Meade SWA vs UWAPosted By Joseph Wong |
On the original question comparing the 14mm UWA and the 13.8 SWA, my experience from use (14 less; 13.8 longer) is both are actually 1.25" EPs, but only the former (14mm) is skirted for 2" diagonal which is the best (only?) way to go with that handful! They are so similar data-spec-wise, that one might not appreciate how opposite they are when in hand, or when handing over the credit card. but different as night and day they are.
a) 14 UWA is everything said, claimed, bragged about it to be, plus. Outstanding in every respect, including great bulk, length, weight, cost. But boy will you want one having used one even if affording one is "taxing" in more ways than one. And it will be taxing your equipment once you have it, 2" diagonal withstanding. To sum up, imagine the classic 13mm TV Nagler type 1 with quite a bit of its kidney bean sins well repented & reformed.
b) 13.8 SWA is so petite, handy, unobtrusive and promising of similar viewing experiences. But it is not, kind of lets down--or is not quite all there.
But it is not so problem-ridden, being cost reasonable (--aka used AstroMart), and is handy in bulk, length, weight, that you would want to throw it out (with the proverbial bath water).
The problem is matching its Erfle-like curved field dropoff of an image-degrading-edge-view to the right scope (longer F) that will allow it to "shine." And it can and will! With longer than f5 toward f8 and beyond, IMHO! Otherwise, it is fully enjoyable with on-axis sharpness that won't let you let it go. But the edgefield rest,... ah' like a good marriage, we can all live with some shortcomings? Joseph Wong
a) 14 UWA is everything said, claimed, bragged about it to be, plus. Outstanding in every respect, including great bulk, length, weight, cost. But boy will you want one having used one even if affording one is "taxing" in more ways than one. And it will be taxing your equipment once you have it, 2" diagonal withstanding. To sum up, imagine the classic 13mm TV Nagler type 1 with quite a bit of its kidney bean sins well repented & reformed.
b) 13.8 SWA is so petite, handy, unobtrusive and promising of similar viewing experiences. But it is not, kind of lets down--or is not quite all there.
But it is not so problem-ridden, being cost reasonable (--aka used AstroMart), and is handy in bulk, length, weight, that you would want to throw it out (with the proverbial bath water).
The problem is matching its Erfle-like curved field dropoff of an image-degrading-edge-view to the right scope (longer F) that will allow it to "shine." And it can and will! With longer than f5 toward f8 and beyond, IMHO! Otherwise, it is fully enjoyable with on-axis sharpness that won't let you let it go. But the edgefield rest,... ah' like a good marriage, we can all live with some shortcomings? Joseph Wong