Bit the bullet - ordered PF-65ED (1 Viewer)

zack2 · Mar 10, 2005

I've just ordered a PF-65ED (angled) from Optics 4 Birding. I got the body only, since (though I've heard it's a great lens) the XF 6.5-19.5 zoom just doesn't seem to have adequate eye relief for eyeglass wearers such as myself. Instead, I took Jay Young's advice (in a thread below) and ordered a 15mm Superview from Owl Services for $35. I'm also getting a Celestron Ultima 2x barlow ($60).

I figure this should give me a good all-around wide-angle 26x eyepiece, with the ability to double this to 52x (7.5mm, still with decent eye relief and a wide 65degree field) when needed -- I'm hoping to get some astronomical use of this scope, and I suspect the 52x will come in handy for that.

I'm still on the fence about getting a zoom. I was thinking about getting the Apogee 7.4-22mm zoom, which was incredibly cheap ($50) and had some very positive word of mouth; unfortunately, it has just been discontinued. I may try and find a used Tele Vue 8-24mm. However, I'm an inexperienced birder and I suspect the wide-field of the fixed 15mm eyepiece may make it easier for me to 'get on the bird' than the narrower field of view offered by a zoom. On the other hand, I may be understimating just how awkward and relatively time-consuming it may be to take out the eyepiece and put in the barlow each time I want a closer look at a bird -- and the bird of course may not cooperate and wait around while eyepieces are being exchanged. If I get the zoom, I could also use it with the Barlow to get higher magnfications for astronomical viewing.

This scope will get a lot of use in open areas; I'm planning on taking it on a trip at the beginning of April to watch the Spring waterfowl migration, and will be in an area that also has lots of raptors. I realize questions regarding the utility of zooms have come up many times in these forums, but do people think I'll be ok relying primarily on a wide view fixed 26x eyepiece?

Zack

HokkaidoStu · Mar 11, 2005

zack2 said:
I realize questions regarding the utility of zooms have come up many times in these forums, but do people think I'll be ok relying primarily on a wide view fixed 26x eyepiece?

Zack

The 26x e/p will be ok I guess (I mainly use the XF12 which gives a mag of 32.5x) but there will be times when you simply need more power.

You might consider the Vixen LV 8-24mm zoom (about $160) or similar eyepieces which can be found at e-bay.I recently got a Vixen clone (ie unbadged) for $80 and it's perfectly useable and the fov isn't as narrow as I'd expected........I haven't used it much though as the weather has been so lousy the last 2 weeks here....................

Dunno about Barlows-I've never used one. Try it out. You might like it and not need the zoom.

william j clive · Mar 11, 2005

Apogee sell another zoom at $70 that I can thoroughly recommend. I think it is a 22-9mm and is great bang for the buck.

zack2 · Mar 18, 2005

My PF-65ED arrived yesterday, and I thought I'd post some first impressions. So far, I've only been able to take some quick looks outside my NYC apartment building window and also view a dollar bill at about 20' inside. Also, I've got very limited experience using scopes (this is the first time I've owned one) so I can't give any meaningful comparisons to other brands. However, I used to be a motion picture camera assistant, and have extensive experience testing and evaluating lenses.

1. This thing is SMALL! I knew it was going to be only 10" long, that's one reason I bought it, but it's still a (pleasant) shock to open the box and see just how small it is!

2. It seems to be really well made. It's surprisingly heavy given the small size (though in absolute terms I think it's lighter than most of the 60mm scopes out there), feels very solid, nicely armored, no noises of any kind when you give it a good shake...

3. The ergonomics seem very good. I was pleased to see three tripod mounting screws on the foot, so you can vary the mounting position and balance to accommodate the weight of the eyepiece you are using. The stay-on-case is well designed, with flaps and velcro intelligently positioned to make using the scope easy while the case is on. I would have preferred a focus ring around the lens - it's what I'm used to with camera lenses - but I know this is a matter of personal preference.

4. The optics seem great! I don't think the scope body will be the limiting factor in optical performance. The GSO 15mm Superview eyepiece (26x) that I got from Owl Services seems like an excellent optic -- wide field of view, great contrast, no color fringing that I could see, sharp across the field except for the outer 5-10 percent or so where things go a bit soft. The eye relief is a bit tight, but manageable with glasses. Impressive performance for a $35 eyepiece. My only complaint regards eyeglass use. When you fold down the rubber eye cup, it exposes a metal ring with a sharp edge which is positioned so that it can scratch an eyeglass lens. I plan to glue a soft protective piece of moleskin to this ring ASAP.

I'm even more impressed by the 8mm-24mm zoom (49x-16x) that I got from Owl. Tom at Owl Services says that to the best of his knowledge this is the same lens that is badged by Vixen, Tele Vue, Orion, Meade et al, and based on what I've seen so far I'm inclined to believe him. No color fringing, great contrast, excellent edge-to-edge sharpness, better field of view than I expected (no dreaded drinking straw effect!). The rap on the Vixen/TV/Meade/Orion 8-24 zooms is that there is some sample-to-sample variation, and some samples go soft at the extreme 8mm end (or, less frequently, at the extreme 24mm end). I must have gotten a good one, since this eyepiece seems to be tack sharp right through from one end of the zoom range to the other. (Admittedly, I've been using it on a somewhat shaky still-camera tripod, so for now I may be missing some subtleties). I've only found two optical flaws so far. There is some very slight ghosting at the wide end -- when viewing the quarter moon against a black sky I could see a faint ghost at 24mm, it disappeared by the time I zoomed into 18mm or so. Also, both color and sharpness fall apart at the very very very edge of the frame, right next to the field stop. It's so far off to the edge that I don't notice it unless I actually force myself to look for it, and it's not something that I find at all bothersome. Mechanically, the lens is less impressive -- there's some roughness and possibly a bit of slop in the zoom action. (I briefly used a Tele Vue 8-24 zoom a few months ago, and I can't remember whether it felt better mechanically.) I'm frankly amazed that it's possible to get a zoom that performs as this one does for $65; I would have been quite satisfied at three times the price. Owl Services is out of stock on these (I think), but the identical lens is sold for Canadian $65 by Vancouver Telescope Center, and it's also available (under their 'Zhumell' brand) from www.telesccopes.com.

5. My only disappointment is that my barlow idea DOESN'T WORK! Even using a Celestron Ultima barlow (identical to the Orion Shorty Plus, I think it's just about the shortest barlow made), I couldn't get either the Superview or the zoom to focus at infinity. Max focus was about 500' with the Superview, a bit further with the zoom. I suspect that the blame lies with the small locating pin at the base of the PF-65's eyepiece receptacle. The barlow was just 1-2mm shy of fitting all the way in. (Optical quality using the barlow at the distances at which I could focus seemed to be fine.) The 49x I can get with the zoom should be fine for terrestrial viewing, but I'd like to have more magnification available for astronomical use. I just had a great view of Saturn's rings from my fire escape this evening, they were clearly and cleanly visible at 49x but it would have been nice to have gone in closer. Celestron says that they will be shipping a new barlow in a month or so (the Xcel ED) that is even shorter than the Ultima barlow, so maybe it will solve the problem.

Sorry to ramble on so long, but perhaps someone will find this helpful. I'll try to report back when I've actually had a chance to use the scope in the field.

Zack

Humboldt Jim · Mar 18, 2005

zack2 said:
My PF-65ED arrived yesterday, and I thought I'd post some first impressions. So far, I've only been able to take some quick looks outside my NYC apartment building window and also view a dollar bill at about 20' inside. Also, I've got very limited experience using scopes (this is the first time I've owned one) so I can't give any meaningful comparisons to other brands. However, I used to be a motion picture camera assistant, and have extensive experience testing and evaluating lenses.

1. This thing is SMALL! I knew it was going to be only 10" long, that's one reason I bought it, but it's still a (pleasant) shock to open the box and see just how small it is!

2. It seems to be really well made. It's surprisingly heavy given the small size (though in absolute terms I think it's lighter than most of the 60mm scopes out there), feels very solid, nicely armored, no noises of any kind when you give it a good shake...

3. The ergonomics seem very good. I was pleased to see three tripod mounting screws on the foot, so you can vary the mounting position and balance to accommodate the weight of the eyepiece you are using. The stay-on-case is well designed, with flaps and velcro intelligently positioned to make using the scope easy while the case is on. I would have preferred a focus ring around the lens - it's what I'm used to with camera lenses - but I know this is a matter of personal preference.

4. The optics seem great! I don't think the scope body will be the limiting factor in optical performance. The GSO 15mm Superview eyepiece (26x) that I got from Owl Services seems like an excellent optic -- wide field of view, great contrast, no color fringing that I could see, sharp across the field except for the outer 5-10 percent or so where things go a bit soft. The eye relief is a bit tight, but manageable with glasses. Impressive performance for a $35 eyepiece. My only complaint regards eyeglass use. When you fold down the rubber eye cup, it exposes a metal ring with a sharp edge which is positioned so that it can scratch an eyeglass lens. I plan to glue a soft protective piece of moleskin to this ring ASAP.

I'm even more impressed by the 8mm-24mm zoom (49x-16x) that I got from Owl. Tom at Owl Services says that to the best of his knowledge this is the same lens that is badged by Vixen, Tele Vue, Orion, Meade et al, and based on what I've seen so far I'm inclined to believe him. No color fringing, great contrast, excellent edge-to-edge sharpness, better field of view than I expected (no dreaded drinking straw effect!). The rap on the Vixen/TV/Meade/Orion 8-24 zooms is that there is some sample-to-sample variation, and some samples go soft at the extreme 8mm end (or, less frequently, at the extreme 24mm end). I must have gotten a good one, since this eyepiece seems to be tack sharp right through from one end of the zoom range to the other. (Admittedly, I've been using it on a somewhat shaky still-camera tripod, so for now I may be missing some subtleties). I've only found two optical flaws so far. There is some very slight ghosting at the wide end -- when viewing the quarter moon against a black sky I could see a faint ghost at 24mm, it disappeared by the time I zoomed into 18mm or so. Also, both color and sharpness fall apart at the very very very edge of the frame, right next to the field stop. It's so far off to the edge that I don't notice it unless I actually force myself to look for it, and it's not something that I find at all bothersome. Mechanically, the lens is less impressive -- there's some roughness and possibly a bit of slop in the zoom action. (I briefly used a Tele Vue 8-24 zoom a few months ago, and I can't remember whether it felt better mechanically.) I'm frankly amazed that it's possible to get a zoom that performs as this one does for $65; I would have been quite satisfied at three times the price. Owl Services is out of stock on these (I think), but the identical lens is sold for Canadian $65 by Vancouver Telescope Center, and it's also available (under their 'Zhumell' brand) from www.telesccopes.com.

5. My only disappointment is that my barlow idea DOESN'T WORK! Even using a Celestron Ultima barlow (identical to the Orion Shorty Plus, I think it's just about the shortest barlow made), I couldn't get either the Superview or the zoom to focus at infinity. Max focus was about 500' with the Superview, a bit further with the zoom. I suspect that the blame lies with the small locating pin at the base of the PF-65's eyepiece receptacle. The barlow was just 1-2mm shy of fitting all the way in. (Optical quality using the barlow at the distances at which I could focus seemed to be fine.) The 49x I can get with the zoom should be fine for terrestrial viewing, but I'd like to have more magnification available for astronomical use. I just had a great view of Saturn's rings from my fire escape this evening, they were clearly and cleanly visible at 49x but it would have been nice to have gone in closer. Celestron says that they will be shipping a new barlow in a month or so (the Xcel ED) that is even shorter than the Ultima barlow, so maybe it will solve the problem.

Sorry to ramble on so long, but perhaps someone will find this helpful. I'll try to report back when I've actually had a chance to use the scope in the field.

Zack

Your experience with the PF-65ED is the same as mine, but I got the 12mm eyepiece and suppliment it with a Vixen Lanthanum 10mm, and have ordered a 20mm Superview.

I am finding the small sisze of the PF-65ED has opened more oportunities than I first realized. I have ordered a BushHawk shoulderpod for using the scope with the 20mm eyepiece for forest birding. The small scope size and angled eyepiece should make for a very handy 19.5x scope that will allow me to look straight up while tilting my head up only 45 degrees. A real necksaver!

Thanks for your coments on the zoom and barlow. I'll be looking for a inexpensive version of "that" zoom.

For digiscoping, I,m looking for an adapter to conect my Canon A80 to the threads on the pentax eyepiece, probably using a Lensmate attachment.

todd.benko · Mar 19, 2005

zack2 said:
5. My only disappointment is that my barlow idea DOESN'T WORK! Even using a Celestron Ultima barlow (identical to the Orion Shorty Plus, I think it's just about the shortest barlow made), I couldn't get either the Superview or the zoom to focus at infinity. Max focus was about 500' with the Superview, a bit further with the zoom. I suspect that the blame lies with the small locating pin at the base of the PF-65's eyepiece receptacle. The barlow was just 1-2mm shy of fitting all the way in. (Optical quality using the barlow at the distances at which I could focus seemed to be fine.) The 49x I can get with the zoom should be fine for terrestrial viewing, but I'd like to have more magnification available for astronomical use. I just had a great view of Saturn's rings from my fire escape this evening, they were clearly and cleanly visible at 49x but it would have been nice to have gone in closer. Celestron says that they will be shipping a new barlow in a month or so (the Xcel ED) that is even shorter than the Ultima barlow, so maybe it will solve the problem.

Some thing that you might consider if if your eyepiece does still have thread on the bottom you might be able to get a scopetronics maxpower element and it might just shift the inifinity focal point much further out than you currently found it. I don't know if it would work but worth a try. Without it my scopetronics eyepiece only focuses to about 75ft.

Ps I love this little gem still!

zack2 · Apr 23, 2005

Recently got back from a two week trip with my Pentax 65ED, and thought I'd report back in more detail.

It's a great scope. The small size and light weight are even more of an advantage than I had expected. I was using it in a windy environment, and at higher magnifications it was just usable on my Bogen 3001/3130 tripod (which is the heaviest tripod that I'm willing to carry). A bigger/heavier scope would have been problematic under these conditions. Also, the small size/weight made it easy to decide to take it along on hikes -- I'd 'just throw it in the bag in case we see something along the way'. One reward was half an hour spent watching a herd of Rocky Mountain sheep (including 14 rams!) several hundred feet away across a meadow...

I found no problems whatever with the scope body relating to ergonomics, build quality or optical quality. No problems with sun flare or sky flare.

Now for the eyepieces. I found that I simply didn't use the GSO 15mm superwide (26x) since it just didn't offer enough eye relief for comfortable use with eyeglasses. It's usable, but it takes an effort, and for me the whole point of having a wide-angle low magnification eyepiece is to have a comfortable, effortless luxurious view. Since the Superwide doesn't actually offer a larger field of view than the wide angle of my 8mm-24mm zoom, I found it both easier and more comfortable to view exclusively with the zoom. Note that none of this applies if you don't use eyeglasses -- without eyeglasses, you'd probably be very happy with the GSO 15mm Superview. Also, the GSO 20mm Superview apparently offers more eye relief than the 15mm; this may be another option for eyeglass wearers, but I haven't tried it.

The 8mm-24mm zoom (16x-49x) I got from Owl Services for $65 (and available from various other venders on the Net) is a good lens, and a bargain at the price. The range is very useful - 16x gives a decently large field of view, and because of the scope's light weight it is just possible to handhold the scope at this magnification. This is more useful than I had realized, since it makes it easy to check whether it's worth pulling out the tripod, and also offers more options for viewing from within a car. 49x generally seemed about the limit that atmospheric conditions will allow. I was completely satisfied with the zoom's optics - no obvious aberrations or flares, good contrast, sharp throughout the range (the wide angle is very sharp, it may soften just slightly at the tight end but it's hard to tell whether it's the eyepiece, atmospheric conditions, or just the inevitable reduction in brightness as magnification increases). Eye relief was comfortable for use with glasses. Field of view was fine -- to my surprise, I didn't found myself frustrated and wishing I had more.

I had one opportunity to compare this scope with zoom eyepiece against another scope -- an older Zeiss 85 (82?) scope with a (new?) 20x-60x Zeiss zoom. It was late afternoon with rain clouds moving in, but it was still reasonably bright. I was only able to compare the scopes at maximum magnification, and it was no contest. The Zeiss at 60x was brighter, had more saturated color, had greater field of view, and had better eye relief than the Pentax at 49x. The increased brightness and saturation is obviously due at least in part to the Zeiss's larger objective, which carries with it a (to me unacceptable) penalty in weight and size. However, I do think that the Pentax was being held back by the quality of the cheap zoom. Again, this zoom is a bargain for the price and completely acceptable on its own terms -- I greatly enjoyed using it and had no complaints -- but I believe that the Pentax scope could do better with another zoom.

This begs the question of whether the 'no-name' 8-24 zooms such as the one I purchased are really the same eyepiece as the Vixen/Televue/Meade 8-24 zooms as some have claimed. I may purchase a used 'branded' 8-24 zoom on Astromart and compare it with my current zoom -- I HOPE the branded zooms are better, since this would be the obvious way to obtain a superior zoom. Otherwise, I'm not sure what the options would be. The Pentax 8mm-24mm zoom is by all accounts a great eyepiece but it's bigger and heavier than I'm willing to deal with. I suspect that the new compact Pentax XF zoom (6.5mm-19mm) is a great lens optically, but the published eye relief figures indicate that it probably can't be used with eyeglasses. I'd love to hear back from any eyeglass wearers who have actually had an opportunity to use this eyepiece; it would be great to be proved wrong!

Zack

John Fleet · Apr 23, 2005

zack2 said:
Recently got back from a two week trip with my Pentax 65ED, and thought I'd report back in more detail.

Now for the eyepieces. I found that I simply didn't use the GSO 15mm superwide (26x) since it just didn't offer enough eye relief for comfortable use with eyeglasses. It's usable, but it takes an effort, and for me the whole point of having a wide-angle low magnification eyepiece is to have a comfortable, effortless luxurious view. Since the Superwide doesn't actually offer a larger field of view than the wide angle of my 8mm-24mm zoom, I found it both easier and more comfortable to view exclusively with the zoom. Note that none of this applies if you don't use eyeglasses -- without eyeglasses, you'd probably be very happy with the GSO 15mm Superview. Also, the GSO 20mm Superview apparently offers more eye relief than the 15mm; this may be another option for eyeglass wearers, but I haven't tried it.

The 8mm-24mm zoom (16x-49x) I got from Owl Services for $65 (and available from various other venders on the Net) is a good lens, and a bargain at the price.

I had one opportunity to compare this scope with zoom eyepiece against another scope -- an older Zeiss 85 (82?) scope with a (new?) 20x-60x Zeiss zoom. It was late afternoon with rain clouds moving in, but it was still reasonably bright. I was only able to compare the scopes at maximum magnification, and it was no contest. The Zeiss at 60x was brighter, had more saturated color, had greater field of view, and had better eye relief than the Pentax at 49x. The increased brightness and saturation is obviously due at least in part to the Zeiss's larger objective, which carries with it a (to me unacceptable) penalty in weight and size. However, I do think that the Pentax was being held back by the quality of the cheap zoom. Again, this zoom is a bargain for the price and completely acceptable on its own terms -- I greatly enjoyed using it and had no complaints -- but I believe that the Pentax scope could do better with another zoom.

This begs the question of whether the 'no-name' 8-24 zooms such as the one I purchased are really the same eyepiece as the Vixen/Televue/Meade 8-24 zooms as some have claimed. I may purchase a used 'branded' 8-24 zoom on Astromart and compare it with my current zoom -- I HOPE the branded zooms are better, since this would be the obvious way to obtain a superior zoom. Otherwise, I'm not sure what the options would be. The Pentax 8mm-24mm zoom is by all accounts a great eyepiece but it's bigger and heavier than I'm willing to deal with. I suspect that the new compact Pentax XF zoom (6.5mm-19mm) is a great lens optically, but the published eye relief figures indicate that it probably can't be used with eyeglasses. I'd love to hear back from any eyeglass wearers who have actually had an opportunity to use this eyepiece; it would be great to be proved wrong!

Zack

Zack
I'll be very interested to hear how you get on. I've just bought an Astro Engineering 8-24mm zoom which sounds very similar to your one. I've not had the chance to compare against a 'name' zoom and I too was wondering if this is indeed the same as the Vixen/Televue/Meade - Celeston? models - I suspect not. I've found with my particular zoom that with spectacles on I do find it slightly difficult to track moving objects without getting blank areas requiring constant head movement. Don't have the same problem with the 15mm wide angle, so I think its down to the eye relief on this particular zoom.

In the UK, there's a German brand - Seben currently offering a whole range of ED fixed lens for £19.99 on eBay - they claim they're on intro and the regular price will be £99. I'm very tempted to get one to compare with my two cheapo lenses and see if I can see a difference.

I agree with your general findings about the PF65-ED. Only had mine a week or so, but I'm delighted with its lightness, and terrific ergonomics. Having all these different 1.25" lenses to choose from is just another bonus. Has anyone tried one of the video eyepieces yet I wonder - available for as little as £30!

Has anyone found a Barlow that does suit and are they worth having for birding or is the magnification just too much for real world birding?

John

zack2 · Apr 23, 2005

John Fleet said:
Has anyone found a Barlow that does suit and are they worth having for birding or is the magnification just too much for real world birding?

As I've noted elsewhere, I tried a Celestron Ultima Barlow (identical to the Orion Shorty Plus Barlow) and found I was unable to focus beyond 500-600 feet with either the GSO 15mm or the 8-24 zoom. The problem is that the small positioning pin at the bottom of the eyepiece receptacle on the Pentax prevents the barlow from seating all the way in. Since as far as I know the Celestron Ultima is the shortest barlow made, I don't believe that any other currently available barlow will work. Celestron claims that they will be coming out with an even shorter barlow (optical quality claimed to be similar to the Ultima, which is excellent) later this year. When and if it becomes available, it might solve the problem.

I don't think that a barlow would be that useful for terrestrial use (unless perhaps you had something like a high quality 20mm fixed eyepiece and wanted to be able to use it as a 10mm), but it could be very useful for astronomical observing, where higher magnifications are both desireable and possible.

Zack

Bit the bullet - ordered PF-65ED (1 Viewer)

More options

zack2

Active member

HokkaidoStu

occasional moderator

william j clive

Well-known member

zack2

Active member

Humboldt Jim

Well-known member

todd.benko

Member

zack2

Active member

John Fleet

Finally reached 300!

zack2

Active member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread