's actually a bit larger and heavier than the Baader Hyperion 17mm, even with the 2" skirt removed.

I bought one of those not too long ago, the 17mm Arcturus Ebony model with the removable 2" barrel.  I like the 2" 22mm Arcturus Ebony I've had for over a year now, so I thought I would try the 17mm version.  That eyepiece is the same physical size pretty much as the 2" 22mm, and when I compared it back and forth with a 1.25" ATM 18mm UFF I bought a couple years ago from some eyepiece dealer in the Los Angeles area, I decided the 18mm UFF was better--both from an optical performance standpoint, and also from a size and weight standpoint.

[Pixeltim]

This is very cool and helpful, but has anyone done any kind of comparison based rating that shows which eyepieces are exceptional at each size or perhaps which are exceptional for specific types of scopes and viewing situations?

[Starman1]

I bought one of those not too long ago, the 17mm Arcturus Ebony model with the removable 2" barrel.  I like the 2" 22mm Arcturus Ebony I've had for over a year now, so I thought I would try the 17mm version.  That eyepiece is the same physical size pretty much as the 2" 22mm, and when I compared it back and forth with a 1.25" ATM 18mm UFF I bought a couple years ago from some eyepiece dealer in the Los Angeles area, I decided the 18mm UFF was better--both from an optical performance standpoint, and also from a size and weight standpoint.

I agree.  The 22mm and 17mm, though, are the best eyepieces in that series.  The 22mm is kind of special, though.  Something magical about the focal length.

Skip the 13mm, though, as it is the weakest one in the entire series, with terrible edge of field brightening covering the entire outer field from the 50% field point to the edge.

[Starman1]

This is very cool and helpful, but has anyone done any kind of comparison based rating that shows which eyepieces are exceptional at each size or perhaps which are exceptional for specific types of scopes and viewing situations?

You'd have to look at literally hundreds, if not thousands, of posts to get that info here on CN.

The closest we have is Ernest Maratovich's reports:

https://astro-talks....2&t=1483#p41976

Click on any title to get the full review.

Unfortunately, a lot of eyepieces are not reviewed.

 

I'm familiar with about 400 different eyepieces, though many of my memories are with small scopes, and not applicable to today's sub f/5 scopes.

[Pixeltim]

You'd have to look at literally hundreds, if not thousands, of posts to get that info here on CN.

The closest we have is Ernest Maratovich's reports:

https://astro-talks....2&t=1483#p41976

Click on any title to get the full review.

Unfortunately, a lot of eyepieces are not reviewed.

 

I'm familiar with about 400 different eyepieces, though many of my memories are with small scopes, and not applicable to today's sub f/5 scopes.

Thanks, that helps!

I might import your data into a mysql database and see if I can mess with a rating system and filtering for size and type of scope. Assuming I have time... 

[MrsM75]

Sir Starman1, I have a question to ask you.

 

The Badder Hyperion 21mm eyepiece, it has 2 inches and 1.25 inches, how do you remove the 2 inches barrel so you can use the 1.25 barrel instead.

[Starman1]

Sir Starman1, I have a question to ask you.

The Badder Hyperion 21mm eyepiece, it has 2 inches and 1.25 inches, how do you remove the 2 inches barrel so you can use the 1.25 barrel instead.

The 2" barrel is a machined outer surface of the eyepiece above the 1.25" barrel, so you can use either size without removing anything from the eyepiece.

[MrsM75]

Sir Starman1, I have another question. aaaaa I don't know why I just have alot of questions, lol. Sorry Sir.

 

So you see this screenshot below it from Ageana, it say 65 degrees 17mm

Is this the clone of Orion Expanse of 15mm 68 degrees? If so then why it say 17mm on it instead of 15mm

 

[Starman1]

The Agena Wide Angle (WA) eyepieces are different from their Enhanced Wide Angle (EWA) eyepieces.

 

Their EWAs are from Tianying, the same company that makes the 6-9-15-20mm 66-68° eyepieces sold by a zillion companies,

including the old Orion Expanse series and still sold all over the world today.

 

But their WA are a different series from, I believe, a different manufacturer.  I don't know who that mfr is.

They too are sold by 4 different companies (Auriga, Lacerta, Tecnosky, and Agena) under different labels, though Agena is the only US source.

I've never used one, so I can't advise you, Certainly the price is low enough to experiment.

[Oldfracguy]

The Agena Wide Angle (WA) eyepieces are different from their Enhanced Wide Angle (EWA) eyepieces.

 

Their EWAs are from Tianying, the same company that makes the 6-9-15-20mm 66-68° eyepieces sold by a zillion companies,

including the old Orion Expanse series and still sold all over the world today.

 

But their WA are a different series from, I believe, a different manufacturer.  I don't know who that mfr is.

They too are sold by 4 different companies (Auriga, Lacerta, Tecnosky, and Agena) under different labels, though Agena is the only US source.

I've never used one, so I can't advise you, Certainly the price is low enough to experiment.

I tried those Agena Enhanced Wide Angle eyepieces several years ago, and soon got rid of them.  They exhibit that "kidney beaning".  The Agena WA eyepieces have a 65° AFOV, but only four lens elements.  The 17mm model didn't perform well at all in an f/4.7 Dob according to one reviewer, showing lots of astigmatism.  It might do a lot better in an f/12 to f/15 Mak, but only four lens elements in a 65° AFOV eyepiece would seem suspect to me. 

[Starman1]

I tried those Agena Enhanced Wide Angle eyepieces several years ago, and soon got rid of them.  They exhibit that "kidney beaning".  The Agena WA eyepieces have a 65° AFOV, but only four lens elements.  The 17mm model didn't perform well at all in an f/4.7 Dob according to one reviewer, showing lots of astigmatism.  It might do a lot better in an f/12 to f/15 Mak, but only four lens elements in a 65° AFOV eyepiece would seem suspect to me. 

Suspect?  Just like the 5 element 85° Masuyamas.  Manufacturers cannot suspend the laws of physics.

[Oldfracguy]

Suspect?  Just like the 5 element 85° Masuyamas.  Manufacturers cannot suspend the laws of physics.

What do you mean exactly, Don?  I think you are saying the 5-element 85° Masuyamas are bad in the outer portion of the FOV.  Is that right?

[Starman1]

What do you mean exactly, Don? I think you are saying the 5-element 85° Masuyamas are bad in the outer portion of the FOV. Is that right?

LOL. Yes, exactly. Though there is likely a long enough f/ratio to clean that up. Definitely not f/7, where the outer field was not good, but maybe f/12 or longer?

[MrsM75]

f/15 Mak would work, f/15 eat anything, lol. But Masuyamas so expensive omg expensive.

[Starman1]

f/15 Mak would work, f/15 eat anything, lol. But Masuyamas so expensive omg expensive.

They also have short eye reliefs and no glasses compatibility.

[MrsM75]

Sir Starman1, is the AstroTech SWA 82 deg the 7mm is really 7mm? Or it is 6.5mm or 8mm?

[MrsM75]

Sir Starman1, so I have a question.

 

So I just got a 1.25 Astrotech SWA 82 deg.

 

The barrel of the Astrotech it alot longer than the Oiron.

And whenI put the Astrotech into the GSO/AstroStreet diagonal, the barrel of the Astrotech it too long so it was not able to go all it, it protrude out and it leave a  big gap.

 

Should I worry that would leave some light leaks? Please look pics so you see what I'm trying to say. It a big gap, the second pic show it.

 

 

 

[Starman1]

Don't worry about light leaks.  Different eyepieces have different lengths on their lower barrels.

It only means you will need a bit more focusing change to focus the eyepiece; it isn't a safety issue.

And it has been measured to be an 8mm eyepiece with an 84° apparent field and a 10mm eye relief.

[MrsM75]

omg the Astromania 1.25"/2"- 8mm 70 deg SWA the spec said it weight 18 oz, that is heavy, that is 1.1 lb

I was about to buy the 8mm but nope, it heavy for a small aperature scope.