Excellent info on eyepieces but Pentax xw eyepieces are superb but expensive, I consider them more neutral than some eyepieces mentioned in the video using GSO10" DOB and Stellarvue SVX 140T apo and the Fujiyama 25mm is very sharp, excellent contrast with vg ER.
TeleVue are the best eyepieces I have ever used. My biggest scope is a 14in Dob. I agree about the 5mm DeLite, use it for planets all the time. Also have 8mm and 17.3mm Delos. They are well built, give sharp images, and good contrast. The most incredible eyepiece I use is the 31mm Nagler hand grenade. Best I have ever used for wide field deep sky. I have looked thru the 100 degree FOV Ethos series. They are like looking thru a spaceship window, and well worth it if you can afford it. I have not bought them, because their price approaches $1000. Televue are not cheap. I will go exclusive with them, but that will take years to achieve. They will last a lifetime, and with the money spent, you will want to be buried with them!
@Aeromarmot A Tele Vue eyepiece collection is definitely endgame stuff. Unfortunately I hadn't had the chance yet to extensively test the 31mm Nagler or an Ethos. Both of them are very high on my list however.
@@BogdanDamian I have a Nagler 5 and a set of Ethos eyepiece, with two lower magnification Panoptics I was debating between the Ethos and Delos line. A range between 41mm panoptic down to the 8mm Ethos
@Gary Cameron Getting a couple of Delos eyepieces to cover the medium power range is definitely a good idea. Above the 17.3mm you could close the range to the 41mm Panoptic with one or two Nagler eyepieces.
An Incredible set of eyepieces ( especially for the price back in the day , Today they come at a premium price if they can be found at all! ) are the Orion Stratus line! I personally like a AFOV of 68-82 degrees , but that is totally personal taste. It's a pity that they have discontinued the line. I own the complete set and love them! ( The 24mm is outstanding !! and the Holy grail of the Stratus line , impossible to find today ) The Baader line are a VERY close 2nd runner up to the Orion. Outside of those I find the TeleVue Nagler line to be outstanding in so many ways! and in my option to be one of the very best ,if not the best eyepieces you can purchase! For an "affordable" line , the SvBony is showing great promise and well worth looking at. BTW, I totally enjoy your videos! You do a wonderful review.
While Naglers are very highly performing, just like closely related Explore Scientific 82s non-long focal length ones struggle with eye relief making it hard to actually see that wide view unless having head/face shape favourable to short eye relief. Baader Morpheus is about the widest AFOV eyepiece line with good eye relief.
Orion stratus is a chinese copy of the vixen LVW eyepieces that orion also used to sell with the orion brand as the lanthanum super wide. Baader hyperions are the exact same eyepieces but with the addition of the modular spacer system and supposedly baaders phantom coatings. Made by the same supplier. They are very well corrected, except for the 24mm which does not have a negative lens group. When compared to the LVW though, they don't quite have the same quality, and they don't use lanthanum glass. And vixen never tried to make a 24, stopping at 22mm, where stratus and hyperion have a 21mm. The best stratus/hyperion are the 8mm and 13mm The vixen made ones are also a little bit smaller. But still 1.25/2" hybrid barrels because they have big lenses at the top like a nagler. I find the vixen ones to be almost as good as pentax XL and XW eyepieces,. and better than televue radians. The Chinese ones are decent but not quite the premium experience. Hyperions have always been overhyped on the forums, and that is what killed the stratus. Which was unfair, but forums shmoerums. I know because I was working at a dealer when the hyperions came out, and the internet sensation lowered the demand for the stratus, even though it was the same eyepiece, it didn't have the digiscoping threads and spacer system that allowed you to change the focal length.
Baader is not a close 2nd to the stratus, they are the same eyepieces just with the addition of the modular spacer system and phantom coatings which most would say is an improvement over the stratus. But that might just be marketing, but even if not the difference would be slight at best
@paganphil100 Hi Philip! The Ultra Flat Field series look to be identical to the APM UFF which are very good value. I've just reviewed the 24mm version if you want to check it out. Unfortunately I haven't had the chance yet to test the other lineups from StellaLyra so I can't comment on those.
@@BogdanDamian :Thanks for your reply Bogdan. I've just bought the StellaLyra 12.5mm to replace the low-quality 10mm eyepiece that came with my telescope. I haven't had a chance to test it properly yet (due to weather conditions) but it looks very well constructed and it only cost £59 ($75 / 68Euros). I'll probably be buying more from them in the future as their prices are very reasonable. 🙂
Thanks for replying so quickly, and let me add that your demeanor seems so pleasant and it’s nice to see someone who really enjoys what they do. I’m considering a 12” dob and I prefer binoviewing. I’ve checked the other videos on your channel but can’t seem to find anything about the baader Morpheus eyepieces and whether the maxbright II would be a good fit. I saw several Hyperion reviews, just not for Morpheus, so I’d appreciate knowing which of your videos I should look at. You also suggest the tele vue 2x Barlow often and I was wondering if you’ve ever used the Denkmeier super system with power switch. If so, any thoughts about the bino and how the power switch compares to the tele vue barlow? Thanks so much and keep up the wonderful work. 🙏
@paullawrencesmith9554 Thank you for your positive feedback! I really appreciate it. Regarding the Morpheus and binoviewer videos, I meant to say that both are already on the list for upcoming videos. I only need to get to actually make them 🙂 Sorry for not being more specific. Unfortunately I haven't had the chance to test the Denkmeier yet so I don't know how it's power switch compares to the Tele Vue 2x Barlow. I can only tell you that out of all Barlow lenses I tested so far (there has been a few), the ones from Tele Vue are the only ones where the negative impact of the extra lenses on the whole optical system isn't noticeable (to my eyes). For my 12" dob I'm seriously considering a liniar binoviewer. Having no extra light path length is a great feature for a reflector telescope.
@@BogdanDamian Thanks again and I’m really looking forward to your thoughts on them. I’ve noticed tele views paracor lenses and am thinking it’s a must for a 12” dob. I’ve noticed their powermates too, probably because Al talks about the “need” to improve on his own Barlows… and of course they’re more expensive. But I’m a person with a discerning mind and though I seem to gravitate towards the upper-end products, I do a lot of research to find the best value for me. That’s why I’m so intrigued with combining a Morpheus eyepiece with it’s huge top lens and decent eye relief, and a really good bino. The “linear” type you mentioned is new to me, so when you do the videos for the Morpheus lens/bino, a bit of detail about bino specs and why each is important would really help. Thanks once again and I hope you have dark-sky nights and great seeing. All the best! 🙏
You need to start down the 100 degree rabbit hole. I suggest the APM 20mm. I own the william optics xwa version with the same optics. Avoid the 20mm ES100 if you have anything faster than say f7, but the 14mm is excellent. I think it is silly for the 9mm and lower being 2" only, and borderline silly on the 14mm, but since televues 13mm was the largest 1.25 they made, it is more acceptable. Either way that led me to not persue the shorter focal length ones. In fact I wasnt even planning on buying any of them at the time, but scott got me started by plopping one down on my counter one day at work (astronomy sales at a big dealer), this was from the first batch when the 14 was the only one. I later bought a used 20mm for like $220 a few years later. I got robbed of everything in 2018, but now have the 20xwa i got for around $180 because that version isnt as popular because of the huge wide flat top it has, similar to the 28 uwan which i also have a version of, which is THE best big 2" 82 degree non nagler i have ever seen. Which is also now available as the meade PWA, in the same 4 focal lengths of 4, 7, 16 and 28, as the wo uwan/orion megaview. Give that one a go if you want to closely approach 31 nagler performance. If you have a slow scope, then the es82 30mm or a used 31mm axiom LX, or 30mm meade 5k UWA, as all 3 have the same optics, is close enough for government work. Or a 31mm luminos which i believe is the cheapest option, though known to have some edge of field brigtening. If there was one thing I have been obessive about it has been eyepieces. Let me know the fastest scope you have used the 14mm es82 in, and if it had sharp stars at the edges. My experience with the original meade versin was dissapointing at f5 and i brought it back the next day. And I know for a fact that the early es82s, and at leasy a few years into production had the same issues. I wonder if they finally fixed it or if it is still the same. I think it is the only one that is significantly that bad at the edges. The 4.7 i know is good, and the 24 is outstanding, the 8.8 is another good one, and I already talked about the 30, but it doesn't equal the 28 uwan or 31 nagler at the edges. I will also mention the 5.5mm meade 5k UWA, the ones after they had to switch manufacturers, is a downright equal in performace to a tyoe 6 nagler. I had the 7mm type 6 and when I was in dark skies with my Telvue 101 f5.4, it was like just changing powers, the quality and comfort of the view was amazing, and it was a $129 eyepiece that frequently went on sale for $99. I miss that one, let alone everything else I used to own If you didn't know, the es68 was originally the meade 5k SWA, and it is the only panoptic clone I know of, all other well corrected super, ultra, and hyper wide eyepieces use negative lens group at the bottom. The panoptic uses a highly inward curved field lens, and the es68 which has the same optics as the meades did, is the same type of design. I did a head to head 24 meade vs 24 pan in a small f6 refractor limited to 1.25', the main reason I bought the 24swa. The pan was sharp to the extreme edge where the meade 24, which absolutely destroying the 24mm hyperion I owned before it, did not quite match the panoptic, it was still the best 24mm superwide other than the 24mm panoptic. After being robbed, i did buy a used 24mm es68, because i got an old xt6 with 1.25" focuser, and at the time i also had a meade 114f4 synta made mini dob that i planned to use for wide field on a nexstar gt mount or on its own dob base on a stool, but a run of bad luck had me lose a few scopes and mounts including the GT and a 127 mak, among others, and i lent the 114 dob to someone who later cut me off and said no when I asked for it back. I only paid like 40 for it so I let it go. The 24 would have been perfect for that scope, as was the 18mm meade UWA which was 1.25" unlike the later 2" ES version, but it has coating damage that made jt useless. I also got a 24mm that was even worse. Someday I may find someone who can remove the coatings and make them useable again, though they would be a little dimmer and probably would lose some contrast. But my perfectionism, and owning the xt6 does give the 24 a rightful place, and sometimes when i use my vintage c8 i just leave the original vixen made japanese 1.25" prism star diagonal and 26mm silver top plossl in there, and the view is so crisp, but I do like a wider field at that focal length, so it would be perfect for that. But realistically I usually put a 2" on there and take advantage of my 30m widescan II 84deg, 56mm super plossl and 40mm astrola widefield (until I re aquire a nice 40-42mm classic design, non huge 68-72 deg eyepiece like the meade 4k 40SWA I had, which was meade's answer to the televue widefield before the panoptics came out) I would take a WO 40mm swan in a pinch because it uses the whole 2" field, I am a stickler for that, or as close as possible. But i prefer the old Japanese made ones when I can. Like UO MK70 or televue wide field or others I used to want but cant think of now. The 40mm panoptic and its clones are too damn big and heavy, but if the price was right on an old meade or ES..... But you have a 24pan so you are good. I had the full line of 5k SWA before i was robbed, except for the 15 and 20 because the eye relief was too short, and this applies to the ES68 as well of course. Televue even discontinued the 15mm panoptic because of that. I have to say I really liked the 28 as a nice 100x eyepiece in my c11, and the 34 and 40 were excellent as well. I never really used those 3 in a fast scope because the 34 and 40 exit pupils were getting too big, and I had a 31mm nagler which covered for all 3 of them really, having almost the field of the 40 and almost the power of the 28. I owned a 35 panoptic, but sold it shortly after getting the 31 nag. The c11 and later the SWA set came later, when meade was clearing them out. So i never tried the 35pan in the c11. The set of well corrected 65-100 degree eyepieces i use now are... 28mm orion Megaview 24mm es68 22mm vixen LVW (lanthanum 65deg 20mm er) 20mm WO XWA 17mm Orion Superwide Lanthanum (rebranded vixen LVW) 14mm meade 4K UWA (love the old huge Japanese type 1 nagler killers, 84 degrees) 8.8mm meade 4k UWA 7mm nagler type 1 smoothside 6.7mm meade 4k UWA 4.7mm meade 5k UWA
Compre el ocular Omegon Panorama 2 21mm 100grados y fue un desastre, tiene grandes aberraciones cromaticas cerca del borde del campo de vision, que me hacia imposible observar, me daba fatiga ocular tener tanto desenfoque, pero gracias a tus recomendaciones compre explore cientific de 11mm y 18mm y un Nagler t6 5mm, gracias por las recomendaciones y videos. Cielos Despejados!
@Stephen-gp8yi I don't think that the risk is higher than with any other type of product. I got my 24mm panoptic on ebay used for half the normal price and I don't have any trouble with it. I recommend talking to the seller for a bit if possible to get a better sense if they are honest. 85-110 pounds for a Hyperion sounds reasonable.
Hello. I have an Orion XT10 DOB but only have Plossel’s at this time. Better eyepieces will slowly trickle into my new collection. Question - I know 2” eyepieces cost more but if I’m going to start buying better eyepieces, should I only buy 2” or will more 1.25” eyepieces suffice?
@YoMoma777 Depending on the focal length, 1.25" eyepieces can be excellent as well. I suggest getting one eyepiece for high (3-9mm), medium (9-17mm) and low power (17-38mm) observations, where the one for low power has a 2" barrel. Depending on your budget and preference you could get a medium power 2" eyepiece as well, but this isn't necessary. For example a 24mm Panoptic from Tele Vue is almost perfect and comes with a 1.25" barrel size. You don't always need 2" eyepieces to get the best views possible.
Excellent video. Very informative. I am wondering if you have used the BST StarGuider 60 eyepieces before and how they compare to the Oregon UWA? Thank you
@cabbagecky Thanks! I haven't had the chance to test the BST eypeices, but from what I can tell they are the same as the NED eyepieces from TS-Optics (same manufacturer). Those aren't as good as the UWA from Omegon. While observing bright targets some internal reflections and a bit of chromatic aberrations can be noticed. Sharpness, contrast and eye relief are however good enough. If I had to choose, I would go for the UWA's from Omegon. Hope this helps.
@cabbagecky I'm glad that I could help you with your decision. Enjoy the 8mm Omegon! As for the nirvana 82°, I haven't tested them yet. Maybe I can get my hands on one and make a review.
Yeah. From doing some research, it seems they are a very good price for an 82 fov eyepiece. Half the cost of an equivalent ES and a third of that of a TV. Would be interesting to find out if the nirvana optical quality is compared to the others
Thanks. Multumesc. I apreciate your tutorials. Could you tell me if the telescope suffers a lot of damage if I want to observe from the seashore? I say this because of the salinity that can affect the lenses. Is there a trick to protect it and be able to go anyway?
@Mike reformasgordon Salut! As long as you aren't too close to the water so you would run the risk of water spray from the waves getting onto the telescope/lenses, then it should be fine. If you are thinking about going to the beach with it, then also think about the sand that can get in everywhere and could scratch things. Also, in that enjoinment I wouldn't use any type of cloth to wipe the telescope/lenses clean as grains of sand or salt on the cloth or telescope might leave scratches. But if you are careful, then observing from the seashore can be really nice. Hope this helps.
Would the Omegon swa 32mm work with my Orion xt10? I'm also worried because some reviews said that it can catch moisture in the inner lenses (the eyepiece)
@@BogdanDamian Thank you very much! I do have another question. Should I buy the 38mm version of this eyepiece or the 32mm? I really don't know which one to choose so your help would be greatly appreciated.
@negalibuti1394 This depends on what eyepieces you already have. The 38mm is more of an overview eyepiece because of the low magnification it produces. If you don't have anything in the 2x mm range, then I would recommend the 32mm.
@negalibuti1394 I meant any eyepiece with a focal length between 20mm and 29mm. Even with the 25mm Plössl I would still get the 32mm swa. With the 38mm that gap would be too big in my opinion.
Great sharing of Eyepiece knowledge. I am concerned about the exit pupils of lower focal length eyepieces. My scope’s f ratio is 6, if I use 8mm eyepiece, the exit pupil is 1.125mm. How to fix such a tiny pupil and dim light situation? Thanks
@Edward Lee Since the formula for exit pupil = eyepiece FL / telescope FL, the only way to increase the exit pupil of a given eyepiece is to change your telescope to one with a smaller f ratio. You could always get a longer FL eyepiece instead, but this will result in a lower magnification. The exit pupil being linked to magnification (exit pupil = aperture / magnification) is just something we must live with. Hope this helps.
They must be excellent eyepieces for the high price-point however it would be nice to know how the budget eyepieces stack up too. Are there any low price eyepieces that measure up at all? Not everybody can afford to buy the more expensive ones so why not help the less fortunate to make their purchases and get the best bang for their dollar?
Hey I was wanting to buy a barlow 2.5 or 3x lens to add to the ocular or a rangefinder. Do you think it is possible to use one of these as a doubler? Also would the proper end have threads? Thanks
@SuperWayne65 The eyepiece itself is excellent. Bright, sharp and with a very generous AFOV. But I'm not sure about it's use case. Your existing eyepieces and telescope play a very important role here. If you have all the other focal length ranges covered, then the 22mm Nagler is definitely a good choice. But if not then the 22mm focal length sits a bit oddly in the middle. On one side it's to long for any type of planetary observations and on the other side it might be to short for faint DSOs as well. Its good for bright targets such as M42, M31 or Pleiades, but it might not be bright enough for the fainter ones. In this case I personally would prefer an EP with a longer focal length.
@Iornaz1975 Thanks for pointing that out. I only took the German prices in Euro and then converted to US dollars. I didn't realize that the prices are so much lower over there. I'll keep this in mind for the video.
Hi bogdan ! Firstly i want to thank you for all the helpfull reviews and videos ! I want to ask you some questions. I am going to buy a 10'' skywatcher classic dobsonian, but i'm not sure of what eyepieces i should buy. I want to do Deep sky observations more than planetary so i think i should buy a better low power than the high power eyepiece, and i want to spend around 200-250 € (for the eyepieces), which ones do you think i should buy ? Also, i want to ask if I need a coma corrector, because the telescope has a f of 4.7. Lastly should I buy a UHC or an OIII filter for better observations from inside the city ? Thank you in advice.
@Astra Thank you, I'm glad you enjoy my videos. If DSOs are your priority right now then you could get something like the 32mm SWAN from Omegon. It has a wide enough AFOV (70°) so that a bit of coma aberration will be visible around the edges of the FOV (last 10% or so), but I wouldn't get a coma corrector just yet. First try out the eyepiece you decide to get and see for yourself if the coma bothers you that much. If you want to get a coma corrector, then get either the HR2 from Explore Scientific or the Paracorr Type 2 from Tele Vue. A better alternative to the 32mm SWAN would be the 30mm 82° from Explore Scientific. This eyepiece is however over your budget, but maybe you could get it used somewhere. Regarding filters, I would try out a UHC filter, but this too I would get only after observing a few times with the naked eyepiece+telescope. Also keep in mind that a filter can only do so much. If the light pollution in your area is very heavy, then a filter won't do much. I hope this helps.
I just purchased the Omegon SWA 15mm eyepiece and a Omegon variable grey filter. The filter connects to the eyepiece but I may need another adapter for my focused. I have a Skywatcher 200P. What do you think?
@Craig Lombard Why do you think that you might need an adapter for the focuser? Can't you reach focus with the filter attached to the eyepiece? Or what seems to be the problem?
Hello Bogdan ! First of all I do enjoy watching your reviews as they are extremely detailed and very nicely explained ,keep it up ! Secondly I do have a question , I personally use a Skywatcher 203/1200 Flextube with a f/ of 5.9 and I want to buy a high power eyepiece mainly for planetary viewing but I am not sure which one to choose between the 4.7 mm and the 6.7mm from ES 82 degrees . I currently own a 6mm Goldline which is nice but I'd like to step up and to find a sweet spot between high magnification and reasonably sharp images . Do you think that the 4.7 mm would be a good fit for my scope ( I'm inclined more towards that) ? Thanks in advance!
@Petru Stoian Hi! Thank you, I'm glad you enjoy my videos. With the 4.7mm EP you will achieve a magnification of 255x which is good for planetary viewing, but depending on your location, the seeing conditions might prevent you from using such a magnification very often. This is why I would rather go for the 6.7mm EP instead and get a decent Barlow lens later on as well. This way you'll be much more flexible in your choices and can better adapt to the seeing conditions. The 6.7 also has the advantages of a longer eye relief - 15.7mm vs 13.6mm. However, if money is not an issue, then go for the 4.7 and fill in the gap with another 6 - 9mm EP later on. This would be a good strategy as well. I hope this helps.
@@BogdanDamian Thank you , I do appreciate your input since I am a beginner and I'm learning each day new things ! I'm currently viewing ( most of the times at least) from a Bortle 6 sky , which is not amazing but I can see the planets fine ( when the seeing conditions do allow it) . So probably the 6.7mm would be the best bet for now . I do appreciate your help and I'll continue to follow with interest your future reviews / videos. Have an amazing day and clear skies!
Like always, Lovely Piece of Knowledge! Thanks for that! Question. Sure the top line is always The Most expensive as the rest and mostly the best one, but Compare to the Next lower one from the top Tier, is the Price Difference justified? For Exemple mostly the Explorer sience with the Tele vue, do you get a 200€ Better eye pieces? Or is the Difference in better experience much Smaller than the Price Difference? Best regards and happy Christinas!
@Marcel Liebreich Thank you! You correct. The rule of diminishing returns is very much true for eyepieces as well. The jump from a budget eyepiece like TS-Optics to a mid-range one like Explore Scientific is always going to be bigger and noticeable than going from mid-range to premium. You pay the premium price for those last 15% to get the "perfect" viewing experience. The question whether to go for that last bit of performance is very subjective. I for one could live very happily with the Explore Scientific :) Mary Christmas!
First of all just want to say that your videos really are a good help. I would like to know if you really tested the Omegon SWA 15mm, because if it is as good as the 32mm ( I also have a prodob), I would risk to buy it in stead of the Morpheus. I know that the morpheus is much better, but also much expensive.
@filipelopes2102 Thank you! Yes I did test it, but only for a limited time. The SWA 15mm is very good and not only for its price. It can hold its own against much pricer competitors.
@gangidante Hi! You could try out one of the zoom eyepieces from Omegon, but these won't be as good as the Baader. www.astroshop.eu/eyepieces/15_10/m,Omegon/a,Zubehoer.Allgemein.Serie=Zoom The Premium or der Magnum version seem decent. You can find similar eyepieces from TS-Optics as well, should the Omegon brand not be available in your area. Hope this helps.
@@BogdanDamian FYI, Omegon zoom eyepiece is available through Amazon here in North America. BTW, what are your thoughts on the Svbony SV191 super-wide-angle 1.25'' zoom eyepiece 7.2-21.6mm ? The price is about 100 USD for either of them
@gangidante Good to know that Omegon products are available through Amazon in NA. Ragarding the Svony SV191 7.2-21.6mm, I haven't had the chance to test it out yet, but I assume the quality of the optics should be similar to that of the Omegon Premium 1.25", 7.2 mm - 21.5mm zoom eyepiece. They are both manufactured by the same company and should offer comparable results. On paper the Svony seem to offer better specs. Like a bit wider AFOV and longer eye relief. This would make it the better choice. If you have the possibility I would recommend trying them out before you settle on either one of them.
@Mountain Fisher I haven't tested the Takahashi Orthoscopic eyepieces yet, but from what I've heard they should be excellent for planetary observations. The field of view is relatively narrow, but it's enough for planetary observations. The contrast however should be very high and the colour correction very good.
@@BogdanDamian I read a detailed review and the reviewer said the 14mm Ortho was 50 degrees not the advertised 45. I think I'll get that for my 150 Newtonian. Should easily Barlow to 107x in that f5. I'm on a budget and those Takahashi's fit my budget.
@stanleybest8833 Depending on the telescope type, I would use a diagonal that produces an upright image. Either 45° or 90°. There are also image-erecting eyepieces, but the image quality they produce isn't that good. Also they will act like 1.2x to 1.7x Barlows depending on the model.
@stanleybest8833 There are both 45° and 90° diagonals that produce upright images. Celestron currently offers both versions: www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/201978-REG/Celestron_94108_90_Degree_Erect_Diagonal_1_25.html www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/201971-REG/Celestron_94112_A_45_Degree_Erect_Diagonal_1_25.html
@@BogdanDamian I found an article that a mirror will produce an upright backwards image but a prism will give an upright readable image. Vocabulary: diagonal prism adapter.
@stanleybest8833 That is correct. A prism will produce a different oriented image compared to a mirror diagonal. There are however exceptions like those from Celestron.
@Даня Бурлов Hi! If you have the possibility to get a decent one like those from Zeiss or Takahashi for a good price and don't mind the narrow 40°-ish AFOV, then go for it. But, keep in mind that there is a lot of unfounded hype surrounding Orthos. Not all are great and there are "normal" premium EPs out there that offer the same levels of contrast, brightenss and sharpness.
Hello. Thanks for your help is very important for beginners. In USA delos 6mm is more expensive only 60 euro for Morpheus. In Hellas price for Morpheus 6.5mm is 275 euro . For Delos today told me price 530 . Is worth it . Thanks !!!
Don’t buy the Celestron star sense explorer Lt. at 275 dollars it has a very cheaply made stand . Only one slow motion control that broke after 6 uses. The Galileo 1000 mm by 40 mm telescope from Walmart is 100 dollars cheaper has a great stand that feels heavy duty, two slow motion controls. And honestly is better for viewing the planets.
At the moment I have seven eyepieces and they are all televue eyepieces, and my biggest one is the 41mm panoptic which is just a superb eyepiece, pinpoint star images across the entire 3.3 degree field, I find all my televue eyepieces give pinpoint star images across the whole field and excellent I relief, I find all my eyepieces easy to look through, I use a electric focuser which makes telescoping a dream, I do not have a tracking mount just a manual mount, so even watching the planets go from edge to edge on my high power delos televue eyepieces 4.5mm and 3.5mm using my teskar 120mm apochromatic triplet refracting telescope F7 is superb, the planet travels from edge to edge of the field of view and it remains sharp from edge to edge, but Televue are expensive eyepieces but the images you get are excellent, thank you for your video it was most informative.
In a few cases, where one of the Chinese clones has an exceptional performing focal length or 2 in a line, such as the original ethos killer 14mm ES100, and the 20mm APM and other branded 20mm XWA, as well as some sleepers like the meade 8.8 and 5.5mm ultrawide, and some focal lengths of ES82 (formerly the first iteration of the meade series 5000 ultrawide and celestron axiom LX), with the exception of the 14mm which was extremely disappointing at f5, televue is usually noticeably better unless you are only using slow f7 or slower scopes. Easy to spot examples are 20mm ES100 clearly losing to the 21 ethos and 20mm XWA, the aforementioned 14mm es82 unless they finally changed that design, which I don't think they did. I see a huge difference between the 30mm 82 vs the 31 nagler, and after my stuff was stolen I sought out a 28mm UWAN type (orion megaview, and now also meade PWA), since that one is the original 31 nagler killer (price wise, I wouldn't say it is better but it is close enough). The 24mm ES82 (and celestron 23mm axiom lx and 24mm meade UWA, all three are the same optics), is a really good one as well, better than the 30. And I would say that 4.7 and 8.8 are really nice, but the 5.5mm meade that was made by a different vendor after JOC made ES the exclusive brand for their eyepieces in USA (hence celestron changing axiom LX line to luminos, which are not quite as good), performed as well as my 7mm nagler type 6, as far as comfort, and edge correction and overall image quality. As for the only ripoff of the panoptic being the meade series5000 SWA which is now only available as ES68, I have compared the 24mm, and while I really liked my meade I had before I was robbed, the televue 24 pan was noticeably better corrected at the edge. I did buy a used 24mm es68 because I couldn't afford a panoptic and only had a few scopes that were limited to 1.25 and I wanted the full field with good enough edge correction. I didn't bother with the 15 and 20mm SWAs, since like the pans the er is very tight in those focal lengths, though I probably should have picked up the 20 which is still usable. The 15 isn't, and I think televue discontinued the 15pan a while back. I stopped at the 24 on the smaller end, but got the whole 2" set, 28, 34 and 40 when they were being cleared out, and I had access to dealer pricing at the time. The 28 was exceptionally good as was the 34, and the 40 was close enough to my pentax 40XW that I won in a pentax ep sales contest, in the center, and actually better corrected at the edge vs the pentax, which allowed me to be willing to part with the pentax when I needed money. Though I never did a side by side comparison to the 2" panoptics, and I mostly used my 2' SWAs in my C11 which at f10 won't show the same edge abberations in eyepieces that faster scopes would. Based on the 24 there is a good chance that most or all of the 2" panoptics would similarly win. The only panoptic I ever owned was the 35mm, which I sold shortly after coming up on a 31mm nagler and that was before meade cleared out the SWAs at a price i couldn't refuse. I appreciate panoptics, but since I had naglers and that great 23mm axiom LX, and a few pentax eps, and 14mm and 20mm es100 at the time, I didn't really see much need for panoptics. The one televue line that I was never fond of was the radians, and the type 4 nagler, which wasn't as well corrected as the type 1, 2, 5 and 6 (whatever happened to type 3? Became the radian perhaps? That was one theory). And radians were replaced by delites, and I am sure they are awesome. So there are a few exceptions with the sleeper performers from the Chinese clones, and some televues that weren't 100% awesome, I would say that in general, televue is totally worth it. Especially since ES went exclusive and raised their prices, as much as double in a few cases, lessening the price/performance gap significantly. Though televue prices have also gone up. But then again this whole industry has suddenly went crazy with the prices, especially dobsonians. Just 4 years ago 8" dobs were under $400 and 10's were $600
And I thought a 50 $ eyepiece is expensive :))). Those eyepieces are more than expensive than my Bresser 102/1000 mm achromat plus EQ3 mount :)).
You should get into astrophotography......you will spend all your savings and will still be looking to buy new equipment 😂 (true story 😢)
Very helpful - thank you!
Thank for this, it really helped in my considering what lens to purchase.
The 5mm DeLite is an awesome eyepiece and despite its price tag well worth the money.
Pentax XW 5, 10, 16.5, 20, 30 and TeleVue Panoptic 24mm. This is my set up.
Panoptic is the way to go thank you for steering me right 👍
Excellent info on eyepieces but Pentax xw eyepieces are superb but expensive, I consider them more neutral than some eyepieces mentioned in the video using GSO10" DOB and Stellarvue SVX 140T apo and the Fujiyama 25mm is very sharp, excellent contrast with vg ER.
@williammitchell3586 I'm about to try out my first Pentax eyepiece. I'm very excited about it. There might be a video coming in the near future 😉
Thank you Bodgan for this excellent and informative video!! Any update for 2023?
Very informative video. Thanks for sharing your knowledge with us. Ed.
TeleVue are the best eyepieces I have ever used. My biggest scope is a 14in Dob. I agree about the 5mm DeLite, use it for planets all the time. Also have 8mm and 17.3mm Delos. They are well built, give sharp images, and good contrast. The most incredible eyepiece I use is the 31mm Nagler hand grenade. Best I have ever used for wide field deep sky.
I have looked thru the 100 degree FOV Ethos series. They are like looking thru a spaceship window, and well worth it if you can afford it. I have not bought them, because their price approaches $1000.
Televue are not cheap. I will go exclusive with them, but that will take years to achieve. They will last a lifetime, and with the money spent, you will want to be buried with them!
@Aeromarmot A Tele Vue eyepiece collection is definitely endgame stuff. Unfortunately I hadn't had the chance yet to extensively test the 31mm Nagler or an Ethos. Both of them are very high on my list however.
@@BogdanDamian Yep. I stared my collection with the 31mm Nagler. It is an beautiful eyepiece and an engineering wonder.
@@BogdanDamian I have a Nagler 5 and a set of Ethos eyepiece, with two lower magnification Panoptics
I was debating between the Ethos and Delos line. A range between 41mm panoptic down to the 8mm Ethos
@Gary Cameron Getting a couple of Delos eyepieces to cover the medium power range is definitely a good idea. Above the 17.3mm you could close the range to the 41mm Panoptic with one or two Nagler eyepieces.
I have tried many of the Televue eyepieces and the tiny gains are just not worth the money.
Excellent rundown on your various eyepieces. Thanks for this review.
An Incredible set of eyepieces ( especially for the price back in the day , Today they come at a premium price if they can be found at all! ) are the Orion Stratus line! I personally like a AFOV of 68-82 degrees , but that is totally personal taste. It's a pity that they have discontinued the line. I own the complete set and love them! ( The 24mm is outstanding !! and the Holy grail of the Stratus line , impossible to find today ) The Baader line are a VERY close 2nd runner up to the Orion. Outside of those I find the TeleVue Nagler line to be outstanding in so many ways! and in my option to be one of the very best ,if not the best eyepieces you can purchase! For an "affordable" line , the SvBony is showing great promise and well worth looking at. BTW, I totally enjoy your videos! You do a wonderful review.
While Naglers are very highly performing, just like closely related Explore Scientific 82s non-long focal length ones struggle with eye relief making it hard to actually see that wide view unless having head/face shape favourable to short eye relief.
Baader Morpheus is about the widest AFOV eyepiece line with good eye relief.
Orion stratus is a chinese copy of the vixen LVW eyepieces that orion also used to sell with the orion brand as the lanthanum super wide.
Baader hyperions are the exact same eyepieces but with the addition of the modular spacer system and supposedly baaders phantom coatings. Made by the same supplier.
They are very well corrected, except for the 24mm which does not have a negative lens group. When compared to the LVW though, they don't quite have the same quality, and they don't use lanthanum glass. And vixen never tried to make a 24, stopping at 22mm, where stratus and hyperion have a 21mm.
The best stratus/hyperion are the 8mm and 13mm
The vixen made ones are also a little bit smaller. But still 1.25/2" hybrid barrels because they have big lenses at the top like a nagler.
I find the vixen ones to be almost as good as pentax XL and XW eyepieces,. and better than televue radians. The Chinese ones are decent but not quite the premium experience. Hyperions have always been overhyped on the forums, and that is what killed the stratus. Which was unfair, but forums shmoerums.
I know because I was working at a dealer when the hyperions came out, and the internet sensation lowered the demand for the stratus, even though it was the same eyepiece, it didn't have the digiscoping threads and spacer system that allowed you to change the focal length.
Baader is not a close 2nd to the stratus, they are the same eyepieces just with the addition of the modular spacer system and phantom coatings which most would say is an improvement over the stratus. But that might just be marketing, but even if not the difference would be slight at best
Hi Bogdan. Are you familiar with the StellaLyra range of eyepieces? What is your opinion of them?
@paganphil100 Hi Philip! The Ultra Flat Field series look to be identical to the APM UFF which are very good value. I've just reviewed the 24mm version if you want to check it out.
Unfortunately I haven't had the chance yet to test the other lineups from StellaLyra so I can't comment on those.
@@BogdanDamian :Thanks for your reply Bogdan. I've just bought the StellaLyra 12.5mm to replace the low-quality 10mm eyepiece that came with my telescope. I haven't had a chance to test it properly yet (due to weather conditions) but it looks very well constructed and it only cost £59 ($75 / 68Euros). I'll probably be buying more from them in the future as their prices are very reasonable. 🙂
I really appreciate your thoughts on astronomy equipment. I was hoping you’d review the Morpheus eyepiece line including binoviewer use. All the best!
@paullawrencesmith9554 The Morpheus series and videos on binoviewers are already on the list 🙂
Thanks for replying so quickly, and let me add that your demeanor seems so pleasant and it’s nice to see someone who really enjoys what they do. I’m considering a 12” dob and I prefer binoviewing. I’ve checked the other videos on your channel but can’t seem to find anything about the baader Morpheus eyepieces and whether the maxbright II would be a good fit. I saw several Hyperion reviews, just not for Morpheus, so I’d appreciate knowing which of your videos I should look at. You also suggest the tele vue 2x Barlow often and I was wondering if you’ve ever used the Denkmeier super system with power switch. If so, any thoughts about the bino and how the power switch compares to the tele vue barlow? Thanks so much and keep up the wonderful work. 🙏
@paullawrencesmith9554 Thank you for your positive feedback! I really appreciate it. Regarding the Morpheus and binoviewer videos, I meant to say that both are already on the list for upcoming videos. I only need to get to actually make them 🙂 Sorry for not being more specific.
Unfortunately I haven't had the chance to test the Denkmeier yet so I don't know how it's power switch compares to the Tele Vue 2x Barlow. I can only tell you that out of all Barlow lenses I tested so far (there has been a few), the ones from Tele Vue are the only ones where the negative impact of the extra lenses on the whole optical system isn't noticeable (to my eyes).
For my 12" dob I'm seriously considering a liniar binoviewer. Having no extra light path length is a great feature for a reflector telescope.
@@BogdanDamian Thanks again and I’m really looking forward to your thoughts on them. I’ve noticed tele views paracor lenses and am thinking it’s a must for a 12” dob. I’ve noticed their powermates too, probably because Al talks about the “need” to improve on his own Barlows… and of course they’re more expensive. But I’m a person with a discerning mind and though I seem to gravitate towards the upper-end products, I do a lot of research to find the best value for me. That’s why I’m so intrigued with combining a Morpheus eyepiece with it’s huge top lens and decent eye relief, and a really good bino. The “linear” type you mentioned is new to me, so when you do the videos for the Morpheus lens/bino, a bit of detail about bino specs and why each is important would really help. Thanks once again and I hope you have dark-sky nights and great seeing. All the best! 🙏
You need to start down the 100 degree rabbit hole. I suggest the APM 20mm. I own the william optics xwa version with the same optics. Avoid the 20mm ES100 if you have anything faster than say f7, but the 14mm is excellent. I think it is silly for the 9mm and lower being 2" only, and borderline silly on the 14mm, but since televues 13mm was the largest 1.25 they made, it is more acceptable.
Either way that led me to not persue the shorter focal length ones. In fact I wasnt even planning on buying any of them at the time, but scott got me started by plopping one down on my counter one day at work (astronomy sales at a big dealer), this was from the first batch when the 14 was the only one. I later bought a used 20mm for like $220 a few years later. I got robbed of everything in 2018, but now have the 20xwa i got for around $180 because that version isnt as popular because of the huge wide flat top it has, similar to the 28 uwan which i also have a version of, which is THE best big 2" 82 degree non nagler i have ever seen. Which is also now available as the meade PWA, in the same 4 focal lengths of 4, 7, 16 and 28, as the wo uwan/orion megaview. Give that one a go if you want to closely approach 31 nagler performance. If you have a slow scope, then the es82 30mm or a used 31mm axiom LX, or 30mm meade 5k UWA, as all 3 have the same optics, is close enough for government work. Or a 31mm luminos which i believe is the cheapest option, though known to have some edge of field brigtening.
If there was one thing I have been obessive about it has been eyepieces.
Let me know the fastest scope you have used the 14mm es82 in, and if it had sharp stars at the edges. My experience with the original meade versin was dissapointing at f5 and i brought it back the next day. And I know for a fact that the early es82s, and at leasy a few years into production had the same issues. I wonder if they finally fixed it or if it is still the same. I think it is the only one that is significantly that bad at the edges. The 4.7 i know is good, and the 24 is outstanding, the 8.8 is another good one, and I already talked about the 30, but it doesn't equal the 28 uwan or 31 nagler at the edges.
I will also mention the 5.5mm meade 5k UWA, the ones after they had to switch manufacturers, is a downright equal in performace to a tyoe 6 nagler. I had the 7mm type 6 and when I was in dark skies with my Telvue 101 f5.4, it was like just changing powers, the quality and comfort of the view was amazing, and it was a $129 eyepiece that frequently went on sale for $99. I miss that one, let alone everything else I used to own
If you didn't know, the es68 was originally the meade 5k SWA, and it is the only panoptic clone I know of, all other well corrected super, ultra, and hyper wide eyepieces use negative lens group at the bottom. The panoptic uses a highly inward curved field lens, and the es68 which has the same optics as the meades did, is the same type of design. I did a head to head 24 meade vs 24 pan in a small f6 refractor limited to 1.25', the main reason I bought the 24swa.
The pan was sharp to the extreme edge where the meade 24, which absolutely destroying the 24mm hyperion I owned before it, did not quite match the panoptic, it was still the best 24mm superwide other than the 24mm panoptic.
After being robbed, i did buy a used 24mm es68, because i got an old xt6 with 1.25" focuser, and at the time i also had a meade 114f4 synta made mini dob that i planned to use for wide field on a nexstar gt mount or on its own dob base on a stool, but a run of bad luck had me lose a few scopes and mounts including the GT and a 127 mak, among others, and i lent the 114 dob to someone who later cut me off and said no when I asked for it back. I only paid like 40 for it so I let it go.
The 24 would have been perfect for that scope, as was the 18mm meade UWA which was 1.25" unlike the later 2" ES version, but it has coating damage that made jt useless. I also got a 24mm that was even worse. Someday I may find someone who can remove the coatings and make them useable again, though they would be a little dimmer and probably would lose some contrast.
But my perfectionism, and owning the xt6 does give the 24 a rightful place, and sometimes when i use my vintage c8 i just leave the original vixen made japanese 1.25" prism star diagonal and 26mm silver top plossl in there, and the view is so crisp, but I do like a wider field at that focal length, so it would be perfect for that.
But realistically I usually put a 2" on there and take advantage of my 30m widescan II 84deg, 56mm super plossl and 40mm astrola widefield (until I re aquire a nice 40-42mm classic design, non huge 68-72 deg eyepiece like the meade 4k 40SWA I had, which was meade's answer to the televue widefield before the panoptics came out)
I would take a WO 40mm swan in a pinch because it uses the whole 2" field, I am a stickler for that, or as close as possible.
But i prefer the old Japanese made ones when I can. Like UO MK70 or televue wide field or others I used to want but cant think of now. The 40mm panoptic and its clones are too damn big and heavy, but if the price was right on an old meade or ES.....
But you have a 24pan so you are good. I had the full line of 5k SWA before i was robbed, except for the 15 and 20 because the eye relief was too short, and this applies to the ES68 as well of course.
Televue even discontinued the 15mm panoptic because of that. I have to say I really liked the 28 as a nice 100x eyepiece in my c11, and the 34 and 40 were excellent as well. I never really used those 3 in a fast scope because the 34 and 40 exit pupils were getting too big, and I had a 31mm nagler which covered for all 3 of them really, having almost the field of the 40 and almost the power of the 28.
I owned a 35 panoptic, but sold it shortly after getting the 31 nag. The c11 and later the SWA set came later, when meade was clearing them out. So i never tried the 35pan in the c11.
The set of well corrected 65-100 degree eyepieces i use now are...
28mm orion Megaview
24mm es68
22mm vixen LVW (lanthanum 65deg 20mm er)
20mm WO XWA
17mm Orion Superwide Lanthanum (rebranded vixen LVW)
14mm meade 4K UWA (love the old huge Japanese type 1 nagler killers, 84 degrees)
8.8mm meade 4k UWA
7mm nagler type 1 smoothside
6.7mm meade 4k UWA
4.7mm meade 5k UWA
Compre el ocular Omegon Panorama 2 21mm 100grados y fue un desastre, tiene grandes aberraciones cromaticas cerca del borde del campo de vision, que me hacia imposible observar, me daba fatiga ocular tener tanto desenfoque, pero gracias a tus recomendaciones compre explore cientific de 11mm y 18mm y un Nagler t6 5mm, gracias por las recomendaciones y videos. Cielos Despejados!
Do you think it’s risky buying used eyepieces?have seen baader Hyperion eyepieces selling for 85-110 pounds used and they are about 165 pounds new!
@Stephen-gp8yi I don't think that the risk is higher than with any other type of product. I got my 24mm panoptic on ebay used for half the normal price and I don't have any trouble with it. I recommend talking to the seller for a bit if possible to get a better sense if they are honest. 85-110 pounds for a Hyperion sounds reasonable.
Hello. I have an Orion XT10 DOB but only have Plossel’s at this time.
Better eyepieces will slowly trickle into my new collection.
Question - I know 2” eyepieces cost more but if I’m going to start buying better eyepieces, should I only buy 2” or will more 1.25” eyepieces suffice?
@YoMoma777 Depending on the focal length, 1.25" eyepieces can be excellent as well. I suggest getting one eyepiece for high (3-9mm), medium (9-17mm) and low power (17-38mm) observations, where the one for low power has a 2" barrel. Depending on your budget and preference you could get a medium power 2" eyepiece as well, but this isn't necessary. For example a 24mm Panoptic from Tele Vue is almost perfect and comes with a 1.25" barrel size. You don't always need 2" eyepieces to get the best views possible.
Nice review! Thanks.
Fantasic content bogdan I wish I could afford to buy televue eyepieces but you can’t have everything!✌️
Start with just 1
Excellent video. Very informative.
I am wondering if you have used the BST StarGuider 60 eyepieces before and how they compare to the Oregon UWA? Thank you
@cabbagecky Thanks! I haven't had the chance to test the BST eypeices, but from what I can tell they are the same as the NED eyepieces from TS-Optics (same manufacturer). Those aren't as good as the UWA from Omegon. While observing bright targets some internal reflections and a bit of chromatic aberrations can be noticed. Sharpness, contrast and eye relief are however good enough. If I had to choose, I would go for the UWA's from Omegon. Hope this helps.
Excellent. Thank you for the advice. Bought the 8mm omegon.
Have you had any experience with the nirvana 82 degree eyepieces by any chance?
@cabbagecky I'm glad that I could help you with your decision. Enjoy the 8mm Omegon! As for the nirvana 82°, I haven't tested them yet. Maybe I can get my hands on one and make a review.
Yeah. From doing some research, it seems they are a very good price for an 82 fov eyepiece. Half the cost of an equivalent ES and a third of that of a TV. Would be interesting to find out if the nirvana optical quality is compared to the others
Thanks. Multumesc. I apreciate your tutorials.
Could you tell me if the telescope suffers a lot of damage if I want to observe from the seashore? I say this because of the salinity that can affect the lenses. Is there a trick to protect it and be able to go anyway?
@Mike reformasgordon Salut! As long as you aren't too close to the water so you would run the risk of water spray from the waves getting onto the telescope/lenses, then it should be fine. If you are thinking about going to the beach with it, then also think about the sand that can get in everywhere and could scratch things. Also, in that enjoinment I wouldn't use any type of cloth to wipe the telescope/lenses clean as grains of sand or salt on the cloth or telescope might leave scratches. But if you are careful, then observing from the seashore can be really nice. Hope this helps.
@@BogdanDamian thank you and clear skies.
Would the Omegon swa 32mm work with my Orion xt10? I'm also worried because some reviews said that it can catch moisture in the inner lenses (the eyepiece)
@negalibuti1394 Never had any such problems with it. The eyepiece should work very well with your telescope.
@@BogdanDamian Thank you very much! I do have another question. Should I buy the 38mm version of this eyepiece or the 32mm? I really don't know which one to choose so your help would be greatly appreciated.
@negalibuti1394 This depends on what eyepieces you already have. The 38mm is more of an overview eyepiece because of the low magnification it produces. If you don't have anything in the 2x mm range, then I would recommend the 32mm.
@@BogdanDamian Sorry to ask, but what is the 2x mm range? I just have the orion sirius plossl 25mm eyepiece.
@negalibuti1394 I meant any eyepiece with a focal length between 20mm and 29mm. Even with the 25mm Plössl I would still get the 32mm swa. With the 38mm that gap would be too big in my opinion.
Great sharing of Eyepiece knowledge. I am concerned about the exit pupils of lower focal length eyepieces. My scope’s f ratio is 6, if I use 8mm eyepiece, the exit pupil is 1.125mm. How to fix such a tiny pupil and dim light situation? Thanks
Exit Pupil is 1.33mm
@Edward Lee Since the formula for exit pupil = eyepiece FL / telescope FL, the only way to increase the exit pupil of a given eyepiece is to change your telescope to one with a smaller f ratio. You could always get a longer FL eyepiece instead, but this will result in a lower magnification. The exit pupil being linked to magnification (exit pupil = aperture / magnification) is just something we must live with. Hope this helps.
They must be excellent eyepieces for the high price-point however it would be nice to know how the budget eyepieces stack up too. Are there any low price eyepieces that measure up at all? Not everybody can afford to buy the more expensive ones so why not help the less fortunate to make their purchases and get the best bang for their dollar?
Yes, Celestron Luminos eyepieces are ok and not expensive (especially secondhand, used).
Hey I was wanting to buy a barlow 2.5 or 3x lens to add to the ocular or a rangefinder. Do you think it is possible to use one of these as a doubler?
Also would the proper end have threads?
Thanks
What do you think of the TeleVue 22mm Nagler eyepiece?
@SuperWayne65 The eyepiece itself is excellent. Bright, sharp and with a very generous AFOV. But I'm not sure about it's use case. Your existing eyepieces and telescope play a very important role here. If you have all the other focal length ranges covered, then the 22mm Nagler is definitely a good choice. But if not then the 22mm focal length sits a bit oddly in the middle. On one side it's to long for any type of planetary observations and on the other side it might be to short for faint DSOs as well. Its good for bright targets such as M42, M31 or Pleiades, but it might not be bright enough for the fainter ones. In this case I personally would prefer an EP with a longer focal length.
Bogdan you might want to check your US prices. A delight runs $269 US dollars and the 6mm gold band eyepiece runs $35 US dollars.
@Iornaz1975 Thanks for pointing that out. I only took the German prices in Euro and then converted to US dollars. I didn't realize that the prices are so much lower over there. I'll keep this in mind for the video.
@@BogdanDamian I kinda figured that is what you did.Thanks for the vid and happy holidays.
I'm seeing $64 for the gold band eyepiece, has it gone up by that much?
You don't like the Ethos line from Televue?
@Gary Cameron Sure I do, they're endgame eyepieces. If money is not an issue, then they are definitely an excellent choice.
Hi bogdan ! Firstly i want to thank you for all the helpfull reviews and videos ! I want to ask you some questions. I am going to buy a 10'' skywatcher classic dobsonian, but i'm not sure of what eyepieces i should buy. I want to do Deep sky observations more than planetary so i think i should buy a better low power than the high power eyepiece, and i want to spend around 200-250 € (for the eyepieces), which ones do you think i should buy ? Also, i want to ask if I need a coma corrector, because the telescope has a f of 4.7. Lastly should I buy a UHC or an OIII filter for better observations from inside the city ? Thank you in advice.
@Astra Thank you, I'm glad you enjoy my videos. If DSOs are your priority right now then you could get something like the 32mm SWAN from Omegon. It has a wide enough AFOV (70°) so that a bit of coma aberration will be visible around the edges of the FOV (last 10% or so), but I wouldn't get a coma corrector just yet. First try out the eyepiece you decide to get and see for yourself if the coma bothers you that much. If you want to get a coma corrector, then get either the HR2 from Explore Scientific or the Paracorr Type 2 from Tele Vue.
A better alternative to the 32mm SWAN would be the 30mm 82° from Explore Scientific. This eyepiece is however over your budget, but maybe you could get it used somewhere.
Regarding filters, I would try out a UHC filter, but this too I would get only after observing a few times with the naked eyepiece+telescope. Also keep in mind that a filter can only do so much. If the light pollution in your area is very heavy, then a filter won't do much. I hope this helps.
@@BogdanDamian Thank you for your advice ! Then I will go with the SWAN and i will see about the filter and the coma corrector in the future.
I just purchased the Omegon SWA 15mm eyepiece and a Omegon variable grey filter. The filter connects to the eyepiece but I may need another adapter for my focused. I have a Skywatcher 200P. What do you think?
@Craig Lombard Why do you think that you might need an adapter for the focuser? Can't you reach focus with the filter attached to the eyepiece? Or what seems to be the problem?
Hello Bogdan ! First of all I do enjoy watching your reviews as they are extremely detailed and very nicely explained ,keep it up ! Secondly I do have a question , I personally use a Skywatcher 203/1200 Flextube with a f/ of 5.9 and I want to buy a high power eyepiece mainly for planetary viewing but I am not sure which one to choose between the 4.7 mm and the 6.7mm from ES 82 degrees . I currently own a 6mm Goldline which is nice but I'd like to step up and to find a sweet spot between high magnification and reasonably sharp images . Do you think that the 4.7 mm would be a good fit for my scope ( I'm inclined more towards that) ? Thanks in advance!
@Petru Stoian Hi! Thank you, I'm glad you enjoy my videos. With the 4.7mm EP you will achieve a magnification of 255x which is good for planetary viewing, but depending on your location, the seeing conditions might prevent you from using such a magnification very often. This is why I would rather go for the 6.7mm EP instead and get a decent Barlow lens later on as well. This way you'll be much more flexible in your choices and can better adapt to the seeing conditions. The 6.7 also has the advantages of a longer eye relief - 15.7mm vs 13.6mm.
However, if money is not an issue, then go for the 4.7 and fill in the gap with another 6 - 9mm EP later on. This would be a good strategy as well. I hope this helps.
@@BogdanDamian Thank you , I do appreciate your input since I am a beginner and I'm learning each day new things ! I'm currently viewing ( most of the times at least) from a Bortle 6 sky , which is not amazing but I can see the planets fine ( when the seeing conditions do allow it) . So probably the 6.7mm would be the best bet for now . I do appreciate your help and I'll continue to follow with interest your future reviews / videos. Have an amazing day and clear skies!
Like always, Lovely Piece of Knowledge! Thanks for that! Question. Sure the top line is always The Most expensive as the rest and mostly the best one, but Compare to the Next lower one from the top Tier, is the Price Difference justified? For Exemple mostly the Explorer sience with the Tele vue, do you get a 200€ Better eye pieces? Or is the Difference in better experience much Smaller than the Price Difference?
Best regards and happy Christinas!
@Marcel Liebreich Thank you! You correct. The rule of diminishing returns is very much true for eyepieces as well. The jump from a budget eyepiece like TS-Optics to a mid-range one like Explore Scientific is always going to be bigger and noticeable than going from mid-range to premium. You pay the premium price for those last 15% to get the "perfect" viewing experience. The question whether to go for that last bit of performance is very subjective. I for one could live very happily with the Explore Scientific :) Mary Christmas!
First of all just want to say that your videos really are a good help.
I would like to know if you really tested the Omegon SWA 15mm, because if it is as good as the 32mm ( I also have a prodob), I would risk to buy it in stead of the Morpheus. I know that the morpheus is much better, but also much expensive.
@filipelopes2102 Thank you! Yes I did test it, but only for a limited time. The SWA 15mm is very good and not only for its price. It can hold its own against much pricer competitors.
@@BogdanDamian tks for your reply. Based on your opinion I will give it a try because right now that EP is on sale for about 85€.
Tks for your work.
Hi, what would be a less expensive yet close in quality to that zoom piece Hyperion Mark IV from Baader reviewed by you in the video?
@gangidante Hi! You could try out one of the zoom eyepieces from Omegon, but these won't be as good as the Baader. www.astroshop.eu/eyepieces/15_10/m,Omegon/a,Zubehoer.Allgemein.Serie=Zoom
The Premium or der Magnum version seem decent.
You can find similar eyepieces from TS-Optics as well, should the Omegon brand not be available in your area. Hope this helps.
@@BogdanDamian FYI, Omegon zoom eyepiece is available through Amazon here in North America. BTW, what are your thoughts on the Svbony SV191 super-wide-angle 1.25'' zoom eyepiece 7.2-21.6mm ? The price is about 100 USD for either of them
@gangidante Good to know that Omegon products are available through Amazon in NA. Ragarding the Svony SV191 7.2-21.6mm, I haven't had the chance to test it out yet, but I assume the quality of the optics should be similar to that of the Omegon Premium 1.25", 7.2 mm - 21.5mm zoom eyepiece. They are both manufactured by the same company and should offer comparable results. On paper the Svony seem to offer better specs. Like a bit wider AFOV and longer eye relief. This would make it the better choice. If you have the possibility I would recommend trying them out before you settle on either one of them.
@@BogdanDamian this has been noted. Thanks for the quick response. 🙂
@@gangidanteit tests very well
Great value just very narrow apparent field but very good optics🎉.
main eyepiece - ES20mm 100 or Ethos 17mm 100 for Startravel150 ?
@Filip Polewaczyk If money is not an issue, then go for the Ethos.
Brightness =magnification
Low equals high brightness
High piwer dim.
ALWAYS
I'm looking at some Takahashi Orthoscopic EPs for planetary viewing.
@Mountain Fisher I haven't tested the Takahashi Orthoscopic eyepieces yet, but from what I've heard they should be excellent for planetary observations. The field of view is relatively narrow, but it's enough for planetary observations. The contrast however should be very high and the colour correction very good.
@@BogdanDamian I read a detailed review and the reviewer said the 14mm Ortho was 50 degrees not the advertised 45. I think I'll get that for my 150 Newtonian. Should easily Barlow to 107x in that f5.
I'm on a budget and those Takahashi's fit my budget.
What would you use for an upright viewing? ( 1 n 1/4 ) ?
@stanleybest8833 Depending on the telescope type, I would use a diagonal that produces an upright image. Either 45° or 90°. There are also image-erecting eyepieces, but the image quality they produce isn't that good. Also they will act like 1.2x to 1.7x Barlows depending on the model.
@@BogdanDamian does the 45 give a correct left right and the 90 leave things backwards?
@stanleybest8833 There are both 45° and 90° diagonals that produce upright images. Celestron currently offers both versions:
www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/201978-REG/Celestron_94108_90_Degree_Erect_Diagonal_1_25.html
www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/201971-REG/Celestron_94112_A_45_Degree_Erect_Diagonal_1_25.html
@@BogdanDamian I found an article that a mirror will produce an upright backwards image but a prism will give an upright readable image. Vocabulary: diagonal prism adapter.
@stanleybest8833 That is correct. A prism will produce a different oriented image compared to a mirror diagonal. There are however exceptions like those from Celestron.
Hello from Australia!
Should I buy ortho for planetary?
@Даня Бурлов Hi! If you have the possibility to get a decent one like those from Zeiss or Takahashi for a good price and don't mind the narrow 40°-ish AFOV, then go for it. But, keep in mind that there is a lot of unfounded hype surrounding Orthos. Not all are great and there are "normal" premium EPs out there that offer the same levels of contrast, brightenss and sharpness.
Hello. Thanks for your help is very important for beginners.
In USA delos 6mm is more expensive only 60 euro for Morpheus.
In Hellas price for Morpheus 6.5mm is 275 euro . For Delos today told me price 530 . Is worth it . Thanks !!!
@Konstantinos I'm glad I could help. I can totally understand. Unfortunately the prices for astro gear can vary a lot from country to country.
Don’t buy the Celestron star sense explorer Lt. at 275 dollars it has a very cheaply made stand . Only one slow motion control that broke after 6 uses. The Galileo 1000 mm by 40 mm telescope from Walmart is 100 dollars cheaper has a great stand that feels heavy duty, two slow motion controls. And honestly is better for viewing the planets.
Sweet video!
I had that 6mm Ultrawide and found it horrible for planets. Way too much ghosting. Sent it right back.
At the moment I have seven eyepieces and they are all televue eyepieces, and my biggest one is the 41mm panoptic which is just a superb eyepiece, pinpoint star images across the entire 3.3 degree field, I find all my televue eyepieces give pinpoint star images across the whole field and excellent I relief, I find all my eyepieces easy to look through, I use a electric focuser which makes telescoping a dream, I do not have a tracking mount just a manual mount, so even watching the planets go from edge to edge on my high power delos televue eyepieces 4.5mm and 3.5mm using my teskar 120mm apochromatic triplet refracting telescope F7 is superb, the planet travels from edge to edge of the field of view and it remains sharp from edge to edge, but Televue are expensive eyepieces but the images you get are excellent, thank you for your video it was most informative.
Hello, where are you from?
My guess? Alpha Centauri.
(Can tell from the accent.)
Morpheus 14 > ES 82 14
I refuse to pay the silly prices that Televue are asking. The marginal gains are tiny and just not worth it.
In a few cases, where one of the Chinese clones has an exceptional performing focal length or 2 in a line, such as the original ethos killer 14mm ES100, and the 20mm APM and other branded 20mm XWA, as well as some sleepers like the meade 8.8 and 5.5mm ultrawide, and some focal lengths of ES82 (formerly the first iteration of the meade series 5000 ultrawide and celestron axiom LX), with the exception of the 14mm which was extremely disappointing at f5, televue is usually noticeably better unless you are only using slow f7 or slower scopes.
Easy to spot examples are 20mm ES100 clearly losing to the 21 ethos and 20mm XWA, the aforementioned 14mm es82 unless they finally changed that design, which I don't think they did.
I see a huge difference between the 30mm 82 vs the 31 nagler, and after my stuff was stolen I sought out a 28mm UWAN type (orion megaview, and now also meade PWA), since that one is the original 31 nagler killer (price wise, I wouldn't say it is better but it is close enough).
The 24mm ES82 (and celestron 23mm axiom lx and 24mm meade UWA, all three are the same optics), is a really good one as well, better than the 30.
And I would say that 4.7 and 8.8 are really nice, but the 5.5mm meade that was made by a different vendor after JOC made ES the exclusive brand for their eyepieces in USA (hence celestron changing axiom LX line to luminos, which are not quite as good), performed as well as my 7mm nagler type 6, as far as comfort, and edge correction and overall image quality.
As for the only ripoff of the panoptic being the meade series5000 SWA which is now only available as ES68, I have compared the 24mm, and while I really liked my meade I had before I was robbed, the televue 24 pan was noticeably better corrected at the edge. I did buy a used 24mm es68 because I couldn't afford a panoptic and only had a few scopes that were limited to 1.25 and I wanted the full field with good enough edge correction.
I didn't bother with the 15 and 20mm SWAs, since like the pans the er is very tight in those focal lengths, though I probably should have picked up the 20 which is still usable. The 15 isn't, and I think televue discontinued the 15pan a while back.
I stopped at the 24 on the smaller end, but got the whole 2" set, 28, 34 and 40 when they were being cleared out, and I had access to dealer pricing at the time.
The 28 was exceptionally good as was the 34, and the 40 was close enough to my pentax 40XW that I won in a pentax ep sales contest, in the center, and actually better corrected at the edge vs the pentax, which allowed me to be willing to part with the pentax when I needed money.
Though I never did a side by side comparison to the 2" panoptics, and I mostly used my 2' SWAs in my C11 which at f10 won't show the same edge abberations in eyepieces that faster scopes would.
Based on the 24 there is a good chance that most or all of the 2" panoptics would similarly win.
The only panoptic I ever owned was the 35mm, which I sold shortly after coming up on a 31mm nagler and that was before meade cleared out the SWAs at a price i couldn't refuse.
I appreciate panoptics, but since I had naglers and that great 23mm axiom LX, and a few pentax eps, and 14mm and 20mm es100 at the time, I didn't really see much need for panoptics.
The one televue line that I was never fond of was the radians, and the type 4 nagler, which wasn't as well corrected as the type 1, 2, 5 and 6 (whatever happened to type 3? Became the radian perhaps? That was one theory). And radians were replaced by delites, and I am sure they are awesome.
So there are a few exceptions with the sleeper performers from the Chinese clones, and some televues that weren't 100% awesome, I would say that in general, televue is totally worth it. Especially since ES went exclusive and raised their prices, as much as double in a few cases, lessening the price/performance gap significantly. Though televue prices have also gone up.
But then again this whole industry has suddenly went crazy with the prices, especially dobsonians. Just 4 years ago 8" dobs were under $400 and 10's were $600