38 replies to this topic

[Procyon]

Is there none other in this focal length worth buying, besides the 27mm Panoptic?

How is the 27mm Panoptic's eye relief? Looks like it has a small lens and short eye shield?

Anyone have a diameter measurement on the lens?

Why did I sell my 26mm Nagler again?

 

Does the Masuyama improve with a TSFLAT2 at f/5-f/6?

I wonder which of these 2 would show better color on stars?

 

Tele Vue Optics Panoptic TVO WideField 27.0 2.00 69
Masuyama Masuyama OHI UltraWideField 26.0 2.00 85

 

 

 

This it?
Agena Super Wide Angle SWA  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
Angeleyes (eBay/Ali Express) LER 2"  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
Apertura Super Wide Angle GSO WideField 26.0 2.00 70
Lacerta SWA70  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
Omegon SWA  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
Ostara UK SWA  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
OVL (First Light Optics) Panaview  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
Skywatcher PanaView  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
SVBONY Super Wide Angle  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
Telescope Service Wide Angle  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
Explore Scientific 62 Series JOC Medium Field 26.0 1.25 62

 

The 32mm and 38mm Skywatcher Panaviews are nice, but this 26mm one looks like it's going to be rough getting in there.

Jumping from a T4 22mm Nagler to a 26 ES62?   

Edited by Procyon, 16 June 2025 - 09:42 PM.

[Pixeltim]

The 27 has 19mm eye relief.

[SeattleScott]

Why do you need anything between 22 and 32? A 26/62 feels pointless as it would have a smaller field stop. Even a 27 Panoptic has a smaller field stop than a 22T4. I get that it’s a different exit pupil, but not much different. It feels like you are just reaching for an excuse to buy an eyepiece.

If you wanted something lighter than the 22T4 for balance reasons, or something smaller to fit in a grab and go kit, I could see it. But just to fill a gap between 22 and 32? What scope do you have that you need such small increments at low power? A 12” SCT?

[oninoyakamo]

These sound like questions I've asked. What are you trying to achieve?

In my case I was trying to find something to widen the view for a Meade 7" Mak at 100x to cut the skyglow in my town. Reasoning I wouldn't need a 26mm Nagler for its focal ratio, I picked a used Tele Vue 27mm Panoptic never thinking I'd come across a used 26mm Masuyama 85° up in Canada, then of course one showed up a day later.

 

The Panoptic widened the view some, but the Masuyama was so superior that it was like it and the Mak were made for each other. Well-controlled at f/15, the Panoptic was cleaner in my old f/6 Apo. I haven't yet gotten a 2" adapter for my FC-76DCU to be able to try it at f/12.8, but aberrations creep in enough at f/10 that I prefer the Panoptic on my C9.25. It's like a throwback from the era of the old Unitrons; the Masuyama 85° is a specialist eyepiece nowadays, best on Maks and the FOA-60Q. 

 

The Panoptic is great on everything I've paired it with, but it feels conservative. There is definitely more sky, just outside of view. Both are nice and light for 2" EPs, but at f/6 swapping from the Tele Vue to the Masuyama feels like prying back the Panoptic's field stop to reveal rainbow stars beneath. I can see why Ed Ting likes the Panoptic: It's an enjoyable, reliable, standard.

 

If you're trying for a one size fits all 26-27mm in the maximum field you can get, you may have to wait for another 26mm Nagler to pop up used. There's not much else capable.

Edited by oninoyakamo, 17 June 2025 - 12:44 AM.

[therealdmt]

If you’re willing to consider an eyepiece 1mm outside your desired range, the Explore Scientific 68° 28mm (2" barrel) is well reviewed and has plenty of eye relief (21.6mm per their specs. Likely somewhat less in practice, but from what I’ve read, it is known for its comfortable eye relief)

[balcon3]

These sound like questions I've asked. What are you trying to achieve?

 

The Panoptic widened the view some, but the Masuyama was so superior that it was like it and the Mak were made for each other. Well-controlled at f/15, the Panoptic was cleaner in my old f/6 Apo. I haven't yet gotten a 2" adapter for my FC-76DCU to be able to try it at f/12.8, but aberrations creep in enough at f/10 that I prefer the Panoptic on my C9.25. It's like a throwback from the era of the old Unitrons; the Masuyama 85° is a specialist eyepiece nowadays, best on Maks and the FOA-60Q

I actually use the 85 degree Masuyamas in my f/7.4 refractor. Sure there is a lot of distortion in the outer part of the field. But I still prefer it over my much better-corrected Baader Morphei for many purposes. The contrast and transmission is superior. As you put it, the Morpheus is a “conservative” choice. The  Masuyamas show something special even at faster focal ratios. I particularly enjoy them on open clusters where the fainter stars are more striking than in the Morpheus.

[Procyon]

Why do you need anything between 22 and 32? A 26/62 feels pointless as it would have a smaller field stop. Even a 27 Panoptic has a smaller field stop than a 22T4. I get that it’s a different exit pupil, but not much different. It feels like you are just reaching for an excuse to buy an eyepiece.

If you wanted something lighter than the 22T4 for balance reasons, or something smaller to fit in a grab and go kit, I could see it. But just to fill a gap between 22 and 32? What scope do you have that you need such small increments at low power? A 12” SCT?

[Procyon]

The Panoptic is great on everything I've paired it with, but it feels conservative. There is definitely more sky, just outside of view. Both are nice and light for 2" EPs, but at f/6 swapping from the Tele Vue to the Masuyama feels like prying back the Panoptic's field stop to reveal rainbow stars beneath. I can see why Ed Ting likes the Panoptic: It's an enjoyable, reliable, standard.

You're entire post was helpful, especially this part.
I'm trying some eyepieces and many feel exactly that:
conservative. I like conservative in politics but not in my
eyepieces lol. And I've gotten too many of those lately.

You mention at f/6 it revealed rainbow stars, did you happen to mean at very low power the stars looked better or?

Good info though thanks, may be worth trying.
I've owned the 32mm Masuyama in the past. Great for Nebulae,
Can't remember how stars looked, need an eyepiece for 25-25x.

Edited by Procyon, 17 June 2025 - 06:17 AM.

[Procyon]

I actually use the 85 degree Masuyamas in my f/7.4 refractor. Sure there is a lot of distortion in the outer part of the field. But I still prefer it over my much better-corrected Baader Morphei for many purposes. The contrast and transmission is superior. As you put it, the Morpheus is a “conservative” choice. The Masuyamas show something special even at faster focal ratios. I particularly enjoy them on open clusters where the fainter stars are more striking than in the Morpheus.

That's great. Wow, exactly what I need them for. You guys were very helpful. The fainter stars say in the area outside the center, half way there to the edge, do you find them a little deformed, or is the power so low that it doesn't bother you?

Edited by Procyon, 17 June 2025 - 06:07 AM.

[Jon Isaacs]

There is always the 28mm Astro-Tech UWA.  I measured the AFoV at 84 degrees and the field stop at 40.8mm, similar numbers to what Ernest measured.  

 

Jon

[Procyon]

There is always the 28mm Astro-Tech UWA. I measured the AFoV at 84 degrees and the field stop at 40.8mm, similar numbers to what Ernest measured.

Jon

Why does it feel crammed up to a 70 SWA view though? It feels like the rest of the AFOV you have to go looking for it underneath the eyepiece lol. Or all the way to the sides.

Great transmission and very comfortable eyepiece though.

Edited by Procyon, 17 June 2025 - 06:14 AM.

[oninoyakamo]

I actually use the 85 degree Masuyamas in my f/7.4 refractor. Sure there is a lot of distortion in the outer part of the field. But I still prefer it over my much better-corrected Baader Morphei for many purposes. The contrast and transmission is superior. As you put it, the Morpheus is a “conservative” choice. The  Masuyamas show something special even at faster focal ratios. I particularly enjoy them on open clusters where the fainter stars are more striking than in the Morpheus.

Well, that's good to hear. If I ever get a 2" adapter, I'll look forward to trying them out on my FC-76DCU. The 26mm is a bright eyepiece. In my Mak it is excellent on globular clusters.

 

The Morpheus feels like the Delos and smaller Ethos, a weird hybrid of 1.25" field lens and 2" eye lens. Top heavy.

 

You mention at f/6 it revealed rainbow stars, did you happen to mean at very low power the stars looked better or?

Stars stretch at the outer third. If the center is in focus in my refractor, there is some chromatic aberration introduced in that outer third that gives bright stars a rainbow appearance. It has great transmission though, and the usable field is very colour neutral.

 

I'm waiting on delivery of a 32mm 85°. While the entire field of view is visible in the 26mm, I suspect the additional field of view it provides may be vignetted by my Mak.

 

BTW, I see you found a 40mm MK-70 and it went up for sale almost immediately. What happened?

 

There is always the 28mm Astro-Tech UWA.

Given that this is a private-label branded SkyRover eyepiece out of Kunming, I wonder if Astro-Tech's prices will stay as low as they are at present, or if tariffs will see them increase.

Edited by oninoyakamo, 17 June 2025 - 07:18 AM.

[Procyon]

 

 

BTW, I see you found a 40mm MK-70 and it went up for sale almost immediately. What happened?

 

 

I preferred the view through my 38mm SkyWatcher Panaview much better. The 40mm UO is pretty good though but the view felt restrained. The Panaview has one of the best eyecups I've looked through, it's ultra comfortable and it makes the fov feel wider. Why I might get a 32mm also. Not sure though, the 26 and 32 seem to have a much smaller eyeguard/

Edited by Procyon, 17 June 2025 - 07:35 AM.

[Jon Isaacs]

Why does it feel crammed up to a 70 SWA view though? It feels like the rest of the AFOV you have to go looking for it underneath the eyepiece lol. Or all the way to the sides.

Great transmission and very comfortable eyepiece though.

 

It doesn't seem that way to me. I fold the eyecup down, it's clearly far wider than the 30mm UFF.

 

Jon

[Procyon]

Why do you need anything between 22 and 32? A 26/62 feels pointless as it would have a smaller field stop. Even a 27 Panoptic has a smaller field stop than a 22T4. I get that it’s a different exit pupil, but not much different. It feels like you are just reaching for an excuse to buy an eyepiece.

If you wanted something lighter than the 22T4 for balance reasons, or something smaller to fit in a grab and go kit, I could see it. But just to fill a gap between 22 and 32? What scope do you have that you need such small increments at low power? A 12” SCT?

I was out observing with a Bresser Messier 102mm f/4.5 refractor the other night. Nice little scope at only 5.5lbs. Puts up very decent images and gigantic field of views!

But, it rendered most of my eyepieces useless leaving them with exit pupils over 6mm. The 28mm (28.5) AT82 had a bit of a washed field at 6.3mm Exit Pupil.

I was left using only the 17mm ES 92. I like low power viewing with different eyepieces,

do you? Actually, none of my business, nor do I care, you shouldn't either. 

Edited by Procyon, 17 June 2025 - 07:56 AM.

[Starman1]

Is there none other in this focal length worth buying, besides the 27mm Panoptic?

How is the 27mm Panoptic's eye relief? Looks like it has a small lens and short eye shield?

Anyone have a diameter measurement on the lens?

Why did I sell my 26mm Nagler again?

 

Does the Masuyama improve with a TSFLAT2 at f/5-f/6?

I wonder which of these 2 would show better color on stars?

 

Tele Vue Optics Panoptic TVO WideField 27.0 2.00 69
Masuyama Masuyama OHI UltraWideField 26.0 2.00 85

 

 

 

This it?
Agena Super Wide Angle SWA  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
Angeleyes (eBay/Ali Express) LER 2"  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
Apertura Super Wide Angle GSO WideField 26.0 2.00 70
Lacerta SWA70  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
Omegon SWA  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
Ostara UK SWA  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
OVL (First Light Optics) Panaview  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
Skywatcher PanaView  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
SVBONY Super Wide Angle  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
Telescope Service Wide Angle  WideField 26.0 2.00 70
Explore Scientific 62 Series JOC Medium Field 26.0 1.25 62

 

The 32mm and 38mm Skywatcher Panaviews are nice, but this 26mm one looks like it's going to be rough getting in there.

Jumping from a T4 22mm Nagler to a 26 ES62?   

So you have a 22mm Nagler?

That has a 31.1mm field stop.

Going by the "rules", the next logical focal length lower than the 22mm would be a 31mm eyepiece with a 43.5mm field stop.

 

The closest you can get to that is a 31mm T5 Nagler.

Your CPC has a 2795mm focal length, so 22mm = 127x and a 31mm would be 90x.  That is a very nice spread--noticeable in terms of magnification and brightness.

After 31mm, 43mm, though most SCT users use a 40-41mm instead, or jump to a 55mm Plössl to get the largest exit pupil.

 

I can't see that any eyepiece in between the 31mm and 22mm would get any use--the magnification would be too close to the 22mm.

That's with the SCT.  In the refractors, the magnification change would be so small as to barely be noticeable.

There's a reason why the 31mm Nagler outsold the 26mm by 20:1.

[oninoyakamo]

I preferred the view through my 38mm SkyWatcher Panaview much better. The 40mm UO is pretty good though but the view felt restrained. The Panaview has one of the best eyecups I've looked through, it's ultra comfortable and it makes the fov feel wider. Why I might get a 32mm also. Not sure though, the 26 and 32 seem to have a much smaller eyeguard/

Restrained? By aberrations at the edges?

 

Yeah, the rubber eyecup for the MK-70 is huge and must be removed to put the dust cap on over its mounting flange, so most people lost theirs. Mine arrived without it.

 

Was there any delamination on the one you found?

[SeattleScott]

I was out observing with a Bresser Messier 102mm f/4.5 refractor the other night. Nice little scope at only 5.5lbs. Puts up very decent images and gigantic field of views!
But, it rendered most of my eyepieces useless leaving them with exit pupils over 6mm. The 28mm (28.5) AT82 had a bit of a washed field at 6.3mm Exit Pupil.
I was left using only the 17mm ES 92. I like low power viewing with different eyepieces,
do you? Actually, none of my business, nor do I care, you shouldn't either.

Ultimately my point is that, as Don confirms, the spread really isn’t that significant. Now a lot of us don’t mind some redundancy, and I have a bit of that going on myself. I might have an ultrawide and a long ER at the same focal length, or a SWA and a minimal glass at the same focal length. Variety is the spice of life. But to cram yourself into specifically 26-27mm trying to fill a gap is severely limiting your choices. I would instead look at a little broader range of focal lengths and consider them potential replacements or compliments to what I already have, rather than trying to hit a very specific focal length in order to fill a gap that doesn’t really need filling.

[Procyon]

So you have a 22mm Nagler?

That has a 31.1mm field stop.

Going by the "rules", the next logical focal length lower than the 22mm would be a 31mm eyepiece with a 43.5mm field stop.

 

The closest you can get to that is a 31mm T5 Nagler.

Your CPC has a 2795mm focal length, so 22mm = 127x and a 31mm would be 90x.  That is a very nice spread--noticeable in terms of magnification and brightness.

After 31mm, 43mm, though most SCT users use a 40-41mm instead, or jump to a 55mm Plössl to get the largest exit pupil.

 

I can't see that any eyepiece in between the 31mm and 22mm would get any use--the magnification would be too close to the 22mm.

That's with the SCT.  In the refractors, the magnification change would be so small as to barely be noticeable.

There's a reason why the 31mm Nagler outsold the 26mm by 20:1.

I'll leave you guys select me 5 eyepieces from this list for each of the first 2 refractors. The SCT I own is fully covered.

Anything over 6-6.3mm Exit Pupil is not of much use from Bortle 8-9, decently dark backyard.

I want 5 eyepieces out for the night, and don't care if the magnification difference is minimal. That's my problem.

I don't want anything less than 2.8-2.9mm Exit pupil and max 6.2mm Exit Pupil. So best to split them by 1mm of Exit Pupil...

2.8-3.8-4.8-5.8 and one in between all that for good luck.

 

Blue I own, Light blue I'm thinking about. Green means not fun to look through, washed out sky.

Although I've noticed when that moon is gone, I can go up to 7mm exit pupil, even the 48mm Brandon gets to come out, so there's that also.

I always wanted to try Jon's big easy view smoothie 32mm TV Widefield so don't discard it lol. The 32mm Panaview I might try and like also.

 

 

PS> I tried several refractors in the last 2 months, from 92mm APO's to 110mm ED's 

thinking that my 100mm Achro was a cheapie, and you know what? I ended up

liking it best over all of them for very low power. Go figure. That 92 APO was a killer scope though,

but probably best suited for someone that lives in a darker zone. The 110 ED was a bit too long and heavy at 15lbs

for my 14.5lbs max cap mount. I ordered one final 120T to try out also. It's longish but weights much less than the 110ED.

That Bresser I'm selling, but if no one buys it, I'll gladly keep it,

what a nice fun scope to own, so light too. It's just hard to make an ep set with it.

I use the TSFLAT2 with all of these scopes, works real great!

 

Would love your guys thoughts on a 27mm Panoptic vs the 28mm AT82 also.

I'm not 100% sold on my 28 AT82 yet, but it's such a nice build and has great

color transmission. I think i'll look for a 27mm Panoptic and a 26mm Masuyama

at some point, try all 3 and sell 2. 

 

That 38mm Panaview, I'll use in the SCT as well, but it's great with the 100mm refractor

when there's no full moon coming up from the east. Sold my WO 40mm to keep it,

although they were probably the same eyepiece. That WO 40mm was not bad at all

in the SCT, huge lens and very comfortable but the Panaview has a much better eyecup for me.

The 40 UO was good, didn't like the metal edges touching my cheek.

But good eyepiece, didn't notice any aberrations. Nice lens.

Felt cramped though for some reason compared to these 2 though. 

 

Love me some true color Achros baby.  

Edited by Procyon, 17 June 2025 - 11:19 AM.

[SeattleScott]

Oh, you don’t already own the 22T4. I thought you said you did. In that case, it is a 17-28 gap, which does indeed make more sense to fill. I would also consider a 24 Delos in that spot. Not sure what the availability is at this time.

If you like the 28 UWA, and the 34/68, I don’t see a need for anything in-between. So then the question becomes which don’t you like as well, and look for something to replace it. Or, split the difference and get a 31T5 to replace both. Might cause balance issues in those small fracs though.

[Procyon]

Oh, you don’t already own the 22T4. I thought you said you did. In that case, it is a 17-28 gap, which does indeed make more sense to fill. I would also consider a 24 Delos in that spot. Not sure what the availability is at this time.

If you like the 28 UWA, and the 34/68, I don’t see a need for anything in-between. So then the question becomes which don’t you like as well, and look for something to replace it. Or, split the difference and get a 31T5 to replace both. Might cause balance issues in those small fracs though.

That's the thing though, the 28 and 34 didn't blow me away. 

Both for different reasons. That 34 has a measured 65º, I

should have listened, but I didn't. Nice EP if you don't mind 

that part though. No way someone can have issues using this eyepiece

with that nice eye relief. Big eyeguard, but not the size of a 40mm ES 62

where stray light comes in.

So I'm out looking again. I'm sure you know how it is lol.

If someone would just come in here screaming

I love how blue stars look in my 31mm T5, or any other

eyepiece, I'll run out and get one.

Edited by Procyon, 17 June 2025 - 11:47 AM.

[SeattleScott]

Well the 30UFF is a bit low on red transmission, so blue stars might look more blue.

The 31T5 is a great eyepiece, but obviously pricey, and I could see balance being challenging in those small refractors. I would probably stick with the 28mm for lighter weight. You might have trouble finding anything that will blow away the 28UWA. Sure, something minimal glass like the Masuyama will have great central contrast, but it will struggle in your relatively fast scopes. I think you are better off sticking with something complex with good correction, and then you probably aren’t going to find anything with much better contrast than the 28mm.

[Starman1]

31mm Nagler from Ernest's tests:

18.5mm eye relief

81° AFOV

41.8mm field stop

927g

6 lenses

spot size at f/4 center/mid/edge*

< 3'  7'   11'

spot size at f/10 center/mid/edge*

<2'   3'   5'

5' is indistinguishable from a perfect point.  10' looks like a focused star.

These are great results.

 

He did not measure the RGB transmission because his final comment was:

"Ratings and recommendations:

Let's do without recommendations - it's ridiculous for me to evaluate this wonderful work of optical art."

 

My own personal comment is that it is the only 30-32mm eyepiece I rate higher than the 30mm UFF, though eye relief is tight for glasses on the 31N.

It's heavy though.

Edited by Starman1, 17 June 2025 - 12:23 PM.

[Procyon]

31mm Nagler from Ernest's tests:

18.5mm eye relief

81° AFOV

41.8mm field stop

927g

6 lenses

spot size at f/4 center/mid/edge*

< 3'  7'   11'

spot size at f/10 center/mid/edge*

<2'   3'   5'

5' is indistinguishable from a perfect point.  10' looks like a focused star.

These are great results.

 

He did not measure the RGB transmission because his final comment was:

"Ratings and recommendations:

Let's do without recommendations - it's ridiculous for me to evaluate this wonderful work of optical art."

 

My own personal comment is that it is the only 30-32mm eyepiece I rate higher than the 30mm UFF, though eye relief is tight for glasses on the 31N.

It's heavy though.

Compared to some other eyepieces I have, it felt like a 22mm Nagler in my hand the other day

when someone came to buy a telescope and had a 31 Nagler on hand to try.

I think the ES 92's and 25 ES 100 are half a pound heavier. And a bit larger. I see the 31 Nagler as medium sized now.

I just don't know if I should invest at least 500 for a 5.2mm and 6.2mm Exit Pupil.

 

And if I prefer the 120T Achro over the 100mm, I'll be stuck with a 500 dollar 6.2mm exit pupil investment.

It's easy to resell though. Maybe I'll crack in the end and buy it lol. 

Will definitely do that if I don't enjoy the 120 as much as the 100.

Probably will end with 17 ES 92 - 22 T4 - 31 T5 - 38 Panaview - 48 Brandon and call it a long day.

That 35 Panoptic though....nvm.  

Edited by Procyon, 17 June 2025 - 12:41 PM.

[havasman]

I have always had either the ES82 30mm or 31T5 in my eyepiece kit. I have never had a telescope with long enough focal length that I thought I needed anything in my main kit between those and a 21E and down from there to a 13E or 13XWA. So I've never needed anything in the 26/27mm range. I have an excellent ES68 24mm in my lightweight kit if some strange motivation comes along. I do not think there's anything in my observing practice that would make some 2-3mm focal length difference important at the long end of the kit. A friend with a 10 meter focal length Dob is the only person I've known with an observing need for an ep kit with a closely spaced long focal length end. And he does extremely well with 31T5/21E/17E at the long end of his kit.

 

The short end of both my main and lightweight kits is much more closely spaced as that works for my observing habits and scopes. Main: 10, 7, 6, 4.7, 3.7mm. Lightweight: 7, 5, 3.5, 2.5.

 

And I am not an ep collector.

 

Everyone should have what they want!

Edited by havasman, 17 June 2025 - 01:21 PM.