Image of the day

Captured by
Byron Davies

M-52, NGC-7635, SH2-157, SH2-158, SH2-159, SH2-161, NGC-7510

My Account

New to Astromart?

Register an account...

Need Help?

Why 40mm Plossl?

Started by Jud, 08/16/2008 05:10PM
Posted 08/16/2008 05:10PM Opening Post
Can someone point the advantage of a 40 mm plossl? Since the 32 has the same actual FOV and higher magnification, what are the reasons for using a 40mm?

I Yam What I Yam!
Posted 08/16/2008 07:58PM | Edited 08/16/2008 07:59PM #1
Judson Mitchell said:

Can someone point the advantage of a 40 mm plossl? Since the 32 has the same actual FOV and higher magnification, what are the reasons for using a 40mm?

Judson:

Just to be clear, I believe we are discussing 40mm 1.25 inch eyepieces.

I have two 40mm 1.25 inch eyepieces, they don't get used much but they do get some use. One is an old Japanese Meade MA, the other a Celestron Plossl.

The general thinking does seem to be that they are of little worth because they provide the same true field of view as a 32mm Plossl (at least a good quality 32mm, some do not have a 27mm+ field stop) but lower magnification, they are essentially worthless. There is some truth in that attitude but it stems from a fast scope paradigm.

Not all is field of view and magnification... Sometimes a larger exit pupil is desired. If you are operating at F/6 or even F/7 a 32mm gives you a generous exit pupil but when with slower scopes, even F/8 but more commonly F/11 or slower, a 40mm eyepiece can be useful, even if it is only for aesthetics.

Consider an F/13.3 refractor. a 32mm Plossl provides a 2.4 mm exit pupil, a 40mm provides a 3.0 mm exit pupil, neither is overly large but certainly there are situations with any scope where the brightness of a 3mm exit pupil is desirable. In an F/13.3, a larger nebula like the dumbbell can be quite interesting with a 40mm... It would have the about the same brightness as a 18mm in an F/6.

This is the way I look at it: If I had to choose between a 32mm Plossl and a 40mm Plossl, the choice would be simple, the 32mm. But I don't have to make that choice so I can have both and I do have both. I do believe that the 40mm Plossl ought to have an asterisk with a note at the bottom pointing out the limited usefulness of the 40mm. Unfortunately I think that often people purchase the 40mm thinking they will be getting an even wider true field of view.

Bottom line: In a slow scope, I find that sometimes sometimes a larger exit pupil is desirable, even if it comes at the expense of apparent field of view.

Jon

Attached Image:

jonisaacs's attachment for post 124306
Posted 08/17/2008 03:54AM #2
Besides some of the points already mentioned (eye relief, exit pupil, etc.), I also find the 40mm useful as a finder eyepiece and prefer it to a 32mm in this role. With the same tfov being presented in a smaller afov, it becomes very much easier to see and recognize star field patterns when hunting for some target(at least for me). Oddly, the 40mm is one of the few FLs I have also ended up with multiples of (which I guess must say something about the qualities of this breed) -- The Meades: 3000, 4000 5-element, and MA 40 EWF (love them all).