Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Since the Type 6 Naglers use setting 4 on the original Paracorr, you have only 1/8" additional you can move the Paracorr in from there--3/8" shy of the full 1/2" you need to move in but far from bad. Being 3/8" away from the optimum setting is more than the Nagler 31 and Ethos 21.

---

There is a 0.63" delta of the focal plane position between T6N and the N31 while it is only 0.48" between the the T6N and the D17.3. Ergo using setting 5 on a Paracorr 1 will be closer to ideal for the D17.3 than it is for the N31. While not ideal, 5 still helps for the N31 and it should work a bit better for the D17.3 plus the latter isn't in need of as much help to begin with since the FOV is smaller.

---

You are forgetting that the 31 Nagler is 2" and inserts into the Paracorr a lot more than a 1.25" eyepiece, whereas the Delos and nagler 6's are 1.25" eyepieces.
Ergo, the setting 5 on the Paracorr 1 is only 1/8" away from the optimum setting--not much.
On the other hand Setting 5 is 3/8" shy of far enough in to optimize the 17.3 Delos. The paracorr I has an adapter which is .379" tall. If you can eliminate this height, then setting 5 may be OK for the 17.3 Delos. If the adapter I previously referred to works, it may allow another 3/8" inward movement due to its lower height in the first place and, possibly, a slight inward movement of the eyepiece from a simple shoulder.
The Nagler 6 eyepieces have a 0.48" greater out focus than the 17.3 Delos, which is approximately the whole range of the Paracorr I's tunable top. Unfortunately the Nagler 6's use the 1.25" adapter in setting 4, 1/8" shy of the in-most setting. But you need not one more inward setting, but 4 in order to optimize the 17.3 Delos.
Shortening the 1.25" adapter will help. Add that to moving the tunable top in some, and you will be about as far from optimum as the 31 Nagler and 21 Ethos in the same Paracorr--not very much and quite tolerable.

It doesn't surprise me that TeleVue would make an eyepiece not optimized by their own Paracorrs, either I or II. I think one of the reasons for the greater adjustment range on the Paracorr II was because TeleVue had eyepieces not optimized by the Paracorr I. It wouldn't surprise me if, in the future, there was even a Paracorr III to accommodate eyepieces not yet even in production. It's always a race to accommodate designs as they come out.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

You are forgetting....

---

Yup I realised this a few short minutes after I did my post so I deleted it. Unfortunately you were on top of things and were already responding.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

While I don't use a Paracorr, I find this interesting because I am building a truss scope. In the next month or two it is going to be time to start cutting aluminum, and I certainly want to accommodate my shiny new 17.3 Delos.

From what I gather, the infocus is quite similar (almost identical) to the 31 Nagler. Is this correct?

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Thus creating a need for the Paracorr Type 3 that will be announced at NEAF much to the chagrin of those who invested in the Type 2 over the last year.

---

It is a very clever business model that plans for incremental improvements over the years. Does this mean that the designer didn't get it right the first time?

Why?

Surprised this hasn't come up before.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

I'll check their return policy. I've decided maybe I just don't want to mess with the thing, over this one issue.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

I have cats and a refractor. I did notice it wasn't parfocal with my 24 Pan.

---

Post Extras: