buon oculare, con prestazioni consone alla sua fascia di prezzo. immagini nitide fino quasi al bordo del campo visivo, che si aggira intorno ai 50 gradi come dichiarato.

A

Well made. In daytime with an f/4.7 apochromatic telescope this eyepiece is like a panoramic window. At night, stars are sharp, there is perhaps a barely visible distortion at the edges but truly minor. Frankly my eyeglasses cause more distortion than this eyepiece. I didn't notice reflections even looking at bright objects. This is an excellent value if you like wide field views.It appears to me that not all the lens elements are multicoated. Also you need a telescope capable of a very long back focus distance to use this eyepiece. You might need a right angle mirror or prism to get images into focus because of the long distance required. For the price, it's a lot of fun.

Yes, this will provide magnified views, but also very fuzzy views; so much that I returned it. I checked out the moon and mars but was very disappointed. More magnification is not necessarily better.

I have been quite impressed with the eyepieces in this lineup. I've seen what appear to be the same eyepieces sold under several different brands, and all of them appear to be very high quality. This is the first one I've purchased through Amazon, so I thought I'd go ahead and share my impressions.Quick summary for those who don't like to read:Pros:-Sharp images with a wide field of view-Safety undercuts in barrel keep it from accidently falling out of focuser/diagonal-Lens is less recessed than others making it easier to get to when it needs cleaning-Excellent value for the priceCons:-Doesn't appear to have the best anti-reflective coatings-No rubberized gripMy obvious comparison is with my set of older Meade 4000 Super Plossl eyepieces. I've put the Astromania 32mm side by side with the equivalent Meade 32mm for comparison. Using them both at night it's hard to tell much difference between them, at least to my amateur eye. The Astromania eyepiece is nice and sharp, with a nice field of view and comfortable eye relief. It has a nice heft to it and feels like it's made of quality materials. It doesn't have the grippy rubber surface on the sides the old Meade does, but then again neither does the current generation Meade 32mm eyepiece. In fact, these may be identical to the current generation Meade eyepieces. I see that Astromania has an eyepiece set with case that appears to be remarkably similar to the Meade set.The Meade does seem to have better anti-reflective coatings, perhaps as evident by the "Fully Multicoated" on the label as opposed to the "Fully Coated" label on the Astromania eyepiece. In the side-by-side shot you'll see more light reflected from the Astromania. It's obvious in the photo the Meade has a greenish sheen to it but the faint purplish sheen on the Astromania eyepiece doesn't show up. In practice though I don't notice much difference, at least in my light-polluted yard. There may be more internal reflection when looking at bright objects but if so it's not enough to bother me.One thing I liked was that the top lens was less recessed than the Meade, which seemed to make eye placement easier for me and also makes it easier to get to the lens when you need to brush dust off. Both have enough eye relief that I don't have the trouble with getting eyelash oil all over the lens like I do with some of the shorter focal length models.I've purchased quite a few of these eyepieces: 32mm (3), 25mm (3), 20mm (2), 12.5mm (6), 10mm (2), 6mm (4). Mostly they were bought as relatively inexpensive upgrades for the crummy "stock" eyepieces that came with entry-level telescopes I purchased as gifts for friend/family. In that regard these are a match made in heaven. The price is similar to the "Series 500" Plossl eyepieces I've seen sold under different brands as well, but these have noticeably wider fields of view than the Series 500 eyepieces I've tried (30mm, 15mm, and 10mm).I spend more time than probably just about anyone fooling around with small, inexpensive telescopes. I have found that most budget entry-level telescopes, even name brand ones (Celestron Powerseeker line), have decent main optics but come with low quality Huygens and Ramsden eyepieces to keep the price down. Perhaps worse, they often come with focal lengths chosen only to advertise unrealistic (and unusable) magnification powers. It's no wonder so many people buy telescopes and never use them more than once or twice. I can't stress enough what a difference it makes to have decent quality eyepieces in sensible focal lengths: one to provide 20-30x magnification, one to provide max magnification (the main lens/mirror diameter in mm times 2), and one or to two fill in the gap in between low and high. These Astromania Plossl eyepieces provide a good way to do exactly that without breaking the bank, and this is what I love about them: they're an affordable way to significantly upgrade your telescopes. Even if the scope comes with the more acceptable Kelner or Modified Achromat (MA) eyepieces (like Meade's entry-level scopes do) you'll still see a noticeable difference when upgrading to Plossl eyepieces. Best of all, if you eventually upgrade to a bigger and better telescope these eyepieces will still be useful, making them an investment in the future.All things considered I've been very pleased with every one of these eyepieces I've purchased. As an upgrade for entry-level telescopes they're an unbeatable value. I recommend them without hesitation.