Overall Rating: 8 Optics:8 Value:10 Weight: 20 (Notable Vote) Date: 10/03/2007 11:05:43 am PDT By: msuther Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=569533
Overall Rating: 7 Optics:7 Value:7 Weight: 10 (Trustworthy Vote) Date: 10/29/2002 12:32:00 pm PDT By: rjb Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=140302
Overall Rating: 10 Optics:10 Value:10 Weight: 10 (Trustworthy Vote) Date: 10/07/2002 08:05:20 am PDT By: scottinash Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=138949
Overall Rating: 9 Optics:8 Value:10 Weight: 4 (Unreliable Vote) Date: 01/10/2002 01:35:02 pm PDT By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.236.17) Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=54009
Overall Rating: 9 Weight: 2 (Unreliable Vote) Date: 06/30/2001 09:59:04 am PDT By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.206.111) Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=43798
Overall Rating: 9 Optics:8 Value:10 Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote) Date: 10/28/2002 11:07:07 pm PDT By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.0.233) Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=142908
Overall Rating: 3 Optics:2 Value:2 Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote) Date: 07/14/2002 10:26:52 pm PDT By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.196.46) Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=111861
You must have had a lemon! My 32mm Konig is fantastic and has none of the issues you describe in both f/10 SCT and fast f/4.5 Dobsonians. >This is a great-looking eyepiece. > >I have 30 years experience in astronomy. This eyepiece was tested in a Televue TV-85 apo refractor and in a Nextstar 11" SCT, comparing it with other similar eyepieces. > >It had remarkably poor optics. Stars became horribly distorted in the outer half of the field. I sent my UOptics 32mm eyepiece back and I do not recommend that you buy this eyepiece. > >The Celestron Axiom 34mm eyepiece costs a little more but is vastly superior. > >Please note that UOptics never contacted me when I returned the eyepiece with my test rtesults, nor has the company offered to replace what might have been a poor eyepiece with a more suitable 32mm. > > >Michael Spicer, >Royal Astronomical Society of Canada >Hamilton Centre
Overall Rating: 9 Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote) Date: 05/27/2001 01:09:51 pm PDT By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.64.186) Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=43797
Overall Rating: 9 Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote) Date: 03/24/2001 04:08:03 pm PDT By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.131.59) Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=43796
Overall Rating: 9 Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote) Date: 01/21/2001 05:55:34 am PDT By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.144.161) Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=43795
©2009 by Excelsis Consulting. All Rights Reserved. E-mail webmaster to report abuse, problems, or comments.