Meade Ultra Wide Angle 4.7mm

Ratings:Top:Astronomy:Equipment Reviews:Eyepiece Reviews:Meade Ultra Wide Angle 4.7mm

 Info  Votes  Messages  More Stats  Up One Level
Vote
Page 1 of 1

Meade Ultra Wide Angle 4.7mm
It is extremely hard to focus with this high power eyepiece. However, I have only used this eyepiece in a light polluted city with a 4" telescope. I am waiting for my new 8" telescope top arrive and this eyepiece might work better with a bigger aperture. I would retain my rating until I have tested it with my new 8".

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=42430

Meade Ultra Wide Angle 4.7mm
I have the Meade 8.8mm UWA and love it to death. I also have the Tak LE 5mm and love IT to death. The logical conclusion is that I would like the Meade UWA 4.7mm. Alas, it was not meant to be. I sent it back. Compared to the Takahashi 5mm, it had pronounced ghosting. Not bad if taken by itself but the Takahashi is clearly better. I was surprised!

Overall Rating: 6
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=42431

Meade Ultra Wide Angle 4.7mm
I have the 8.8mm UWA, and the 14mm UWA also, and I like the performance so much in those two eyepieces that I bought one of these 4.7mm UWA's also. My main complaint about this eyepiece is that it seems to be too much power on everyone of my scopes that I own. I don't know if it is just me, or the optics of my scopes. I am waiting for a 17.5" Dob to come, and try this eyepiece on it before I decide on keeping this eyepiece or trading it off for another one.

Overall Rating: 6
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=42432

Meade Ultra Wide Angle 4.7mm
very poor. difficult to use. get a radian 3, 4, or 5mm. i sold for half what i paid for it. this is just a marketing scheme.

Overall Rating: 3
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=42433

Meade Ultra Wide Angle 4.7mm
I've used the Meade UWA 4.7mm for high power collimation and splitting doubles. This eyepiece benefits from scopes with above average optics, so is not for everyone. Eye relief is good (without glasses) and the stars (Airy disks actually) appear sharp to near edge of the field.

Overall Rating: 9
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=42434

Meade Ultra Wide Angle 4.7mm
Regarding that the short focal length that this eyepiece is operating at demands a sharp scope to begin with, I completely agree. On my f/10 C102 refractor, this eyepiece gives more than 50x/in of aperture, but never fails to deliver crisp, sharp views. I am impressed at how sharp an eyepiece as complex as this can be. I have the old style without rubber upgraded parts, and no eyecup to get in the way. The eye relief is about as short as I can deal with but I still can see the whole 84 degrees of view. This eyepiece is sharp to the edge and any image problems other users have noted above are most likely due to the seeing or poor scope optics, in my opinion. I live in Arizona, and finally have a sharp enough scope to utilize an eyepiece this powerful. Our seeing here is very good most of the time. I also have the 14mm UWA and it too is just superb. My verdict: if, and only if, your scope and seeing is up to the task, the 4.7 UWA is a winner. You must also be able to use short eye relief oculars before buying one of these. Jeff Quinn

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=42435

Meade Ultra Wide Angle 4.7mm
In my Antares Skywatcher 8" f/5 Dob, this gives 213x and is well within reason.
Like my 6.7 (see there) and unlike my 8.8, the focus position is well outward
from that of my `standard' 20mm, and refocusing is awkward when the smaller
field has only very dim stars, so I normally apply the 6.7 first which is about
parfocal to the 4.7. The smaller field also means more effort keeping the Dob
on target, but it's still waaaay less work than with a short Ortho!

This is currently my highest power e/p and thus used frequently. Apart from
some lateral color at the very edge, it is extremely well corrected, and
displays wonderful needlepoints around a GC like M5. No blackouts, no ghosting.

For close double stars esp. with unequal components and for Mars, I tend to
prefer my 6mm Ortho, despite the small true and apparent FOV; it is easier to
focus precisely, has somewhat better contrast, and is less sensitive to seeing
and vibrations. (I happen not to be bothered by the Ortho's absurdly low eye
relief. The 4.7's is longer, but in order to use most of the AFOV, I do need
to touch the rubber eyeguard with more than negligible pressure, inducing
some tube vibrations.)

In summary, I don't like it quite as much as the 6.7 and 8.8, but I consider
it a good investment. (Found it at a reduced price in a close-out sale and
found it impossible to resist.)

Overall Rating: 8
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=42436

Meade Ultra Wide Angle 4.7mm
I was amazed when I saw disparaging comments about the Meade 4.7 UWA. Then again, not everyone uses them the same or has the same scope. That being said, I will give my opinion. I have a Celestron Nexstar 80gt and have been using this scope or any for just over 6 months. I was ready and saved up for a big EP aquisition. I wanted one with higher mag than my 10mm and wanted a quality piece with good features. I originally thought large eye relief was my primary desirable feature. I had asked around and heard about Vixen Lanthanum with all EPs having a 20mm eye relief. So I bought a 5mm VL. Although it had the aforementioned eye relief, it gave equal quality views when compared to my stock 10mm SMA EP. I was expecting more, or underestimated my stock EP. Then for the ultimate test, I 2x Barlowed the 5mm, pushing my scope past practical useable magnification. As expected, the image was fuzzy and had abberations, looking at Mars. Fortunately it was try and return if unsatisfied. I took it back and discouraged, I thought I would try the Meade 4.7 UWA. I was amazed at the FOV, first off, but the larger clusters were now up close and personal with the FOV able to take in so much more. Then by wishful thinking, I tried to 2x Barlow it and look at Mars. Wow ! The image doubled in size and lost little in the way of quality or detail. With some added filtering, I was able to make out surface detail. It was this test alone that garnered my endorsement of this EP. But by itself, it is great. Crisp clear images well close to the edge of view, (If you care to tilt your head and try to find the edge)

Overall Rating: 9
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=42437

Meade Ultra Wide Angle 4.7mm
Really like mine in a Pronto . Can't see all the view without moving your head , but I just look thru the center and when I've lost it , it is easy to find again . Takes 2x power well . And by moving your head , you can really look around . I have the 6.7 mm also , love it too . Keepers both .

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=42438

Meade Ultra Wide Angle 4.7mm
AWESOME! I have a Orion XT10, and the views in it with the 4.7UWA is insane!! I totally love it. And the best thing is I got it used...for half price!!! WOOHOO!

Clear Skies!

Jinder~

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=42439

Meade Ultra Wide Angle 4.7mm
I also, like the guy above have an XT10, and I dont have, but used a 4.7mm Meade UWA in the dob. It gave absolutely great views of saturn and jupiter at around 260x. It was pretty impressive to me, but I am not a real expert.

Overall Rating: 9
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=42440

Meade Ultra Wide Angle 4.7mm
Used on a 8" f/6. Sharp over the entire field. I didn't notice any problems with this eyepiece. The eye relief is tight but workable. I compared this to a 4mm ortho that I have and can't tell any difference. I also have the 6.7 and 8.8, all three are very good eyepieces.

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=42441

Meade Ultra Wide Angle 4.7mm
Owned on briefly. Images were very good, but has short eye relief. Bad for colder climates where your eye will cause eyepiece to fog up. Found a strange distortion near the edge of the field which ended up as an imcomplete coating onone of the lens elements. Stars would bounce through this region. As is typical, Meade would not stand up for a product flaws and would not exchange it. I traded for a Televue 4.8. Never had product problems with Televue.

Overall Rating: 4
Optics:8 Value:6
Weight: 10 (Trustworthy Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=52912

Meade Ultra Wide Angle 4.7mm
Have owned this for two months and used with a 4" APO on showpiece objects like Jupiter and Saturn. My points of reference are 4mm and 6mm TeleVue Radians. On the positive side, this eyepiece allows me to take in Jupiter and the four big moons at 187X. Eye relief is a bit tight - visiting eyeglass wearers will have to remove their glasses. On the negative side, this eyepiece does not compete with the Radians in terms of contrast. Also on the negative side, it seems to offer up a warmer or yellowish image in comparisson. Still a good value for the price, but would probably be more at home in a fast Dob than in my refractor.

Overall Rating: 7
Optics:6 Value:8
Weight: 10 (Trustworthy Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=91464

Meade Ultra Wide Angle 4.7mm
My direct comparision is to U.O. orthos using a good 127mm F8 acro (Burgess), while viewing Jupitor and Saturn at around 160 through 200x. I also have experiance with the Stellarvue refractors (short and long 80mm) a MN56, and a 8" clasic Meade reflector. This direct comparision done in a city envirionment. Compared to a 4, 5 or 6 mm ortho the eye relief is generous! Much easier to track manually using my G.P. mount than orthos. I have the rest of the U.W. set (a bit nicer). But I think this eye piece is getting a bad rap.
I am sure my orthos would beat this in contrast and detail in better condiditions, however, in a less than optimum (normal???) situation, the contrast and comfort is pretty close to a 5,6, or even my 7mm Research Grade ortho. The reason for lowering the score to 8 is because of reflections at certain angles. Otherwise I think this to be reasonable at this focal length and A.F.V.. I have also owned Radians (YUK!), Zeiss Jena, Tak LE and Vixen Ultrawides (very good at shorter F.L.), so I am not rating this piece without comparison. I can't afford the Televue prices for their (perhaps) "better" eyepices, and the two short focal length Radians I had, were absolutely killed by the Vixen Ultrawides at a similar price....so a set of Meade Ultra Wides was a more logical choice....

Overall Rating: 8
Optics:8 Value:8
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=361565

Page 1 of 1

[Click Here to Login]
Don't have a login? Register!

Jay Freeman's Eyepiece Primer
Starting out in Amateur Astronomy
 
How to use This Site
Why Register?
Voting Guide