• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Opticron eyepiece woes! (1 Viewer)

Helwith

Well-known member
Hi,

Anyone used an Imagic x 80mm 'scope with a 32ww HDF eyepiece? The reason, I'm asking is that I purchased one recently and to be honest it's the worst eyepiece I've looked through.

Focusing & definition was abysmal. I've sent it back for a replacement although specifying a 25ww HDF instead.

Could it be a bad batch? As my zoom eyepiece works perfectly at the low end of the magnification range.

TIA
 
I recently bought an ES 80 with the32 ww HDf eyepiece and have no problems - could it be the scope that's at fault?

Gordon
 
Gordon said:
I recently bought an ES 80 with the32 ww HDf eyepiece and have no problems - could it be the scope that's at fault?

Gordon
The 'scope is OK IMO. The zoom seems to be OK on it. The 'scope has never been abused so the prisms etc, should be OK.

I'll soon find out after the replacement arrives! If it is the 'scope, I'll have a chat with Opticron. Hopefully they will advise on the course of action. Maybe they'll just replace it with an ES 80 ;)

Craven
 
You must have had a faulty eyepiece - the Opticron HDF 32xWW is very highly regarded. The Imagic 80 is not a bad scope at all, either - although you will see a small amount of colour fringing in some lighting conditions, that is about all.

Also, I would say the 32x eyepiece would be a much better choice for birding use than a 25x.
 
I bought my ES80 with the 32ww HDF and it's absolutely fine. I also have the 23x, which I bought for digiscoping, and that is also OK.
 
digi-birder said:
I bought my ES80 with the 32ww HDF and it's absolutely fine. I also have the 23x, which I bought for digiscoping, and that is also OK.
Hi,

Just got a replacement, but chose a 25 x WW and this eyepiece is fine! I think the original must have been faulty.

Considering that you have 32ww HDF, can you tell me how it fits the 'scope?

The reason is my zoom attaches with a ringed collar on the outer thread on the scope also the new 25X does so, but the eyepiece I sent back just screwed into the body using the inner thread, NOT like the others. The duff eyepiece was marked up to fit an Imagic 80! I'm wondering whether the 32x I sent back was not intended for my scope at all!

Craven.
 
CravenBirds said:
Hi,

Just got a replacement, but chose a 25 x WW and this eyepiece is fine! I think the original must have been faulty.

Considering that you have 32ww HDF, can you tell me how it fits the 'scope?

The reason is my zoom attaches with a ringed collar on the outer thread on the scope also the new 25X does so, but the eyepiece I sent back just screwed into the body using the inner thread, NOT like the others. The duff eyepiece was marked up to fit an Imagic 80! I'm wondering whether the 32x I sent back was not intended for my scope at all!

Craven.

My 32ww HDF screws into the scope body, but I didn't know there was an inner and outer thread, so I don't know which I'm using. The 23x fits in the same way.

What model number is your new eyepiece? I think the same eyepieces can be used on their full range of scopes, but sometimes it gives a slightly different magnification, say on a 65mm scope. It is printed on the eyepiece what mag it gives with which scope size. So my 32x is a 30x on another scope, for example.
 
digi-birder said:
My 32ww HDF screws into the scope body, but I didn't know there was an inner and outer thread, so I don't know which I'm using. The 23x fits in the same way.

What model number is your new eyepiece? I think the same eyepieces can be used on their full range of scopes, but sometimes it gives a slightly different magnification, say on a 65mm scope. It is printed on the eyepiece what mag it gives with which scope size. So my 32x is a 30x on another scope, for example.
Hi, digi-birder,

Yes, there are 2 threads on the scope. One an outer thread ('male' in engineering terms), this thread is what the zoom & replacement 25x fits. The eyepieces have a loose threaded collar that attaches to the 'scope.

The one I sent back x32ww, fitted the smaller inner thread (Female)! No collar but a threaded part on the E/P!

This is why I can't quite fathom out this out. All these eyepieces should fit the same way.

If you just look at your scope and cannot see a screwthread then it's the same fitting as the former two, not the one I sent back;-)

I hope this makes sense to you.

ATB

Craven
 
A 32xHDF came with my ES80 and this screws into the eyepiece socket of the scope, (has a male thread ). The 20-60HDF zoom has a threaded collar ( female ) and screws onto the outside of the scopes eyepiece socket.
So it sounds as if it had the correct eyepiece originally, but it was faulty!.
 
Last edited:
alan_rymer said:
A 32xHDF came with my ES80 and this screws into the eyepiece socket of the scope, (has a male thread ). The 20-50HFG zoom has a threaded collar ( female ) and screws onto the outside of the scopes eyepiece socket.
So it sounds as if it had the correct eyepiece originally, but it was faulty!.
Hi,

Ok, thanks, must have been a faulty eyepiece. Still can't understand why a 25xWW HDF and Zoom attach differently! Does not matter really as long as the eyepiece is set at the same distance from the back prism. Maybe the design has been changed because it's cheaper to produce, if it just screws into the body rather than using a collar.

Anyway, the 25x seems OK not much difference in magnification than the 32x.


ATB

Craven
 
Hi Craven, just bought ES 80 ED with 32xww hdf and find it to be brilliant! , also have the 20-60 hdf zoom, and that is too. Off to north wales for a week soon, so will be able to check them out on mountain views! .
All the best Phil.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 20 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top