Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [ETXASTRO] Barlow Lens; reducer lens for ETX-105

Expand Messages
  • Orest Skrypuch
    ... Bill, Thanks for the report. ... http://www.weasner.com/etx/shutan.html#wfa Maybe I ll give a try for the Shutan unit, especially if someone else has a
    Message 1 of 16 , Dec 30, 2003
      > Regarding Orest's question, I have the Scopetronix 0.5X reducer. I've
      > only used it for photography. It has wicked bad coma artifacts. Anyway,
      > I need to turn the focuser clockwise almost all the way to the end just
      > to bring the focal plane back to the sensor chip. No way to use it with
      > a diagonal, you wouldn't be able to push the focal plane all the way
      > through it. You could put an eyepiece right into the reducer, but the
      > viewing position would be awkward, obviously. If you get that Shutan
      > product, let us know how it works.


      Bill,

      Thanks for the report.


      Hmm, from the Weasner site, on the Shutan diagonal/WFA (1998):

      > Star images were distinct points of light with no distortion. There
      > was only slight vignetting (a darkening at the edge of the
      > field-of-view) when used with the 26mm eyepiece. But this did not
      > appear to be a problem as it is hardly noticeable. I have not yet
      > tried higher power eyepieces.

      > The WFA is nicely made and showed no flaws physically or optically. If
      > you want a wider view of the sky from your ETX, there are two options:
      > a wide-angle eyepiece or a wide-field adapter. Given that wide-angle
      > eyepieces are expensive, the Shutan Wide-Field Adapter is certainly a
      > less-costly but very effective solution.

      http://www.weasner.com/etx/shutan.html#wfa

      Maybe I'll give a try for the Shutan unit, especially if someone else
      has a positive note on it.

      * Orest

      P.S. I guess there is quite a lag for postings, my test message still
      has not posted, and the last couple took a few days!
    • Bill Dirks
      Hi, Hamish. I have the $99 eyepiece set, and the #140 Barlow. My Barlow gets heavy use. The smaller eyepieces are more difficult to view through with their
      Message 2 of 16 , Jan 1, 2004
        Hi, Hamish.

        I have the $99 eyepiece set, and the #140 Barlow. My Barlow gets heavy
        use. The smaller eyepieces are more difficult to view through with their
        very short eye relief. To view planets, I usually use the 15mm + Barlow,
        or 12.4mm + Barlow on very steady nights. Hardly ever use the 9.7mm, and
        I don't think I've ever used the 6.4mm. I also use the Barlow
        extensively with an electronic camera for planets and Lunar closeup shots.

        A quality Barlow is a great accessory to have. I haven't used any other
        Barlows, so I don't have anything to compare it to, but I am very happy
        with this lens. Images are sharp and free of chromatic aberration.

        According to the advertising, "the #140 is designed to optically
        complement Meade Series 4000 eyepieces".

        Bill.


        Hamish Moffatt wrote:

        > On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 09:16:24PM -0600, Jason Stromback wrote:
        > > I am requesting or asking what would be a good barlow to compliment
        > my set.
        > > I do have a cheap meade #124 barlow, but i am wondering what would
        > be a good
        > > one for my Meade 4000 set. If people told me not to waste my money
        > on a
        > > different barlow, then i wouldn't.
        >
        > I was just curious why you would want a Barlow at all when you already
        > have a good range of eyepieces.
        >
        >
        > cheers
        > Hamish
        > --
        > Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@...> <hamish@...>
        >
        > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
        >
        > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ETXASTRO/
        >
        > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > ETXASTRO-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > <mailto:ETXASTRO-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
        >
        > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
        > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
        >
        >
      • Larry
        I use a barlow quite a bit. It gives better eye relief than an equivalent short focal length eyepiece. Plus I use it for projection photography. It makes a
        Message 3 of 16 , Jan 1, 2004
          I use a barlow quite a bit. It gives better eye
          relief than an equivalent short focal length eyepiece.
          Plus I use it for projection photography. It makes a
          convenient, light tight projection system for camera
          or webcam.

          --- Hamish Moffatt <hamish@...> wrote:
          > On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 09:16:24PM -0600, Jason
          > Stromback wrote:
          > > I am requesting or asking what would be a good
          > barlow to compliment my set.
          > > I do have a cheap meade #124 barlow, but i am
          > wondering what would be a good
          > > one for my Meade 4000 set. If people told me not
          > to waste my money on a
          > > different barlow, then i wouldn't.
          >
          > I was just curious why you would want a Barlow at
          > all when you already
          > have a good range of eyepieces.
          >
          >
          > cheers
          > Hamish
          > --
          > Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@...>
          > <hamish@...>
          >


          __________________________________
          Do you Yahoo!?
          Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
          http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
        • autostaretx
          ... I agree... for many applications a Barlow d eyepiece performs better (eye relief, ease of use by bystanders) than a shorter equivalently-priced eyepiece.
          Message 4 of 16 , Jan 1, 2004
            --- In ETXASTRO@yahoogroups.com, Larry <doccpu@y...> wrote:
            > I use a barlow quite a bit. It gives better eye
            > relief than an equivalent short focal length eyepiece.

            I agree... for many applications a Barlow'd eyepiece
            performs "better" (eye relief, ease of use by bystanders)
            than a shorter equivalently-priced eyepiece.

            Plus, if you are using an external diagonal (such as
            an LX90 or LX200 uses), you can move the Barlow to
            upstream of the diagonal and yield a 3x "magnification".

            have fun
            --dick
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.