What is Reddit's opinion of Astromania 1.25" 4.5mm 58-Degree Planetary Eyepiece for Telescope?

From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

> eyepiece

...As you will see, the topic of eyepieces can fill books :-) It depends on your budget really. There are a lot of terms like

eye-relief,

apparent field of view,

too small or too large exit-pupils

...Just scream if something isn't clear.

 

> barlow

IMHO: Don't buy the barlow, buy a dedicated eyepiece instead. Cheaper barlows add chromatic aberration (reducing contrast)... And for the price of a good barlow, you can get two good eyepieces :-)

Barlows were more common when there weren't any (affordable) short eyepieces with decent eye-relief.

 

> more powerful

For planets, definitely. :-)

Assuming the optics are good (mirror parabolic), the 6" can handle 200x without troubles. More can be desirable, but atmospheric seeing is a limiting factor (seeing=>the image wobbles). Also while things get larger, they also get fainter. So for deep-sky, it's sometimes better to use something in the range of 12-18mm instead.

• 6mm "gold-line": Cheap wide-angle eyepiece. ~152x magnification. It's not at the limit of the telescope, but certainly already shows most details on planets (albeit small). Aliexpress, eBay, [US], US. (Normally also via Amazon Prime for $40, but currently only from a seller overseas). Brand-Name: Orion Expanse.

• HR Planetary eyepieces are available in shorter focal-lengths. The 4mm is super cheap over at Aliexpress, but ~228x is pushing things a little perhaps. But should be usable on a good night. 4.5 1 2 and 5mm exist, too. On eBay they cost more, from the US, you'll find them as ALstar, Astromania for ~$50.

But if you get the more expensive ones from the US; you could consider getting a better one instead of the old HR Planetary clones; e.g. the Starguider / Dual ED, basically the newer version.

The next noticeable step up are good 82° ultra-wide-angle eyepieces like the Explore-Scientific.

 

So, three or four good eyepieces go a long way.

• Planetary (4-6mm),

• Overview* (e.g. your current one or a 32mm Plössl),

• in-between (15mm, 9mm).

Over 10mm, the cheaper Plössl work fine. But the gold-line cost almost the same and offer a larger apparent field of view.

*[ THIS is for a smaller telescope but with similar focal-length. The field of view applies to yours as well. As you can see, there's a bit of a difference between the 25mm kit eyepeice and a 32mm Plössl. It's not too big of a deal, so stick with your current one for now. 40mm exist, but just have a narrower apparent field of view. Larger overviews are only possible with 2-inch focusers and eyepieces ($70 an up, $40 in China).]

 

Also note a telescope needs to be colimated to provide the best contrast. It looks overly complicated at first, but in the end, you just need to adjust three screws until everything appears centered.

• Different tools

• Guide

• No tools method / star test

While it's possible with no tools, a Cheshire-sight-tube (Link, simpler shorter ones are a bit cheaper) is a good all-rounder. Not as comfortable as a laser, but the cheaper ones often aren't great (possibly making things worse).

 

TL;DR: 4.5mm HR or 6mm gold-line, perhaps 15mm gold-line.

Also note: If ordering via Aliexpress or eBay-> Check recent seller and product reviews, YMMV.

Clear skies!

Avoid the 4mm Omni. It has under 3mm eye-relief or so. https://imgur.com/FkEaOBG

Usually you can get the 4mm for $49 at Amazon (Link to a different one from the line. The 3.2mm can work but pushed the telescope to what makes sense. Link at Agenaastro)

Again, with such cheap lasers, YMMV. You will need to check and adjust it, else it can make things much worse. https://reddit.com/r/telescopes/comments/hy8srn/made_a_laser_collimator_collimation_jig_out_of/

How's the shape of the telescope and mount in general?

Rule #1: Use what you have :-) While limited, it will get you started.

Best accessory: "Turn left at Orion".

Eyepiece field of view simulation for similar focal-length (900mm)

Apparent field of view of different eyepieces

Eye-relief

 

I would not magnify more than 200x with this telescope. It may be tempting, but while things get larger, it gets dim and dull.

Many nebula benefit from medium magnification. More just makes faint structures invisible.

Eyepieces for 114/910 (Check that 1.25" eyepieces fit, not only 0.965")

Magnification = 910mm focal length divided by eyepiece focal length

• Planets

  • 4.5mm (202x) to 6mm (152x, not as big but larger exit pupil = brighter)
  • 6mm "gold-line" $19Aliexpress, eBay/China, ($40@Amazon)
  • HR Planetary clones are available in 4.5mm, 5mm, Aliexpress, Amazon (Random links, check seller ratings! Again, I would not advise to go to the Max.)
  • Avoid short Plössl under 10mm, as they have very poor eye-relief. Also eyepiece sets (overpriced, overrated, mediocre, redundant).

• Overview

  • 32mm Plössl (25mm = a bit cheaper, 40mm just has a narrower apparent field of view)
  • 32mm Amazon / 32mm Aliexpress

• One in-between

  • For example a 15mm "gold-line" or Plössl. (61)x 15mm Plössl or another "gold-line"

Zoom eyepieces exist, but have a narrow apparent field of view at the overview setting. And for $50-$60 you can get up to three decent eyepieces or so. As mentioned in the image, barlows are another option,but ad some chromatic aberration, and cost as much as a dedicated planetary eyepiece.

Clear skies! :-)

Hello :-)

A 114/900 is a nice telescope, just the mount is usually not stable enough in these bundles.

Regarding eyepieces: I would not go past 200x as the image gets dim.

• http://blog.pixelgiraffe.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/900mmEyepieces.png

Here a few suggestions

• Planets

  • A 6mm gold-line (1, 2) and down to a 4.5mm eyepiece (1, 2) could be a solution for planets.

• For deep-sky,

  • 15-20mm might be more versatile. (gold-line 1, 2 / Plössl 1, 2)

• Overview

  • A 32mm Plössl for a larger overview (1, 2).

Note: Check seller ratings. Random links to the budget eyepiece. Do not get cheap Plössl under 10mm or the common box sets containing them, they have horribly short eye-relief

 

You can also get $15 sets, but they are not good. Plastic-y eyepieces with limited quality, small apparent field of view, short eye-relief. Basically what's included with many department-store telescopes. As you've already posted, they can be smaller, and you'd need an adapter. ((Links to Chinese sellers, beware of shipping times))

 

If you find the mount's stability troublesome:

• balance the tube

• do not extend the tripod

• put some weight on/under the center plate

• some fill the tripod legs with sand or replace them

• Possibly build a rockerbox for a few bucks; 1, 2. A better commercial mount (NEQ3/CG4) would exceed the cost of a larger telescope (Skywatcher/Orion 6" dobsonian).

Three decent eyepieces can go a long way. If you are mainly interested in planets, you can survive with two (one for high magnification, one for orientation).

Does the telescope still have a finder-scope?

Clear skies!

Hello :-)

Congratulations, that's a 114/900 reflector telescope! They already show quite a bit. Sadly, the mount it's on is very weak, which can cause a lot of frustration.

You can build a simple "dobsonian rockerbox" for $5-$10 (1, 2) if you'd like to increase stability. As for now, don't extend the tripod fully, put some weight on the center plate, make sure it's balanced well (use a magnet, weight).

.

The barlow alone is useless; It tripples the magnification of an eyepiece. The barlows from these sets are not good, 3x is way too much for most eyepiece combinations, and just lowers the contrast.

To start observing you will need two, better three eyepieces or so.

• One for a good overview (kit eyepiece: 20-25mm, ideally, 32mm Plössl, not the 40mm though)

• One for planets (200x, 4.5mm max, also see this)

• one or two in-between, e.g. 15mm.

If you are on a very low budget, a 25mm eyepiece and a 5x Barlow can work, but it's far from ideal.

Ideally, a 32mm Plössl (1 2* 3)

A 4.5mm HR Planetary 1 2 or modify a cheap gold-line 1 2 3

In-between, also the gold-line. These wide-angle eyepieces have a large apparent field of view which makes it easier to find objects and keep them in view. And it looks amazing :-)

.

On a budget, you could get a 25mm Plössl and a 5x Barlow. I would not recommend it, but it'll work. These 5x barlows are cheap (a bit cheaper in China...) and are not as bad as the kit barlow. 25mm will give you 36x magnification, 180x with the Barlow.

.

This eyepiece set is not great, but a bit better than the cheapest department store eyepiece sets. 4mm is already a bit much.

You can also get kits like this but those are basically the cheap, no-good sets provided with cheap telescopes.

.

Oh, make sure it already accepts 1.25" eyepieces, not the older 0.965". Avoid eyepiece sets (overpriced, short Plössl have short eye relief, so many filters are not necessary).

If you don't have any eyepieces, see if you have some magnifier like this one, or even two google cardboard lenses. They can be used as simple eyepieces, e.g. to observe the moon.

.

.

A collimation tool is almost mandatory to get the best contrast; But you don't need anything fancy, or you can even do it without one.

.

Adjust the finder during the day (when you have an eyepiece ;-) ) but avoid turning the telescope near the sun at any cost, permanent damage to your eye and telescope!

.

As /u/sflamel stated, focuser and eyepiece sits to the side of the opening. And open the whole lid in front, not just the small hole :-)

.

Make sure to pick up "Turn left at Orion" (or Nightwatch; Or simple stargazing; Or...); It's the missing manual :-) It will not only show you where to find targets, but what to expect, what's worthwhile observing, how to observe... And a great way to learn about the night sky. Make sure to pick up a dim red light to preserve night-vision better than with a cellphone/app. E.g. a $1 bike tail light with a few layers of tape, or a $20 adjustable astronomy flashlight.

.

Clear skies!

---

• Consider the shipping times when ordering overseas, check reviews, ratings.