StarStructure 24" f/3.3 | ServoCAT/Argo Navis
Astro-Physics 175EDF | AP1100GTO | ATS Portable Pier
Psalm 19.1 - A Psalm of David. "The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork".
"Coffee leads men to trifle away their time, scald their chops, and spend their money, all for a little base, black, thick, nasty, bitter, stinking nauseous puddle water." ~The Women's Petition Against Coffee, 1674If it ain't broke, fix it 'til it is.
Quote:For my A-P F/8 175EDFS, I'm considering getting a 41 Panoptic vs. the 31 Nagler that I already have. The 41 Pany gives a better exit pupil (5.1 vs. 3.9) it widens the fov a bit more (1.9° vs. 1.7°), and has even more eye relief. Does anyone have any suggestions and experiences with their 41 Pany vs. 31 Nagler? I'm looking at issues like: eyepiece field curvature, distortion, light transmission?
Fred StarStructure LE Series 18" f/4.3 (Zambuto & Nexus/ServoCat/Skytools3 Pro) Celestron 8" SCT w/Starlight Feathertouch Microfocuser; Celestron 102mm f/9.8 refractor Stellarvue SV80ST f6 Triplet APO Tele Vue & EarthWin binoviewers Enough Eyepieces and Accessories to put my Scopes to Good Use Free-Turn Q HalfHitch, CG5-ASGT(2), Astro-Tech Voyager mounts
Jeff Morgan - Wile E. Coyote School of Telescope Making
Quote:A couple of years ago I was running the 40 XW against the 41 Panoptic and 31 Nagler. The Pentax was eliminated literally in minutes due to field curvature. Totally unacceptable for the money. (Of course people react to eyepieces sometimes in a personal way and the 40 XW has its fans.)A bit more interesting was the 41 Panoptic against the 31 Nagler which took a few more months to play out.Both are of course fine eyepieces, and at f/8 would be excellent. It really comes down to what one is after. Provided similar field stops, a design with a wider apparent field has an inherent advantage in being able to show similar fields at smaller exit pupils. The overall field is darker (both sky background and DSO) but the net effect is more pleasing to most people. The logical conclusion would be to go straight to Ethos, although I personally don't care for the 100 degree class eyepieces.While the 41 Panoptic would give you slightly more field (quite a bit more if you calculate by area), how many large DSO's does it really make available? It sounds to me like this is what you are really after. Make up a transparency with scaled rings representing each field size and slide it across your favorite star atlas. You'll probably conclude that the number of discrete large DSO's is a pretty small number, and the "extra" DSO's the 41 Pan would completely show (vs. partial in the 31 Nagler) is counted on perhaps one hand?In the end, I kept the 31 Nagler. The 41 Panoptic is really kind of specialist eyepiece for the very long focus scope, or where maximum true field trumps all else.I should mention that I only use the 31 Nagler in my Dobs. With my AP Star 12 (f/8.5) I use a 48 Brandon in the low power role. Reason? I don't have a slide rail balance on the refractor, and changing from a 2+ pound eyepiece unbalances the scope and puts extra strain on the RA motor of my GM-8. The 48 Brandon performs very well at f/8.5, has a 38 mm field stop (very good true field), and only weighs 11 ounces.
Quote:While the 41 Panoptic would give you slightly more field (quite a bit more if you calculate by area), how many large DSO's does it really make available?
Quote:And, or course, on a short focal length scope, if the FC of the eyepiece and FC of the scope match in sign, then the visual FC will be a sum of the two, and the combination will be worse than either by itself.
Quote:There are lots of DSO's to observe at a local Bortle 3 and 2 dark site with my 7" APO. I would like to generously frame in a 1.5°+ field of view: large OC's, MW star clouds; narrow-band filtered Sharpless nebulas, large NGC's, IC's lying along the summer and winter galactic axis. My 175EDF F/8 might do very well with this kind of observing. Hence my initial interest in a 41mm Panoptic. Though no match with my 24" StarStructure Dob's light gathering ability, the 175 AP F/8 has very high contrast and definition capability. For instance, summertime Barnard's appear more pronounced (darker, contrasty, sharper, and more 3D) in the 175 than the 24" Dob. In the 175, would a 41 Panoptic better this effect over my 31 Nagler?
Quote: For instance, summertime Barnard's appear more pronounced (darker, contrasty, sharper, and more 3D) in the 175 than the 24" Dob. In the 175, would a 41 Panoptic better this effect over my 31 Nagler?
Two eyeballsAP 5.1" f/6 on a GM-8 -- The Instrument10" f/4.8 Newt on a Dob -- Marcia!! Marcia! Marcia!!!12.5" f/4.5 Portaball -- The CojoneLunt LS100FHaBinotron 27Fujinon FMT-SX BinosBlack & Green Glass
Hauppauge, NY -
RMSP, NY -