Two new (well, used) toys

I have read several very positive comments about the Meade 6.7mm UWA
eyepiece, so, a few days ago when I saw on one Astromart, I jumped in and
bought it.

The eyepiece arrived yesterday and I tried it out last night -- it certainly
did live up to its reputation. Objects were sharp all over the eyepiece --
center and edge, without refocusing. In my 8-inch Dob, the 6.7mm ep yields
180X, which is fairly high mag, yet the field of view is amazing at that
mag.

At the same time, I purchased a UO 18mm ortho -- it's a dandy ep also.

Looks as though I got lucky and picked up two fine toys. Now my ep case
has: TV 32mm Plossl, Meade 18mm Superwide; Nagler 7mm and 5mm; Meade 6.7mm
UW; UO 18mm ortho; TV 2X Barlow. Why two 18mm? I give up, why?

--

----
Joe S.

"Joe S." wrote in message
...
I have read several very positive comments about the Meade 6.7mm UWA
eyepiece, so, a few days ago when I saw on one Astromart, I jumped in and
bought it.

The eyepiece arrived yesterday and I tried it out last night -- it
certainly
did live up to its reputation. Objects were sharp all over the
eyepiece --
center and edge, without refocusing. In my 8-inch Dob, the 6.7mm ep
yields
180X, which is fairly high mag, yet the field of view is amazing at that
mag.

At the same time, I purchased a UO 18mm ortho -- it's a dandy ep also.

Looks as though I got lucky and picked up two fine toys. Now my ep case
has: TV 32mm Plossl, Meade 18mm Superwide; Nagler 7mm and 5mm; Meade 6.7mm
UW; UO 18mm ortho; TV 2X Barlow. Why two 18mm? I give up, why?

--

----
Joe S.



Hey Joe,

Do you like Meade 6.7 better than the Nag 7?
Just curious.

Steve

Realize that I am still a beginner and my comments are not scientific -- and
this is based on one night's viewing.

I'm not certain how to describe this -- but -- the Meade seems to have a
wider FOV then the Nagler -- my 7mm Nagler is the older one, not the Type 6.
The Meade seems to have more "kidney bean" effect than the Nagler -- I have
never noticed kidney-beaning on the Nagler -- if I got my eye too close to
the Meade, the edges of the FOV disappeared and I have to move my eye back
just a hair to see the whole FOV, not so in the Nagler, the whole FOV is
always there in the Nagler. The two eyepieces are equally bright -- I
observed Saturn, Jupiter, and the Trapezium and could tell no difference in
brightness or clarity between the two, details in all objects were equal.

My amateur opinion is that they are equivalent -- I would give the Nagler a
slight edge.

The new price on the Meade is just about what I paid for the Nagler although
I got the used Meade at a lower price.

Hope this is helpful and I wish I were more knowledgeable and could make
more sense for you.

--

----
Joe S.

"Steve Little" wrote in message
...

"Joe S." wrote in message
...
I have read several very positive comments about the Meade 6.7mm UWA
eyepiece, so, a few days ago when I saw on one Astromart, I jumped in
and
bought it.

The eyepiece arrived yesterday and I tried it out last night -- it
certainly
did live up to its reputation. Objects were sharp all over the
eyepiece --
center and edge, without refocusing. In my 8-inch Dob, the 6.7mm ep
yields
180X, which is fairly high mag, yet the field of view is amazing at that
mag.

At the same time, I purchased a UO 18mm ortho -- it's a dandy ep also.

Looks as though I got lucky and picked up two fine toys. Now my ep case
has: TV 32mm Plossl, Meade 18mm Superwide; Nagler 7mm and 5mm; Meade
6.7mm
UW; UO 18mm ortho; TV 2X Barlow. Why two 18mm? I give up, why?

--

----
Joe S.



Hey Joe,

Do you like Meade 6.7 better than the Nag 7?
Just curious.

Steve

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 18:35:23 -0500, Joe S. wrote:

I have read several very positive comments about the Meade 6.7mm UWA
eyepiece, so, a few days ago when I saw on one Astromart, I jumped in and
bought it.

The eyepiece arrived yesterday and I tried it out last night -- it
certainly
did live up to its reputation. Objects were sharp all over the eyepiece
--
center and edge, without refocusing. In my 8-inch Dob, the 6.7mm ep
yields
180X, which is fairly high mag, yet the field of view is amazing at that
mag.


Congratulations! I agree that the 6.7mm Meade UWA is truly hard to beat
at this FL, regardless of your intended viewing purpose, or the speed of
your scope. Great prices on used ones make these a steal compared to
purchasing a new 7mm Nagler Type 6. I affectionately call mine my "planet
killer" eyepiece of choice. You can save roughly 48% over the new Nagler
by opting for a good used 6.7mm UWA (of the latest style, with improved
multicoatings, a nice knurled rubber grip, and a nice fold down rubber
eyecup). If you are willing to go with the original 6.7mm UWA (no rubber
grip, no rubber eyecup, and a bit less sophisticated multicoatings) the
typical savings over the new 7mm Nagler are ~61%. Once you've tried one
you won't ever regret not having spent more.

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')
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I like the whole uwa swa set! I lack only the 32mm. Would it be wise to buy it
over a comparable Nagler?
jerry

Lawrence Sayre wrote:

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 18:35:23 -0500, Joe S. wrote:

I have read several very positive comments about the Meade 6.7mm UWA
eyepiece, so, a few days ago when I saw on one Astromart, I jumped in and
bought it.

The eyepiece arrived yesterday and I tried it out last night -- it
certainly
did live up to its reputation. Objects were sharp all over the eyepiece
--
center and edge, without refocusing. In my 8-inch Dob, the 6.7mm ep
yields
180X, which is fairly high mag, yet the field of view is amazing at that
mag.


Congratulations! I agree that the 6.7mm Meade UWA is truly hard to beat
at this FL, regardless of your intended viewing purpose, or the speed of
your scope. Great prices on used ones make these a steal compared to
purchasing a new 7mm Nagler Type 6. I affectionately call mine my "planet
killer" eyepiece of choice. You can save roughly 48% over the new Nagler
by opting for a good used 6.7mm UWA (of the latest style, with improved
multicoatings, a nice knurled rubber grip, and a nice fold down rubber
eyecup). If you are willing to go with the original 6.7mm UWA (no rubber
grip, no rubber eyecup, and a bit less sophisticated multicoatings) the
typical savings over the new 7mm Nagler are ~61%. Once you've tried one
you won't ever regret not having spent more.

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')
------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 01:37:44 -0600, jerry warner wrote:

I like the whole uwa swa set! I lack only the 32mm. Would it be wise to
buy it
over a comparable Nagler?
jerry


Jerry,

The Meade SWA's are a lot like the old TeleVue Widefields (pre Panoptic).
Thus the 32mm Meade SWA will not be nearly as good as a 31mm Nagler in
faster scopes, and it will have only a 65 degree AFOV, vs 82 degree AFOV.
Particularly edge performance in faster scopes will not be very good.
However, you will save a bunch of money. OTOH, if your scopes speed is
mid range to slow, then the Meade SWA may offer quite adequate views.

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')
------------------------------------------------------------------------