Posts Made By: Charles Hakes

I have an Orion Ultrascopic, which I think is similar. Have you tried adding a diagonal between the barlow and the eyepiece? I think that is supposed to get you close to 3x. I also have both a 1.25"-.965" and a .965-1.25" adapter. When I put both in, stacked as an extension tube, I get a bit more magnification too. This might not be what you are looking for, but it's worth a try.

Charlie

I have a 13.8 SWA that I got for my homemade 6" f5 dob. Great eyepiece. Easily the most used. Works well with my Ultrascopic barlow. It is very small and light and the eye relief is "medium". That 9-10mm sounds about right. I read a comment once that your eyelashes don't quite touch and believe that is correct. I would not trade my 13.8 SWA unless I somehow can afford one of those tiny T6 Naglers. That being said, every comment I have heard says the 14 UWA is in a whole different league as far as quality. I have not looked through one of those, but then again I could never use it in my scope because of ballance problems. I understand the UWA is one of those monster hand grenade eyepieces with lots of glass.

Charlie

I certainly like the eye relief on shorter fl Orthos than that of same fl Plossls. (e.g 9 and 12.5) Somewhere in the mid-teen focal lengths, I start to like the Plossls. And with less glass than "premium" eyepieces, I understand that Orthos are as sharp as they get. The only downside is that reduced FOV, and if you are not tracking you want that as big as it can get.

Charlie

I bought one of those 60mm scopes (Orion 2nd) a little over a year ago, just to try it out. It worked better than expected - f15 does wonders on refractor colors. I played with it quite a bit at the time, but have since made it into a solar projection scope. I guess that 7.5mm Lanthanum eyepiece I was using to view Saturn cost more than the scope.

Charlie

I don't like to go over 200x. 150x is even better. I have a 4.8 Nagler that gives ~156x and that is OK since the field is so wide. I sidestep the problem with my larger Dob by using a Dob Driver II.

Charlie

I have an Ultrascopic Barlow (Orion's version of the Ultima - 3 element, long version) and am guessing you must have a lemon. This is the first barlow I have used that I didn't think the same thing you said about image degradation. I still think mine was a great purchase. From what I understand today though, I might go with a Powermate, since it supposedly doesn't mess with the eye relief as much.

Charlie

You might consider a Meade 13.8 Superwide. Some say the design is a bit long of tooth, but I have been very happy with mine in an f5 scope. I think they run ~$130-140 new, less used. They have a nice wide view and would give you 108x. Eye relief is OK.

Charlie

I have an Ultrascopic and really like it. I haven't looked through a Televue to compare though. This barlow requires about 1cm more out focus, but when I combine a 1.25-.965" adapter with a .965-1.25" (to still use 1.25" eyepieces), it is just about parfocal. You won't be able to use this one outside a diagonal very well, because it is so long. I have used a few cheaper barlows and this is in a different league - I don't notice any image degradation. With Orion's return policy, why don't you try it.

Charlie

I am curious about your focuser. I got one of those "cheap" 2" models from Orion and thought it was a great buy for the $. What focal length eyepiece are you trying to fine focus? (I have mine on an f9.6 scope, so may not have encountered the same problem.) And why can't you collimate with a laser?

Charlie

I just got the 38mm Erfle because I asked a similar question here a couple of months ago and didn't get any feedback at all. I have used it only a couple of times, and have been waiting for a night to really evaluate it, but fortunately we are finally getting some snow here in SW Colorado. I got this just for a "finder" eyepiece, since 60deg AFOV at 38mm would be much bigger than my 50deg AFOV at 32mm in a Plossl I have.

Here's my impression so far. This one seems OK for the money, but no great bargain. I am not convinced that the AFOV is quite as big as advertised, but it is definitely bigger than a Plossl (50deg). The image was sharp in the middle and soft on the edge (and when it gets clear again I can quantify that better). The field stop is also a bit fuzzy. I also got the rubber eyecup that they also sell and that one is a waste of money. I guess it does block the light, but I think it "feels" funny. (What a technical comment!) It also puts my eye far enough away that I can't quite see the field stop, so I must be missing something. I never noticed any real bad kidney beaning, but that may just be me. I think the construction is OK, but maybe I wasn't expecting too much to start with.

And just so you know, they build these when they get orders. At least that's what I was told over the phone when I called to see if it had shipped.

Overall I think I got what I paid for and it will work just fine as a finder eyepiece. Also, I forgot to mention that I was using an f9.6 scope.

And you were asking about their plossls - I did see that they are selling the Meade 26mm for $35 new.

Charlie