Pentax 20-60 zoom or not?? (1 Viewer)

[Tim Taylor]

Hi all. Just received my first spotting scope this lunchtime - the PF-80EDa. I'd appreciate advice on eyepieces and in particular whether or not to go for the 20-60x zoom. I have eyepieces as below:

Televue Panoptic 19mm
Burgess/TMB planetary 9mm and 4mm
Astroengineering 8-24mm zoom
A couple of longer FL celestron plossls

I bought the scope because it's lighter than my 80mm astro scope that I've been lugging round and it's watertight. I'd like to think the Pentax 20-60x lens would be sharp at all magnifcations, would have a reasonable FOV and that keeping my eye directly central over the EP would be less critical than with my existing zoom which is designed primatily for photography rather than viewing. It's also supposed to be water-resistant. The views through the Panoptic set the standard to be followed!

All advice gratefully received.

Tim

 

[dipped]

Personally if I was in your position I would want to check out the new Baader Hyperion zoom, to see if it worked on the 80mm Pentax. You can't have missed the reviews on it. It's not waterproof but does it really have to be?

I did have the (Pentax) zoom on a straight pf80. I found it very heavy, very stiff to focus and eye placement is an acquired taste as it is so huge. I'm sure there are other users who just love it. I did find it sharp all through its range and it opens up nicely at higher mags but is rather narrow at 20x.

Hope this helps somehow.

 

[henry link]

I don't know whether the Baader will reach focus on the Pentax 80, but I think it is a far better eyepiece than the Pentax, which IMO is the least successful of the expensive zoom eyepieces. Compared to Swaro, Nikon, Zeiss and Baader the Pentax loses sharpness and contrast and shows more lateral color at short focal lengths. It's the biggest and heaviest of them all at 19 oz and yet has a field no wider than the small Nikon (40-60 degrees). And it costs over twice as much as the Baader. I also have a 19mm Panoptic. I don't think you will see any significant difference between the Panoptic and the Baader set at 19mm within the center 40 degrees of their fields. Outside that area the Panoptic has less astigmatism and field curvature but much more pincushion distortion.

 

[Tim Taylor]

Thanks for your comments. I'm not keen to take a risk with a lens that might not reach focus. Is something like the Swaro easy to adapt for a 1 1/4 inch fitting and is it worth the effort involved? There's no obvious price difference for me at present with lens purchase between these two zooms.

 

[henry link]

There is no 1.25" adapter for Swarovski eyepieces, but you're going to have to take a risk that focus can't be reached with any non-Pentax eyepiece. Surely any dealer would allow you to return an eyepiece that won't reach focus on your scope. FWIW the Baader zoom needs 10mm of in-focus compared to the 19mm Panoptic. Unfortunately its not much help to know that with an internally focused telescope unless you happen to have another eyepiece that also needs 10mm.

 

[Tim Taylor]

Hmm, guaranteed compatability sounds like a great selling point for the Pentax lens then! I'll give it all some more thought. Thanks for the advice. Tim

 

[Nigel G]

My Pentax came with the 20-60x and for a year or so it was all I had and did most of what I wanted including digiscoping. Then I bought the Pentax XW 20mm and I have hardly ever put the zoom back on. The fixed XW at about x26 is so much brighter that the zoom looks positively gloomy by comparison and I find I would rather do without the extra magnication in favour of a bright image.

 

[Tim Taylor]

My Pentax came with the 20-60x and for a year or so it was all I had and did most of what I wanted including digiscoping. Then I bought the Pentax XW 20mm and I have hardly ever put the zoom back on. The fixed XW at about x26 is so much brighter that the zoom looks positively gloomy by comparison and I find I would rather do without the extra magnication in favour of a bright image.

Thanks Nigel. I've used the scope this weekend with the 19mm Panoptic and most of the time I haven't looked for more magnification and I've really enjoyed the wide bright image. I'm thinking I might I might go for a 20XW and a 10XW or 14XW. Rather depends on what turns up. I occasionally like to digiscope so this would probably work well for me.

 

[medinabrit]

Thanks Nigel. I've used the scope this weekend with the 19mm Panoptic and most of the time I haven't looked for more magnification and I've really enjoyed the wide bright image. I'm thinking I might I might go for a 20XW and a 10XW or 14XW. Rather depends on what turns up. I occasionally like to digiscope so this would probably work well for me.

I have the 20 ,14 , & 10 XW,s. You will never regret getting any of them .
You can unscrew the eye cup & use the thread to attache cameras with a thread adapter.They are in my opinion the best EP,s available.
Brian.

 

[Tim Taylor]

Thanks Brian. I've ordered the 10x and 20x XW. Tim

 

[medinabrit]

Thanks Brian. I've ordered the 10x and 20x XW. Tim

Great photos Tim. Hope you enjoy the XW,s as much as i do
Brian.

 

[Tim Taylor]

Just to feed back to people, I'm getting great views with the 20 and 10mm XWs. Secondhand they didn't come to much more than the zoom. Because of their size and weight it is a mild nuisance carrying both and changing but most of the time the view through the 20mm is all I need.

Is there an adapter to mount to the thread on the 20mm lens? I have a coolpix 990 that I'd like to try on it. Can't find one so far on the net.

Thanks, Tim.

 

[medinabrit]

Is there an adapter to mount to the thread on the 20mm lens? I have a coolpix 990 that I'd like to try on it. Can't find one so far on the net.


Hi Tim .I use a 28 to 43 step up ring on a nikon 4500 camera for the xw EP,s
I Got it from [email protected]. give them a try . it only cost a few bucks.
Brian.

 

[mmdnje]

Hi Tim. I also use a 28-43mm step ring to attach a CP4500 to XW20. Works fine. Jose

 

[Tim Taylor]

Thanks Brian and Jose, I'll give it a try. Tim

 

[medinabrit]

Thanks Brian and Jose, I'll give it a try. Tim

Hi Jose it was you who put me onto the step up ring site .
Thanks Brian.

 

[eitanaltman]

Just to feed back to people, I'm getting great views with the 20 and 10mm XWs. Secondhand they didn't come to much more than the zoom. Because of their size and weight it is a mild nuisance carrying both and changing but most of the time the view through the 20mm is all I need.

Hi Tim,

Out of curiosity, since you had some nice astro ep's before you got your XW's, I'm curious as to your thoughts on:

20mm XW vs. the 19mm Panoptic

10mm XW vs. the 9mm B/TMB planetary?

I know the Pano is highly regarded for astro stuff, I'm just curious what your thoughts are after trying it vs. the XW in terrestrial birding applications.

 

[Tim Taylor]

Hi Tim,

Out of curiosity, since you had some nice astro ep's before you got your XW's, I'm curious as to your thoughts on:

20mm XW vs. the 19mm Panoptic

10mm XW vs. the 9mm B/TMB planetary?

I know the Pano is highly regarded for astro stuff, I'm just curious what your thoughts are after trying it vs. the XW in terrestrial birding applications.

I haven't really had time to do much of a comparison so far and I'm far from expert myself but I'll post some comments when I've had more of a chance to experiment. In practical terms my plan is to move the Panoptic 19mm and the TMB 9mm on unless the comparison unexpectedly goes in their favour.

 

[Tim Taylor]

Spent some time moongazing this evening so some brief comparisons were possible.

20mm XW vs 19mm Panoptic: 20mm brighter and whiter. Both beautifully sharp. No obvious colour fringe on the bright limb of the moon. 20mm had a wider field and seemed to me to be less fussy about eye placement.

10mm XW vs TMB planetary 9mm: 10mm brighter and the TMB to me seemed to have a yellowish cast and some slight colour on the edge of the moon. Both were sharp but the Pentax was sharper and in addition had a much wider FOV.

Other comments: The Pentax lenses are huge, heavy and expensive but they fit the scope perfectly and are just beautifully engineered. They are more or less parfocal and they are apparently waterproof enough for birding. For me at present I will forgive them their bulk and sell the other lenses. For people with tighter budgets, the Panoptic gives views nearly as good but for the money, the TMB planetary series give a good sharp view.

As I said earlier, I'm no expert and this was just a quick opinion based on moon rather than bird gazing.

Tim

 

[young ian]

Hi all. Just received my first spotting scope this lunchtime - the PF-80EDa.

Hello to everybody.
I too have just aquired the PF-80ED. I have also bought
the Hyperion 17mm and the 21mm eyepieces, brillient over the moon
with them.
I then tried the Hyperion Zoom. Sadly,this eyepiece would
not reach focus. There seems to be an additional layer/ washer at
the base which prevents in being pushed home, this cannot be removed.
I must say though, that the two eyepieces that I have 17mm
and 21mm do seem to cover what I shall need. I just fancied a zoom at the
time.
Wonderfull service from Teleskop-Service, Germany.

Kindest regards,
Ian.