Nagler vs Radian
Posted 10 December 2012 - 06:06 PM
Posted 10 December 2012 - 10:36 PM
Posted 11 December 2012 - 02:09 AM
Posted 11 December 2012 - 06:14 AM
5 Radian vs 5 Nagler
I have all three and the only real difference I see is in fov. Like Richard Orr said you can back off from the Nagler to a longer eye relief and have the fov of the Radian. OTOH, although the fov is smaller the ability to exactly match the magnification to the seeing makes the Nagler zoom extremely handy. I haven't tried a Delos yet. Best approach would be to try all three, either at a star party or club observing session, or buy them used off the Mart and sell the ones you don't prefer at little to no real cost. Your scope-eye-brain combination may favor one over the others, and the ergonomics of one may just "feel" right to you.
Posted 11 December 2012 - 07:15 AM
The T6 series is neither of the above. You can't dial in the right magnification as you can with the zoom, nor do you have the ability to view the whole field as you can with Radians. Sure , the T6 Naglers are a 82* design, but how much of it can you see in one shot without having to turn your head around? YMMV though, as they are all excellent eyepieces with 99% similar views.
Posted 11 December 2012 - 08:02 AM
Posted 11 December 2012 - 09:35 AM
Other than a smaller field of view, what difference will I see between a TeleVue Nagler 3.5mm and Radian 3mm or 4mm eyepieces? Will one produce a sharper or better image for planetary use? What are the advantages / disadvantages of each one? Would the Radian give a better image compared to the Nagler 3-6mm zoom?
My eye finds the Radian to give a better planetary image than the T6. Better contrast and definition. I also like the virtual lack of Rectilinear Distortion off axis that the Radian has compared to the T6. The 3-6 Zoom is definitely nice, but the FOV is small. If a 3mm or 4mm eyepiece produces very high magnification in your scope, then I would opt for the Radian over the Nagler Zoom for its larger FOV. I would also opt for the Radian over the T6 because I like its tone better (not as warm as the T6s) and feel it gives a slightly crisper image for planetary. If this very short FL eyepiece is for more than planetary and will produce high magnifications, then the 82 degree AFOV of the T6 trumps all other considerations as the extra context over the Radian or the NZoom is well the trade off for a slightly warmer and slightly less than perfect planetary image. All a matter of compromises and priorities.
Posted 11 December 2012 - 02:07 PM
I agree with GeneT, if the 3.5mm Delos is as good as the 6mm, you'll probably better off investing in the Delos than in the Nagler or the Radian.
Mind that Radian coatings may vary according to the year of production. The Delos design is the latest, that means better coatings.
Posted 11 December 2012 - 08:00 PM
Posted 25 January 2013 - 10:54 PM
Posted 26 January 2013 - 12:10 PM
Posted 26 January 2013 - 12:20 PM
I see the same thing as Bill does. I like the Radians on planets and especially on the Moon. Normanlly the lack of Rectilinear Distortion isn't important to me. But on the Moon it can really help reduce the "fun-house" effect as you scan around the lunar disc.
My eye finds the Radian to give a better planetary image than the T6. Better contrast and definition. I also like the virtual lack of Rectilinear Distortion off axis that the Radian has compared to the T6. The 3-6 Zoom is definitely nice...
Usually, I'm like Gene in that I prefer long eyerelief eyepieces. But at very short focal lengths which produce small exit pupils (<1mm) I don't need them to correct for asigmatism. I have a Pentax 5.1mm XO and don't mind the extremely short eyerelief. But it's still nice to have the longer eyerelief just to avoid the hassle of taking my glasses on and off.
I'm actually getting ready to sell my 5mm Nagler and keep the 5mm Radian.
Posted 26 January 2013 - 07:34 PM