Author Topic: General purpose Morpheus thread...  (Read 318 times)

Stanley Edwards

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 132
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: General purpose Morpheus thread...
« Reply #15 on: January 18, 2018, 07:09:31 AM »
Wow, such a capricious system.

I have probably bought stuff internationally about 10 times, and I have never had a duty request.

For an eyepiece of modest price, it's worth the risk, but for an expensive item it would make me think twice.

Jason Rivard

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: General purpose Morpheus thread...
« Reply #16 on: January 18, 2018, 08:53:06 AM »
Quote
Wow, such a capricious system.

I have probably bought stuff internationally about 10 times, and I have never had a duty request.

For an eyepiece of modest price, it's worth the risk, but for an expensive item it would make me think twiceWhen

When you bought your eyepieces from FLO were they shipped DHL? They seem to charge duty while USPS may not.

bakhvecenle

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: General purpose Morpheus thread...
« Reply #17 on: January 21, 2018, 12:42:26 AM »
Yep, DHL both times . . .

Both had unopened forms appended to the outside of the boxes declaring country of manufacture and cost in pounds.

Roger Evans

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: General purpose Morpheus thread...
« Reply #18 on: January 21, 2018, 04:35:39 AM »
Tried a 14mm out tonight. Liked the field of view, the eye comfort, as nice in sharpness and light transmission as the 15mm DeliteI was comparing it too....but I just don't like the eyecups...at all. Trying to unfold the default one and then fold it back up when I was done, I was annoyed as I felt if I had a full set of these, I'd leave many fingerprints on them because I wouldn'tbe so careful like I wastonight. Just wrong.

Other than that, very nice! Still like Delos better overall but these would work with a better permanent eyecup!

Kyle Montes

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: General purpose Morpheus thread...
« Reply #19 on: January 23, 2018, 02:07:45 AM »
I have the 4.5mm and it's an optically excellent and very well corrected eyepiece. Edge of field correction is very close to the Delos and XWs. Contrast on the planets is the best I have seen with the 4.5 Morpheus and at least on par with the Delos.

The downsides are the eye cup like others have mentioned and some some EOFB. I have also had some very serous eye positioning and black out problems when viewing the moon, luckily for me I'm not a Lunar observer.

bandretaco

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: General purpose Morpheus thread...
« Reply #20 on: January 23, 2018, 12:57:45 PM »
Another clear night and I have these another several hour comparison to my Pentax XW's.

Transparency was much better but still some 'wavy' turbulence, one of the better nights so far. My daughters boyfriend was here again so i had a pair of younger eyes to compare views with. Over the time we viewed the planetary observing did deteriorate somewhat, to me seeming that the transparency allowed for less magnification. This Saturn comparison was only done with the BaaderMorpheus and the Pentax XW's, well ok I did at one point slip in the Delos 6mm... but removed it fairly quickly so as not to confuse myself. Using the 14" as a sort of secondary reference but concentrating on the FC100-DF. Both scope on tracking mounts. It seemed to me that the Tak was doing a better job on Saturn with the seeing, though more moons visible in the XX14g. That was just my impression. It was Bruce's first time with the Tak and he was immediately impressed with 'the little refractor view'. I'd only given a brief intro to it saying this is a two lens refractor from a company known for making very good refractors.

I was specifically looking for scatter, any difference in color rendering, and sharpness. At one point i said to myself "time to put the Baader back in ".... I reached into the tripod ep tray only to realize it was the BaaderI was looking through... well that may be the highest compliment to the eyepiece or a graphic example of my inability to remember things? I was using the Cassini division and the ring to planet interface on both sides to judge the seeing as there is an interesting optical illusion happening there just now with ring tilt. It presents as a sort of dark shadow triangle intrusion, great drawing of it in the"Solar System Observing forum"observing forum. The Saturn Cassini merger I see this in my small refractor also where the inner ring intersects the planet. Anyway, the way the night went It became difficult to keep a sharp Cassini and that is when we moved to Alberio.

One thing I've been trying to nail down and I do not know what the correct term would be is a red to blue shift (top to bottom on the rings, on the short axis, or longitudal to the planet poles) that I noticed in the Dob. This is not the first night it's happened. A sort of chromatic aberration on the outer edge of the ringsnear and at best focus (as approached from both sides). Noted that it was more prominent when looking for highest useful magnification. ThisI need to drill into as it seemed obvious but also somewhat inconsistent over the hours.Is it the scope or the eyepiece? Time to double check collimation. I am mentioning this in the interest of completeness, though it's my own shortcoming as a reviewer to say if it was more or less in one ep over another or what is a possible cause. It did not seem to detract from the definition, and 'in the better seeing'using the Dob Saturns belts and pole were obvious in a way not seen in the much smaller refractor.

Turned both scopes to Alberio and observed at various magnifications using all four eyepieces. I will say 'to my eyes'itwas a toss up between the two brands of eyepiece as to the sharpness and color. On all eyepieces I carefully defocused on both sides(this accents the colors greatlyamber on the one and a sapphire blue on the other) and refocused. Again I found myself confusing exactly which brand was in the eyepiece. I tried to be careful in looking from center to edge to try and discern if there was any change in sharpness and image fidelity and it was not at all obvious if there was any difference at all. The Dob did present a very slight diffraction spider print on theamber member of the pair (Alberio A?), but that was the only real difference I noted. I should also say the diffraction ring in the Tak are nicely circular on both side of focus... Across the 4 eyepiece focal lengths I own of these the only noticeable difference was the spacing of the colored double and number of stars in the field. As the eyepiece focal length increased the view only became more immersive, this true on both scopes used.

Oh! I should say that the Pentax XW and the Baader Morpheus are very nearly par focal. I knew there was something I was forgetting. Only a very small, and I mean very small, refocus necessary. An odd plus comparing the two brands. Thisis not true of the Delos to either of them.

About the eyecups. I usually don't pay a lot of attention to them as I've restricted any outside light sources that could be an issue. I do agree they are less than ideal. I tried flipping them up making a sort of OK sign with finger and thumb and it came off in the dark. Located it, reattached and about the only way i could raise itinvolved touching the outer peripheral of the eyepiece lens, it seemed unavoidable. Maybe this is why the include the winged variant in the box? As with the Pentax with that big eye lens I am sure must be very prone to external light sources and issues related to them.Again not an issue for me but I think if it is the winged variants would help a lot if it was only from one direction? Maybe I am lucky i can only care about the view through the eyepiece.

My main take aways from last night are
- The performance in the Morpheus are good enough to confuse me if I am looking through it or the Pentax XW.
- I need to nail down the source of the chromatic shift aberration in the Dob and i suspect collimation.
-Not having same focal length to compare makes this whole comparison a little hopscotch and maybe a little oddball, possibly irrelevant?

Here are two charts that have the eyepieces evaluated highlighted in yellow and their spec data for each scope if you are interested. This is my first attempt ata reviewlike this and so I only am hoping it helps folks and does not muddy any waters.

here is for the FC100-DFhere is for the XX14gI hope to ad to this as observing time allows.

meenchinobun

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: General purpose Morpheus thread...
« Reply #21 on: January 23, 2018, 04:04:33 PM »
Great, detailed report!

I also got out last night and made comparisons between the M14, the D14, 14XW, and Leica ASPH estimated at 14. . . The comparisons were made in my 6" F8 triplet.

The session just started as a quick look at Saturn from my balcony, but before long Saturn was out of reach so I started scanning around the SE sky.

I chanced on a small open cluster which gave the impression of some nebulosity (I guessed it at about Mag 9, and a size of 5-8 arc minutes). A little bit of searching on Sky Safari this morn, I suspect I was looking at NGC 6802--Mag 8.8 and 5 arc minutes: "the cluster appears as a faint oval patch of haze in which seven stars are resolved". I would say that it had two lobes of faint nebulosity, with a larger round lobe to the left, and a thinner extended lobe to the right. There were quite a bit more than 7 stars embedded (but I wasn't counting).

This was an interesting object to make comparisons as it was high (70-75 degrees) with good seeing and transparency, and it was quite dim from my light polluted location making it a good place for 'near the limit' comparisons.

I spent a couple of hours doing lots of swapping back and forth to see if any eyepiece was giving me a better sense of what I was looking at. At first glance it looked like an irregular galaxy, but once my eyes were dark adapted, that was soon ruled out. Swapping in a DGM NPB filter had no effect on the nebulosity, however.

First Place

Out of the four eyepieces, the Leica was the decisive winner. Brighter stars around the field were a tiny hair tighter and the object was a tiny bit easier to pick up. The field was fairly small at 14mm, but the ability to zoom with the excellent contrast was just unbeatable. This thing keeps reminding me why it's my most used eyepiece.

Second Place

I was a surprised to discover that the M14 and 14XW were tied for second place.

This is not because I have a high opinion of the 14XW. Quite the contrary. I really don't like the field curvature in the 14mm XW, but at F8 I accommodate it very well. So the field curvature issue just wasn't there. All I was concerned with was the tightness of the stars and the transmission in the center of the field. Both gave very similar views. The only place that I could fault the M14 was that brighter stars at the edge of the field (say 20 degrees from the edge) seemed to be showing a little bit of blue lateral color (I'm guessing the coatings are the culprit), and this depended on the angle at which I was looking at the view--I only saw this with my head turned.

Third Place

The surprise of the evening was that the Delos 14 came in last spot. Really not by any major margin, but I was expecting that it would come in first, or at least be tied with the Leica. We are not talking a major difference, just a very subtle difference in the ease with which I could pick up the object. It was just a tiny bit dimmer in the D14. Perhaps it just needed a cleaning.

So the Morpheus 14 is a real winner in my view. For the money, views just as sharp as the Pentax (and better for most scopes b/c of the field curvature in the XW), it has a noticeably larger field, and is just as comfortable to use, though the eye relief is a bit tighter than the XW.

And one final thing . . . I misplaced the dust cover for the M14 and went back to the packing materials to fetch the second dust cover. When I did I noticed that the second dust cover is a little smaller, and slides nicely over the extended cup. The dust cover issue only exists if you insist on folding the cup down before you cover it. I'll be leaving it this way from here on in as I prefer to use it with the cup extended.

faubloginac

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 127
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: General purpose Morpheus thread...
« Reply #22 on: January 23, 2018, 05:50:57 PM »
Quote
- The performance in the Morpheus are good enough to confuse me if I am looking through it or the Pentax XW.


I think we are finally at the point in technology with conventional glass that there is nothing more than can really be done. So expect that it will be like this where really hard to make any distinction in the views given the state of where the optic technology is, so if you design it well then performance will be on-par with the other top class offerings. Question really now becomes, where to go from here?

ps - great report btw

breakagalkit

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: General purpose Morpheus thread...
« Reply #23 on: January 25, 2018, 05:30:36 PM »
Quote
Quote
My main take aways from last night are- The performance in the Morpheus are good enough to confuse me if I am looking through it or the Pentax XW.


I think we are finally at the point in technology with conventional glass that there is nothing more than can really be done. So expect that it will be like this where really hard to make any distinction in the views given the state of where the optic technology is, so if you design it well then performance will be on-par with the other top class offerings. Question really now becomes, where to go from here?

ps - great report btw
It is sounding as though the Pentax XW, Delos and Morpheus are all pretty close with only minor differences. Bill, I know you love your PXW and now you are comparing the Morpheus to them. Did you ever try the Delos? Perhaps the PXW won out because of the 30mm and 40mm in its line?

middbankrecra

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 106
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: General purpose Morpheus thread...
« Reply #24 on: January 31, 2018, 05:24:43 AM »
Yes I did try out the Delos. They were fine...and again on-par with the XWs and better with respect to lateral color. In fact, before I got my XWs the Delos had just come out so it was a bit of a decision since both optically are very close to on par and both have nice eye relief. For my eye I felt the exit pupil was a little easier to hold on the XWs and I actually like the rubberized housing better (in dead of winter metal housings just get way too cold to touch). But the real clincher for me at the time was availability of a full range of focal lengths. The Delos was going to be partial and stop at 17.3mm so that left me to decide what do I get with similar visual look and feel in the longer focal lengths? XWs? So just went with the XWs so I could get a full range of focal lengths, a consistent form factor, and a consistent visual experience. So I have the 40mm thru 3.5mm XWs. Unfortunately for those today, can no longer get the 2" models. So whether one gets Delos or XW today, what do you get if you want a 70 deg AFOV and 20mm ER eyepiece to maintain consistency and have the same premium visuals?

indepmontla

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: General purpose Morpheus thread...
« Reply #25 on: February 03, 2018, 03:47:28 AM »
areyoukiddingme - thank youfor your report on the comparison, well done!

BillP, first , thank you! I'm curious about the longer focal length Morpheus, ..? time will tell.

Paul Hunt

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: General purpose Morpheus thread...
« Reply #26 on: February 08, 2018, 02:43:15 AM »
I do not know what the hold up with that one is. But I think they are getting very close.

Michael Zamora

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 104
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: General purpose Morpheus thread...
« Reply #27 on: February 09, 2018, 08:25:30 AM »
The 14mm Morpheus has quickly become my primary eyepiece for DSO. I use it native at 64x and barlowed at 135x. Realistically those two magnifications cover most of my DSO needs. Sometimes I throw in the 12mm Pentax XF for 75x and 158x or the 5.5mm Meade UWA (164x). For wider TFOV I use either the 32mm Meade RG erfle or the 28mm Pentax XL.

The Morpheus is extremely comfortable and engaging.  Baader ought to look into developing 2" Morpheus eyepieces in longer FL. How about a 32mm FL with a 42mm field stop?  That could be a nice replacement on the market for the 30mm XW. If it could be made with the same weight as the 30mm and 40mm XW's it would be a real success.  Maybe a 2" 24mm FL as well.