Orion 25mm Ultrascopic vs Meade 26mm Super Plossl
J. Jason Fry
add to my collection? I have an Orion XT8 Dob, and I have the stock 25mm
and 9mm plossls that come with the scope. I have added an Orion 32mm Sirius
plossl (like it well) and I have recently taken the plunge to acquire a TV
12mm Nagler Type 4 (really like this one). I'm thinking of getting a little
better eyepiece to replace my stock 25mm, and am wondering if the Meade
Series 4000 Super Plossl 26mm would be what I ought to go with or whether I
should get an Orion 25mm Ultrascopic. I know the Meade would be superior to
the one I have, but I don't really know that much about the Orion
Ultrascopics and how it would compare. It seems to be a higher end
eyepiece, but I wonder how it would compare optically, since it's a
different design.
Thanks for your help.
Jason
Rich Vadenais
I bought the 26mm SP when I got my C9.25; optically it is fine. What
bothers me about it is that the eye lens is recessed into the body of the
eyepiece, rendering the eye relief very short. Without glasses, you still
have to push your eye all the way into the ep to get the whole FOV; with
glasses, forget it.
I also have an 18mm Ultima which is very similar in design to the
Ultrascopics. Like the 25mm Ultrascopic its eye lens not recessed and is
much more comfortable to look through. Excellent optics.
Since I now use Pentax XLs I don't use either much anymore. The 21XL gives
the same FOV as the 26 SP but at higher mag, more pleasing AFOV (65 degrees
vs. 51), and 20mm eye relief with a great adjustable eyecup. The 14XL does
the same to the 18 Ultima. I don't know how well a heavy ep like a Pentax
would work with your Dob (just under a pound each) but once I looked through
them there was no going back..........well worth the extra money.
Rich
"J. Jason Fry" <jaso...@interconnect.net> wrote in message
news:3b91a9aa$1...@corp-news.newsgroups.com...
Frank Bov
I find 25mm to be my least-used eyepiece range. I'd much more recommend a
16-20mm; enough field to frame larger objects with even more magnification,
without getting too close to the 12mm Nagler. You might consider a 19mm Televue
Panoptic, 18mm Meade Superwide, or 16mm UO Konig II.
Regarding the Ultrascopic and 4000 SP, either would serve you very well.
Have fun,
Frank
"J. Jason Fry" <jaso...@interconnect.net> wrote in message
news:3b91a9aa$1...@corp-news.newsgroups.com...
Dave S
You may not notice that much difference between the plossl that you have and
the Meade Series 4000. If I were you I would go ahead and buy a different
eyepiece such as a 16-20mm range. The Ultrascopics are nice and I believe
they are the same as the Celestron Ultima series.
Dave
----------
In article <3b91a9aa$1...@corp-news.newsgroups.com>, "J. Jason Fry"
Herm
would suggest you go a little lower to a 18-20mm wideangle. In the low end you
do need a very closely spaced set of eyepieces.. I own 4,5,6,7,9,10,12 orthos
for planetary viewing, then jump up to 20mm Erfle and then 32mm Ultima for
widefield views.. I'm perfectly happy with this collection. My 20mm Meade
Widefield (Erfle) gets a lot of use with a 2x barlow.
Gary Hand sells a good line of inexpensive ploss eyepieces, at one time he also
sold an ultrascopic type.. you may want to email him, here is his web site:
http://www.handsonoptics.com/astronomy/GTO_series/gto_series.html#stosp
On Sat, 1 Sep 2001 22:50:06 -0500, "J. Jason Fry" <jaso...@interconnect.net>
wrote:
>I was wondering - which of these eyepieces would be the better one for me to
Herm
Astropics http://home.att.net/~hermperez
Herm
http://www.handsonoptics.com/astronomy/sky_anteres/sky_anteres.html
BTW, my 30mm Ultima is an "ultrascopic" type, I cant tell the difference between
it and a good 32mm ploss.
On Sat, 1 Sep 2001 22:50:06 -0500, "J. Jason Fry" <jaso...@interconnect.net>
wrote:
>I was wondering - which of these eyepieces would be the better one for me to
Herm
Astropics http://home.att.net/~hermperez