Buying a new telescope...suggestions welcome

Thanks Larry, I'll keep that in mind. I think I might still get the TV
plossl (32mm), propably won't get the ST80 and don't know about Burgess
32mm. I might get some UO instead, for about 1.5 times the price of ST80,
probably better value. Thanks again.
"Larry Stedman" wrote in message
...
I've owned and used all 3 eyepieces you've mentioned. Sold the 32mm TV
Plossl as I preferred the 30mm Ultima. Eventually, many years later,
sold the 30mm Ultima because it was displaced by a 35mm Ultima on the
widest field of view end (for a 1.25" eyepiece) and by a 21mm Pentax on
the best exit pupil, close enough fov, on the "shorter" f.l. end.

Sold the 1rpd and kept the 32mm Burgess. The Burgess is lighter, had
more eye relief, and has an excellent eye guard. I wear eyeglasses for
observing and the 1rpd required putting the glasses right up to the lens
where they would be scratched. One person I know literally sawed off
the top of 1rpd (it has a recessed lens).

Optical quality fairly similar. While they might not provide crisp
views across as much of the field of view as a 35mm Panoptic... at f/6,
you're going to good large sized crisp field of view with either
eyepiece and for a lot less money. Check back posts for comparisons of
actual field of view. The two were comparable but not nearly what they
are advertised as having (no 70 or 80 degrees that's for sure).

Still, the 2" Burgess or the 2" 30mm 1rpd will have wider fields of view
than the 32mm plossl. That's better for star hopping, framing big
clusters or DSOs (or conjunctions), and sweeping the Milky Way. But the
sacrifice is switching back and forth between 2" and 1.25" eyepieces.
Some observers don't mind; others are driven to distraction. But the
advantage is the big sky context. When you want to put M81 and M82 in
one field of view, having the 2" eyepiece will help you with your 8".

Larry Stedman
Vestal