Posts Made By: Ian Van Voorst

Anyone know about their eyepieces? There is an old post on this, but no one had tried them yet. I'm terribly curious.

Sept. eyepiece review -- Does anyone else think this review is bizarre?

Let's see... Eye relief is a "yes or no" item, only 3 eyepieces are listed as having internal reflections (I can't believe that, nor the number of EPS marked as having no distortion), The ONLY eyepiece rated as having "very good" contrast is a $25 Chinese Plossl that is also listed as having poor contrast when used with a SCT.

One of the things that bugs me the most, is that the results vary erratically between the scopes used for the test (TV101 and an 8" SCT) -- some EPs perform better in the SCT some in the refractor. I'm sure this is possible but I would think that the author would want to include a discussion of why this happened --i.e. why did the Chinese plossl apparently ouperform all the other EPs on the TV101 but perform as one of the worst on the SCT? Yuck -- how could you put that on the chart and NOT explain!

I felt like the whole thing was pretty much designed to give as little info as possible. Since I built my own scope, my EP collection can easily represent more than 2x the cost of the scope. When are we going to get quality optical testing of EPS from the magazines?

I would like to hear comments about eyepieces for planetary observing that have built in barlows, such as Supereasyviews, lower focal length Ultrascans, Lanthanum LV and others, versus EP barlow combos. I would also like to hear about favorite EP barlow combos and favorite barlows in general.

I have an 8" F6 (focal length 1219mm) newt, so a barlow is probably necessary on a night that allows higher magnification.

OK... subject line got your attention? Looking for opinions info here.

I'm finishing a scope and since I can't observe with it yet I'm obsessing about eyepieces. I am primarily interested in planetary observing and already have a couple of Orion Orthos which everyone seems to agree come from KK in Japan same as UO orthos. I was thinking of collecting the rest of the series if I could find them used since they seem to be parfocal. Then I checked out the April 96 S&T EP review -- the Orion orthos rated LAST for on axis detail (with TVs and Ultima rating the best).

So... are circle/UO/Antares/Orion orthos overated? They seem to be the darling of the message boards. Maybe the Orion Orthos came from somewhere else. Has anyone done a good comparison of UO Orthos and TVs and Ultimas? Oh, and while I'm at it: does anyone else want to weigh in on the HD orthos versus the regular ones?

What is a good pick for a portable, quick-look, grab-and-go planetary scope (consider weight, bulk, cool-down, and set-up time)? DON'T suggest a 4" apo! Unless you have one with a mount to sell me for under $1500 .

Basically I want an scope that will show just enough planetary detail to make it worth looking from night to night, but can be taken out of an apartment and used on a sidewalk in an urban setting without too much hassle. Being able to take it on vacation (by plane) would be a bonus.

This scope is about 14 years in the making. It started with a hand-ground 8" F8 mirror that was stolen by a certain optical company that took my mirror with it when it went under in the 80s. I then purchased a 8" F6 from J.C. Wilkinson (anyone else have one of his mirrors?).

This is the latest, most portable, experimental version -- obviously inspired by the Boppian/Scope Like Alice scopes. Still need to add a light baffle at the focus board. Everything fits in a carry-on (the tubes are in 2 sections).

That's a EQ Platform underneath that I bought used and altered to make lighter.

Does the fan-behind-mirror/baffle arrangement so many folks are trying work as well as the Adler arrangement (where the fan blows over the primary) described in the S&T article? Has anyone compared?

I am looking for a good high power eyepiece for my optically excellent 8" F6 Newt. Radians are out -- cost is an issue. I have a Klee barlow which seems to work OK with a 12.5mm ortho, but I have nothing to compare it too and wonder if a 4mm ep would give a better image. I will probably also be replacing a 6mm Celestron ortho that seems to be mediocre.

I don't really care too much about eye relief I never hear anyone mention this when it comes to eye relief, but the real problem for me is bumping the scope because the eye relief is so small (I have an light scope). The 6mm ortho that is completely fine as far as eye relief.

The UO orthos are an obvious choice, but I am not sure if I should get the HD or the regular since I have found that volcano tops give one a feeling of more eye relief. What do people think of the new shape?

What else:

Ultrascopics 5 and 3.8

Ultima 5mm -- I have the 7.5 and love it, but I would bet I need to stick my eyeball right up to the 5mm, but still it should give great image brightness and contrast. Anyone using this one successfully?

Ultima barlow -- the 2.8 power from the Klee means that one ends up looking for some odd EP focal lengths to get a certain magnification -- 2x would be more useful. Or I could use an 18mm with extension tubes on the Klee.

So... I guess it's kind of a UO HD versus classic ortho versus Ultima 5 element versus Ultrascopic 7 element versus
something with a barlow question. OK?

Just wondering how these perform.

thanks,

Ian V. V.

Wind.

No one ever seems to mention this when you see all those great pics of ultra-light dobs all over the internet.

I am building an ultra-portable 8" F6 dobsonian, but recent experience has shown me that making anything too lightweight is a problem. In my last design I needed to attach a baffle, but this turned my scope into a weather vain! The no-baffle, no-shroud approach won't work, because I frequently observe from the city.

I want to make the final version of the scope a string scope with a single-ring secondary assembly, but I'm thinking I need the extra weight of trusses and the two-ring assembly.

Anyone else find themselves adding weight to a scope for this reason? Any words of wisdom?