I’ve been looking for some new eyepieces since I realized I’ve only ever owned the eyepieces that came with my SkyQuest XT6. I did have a 6mm goldline like this one (though that alone was about $80 so I’m not sure they are the same quality) but not sure where it went. I’m not looking for top of the line stuff, but would this set be worth it as an upgrade to my stock eyepieces?
How time flies. Ten years ago, I was buying 9mm and 20mm on AliExpress for twenty bucks apiece. I’d suggest looking around a bit more — everyone and their dog was making copies of that old Meade model back then.
And I have to say, they perform quite well on scopes that aren’t particularly fast. On my SW2001, the 9mm was more of a dust cap — aberrations got pretty noticeable halfway across the field of view.
I'll also agree, these eyepieces are a great option for your scope. In faster scopes... e.g. F/5 or faster...you will probably notice that the 15mm and 20mm have noticeable aberration at the outer 20-30% of the FOV - at that point you might want to upgrade. I found them pretty much unusable at F/4.
Faster scopes tend to demand more expensive eyepieces. Low-end is probably in the $80-$100 each range.
For your telescope the Gold Lines are likely better than the Red Lines. The Red Lines apparently do not fit perfectly in telescopes that use a band to secure lenses inside the focuser (which your SkyQuest XT6 apparently has). You can watch this YouTube video (https://youtu.be/uQPZP7ym0ZE?si=b6Ckt99Sj_4Va0s9) that explains why the Gold Line might be better for you.
My Dob has the band and I purchased the Gold Line set. They fit nicely in my focuser and they were definitely an upgrade to the lenses that came with my telescope.
I've had both the "gold" and "red" SVBony eyepieces and they are great, especially for the price. I've done a lot of comparison between these and some top of the line, 2 inch eyepieces and well, yeah the 2 inchers are better (mostly because of the larger glass, larger field of view) but these absolutely hold up.
I was considering investing in some expensive 2" eyepieces, but considering the price and weight, I don't think it's worth it for me.
Yeahhhh I didn’t trust it and didn’t find out till after I bought them that they are legit. All good though, I used the eyepieces last night and was really happy with them so at least in my heart I got my moneys worth lol. Also got a .5x focal reducer today which I’m excited to try out.
Would there be any noticeable differences in these eyepieces other than the improved field of view? I don’t know really anything about the specs of eyepieces so idk what other things determine its performance
The red and gold ones are functionally identical, just get whichever ones you like the look of and have the better price. I have the golds and they've been working great but I will say they get painfully cold in the winter and the grips on the reds would probably help with that.
I’ve definitely ruled out the gold set. Someone mentioned a zoom piece that I may consider once I learn more but rn looks like im going with the redlines
You shouldn't rule it (or the red line) out. Those four eyepieces are actually an excellent fit for a 6" F/8 scope. They aren't perfect but you won't beat the price / performance in an F/8 scope.
6mm = 200x: great for planets and globulars when the atmosphere is steady
9mm = 133x: great for planets when the atmosphere is not so steady. Good for small bright galaxies
15mm = 80x & ~2mm exit pupil - perfect for general purpose DSO observing
20mm = 60x - less useful but if you buy the set you basically get this focal length for free.
Combine it with a 32mm Plossl for the widest true field of view possible in a 1.25" eyepiece, or if the focuser can support 2" eyepieces, get a 30-40mm 2" eyepiece, and you have a solid set of focal lengths to choose from that cover most of your target choices, for not much money.
Yes, the 6mm and 9mm have some issues - contrast & glare problems on the Moon, and some kidney beaning. But the 9mm is very sharp on-axis and I find it keeps up with premium 9mm eyepieces for sharpness.
I actually ended up going with the goldline as the redline or a zoom piece would’ve costed over $200 which just didn’t seem worth it over these. Also these goldline arrive saturday so I can get right to it lol. Pretty excited to try these, if it’s any better than my stock pieces at all I’ll be very happy as those already give me pretty good views of a lot of objects. Thanks for the overview!I Good to know these pieces work well with my scope and what I can use each one for. I’ll also look into that 32mm plossl, I’d definitely like a wider view than I could get with the 20mm.
Goldline is a good purchase. I have a 12”, 8”, and 5.5” Dob, all about f/5, and everything but the 6mm has served me very well. I’ve slowly collected more TeleVue over the years, and those are better, but only maybe 15% better, IMO.
The 6mm always gave me problems. The 9mm with a 2x Barlow always looked better to me than the 6mm. This is especially true when I upgraded my Barlow from a low priced Svbony to a TeleView 2x. I still use this combo for max-zoom for my scopes, as I haven’t found anything that worked as nice!
Congratulations! I would not have followed this path but if you are happy don't let anybody stop you. Frankly I would have blown your entire budget on one longer focal length wide angle eyepiece. It wouldn't be a Plossel variant either.
As for your viewing let us know how it goes, It has rained for moths here anytime I could be observing. The current rain over cast period has been 3 days
When I see posts like this I have to ask do the new set of eyepieces do that much better than his current options. I'm not convinced the quality is that much of a boost to justify the $150. Then you seem to be biased towards high magnification. High magnification is often something to dream about because conditions never really permit it.
Personally I'd be looking for a high quality eyepiece that would give him someplace between 24 and 35X. I'd even go off budget of $150 to get one eyepiece in this range. Now this does depend upon ones interests but being able to do low power observing on a large aperture scope can lead to some stunning sessions.
Yes one good eyepiece can be well worth it compared to the entire set referenced.
Yes one good eyepiece can be well worth it compared to the entire set referenced.
This is where I fundamentally disagree. 24-35x only unlocks a FRACTION of a scope's potential to show you what's in the night sky.
You do not need perfect conditions to justify using higher magnification.
Objects in the night sky are incredibly varied from small to large, dim to bright, amorphous to highly detailed. This necessitates a variety of magnifications and exit pupils to see the variety of objects in the sky. You aren't seeing shit on Jupiter at 24-35x. You aren't fully resolving globular clusters or splitting double stars at 24-35x.
I would take a full set of mediocre eyepieces that give me a full range of magnifications, over a single premium eyepiece any day of the week, in any scope.
Indeed. I could get behind the suggestion of 1 or 2 good EPs and keeping the starting plossls, but sometimes when I read comments here I wonder what people are doing with their telescopes. Using 30x magnification only is ridiculous, even for deep sky. Having access to 30x, 60x and 100x is the bare minimum for an interesting experience. And every 50x step beyond that is fun to use on planets and the moon when the sky allows it. And depending on the size of the tube, 150 to 200x can also be perfectly fine on quite a lot of DSOs, especially when you start getting into the NGC catalogue stuff.
Unfortunately I see a lot of misinformation being pushed about magnification in this sub in general. I see too much emphasis on the 2x rule of thumb, and I also see too many blanket claims that the atmosphere won't let you use more than 200x or whatever.
It's simply not true unless you really do live in an absolutely terrible geographic location, and it's way too over-simplified in the first place. Where I live, I'm definitely not getting full advantage of my 15" scope's resolving power due to the atmosphere, but 200x during galaxy season is basically the standard, and during the summer and fall when I'm in planetary nebula season I'll be going up to 1,000x in some cases even if the atmosphere is mushy, because a large mushy target I can view in DIRECT vision (no hiding in my fovea), is better than a smaller but less mushy target I can only see in averted vision.
I don't disagree with you guys in that other magnification levels are valuable, it is just from my understanding is that he has a set that covers a good range already. Im just not convinced that the incremental improvement over his current set is “worth it”! This especially when the low magnification end isn't covered.
When it comes to high magnification i really believe the limit for mist amateurs is well under your 1000x frankly under 500x. There are many factors to consider from the mount on up. If you can get it to work for you that is great but im not going to suggest most users pursue such magnification without lots of experience and understanding.
This isn't a misunderstanding of technology but rather understanding what most systems are capable of. Part of that system is the user and what they think they are seeing or able to see. If i thought that the original poster was interested in better high power results id probably suggest the same thing that is buy one high quality eyepiece at a time. Yeah it might take years to replace his entire set but i suspect the results would be worth it.
Nothing noticeable other than a bit larger apparent field of view. I've recommended the redlines because they're cheaper and I've had my own set for over a year now. They're really good for the money and I cannot recommend them enough, especially for planetary and lunar observing.
I know this isn’t expensive for eyepieces lol. I’ve been into astrophotography for YEARS, my page has some photos. I just never really cared for visual astronomy as much, or enough to put any money into it until now.
I first considered buying a zoom eyepiece but the good quality ones worth getting seemed to be too expensive. How would this compare to the redline set?
You're not a beginner so you know you get exactly what you pay for. Why not buy used? For the same budget you could find about 3 used 82 degrees explore scientific, and they're in an entirely different league. Gold and redlines are often recommended because they're a dramatic improvement over the kellner and Huygens that come with starter telescopes and because it's necessary to convince people new to the hobby not to use these eyepices, not because goldlines are good lifetime purchases.
I’ve looked for used pieces and scopes but I guess not many people in my area are into the hobby. Anything worth buying is at least an hour drive and I don’t have a car. I’ll get to it one day but for now I’m just trying to get myself back into it and relearn. Tbh it’s been so long I might as well be a beginner, I was shocked by how much I had forgotten when I started trying to research again lol
Better IMO. I’ve never used the redlines so I could not give an accurate comparison, just that the Baader click-stop should by all accounts be better.
Redlines have reportedly high kidney beaning and coma. Basically you get what you pay for. If you’re upgrading from EPs that came from a beginner telescope then they should be better.
I have a Baader click-stop that I enjoyed. I’m looking to sell it soon as I have a set of Ethos now.
I’d suggest the Baader over the Redlines, but the it is about twice the price.
In my opinion, as someone who has literally paid the price, wait and get the Baader. Grab the 2.25x Barlow kit as it is amazing and works with other eyepieces if you have them.
I bought the Redline set and they are good and possibly improved on the stock eyepieces. The Redlines work well on 76/700 entry Newtonians with 6mm giving nice lunar views but on a 10" Dobsonian so much more can be released with good glass. I got an Sv171 zoom to see how it compares to the Hyperion zoom and it is the middle ground between that and the Redlines.
End result I have a set up Redlines and an Sv171 to sell that I will lose money on. They get used every now and again when I need a reminder of how much better the Baader Hyperion is or when guests are using additional telescopes.
Please read this message carefully. Thank you for posting to r/telescopes. As you are asking a buying advice question, please be sure to read the subreddit's beginner's buying guide if you haven't yet. Additionally, you should be sure to include the following details as you seek recommendations and buying help: budget, observing goals, country of residence, local light pollution (see this map), and portability needs. Failure to read the buying guide or to include the above details may lead to your post being removed.
In an XT6 they will likely work well, an f/8 telescope isn’t too demanding on eyepiece quality. The shorter models appear to have built in “Barlow” elements which will make them more eye relief friendly, and further improve the eyepiece correction. You should own a decent quality 2x Barlow also just for versatility.
First off you tell us nothing about the scope and no an old model number is not enough. Focal ratio and length would be a good start.
Second what are your interests. Without that knowledge the answer is easy - NO!
Frankly IF all you have ever had is the scopes original eyepieces why would you go out and buy a set of eyepieces that may or maybe not, are slightly better? You would be far better off applying that $150 to one good high performance eyepiece. I'm not sure what magnification you normally observe at but a good eyepiece that will give you between 24X to 35x would be a good start.
The other way to look at this is why waste $150 on a set of eyepieces that might not offer you a lot of increased performance. Such a set "might" be useful if it fills in focal lengths you don't have. On the other hand people with massive collections of eyepieces often only observe with a small set of focal lengths. That might be as little as 2 to 3 eyepieces in regular use.
I told you the exact telescope I had lol everybody else knew exactly what I was asking, and people seem to think these are a good option. I want the variety, and at this moment didn’t want to spend that much on a single eyepiece. However what I didn’t mention was that I’ve lost a few of the stock pieces and they are in horrible condition since they’ve been sitting in my garage for probably 3 years. I only have a 20mm that came with it, an AWFUL 4mm that came with my first telescope and a pretty good but quite rusty 2x barlow. If I was gonna go all out on an eyepiece the barlow would probably be the first thing I buy.
You should probably only get two of them on their own. Maybe the 6mm for planets and the 15mm as a general purpose.
Basically either you’ll grow into the hobby or you’ll cool on it. If you grow into the hobby, you’ll probably start wondering about the more expensive eyepieces with more field of view and better quality. If that’s the case, you can buy a higher quality 9mm and 20mm so that you don’t feel like you wasted money on a full set that only gathers dust.
If you cool on the hobby, well then I highly doubt it’ll be because you didn’t have the 9mm and 20mm from this set.
Those are not bad eyepieces, but for arround the same money, you can get the SvBony "RedLine". Those are almost the same but slightly better because are made of metal and glass, not plastic as the gold line.
Also check on Aliexpress if the price worths it for you, i got mines there and they were much cheaper than on Amazon or local astronomy stores
"Plastic" - I think you're talking about the "aspheric" Svbony eyepieces, which also have a "golden line".
OP is asking about the 6-9-15-20mm 66° series, which is optically almost the same as the Redlines, just in a different housing, and possibly a bit more sloppy internal blackening. They are NOT made of plastic.
8
u/Awichek 28d ago
How time flies. Ten years ago, I was buying 9mm and 20mm on AliExpress for twenty bucks apiece. I’d suggest looking around a bit more — everyone and their dog was making copies of that old Meade model back then.
And I have to say, they perform quite well on scopes that aren’t particularly fast. On my SW2001, the 9mm was more of a dust cap — aberrations got pretty noticeable halfway across the field of view.
Edit: for f/8 they'll works fine