Jump to content


Photo

Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan

  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

#76 Jeff Morgan

Jeff Morgan

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5694
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2003
  • Loc: Prescott, AZ

Posted 02 October 2013 - 04:51 AM

If I could have only eyepieces, I would keep my 22mm and 35mm Panoptic. Though my 32mm Brandon and Zeiss Jena Orthos would be hard to part with ...


I've been comparing the 22T4 against the 22 Panoptic for the last 6 months or so. It has been on my mind for many years, but this thread was the last straw, so I picked up the Nagler.

After the last two nights of observing, I think the results are in re the 22 Panoptic vs. the 22 Nagler T4:

(the envelope please)

In my 4.7" f/8.5 Astro-Physics refractor the 22 Nagler has a slight edge. Both show a bit of field curvature, which could be my worsening accommodation. Possibly.

In my 16" f/7 Newtonian, the 22 Panoptic edges out ahead - it just seems to have a bit - ever so slightly more - contrast to it. Although it has less AFOV, stars at the edge seemed tighter. No field curvature at all, just a touch in the Nagler. The loss in true field is about 8 arc minutes - but I do have a couple of lower power eyepieces to fall back on if I need more field.

The deciding object was M27, the Dumbell Nebula. Both eyepieces presented the nebula as hanging in space, the edges seemed to have a hard definition. But what caught my eye was a chain of stars across the front of the nebula. Four noted in the Nagler, seven seen in the Panoptic. My friend George, Mr. 100 Degree AFOV and collector of ES100 eyepieces, actually liked the Panoptic better.

So in the end, the 22 Panoptic seems better in my primary scope, weighs less, and has no Instadjust. Add to this that 22T4 will fetch twice the price on the used market.

My 22T4 is officially surplus and on the disposal list - a some point. Maybe one more outing just to be sure ....

#77 SteveG

SteveG

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4321
  • Joined: 27 Sep 2006
  • Loc: Seattle, WA

Posted 02 October 2013 - 11:51 AM

You must not be using a Paracorr.

#78 Jeff Morgan

Jeff Morgan

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5694
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2003
  • Loc: Prescott, AZ

Posted 02 October 2013 - 02:34 PM

You must not be using a Paracorr.


No, I prefer the longer focal ratios. My last "fast" scope was 10 years ago. I suppose if I was still in the short game and using a Paracorr it could have gone the other way.

I posted immediately after returning from back-to-back long observing sessions. Getting a little more sleep and reflecting on the experience, I used to own a 17T4 and was absolutely in love with it. So when I got the 22T4 last spring I was expecting a wipe-out in the head to head comparison.

But it just didn't happen. Instead, they are quite close with one eyepiece costing twice as much. I could use that money to buy another eyepiece :grin:

#79 Deep13

Deep13

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2772
  • Joined: 25 Jan 2005
  • Loc: NE Ohio

Posted 03 October 2013 - 02:38 AM

I keep the 22 Pan because the 24 is too close to the 27.

#80 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 43928
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 03 October 2013 - 04:05 AM

No, I prefer the longer focal ratios. My last "fast" scope was 10 years ago. I suppose if I was still in the short game and using a Paracorr it could have gone the other way.



I am in the "short game" with my Newtonians. I have had a 22mm Panoptic for a few years but until recently it did not get much use, I mostly used my 20mm type 2 Nagler. However, I recently acquired a scope that does not balance with the 20mm Type 2 so that has rekindled my interest in the 22mm Panoptic.

A while back I de-skirted it and I have been enjoying the views, even in my F/4.06 (F/4.67 with the Paracorr)... quite clean. My normal eyepieces are the 31mm Nagler and the 20mm type 2 but I finding the 35mm Panoptic and the 22mm make another pair of choices.

Jon

#81 SteveG

SteveG

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4321
  • Joined: 27 Sep 2006
  • Loc: Seattle, WA

Posted 03 October 2013 - 12:16 PM

Before purchasing my Paracorr, I did not like the T4's in my f5 scope. And the Pan 22 & 27 gave me very nice views. I sold my Pan 24 in favor of the 22, due to the much longer eye-relief it provided, plus it works with a Dioptrx (the 24 does not).

After adding the Paracorr the game changed. I picked up a 22T4 and with the Dioptrx, I still have tons of eye relief and sharp stars across the field, Instadjust be damned! I hated the Instadjust so much that I figured out a way to lock the barrel completely, in the full-down position. Now this is my favorite low-power eyepiece.

#82 Jeff Morgan

Jeff Morgan

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5694
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2003
  • Loc: Prescott, AZ

Posted 18 January 2014 - 12:56 PM

In my 16" f/7 Newtonian, the 22 Panoptic edges out ahead - it just seems to have a bit - ever so slightly more - contrast to it.


Confirmed via the Sidewalk Test, see attached graphic.

Attached Files








Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics