Baader Morpheus Eyepieces

[gregbradley]

I just received a 17.5mm Morpheus and a 16mm Nagler T5. I'll be pitting these 2 together next clear night probably at a dark site.

The Morpheus comes very nicely packaged with a belt pouch and a screw up eyepiece and seems really well made. The Nagler is surprisingly small, compact and light.

Has anyone had experience with these Morpheus eyepieces? If its a good eyepiece I'll most likely get a shorter focal length one around 9mm.

I'll be using it on a CFF105 F6 and an AP130GT F6.3.

I like Nagler eyepieces and have a 3.5mm, 9mm and 16mm Nagler.

The best views I have ever had was through a Tak FS152 and a Nagler 22mm T4. Next best was a TEC180FL and a 13mmTV Ethos. But generally I don't want huge and heavy eyepieces. The 100 degree FOV is not that appealling to me. 76-82 is plenty.

The Masuyama 10mm is a beautiful eyepiece and gives some of the best views in 3/4 of it field with the last 1/4 a bit aberrated but it still left about 60 degrees looking very natural, sharp and good colour - natural. They make a 20mm, 26mm and larger. 20mm on those scopes is quite widefield.

I have a few other brand eyepeices from years ago, a 12mm University Optics, Edmunds RKE 15, Meade UWA 14mm (don't laugh, its an awesome eyepiece but huge).

Suggestions?

Greg.

[jahnpahwa]

A hack observer here, but my impression upon looking through one in my Tak was "this blows my Hyperions and zoom mk4 away. It looks like the stars are in the eyepiece, not millions of miles away."
The field is so big that I didn't feel like I needed to shove my eye in really close to make the most of it... It's like a perfect, crystal clear and razor sharp tv screen that is broadcasting from way up there.

[GUS.K]

I have the whole set, and mainly use with a 10 inch f6 and 18 inch f4.5. For me the 9mm is the standout, followed by the 17.5, 12.5, 6.5, 14 and 4.5mm, but in general all are good with a coma corrector, and I love the immersive view.

[wavelandscott]

The Morpheus eyepieces are very nice and I use them in my binocular telescope kit.

I prefer the Pentax and TVs when using my scopes but the Morpheus are really comfortable and quite good.

[gregbradley]

That's impressive.



Thanks for that. What coma corrector are you using with them?



Thanks Scott. I have never used a Pentax but always hear good things about most of them. The shorter focal lengths usually are the ones recommended.

Greg.

[mura_gadi]

Hi,

From what I have read the 9mm is one of the stand outs, very few lines of EPs will be expectational across all FL even the green meanies. (12.5/14mm Morpheus are maybe the lesser of the line according to some and contradict what's already be said here for instance)

Also you need to remember that till recently the Morpheus were $360 new, going up against $800+ new eyepieces is a little bias. You get what you paid for (if you're lucky).

There is a good write up from "The Russian - Ernest" (astro-talks.ru) in regards to eye pieces, he has done a lot of EP's (at f4/f10) and it pretty clear even from a quick look through the list that some lines excel at some focal lengths.

Even the X-Cel LX at 7/9mm are great ep's even if the rest aren't the best, and there $130 a pop.

But it all depends on your eye's as well as your scope. Try and see what scope people are using when they ditch or rave about an eyepiece. - Did they like the EP due to better eye relief as they wear glasses etc. Did they have a slower scope making the exit pupil too small or a lot easier light cone correction.


Steve
Ps. A top of the line plossl is a great EP, it puts the least amount of glass between you and the object. Its when you want to chase the wider fields that everything goes a bit pear shaped. You add costs and weight to essentially keep a similar image across a wider view. Coma correctors essentially just shave/reduce the FOV to fix it up for instance.

[gregbradley]

Thanks Steve.

I was very impressed by the presentation and range of accessories from the Morpheus. I was used to just getting 2 caps and a box.
It comes across as a very professional product.

Greg.

[Don Pensack]

Ernest's measurements of the star size spot at the edge of the field in the Morpheus eyepieces at f/4:
4.5mm--14'
6.5mm--16'
9mm--14'
12.5mm--16'
14mm--24'
17.5mm--not measured
10' is considered essentially perfect, and seen as a tiny dot.
These measurements are at the edge of the field, where you generally aren't inspecting star clusters or double stars.
At f/10, they are all essentially perfect.
I notice at f/5.75, the 14 is nearly perfect at the edge, so if that is the worst of them, this is a killer line.

[gregbradley]

Thanks Don.

That is very good data.

Greg.

[mura_gadi]

Hello,

I look forward to your comments and I have my fingers crossed for clear skies at your dark site.

My dream set is the Morpheus 17.5 and the 9mm with the APM 30mm UFF as I'm a dob user and there is next to nothing in weight difference.


Steve

[gregbradley]

I have the 17.5mm Morpheus. Just ordered the 9mm yesterday and the APM30 UFF is out of stock for a few weeks but plan to get that one as well and I think that's enough. I also got a Svbony 8-24 zoom which arrived today. Its cheap but it seems really well made. It reviews well on CN.

I am also wondering if I should upgrade my 9mm Nagler from a type 1 to a type 6. The T1 is quite sharp but advancements in the T6 may be worth it.

I think I'll wait to see how good the 9mm Morpheus is.

I also am interested in the APM 12.5mm Hi FW as it appears to be a clone of the Docter 12.5 which seems to be a legendary eyepiece.

Greg.

[mura_gadi]

and here I was waiting for the expected gains against the euro over the next few months...

Very jelly I must say

[GUS.K]

QUOTE
Thanks for that. What coma corrector are you using with them?

Televue paracorr type 1.

[gregbradley]

I got to try out the 17.5mm Morpheus on my AP130GT scope at my dark site.
Best eyepiece I have ever used.
Slightly better than my 16mm Nagler and a bit more comfortable but the Nagler
is also a beautiful eyepiece.
Greg

[Don Pensack]

The APM 12.5mm has one more element than the Docter, a slightly larger field stop, a millimeter less eye relief, so not exactly a clone.
That being said, distortion characteristics are almost the same, with angular magnification distortion (rolling ball or globe distortion) predominating, unlike most astronomical eyepieces. It is usable with glasses.
It is quite sharp but also has a bit of edge of field brightening (EOFB).
No noticeable spherical aberration of the exit pupil (SAEP).

[gregbradley]

Thanks Don.

We are so lucky to have you post here.

So would you rate this APM12.5 hi fw a hot eyepiece
or just a good eyepiece?

In Aussie dollars this is a $500 eyepiece
so it needs to be better than a 12.5 Morpheus or Nagler etc.

Greg

[Don Pensack]

No, not better than the 12.5mm Morpheus, just wider.
And if it's more expensive than a Nagler, and you don't need to wear glasses at that focal length, forget it. It is not the equal of the Docter/Noblex.

[gregbradley]

Thanks Don.

Greg

[gregbradley]

Bit of an update.

Since my last post I received the 9mm and 12.5mm Morpheus eyepieces.

I tried them out last night along with the 17.5mm Morpheus again and compared the views with various other eyepeices.

Scope : AP130GT
Done at my home in semi rural skies. Lovely clear night, reasonably good seeing.

9mm Morpheus compared to the 17.5 and 12.5mm. All 3 seem very similar viewing objects with of course different magnifications.

The most obvious thing about the 9mm was the sky was quite a bit blacker. Not sure if this is only because of the shorter focal length but I don't think so.

I compared the 9mm Morpheus against a 9mm Nagler T1, 10mm Masuyama 85 degree, 12mm University Optics Ortho, 15mm Edmunds RKE.

Against the 9mm Nagler. Both are very sharp and wonderful views. The main difference is the image in the Morpheus is more "stable" due to the ease you can reach a comfortable viewing position. The T1 Nagler just has a rubber eye ring and whilst its not hard to maintain a good viewing position if you go offaxis like with most Naglers etc you'll get blackouts.

The Morpheus eyecup has a wing on it and screws up to get a nice comfortable viewing position with its high eye relief. I did not realise how important eye relief is. I don't wear glasses so its not usually an issue but its not the only reason to have good eye relief. It means you can immerse yourself in the view more easily without little flares and blackouts from moving slightly.

The Morpheus was slightly sharper than the Nagler but not by a lot.
But it was the first time I saw all 6 Trap stars in Orion. I also saw them with a 3.5mm Nagler T6 and a barlowed Morpheus 17.5. So a testament to the optical quality of the AP130 GT which I would describe as exquisite.

The 10mm Masuyama is also a very pleasant eyepiece to use When I looked to the edges the last perhaps 20% were less than perfect. Barlowing the lens though and the edges were corrected and sharp.

The 10mm UO Ortho gave a very detailed and sharp view but that 40 odd degree FOV is a bit hard to take compared to these others. The 15mm RKE was also very good but the same applies.

Open clusters can be particularly beautiful with this setup. Different bluish stars and yellow stars are pinpoints and very beautiful. Its hard to imagine these little pinpoints being blazing nuclear furnaces.

All in all the Morpheus are a stunning range of eyepieces. I am tempted to get the 6.5mm but I can barlow the 17.5 or the 12.5 so it seems a bit over the top (not that that has ever stopped me!).

I compared the 17.5 Morpheus to the 16mm Nagler T6 again and yet again whilst the Nagler is superb the Morpheus is more engaging, a bit better detail and contrast. Again its the eye relief which is the major difference. The 16mm Nagler though is quite comfortable and does not black out easily either.

I looked through the 15 and 25 Dual ED again. Overall a good eyepiece for the cost but they are never going to be in this league.

I have 2 more Edmunds RKA eyepieces on their way to me as well as some TMB Planetary 2 eyepieces. I may not be able to resist getting a Baader Classic Ortho probably the 18mm which seems to review the best.
I would like to try out a TV Delite. I also have an APM 30mm UFF coming.

I am keen to hear others favourite eyepieces to get some ideas.

I hope this is helpful.

Greg.

[Don Pensack]

Greg

The darker background sky is magnification.

A 9mm has almost twice the magnification of a 17.5mm, which makes the background sky only 25% as bright. That is well over a magnitude darker sky and quite noticeable.

The Morpheus eyecup isn't supposed to be screwed up and down.

They provide an eyecup extender in the box if you want it higher to hold your eye in place.

It's supposed to be tightened down, however.
Glad you are seeing good things from the scope. I like the Morpheus eyepieces, too.
Don

[FlashDrive]

I have the 17.5mm Morpheus and consider it a beautiful eyepiece for my Scopes.

[gregbradley]

It sure is. The 9 and 12.5 would suit certain objects and depends on the focal length of your scope. 9mm at 819mm focal length is good for a close up look.

17.5 is a pleasant slightly wide view.

I saw all 6 stars of the Trapezium in M42 the other night with the 9mm. Never seen them all before. AP130 GT optics are superb. Good seeing as well helped.

Greg.

[Don Pensack]

Good seeing rules what you see in that scope.
The E and F stars are not even a test for a 90mm in superb seeing, but can be hard in 300mm when the seeing is bad.
Seeing is king and the rest merely pawns.

[Slawomir]

Agree. I can see E and F with my 105mm in my location, which can have quite good seeing at times.

[gregbradley]

Yeah but no but, as we know the CFF 105 F6 is about as sharp as any scope can be.

I just hadn't seen the E and F Trap stars before even using a Tak FS152. Admittedly that scope was mostly used in a suburban environment.

One time a friend who lived only about 15 minutes away were observing the same night. He was using a TEC140 and me the FS152. He said he could see the E star and I couldn't. I put that down to sharpness of optics.

Greg.

[astro744]

Put it down to seeing as all scopes mentioned should have optics capable of seeing both E & F. I can see both E and F components in my TV-101 and E component in my TV-60 (still looking for F in it and I believe I have been close), provided seeing is good AND magnification is high enough to give good contrast and clear separation of the component stars. About 180x and over is good. I use 6-3mm and 4-2mm Tele Vue Nagler zooms. Larger aperture telescopes can get affected by seeing more so wait for the right moment during the right atmospherics conditions.

[gregbradley]

Thanks.

Greg.

[UniPol]

Yes, seeing reigns supreme (and a Tak :)). Attached a diagram of the Trapezium from Sky & Telescope 2017. The caption reads :

The Theta-1 (θ1) Orionis multiple star is better known as the Trapezium. Its four bright stars are easily visible in a 3-inch telescope. A 6-inch will show two additional stars, E and F, both 11th magnitude. G and H require a large amateur instrument.
Jerry Lodriguss with additions by the author

[astro744]

E & F are easy in a 6" and will show in less aperture given good seeing. We're not talking Sirius Pup here as the separation and magnitude of the components makes them clear targets given good seeing.

So as to be on topic; I haven't had the pleasure of viewing through a Morpheus. I do like the Tele Vue 16mm Type 5 Nagler too for its compact size which I can use on my TV-60 as well as the 17mm Type 4 Nagler which has a nice large eye lens.

[Don Pensack]

I've seen G, H1, and I in a 12.5" on a night of absolutely superb seeing, at 304x, but I didn't see H1 and H2 as separate stars.

[gregbradley]

The 16mm Nagler T6 is a very nice eyepiece and is very compact as you say.
I do prefer the view in the 17.5 Morpheus though as its a more relaxed and comfortable view which makes a large difference in being able to enjoy the view. The Nagler though is a close 2nd.

Too bad there isn't a 25mm Morpheus.

Greg.

[a5tarman]

I have the 12.5mm Morpheus with my 10 inch Dob. Only had a few sessions but I have nothing bad to say about it. I've only used it under suburban skies, but still impressed with the view it provides. When I'm looking at Nebulas and star clusters I can't imagine how a Televue for hundred of $$ more could possibly improve the view. I'm no expert, and I'm comparing this to the original plossls that came with the scope so feel free to ignore my thoughts. :lol:

[gregbradley]

The 17.5mm Morpheus verus the Nagler 16mm Type 6 in an AP130GT at a dark site. The 17.5 was mesmerising in its beautiful and easy to view presentation. The 16mm Nagler was also very good but not as easy to view through as the Morpheus. I would prefer the Morpheus over the Nagler but the Nagler is definitely a nice eyepiece.

I have the 12.5 Morpheus as well and its very similar. The Morpheus eyepieces are right up there.

Greg.

[FlashDrive]

They certainly are :) .... I'll be chasing a Morpheus 14mm when I can ...!!

[gregbradley]

I think I would get the 12.5 or 17.5 over the 14.
Don posted earlier the 14 is the weaker of the series. I went with the 12.5 also because it gave a bit more space between the 17.5 I have and the 9 which I also have.

Greg.

[FlashDrive]

That's a good point ...then it's the 12.5 soon. :) ( I already have the 17.5 )

[Don Pensack]

People SAY the 14mm is the weakest in the series, and it might measure that way, but in my 12.5" coma-corrected scope, it is sharp almost from edge to edge, with only the space at the field stop a bit lesser. If that's the weakest in the series, then the entire series is magnificent, as I said earlier.