Good optics for the money

Great for sweeping up the Spring galaxies. Clarity is good, hardly any edge of field distortion. Lacks just a bit in contrast compared to the Astromania 22mm 70° (that one is pure gold), but still a pretty good eyepiece.

Eyepiece performs well. Well made.

The eyepiece arrived quickly from Amazon. It appears EXACTLY as photographed in the Amazon placements, so I did not bother attaching any additional photos. The add says the eye opening is 22mm. Yep. Its a bit larger than 3/4" (around 13/16"). Also, yes its heavy as indicated!It feels firmly constructed. I gripped parts of the eyepiece firmly and started to unscrew various components, so I could feel the threads. Again, there are no issues. The threads are precisely machined as you would expect. The large rubber grip makes handling the eyepiece very easy.I used the eyepiece for the first time on 3/4/21 with my f4.5 13.1" Coulter Odessey 1 dobs. 10mm eyepiece = 150X. I have a bright sky here near Tampa, but seeing was pretty good, with that exception. I started at M42/43, better known as the Orion Nebula and my 40mm Plossl. Then I switched to the 10mm Astromania SWA. I don't have a lot of experience with expensive ultra wide field eye pieces. Plossls have been my work horse eyepieces for decades (and its been decades since I looked through someone else's 2" Nagler). The view with the Astromania compared to the Plossl is shocking and breathtaking. The experience feels like being closer to the object, I guess because you must pan your eyes around the field of view to see everything as compared to the tunnel view through the Plossl(?). Here I noticed the rubber eye cup is on the stiff side. I found I preferred to fold the eye cup down. This allowed me to get my eye closer to the eye piece and I could enjoy the huge field of view better. I lost count of how many times I said wow as I looked around the Orion Nebula. (Seeing was not good enough to split the trapezium from 4 to 6 stars in any eyepiece this night.)Next I moved on to M47 and then M46. M47 is a large close cluster with a handful of bright stars. It actually resolves in my 10x60mm finder. Then I moved to M46. M46 is a much more distant cluster, but has many many more stars. I moved up from the 40mm Plossl to my 26mm Plossl (58X). The 26mm frames the busy cluster best. Then I moved up to the 10mm Astromania. I positioned the scope such that the cluster would slowly flow though the field. The view is spectacular. There are many many stars resolvable. The contrast in the Astro' seemed to be a little higher than the Plossl. I don't know if this is actually possible, so lets assume it was at least equal. Again, I found myself saying wow several times! The background sky seemed to have some textures to it, like nebulosity, perhaps from additional stars not quite resolving. I did not notice that in the Plossl. Next I went looking for the very small planetary nebula that appears in M46. (They aren't actually together in space.) I could not find the planetary at first, so I added a broadband filter to help with my light polluted sky. I was able to locate the small planetary now. For comparison, I switched to my 10mm Plossl. The view was much narrower, but otherwise comparable. And I am also able to find the planetary in the Plossl with the filter. Interestingly, the 10mm plossl seems to be a little higher magnification. Perhaps the 2 eyepieces are not exactly the same focal length. (A half mm is a 5% difference after all!)It occurred to me here, I have no desire to look for a wider field eye piece than this, that a wider field is just not at all necessary and not worth paying for!! I'm already having to pan around the image. With the rubber eye cups up, its actually NOT POSSIBLE to see to the edge of the field of view!!! You have to roll the eye cup down to actually find the edge of the view and you cannot perceive the circular ring of the field of view all at once. The angle is definitely wider than my peripheral vision!! This is not true of the Plossls.My final target was the globular cluster M3 near Bootes. I found the very distant (read small) cluster in my 40mm Plossl. Then I moved to the 10 mm Astro (150x). It took my eye some time to adapt to the more difficult object. Viewed directly, M3's hundreds of thousands of stars do not resolve. They are a faint blur. Using averted vision stars on the periphery of the cluster resolve to a spray of tiny faint pin points that appear and vanish as I move my eye. I switch to the 10mm Plossl. Again, the magnification is slightly higher. The cluster is a tad bigger. I find it is slightly easier to resolve the stars on the outside of the cluster, though I still absolutely must use averted vision to do this. Next I switch to the 7.5mm Plossl to get a little closer to the cluster (200x). This is best magnification for this cluster. The Plossl views seem to be slightly sharper than the Astro, but only very slightly. Perhaps this is do to fewer lenses in the Plossls. (There is a 7mm Astro and I may decide to purchase it in the future when I can!!)One last note.. I live in Florida. It is always wet here! My wide-band filter fogged up several times. None of my eyepieces fogged though, including the Astro. My primary also did not fog, so it wasn't really terrible fogging conditions! But the Astro performed at least as well as my other eye pieces in this regard.