Morpheus

Es gilt dasselbe wie beim 6,5mm. Am Mond ist das Bild sehr plastisch, man kann in das Bild "abtauchen". Etwas ungünstig ist die schlechte Unterscheidbarkeit der beiden Okulare. Bei diesem Pärchen kann man es aber an der Höhe festmachen. Die Kombination 6,5 und 12,5 ersetzen das Hyperion Zoom, insbesondere wegen der großen Bildwinkel. Für 1:5 Dobson sehr zu empfehlen.

Benutzt an einem Dobson 250mm 1:5 ohne Komakorrektor. Das Okular ist recht handlich. Durch das große Gesichtsfeld kann man bei 190-facher Vergrößerung gut folgen, keinerlei Gefühl von Tunnelblick. Man kann das gesamte Gesichtsfeld überblicken. Das Einblickverhalten ist sehr gut, man findet sofort ein Bild. Außermittig reingeschaut hat man einen leichten Farbsaum, die Mitte findet man aber sofort. Die Sterne sind punktförmig, keine Komaschwänzchen. Allerdings ist der äußere Rand wegen Bildfeldwölbung etwas unscharf, kann aber scharf fokusiert werden, also Bildfeldwölbung. Diese liegt wahrscheinlich am Newton, ich habe kein zweites Instrument, um das zu prüfen. Das stört aber nicht weiter. Der Bereich der Fokusierung der Sterne am Bildfeldrand ist enger, als in der Mitte. Liegt wahrscheinlich auch am Newton. Ich würde mir das Okular jederzeit wieder kaufen.

Tolle - auch optisch sehr ansprechende - Tasche für Filter, Staubkappen, kleinere Okulare oder andere Zubehör-Teile. Sehr praktisch ist die rückseitige Lasche zur Befestigung an Stativbeinen oder am Hosengürtel. So ist alles griffbereit und kann nicht verlorengehen, was bei Staubkappen, Augenmuscheln, Schrauben oder Filtern schnell mal passieren kann.

First use of my 12.5mm Morpheus was pleasant and a treat in less than ideal skies. I bought this through "AAP" an online selling service. The packaging looked like it had been repackaged used because the cardboard is not shaped so tore at stress points. I complained to AAP due to this and the fact the rubber side eye shield was "missing" its ring. Lo and behold, only the main eye cup has a ring, despite the rubber being designed to fit over a ring. The 500 of these they sold routinely tear their packaging in the box I was told. If mounting as a 2", I need my focuser extension tube (Orion 12/f-5 and 1500) These details left me unimpressed. A Euro/Dollar's worth of metal ring seems a silly expense to chintz on. So, I like the wide angle EP so far, but found the chintzy details have ruined what should have been an enjoyable experience. I had hoped the Baader name would mean attention to detail, so experienced disappointment.

Ordered your 17.5mm Morpheus and also the Televue 17.3mm. Delos. After doing a comparison in my 406mm / f5.2 scope, I sent the Televie Delos back for a refund. The Morpheus was so close it was hard to see any difference. I quickly ordered a 12.5mm Morpheus and have been also very happy with its performance. Baader has developed a quality optic at a very cost effective price point.

This has become my first choice for an eyepiece for my 5" SCT (with a nominal magnification of 100x). The AFOV is generous, the optical quality excellent, and the viewing comfort high. No detectable "black bean" effect.

Gestern Nacht (5. 2. 2018) habe ich das Morpheus 17.5mm das erste Mal testen können und auch Bilder mit der Nikon DF (Vollformat) gemacht. Seeing medium. Das Okular ist spitze! Die neue Version der Augenmuschel SUPER!!! Das Feld ist wunderbar, sehr gute Schärfe und hoher Kontrast und so hatte ich einen Festplatz in der Mondfähre!!!

Saturday I loaned my 12.5mm Docter to a friend so he could compare it with his 12.5mm Morpheus. Sunday afternoon he brought the Docter back to me along with the 12.5mm Morpheus so I could compare the two for myself last night. I spent almost two hours exclusively going back and forth between these two eyepieces on deep sky objects in my SW120ED. These eyepieces give 72x in the 120ED. Overall, the 12.5mm Morpheus was extremely close to the Docter and in fact to see any differences in faintest stars detected or nebular details was a challenge. Edge performance: Docter is sharp to the edge and Morpheus has some falloff in last 10% of the field but not significant. Comfort: The Docter was a little easier to look through at first, but as time progressed this difference mostly disappeared. Handling: The Morpheus actually is a more balanced eyepiece than the Docter. There is a significant bulk of the weight in the bottom of the Docter. If you grab near the top of the eyepiece there is a risk of it slipping. The Docter really needs to be grabbed at the lower knurled ring. Presentation: Just as a general feel, the field of the 12.5mm Docter is very similar to the Morpheus eyepieces - different from the XW and Delos eyepieces. In both eyepieces the field is very natural and engaging and easy to take in Snap to focus: Not that the 12.5 Morpheus was hard to focus, but the Docter was easier to snap to sharpest focus. Sky background: Seemed the same level of blackness in both eyepieces - maybe a couple times a slight edge to the Docter, but maybe not. It was close. Sharpness of stars: In general I think the Docter gives a very slightly tighter star image - possibly due to the easier snap to focus. Observing targets: M27 - No difference in detectable details - maybe the light was a little richer in the Morpheus. M71 - At times seemed slightly grainier with barely resolved stars in the Docter. M17 - No detectable difference in details M11 - No detectable difference in details and resolved stars NGC 6712 - Maybe the light was a little richer in the Morpheus. M8 - Maybe the light was a little richer in the Morpheus. M27 again - Maybe the light was a little richer in the Morpheus. M13 - No clear difference in resolved stars. NGC 6819 - A times a slightly grainier texture from resolved stars in the Docter. Field stars in general - I spent quite a bit of time in the fields of the different objects above identifying barely detectable stars with averted vision. Generally these stars were slightly easier to detect in the Docter - but very slightly and it took work to be confident that was what I was seeing. In no case was a star detectable in one eyepiece undetectable in the other. Summary: Wow - these two eyepieces are close. I really love the 9mm and 6.5mm Morpheus for deep sky. So it was really nice to be able to see how closely the 12.5mm Morpheus is able to match the 12.5mm Docter. My observations seem to indicate that where faint stars are concerned the Docter may have a little easier pull whereas with nebular or unresolved light the Morpheus may actually give a little richer light. The presentation and comfort of these two eyepieces is very close. The Morpheus is basically like a slightly narrower Docter in that respect. Now - I do think for lunar observations the Docter is better than the Morpheus eyepieces. I have done comparisons with the 9mm and 6.5mm Morpheus and the Docter with a Barlow and I think in general it is easier to look through the Docter when observing the Moon and I think there is an extra level of crispness to the lunar image in those circumstances. Hopefully this week I can do a direct comparison between the 12.5mm Morpheus and the Docter on the Moon to see if that holds up. At any rate - for those of you that have been considering trying a Docter, the Morpheus makes a very acceptable lower cost substitute - at least for deep sky with my scope and the atmospheric conditions in my area.

Bin mit der Leistung und Handhabung dieses Okulars vollauf zufrieden, auch im Vergleich mit anderen Okularen vergleichbaren Typs.