Konig vs. Konig II

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 06:39:49 GMT, "Mike Jenkins" ...reflected:

Anybody know the difference between the 16 mm UO Konig and the 16 mm UO
Konig II? And is one preferred over the other?

Thanks, Mike

http://www.iteastronomy.com/products...php?p=UO+Konig

You're welcome.


I have the 16mm Konig-II, and it's very good, though I've yet to use it with
my new Tak FS-102.

I also have the 12mm Konig-II.

Alan

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 02:33:43 -0500, Alan W. Craft
wrote:

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 06:39:49 GMT, "Mike Jenkins" ...reflected:

Anybody know the difference between the 16 mm UO Konig and the 16 mm UO
Konig II? And is one preferred over the other?

Thanks, Mike

http://www.iteastronomy.com/products...php?p=UO+Konig

You're welcome.


I have the 16mm Konig-II, and it's very good, though I've yet to use it with
my new Tak FS-102.

I also have the 12mm Konig-II.

Alan

Just so people don't think they are perfect after reading that ad,
they suffer from poor edge definition, especially in faster scopes
and their eye relief is shallow. But they are good eyepieces,
they tend to (the Konig I's) present a very neutrally coloured image
compared to some eyepieces.
-Rich

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 08:09:20 GMT, ...reflected:

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 02:33:43 -0500, Alan W. Craft
wrote:

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 06:39:49 GMT, "Mike Jenkins" ...reflected:

Anybody know the difference between the 16 mm UO Konig and the 16 mm UO
Konig II? And is one preferred over the other?

Thanks, Mike

http://www.iteastronomy.com/products...php?p=UO+Konig

You're welcome.


I have the 16mm Konig-II, and it's very good, though I've yet to use it with
my new Tak FS-102.

I also have the 12mm Konig-II.

Alan

Just so people don't think they are perfect...

What is, really; though they do possess the advantage of a wide field-of-view
rather deftly accomplished by the use of only four lenses, if I'm not mistaken about
the number, just as an orthoscopic, and with their primary target seemingly telescopes
of modest aperture where every last precious photon is just that.

Compromises...endless compromises...

...after reading that ad,
they suffer from poor edge definition, especially in faster scopes
and their eye relief is shallow. But they are good eyepieces,
they tend to (the Konig I's) present a very neutrally coloured image
compared to some eyepieces.
-Rich

Alan

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 06:39:49 GMT, Mike Jenkins
wrote:

Anybody know the difference between the 16 mm UO Konig and the 16 mm UO
Konig II? And is one preferred over the other?

Thanks, Mike



The II version has a bit better multi-coating. Other than that, not much
difference.

Lawrence Sayre

--
My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as
a moral being, with his own happiness as the moral
purpose of his life, with productive achievement as
his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.

Ayn Rand (in the appendix to 'Atlas Shrugged')

Lawrence Sayre wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 06:39:49 GMT, Mike Jenkins
wrote:

Anybody know the difference between the 16 mm UO Konig and the 16 mm UO
Konig II? And is one preferred over the other?

Thanks, Mike



The II version has a bit better multi-coating. Other than that, not much
difference.

Lawrence Sayre

I believe the II was also filter-threaded, whereas the original was not
(I think...)

--

-- Len Philpot --
-- http://philpot.org/ --
-- (alternate email) --

Hi there. You posted:

I believe the II was also filter-threaded, whereas the original was not
(I think...)


The original Konig had threads, but they were not "standard" (ie: they
would only fit University Optics filters). I found this out and took my
24 Konig's barrel down to my local machine shop, where they cut new
threads of a more standard spacing. Clear skies to you.
--
David W. Knisely
Prairie Astronomy Club: http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
Hyde Memorial Observatory: http://www.hydeobservatory.info/

**********************************************
* Attend the 10th Annual NEBRASKA STAR PARTY *
* July 27-Aug. 1st, 2003, Merritt Reservoir *
* http://www.NebraskaStarParty.org *
**********************************************

Jan sold me some adapters about twenty years ago. Just screw a standard
filter into the adapter, then screw the adapter into the eyepiece...
Voila! No worries...

Don't know if he still makes/sells them; they look kinda' homemade, but
work just fine. Might be worth a phone call to UO for those who want to
use standard filters and find the threads on their UO eyepieces won't
fit...

--
To reply, remove the "z" if one appears in my address
"David Knisely" wrote in message
...
Hi there. You posted:

I believe the II was also filter-threaded, whereas the original was
not
(I think...)


The original Konig had threads, but they were not "standard" (ie: they
would only fit University Optics filters). I found this out and took my
24 Konig's barrel down to my local machine shop, where they cut new
threads of a more standard spacing. Clear skies to you.
--
David W. Knisely
Prairie Astronomy Club: http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
Hyde Memorial Observatory: http://www.hydeobservatory.info/

**********************************************
* Attend the 10th Annual NEBRASKA STAR PARTY *
* July 27-Aug. 1st, 2003, Merritt Reservoir *
* http://www.NebraskaStarParty.org *
**********************************************

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 06:39:49 GMT, "Mike Jenkins"
wrote:

Anybody know the difference between the 16 mm UO Konig and the 16 mm UO
Konig II? And is one preferred over the other?

Thanks, Mike

*************************************************

Both designs are from Albert Konig who was an optical designer for
Zies Jena in the 1920's. The original US patent for the Konig was in
1933. This covered what is aften called the Konig, KonigII, and the
Konig wide field. The original Konig and the KonigII are four elements
in a 1-2-1 and 2-1-1 configuration respectively. The Konig wide field
was a six element design is three groups, 3-2-1.

The 2-1-1 configuration yields slighlty better eye relief and better
orthoscopy than the 1-2-1 configuration. For maximum field of view the
1-2-1 and 2-1-1 construction should have focal lengths greater than
about 30 mm should be 2 inch eyepieces. The Konig I and II eyepiece
have a useful field of view around 55 degress.

With different perscriptions it is possible to get wider field of view
but at a sacrifice of orthoscopy, eyerelief, and/or field curvature.

james

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 11:55:44 GMT, Lawrence Sayre
wrote:

The II version has a bit better multi-coating. Other than that, not much
difference.


Hi Lawrence,

Please see my post to James on this thread.

Clear skies,

Pete