Back to Home

Eyepieces Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | Eyepieces | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Selection

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Bob Sal on November 12, 2001 19:22:14 UTC

I think the Barlow degrates the image. Although, I don't have the APO Barlow and I'm sure it's better that mine, A good 13MM eyepiece will be better that any 26MM + Barlow, especially with expensive eyepieces. I don't think it will matter as much with the cheaper ones. But then again, some people sware by them. I've never seen someone using one all night long. Just occationally for real high magnification. I've never seen someone actually using a barlow on a 32MM so they didn't have to get a 16MM. Usually you'll get something around a 16MM and never use it on a 32MM. Liek I said, got one, never use it on the big scope.
Those are the eyepieces I use. It's like this, I chose the 40MM because it's low magnification. I saw the 56MM which will be a little less but they are 52 degree and I didn't like it. That 12" TV or tunnel thing again. The 32MM Panoptic is real nice but that brings me up to 96x, I really wanted the 40MM. You may want the 32 instead, but you don't really need both. That's why I say get one good one not 2 cheap ones, there's not that much difference between 76x and 96x. After that it's a matter of choice. You need one real small one for close up's of the moon, planets and doubles. I thought the 8MM was small enough at 381x. Remember, the image will always degrad some with a smaller eyepiece, it the nature of the beast. Again the Neagler, or Meade Ultra wide, I've seen many. I liked the Radian because of the eyerelief. It's 60 degree so I didn't give up much in appearent field. Then with 76x and 381x, you fill in whatever you want. The point is, you really don't need 5 or 6 eyepieces to fill in, one or two is enough. There's not much difference between say 135x and 155x, you don't need both. If you could get to a star party and see some this stuff, that would help. Some people hate Meade eyepieces, I think mine are great and so do lots of other people. The Neagler's are super and run about $75 to $125 more than the Meade. I know a few people with the Teleview Panoptic 22MM, love that one. Good Luck.
That's it;
BOB SAL

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2020 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins