Quote:

---

There are 1.25" eyepieces with 29mm field stops, a diameter larger than the inside diameter of the bottom barrel. How? Accept lower illumination of the edge that would be the case in a 1.25" eyepiece with a 27-27.5mm field stop.
As was said earlier--it's all about compromises and where one draws the line.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

As far as the ES 100 line being a knockoff of Ethos, I though x-ray photos had long ago proven the obvious to be true?

---

I'm surprised this post is still here. I got a nastygram for a similar statement.

---

Shhhhhh...

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Jeff,

I've owned both the 22mm Pan and T4 Nagler in the past. Yes, the T4 has a larger and somewhat more immersive field than the Pan does.
...

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

What existing eyepiece design covers the full range of focal lengths with consistent ER and AFOV?

---

Pentax XW.

---

Alas, no longer true. The 30 and 40 have been discontinued, and the 20 does not have a field stop anywhere near the limit for a 1.25" eyepiece.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

What existing eyepiece design covers the full range of focal lengths with consistent ER and AFOV?

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Lumping the Naglers together isn't appropriate. The type 4, 5, and 6 Naglers are three completely different designs, and none of them cover the full focal length range.

---

I disagree with that.

---

Seriously? You're saying the types 4, 5 and 6 are the same design?

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Lumping the Naglers together isn't appropriate. The type 4, 5, and 6 Naglers are three completely different designs, and none of them cover the full focal length range.

---

I disagree with that.

---

Seriously? You're saying the types 4, 5 and 6 are the same design?

---

The respective internal optical designs of the above types are different. However, from an END-USER PERSPECTIVE the vastly more important question is whether and how the viewing qualities produced differ across these various types. One difference that IS obvious between the T6s vs the T4s and T5s is strongly related to the significantly larger eyepiece lens size of tha latter: to me, it's MUCH easier to subjectively perceive the purportedly identical 82 deg AFOVs as generously expansive in the T4s and T5s than in the T6s. For example, I often find it takes a minute or two for my mind to "see" the AFOV in e.g. a 13mmT6 as equally expansive as in the 17mmT4 when I swap out the latter for the former, while by comparison, there is no such perceptual gap produced in switching from a 17mm Ethos to a 13mm Ethos (equal eye lens sizes). What's curious is that if I comparatively test the views through the raw eyepieces (no scope) against an illuminated sheet of white paper (i.e. an effectively "null" blank view), the perceptual gap produced by the difference in lens sizes between the 13T6 and 17T4 disappears in that I more or less instantly perceive the "sameness" of the 82 degree AFOVs.

Which brings us back to the larger question: what potential improvements could be made to the 31T5 Nagler, 41 Panoptic, or 21 Ethos, other than perhaps new versions thereof with expanded eye relief? What improvements would be sufficiently non-incremental to justify introduction of an additional eyepiece line or additional "type" for an existing line (e.g. T7 Naglers, or T2 Panoptics?) That is, enough of a difference that the re-labeling would be more than just marketing hype? Would you be more satisfied if Televue sold the improvement as "enhanced majesty factor" or if they sold it as "Ethos Type 2", or "3.7mm Ethos SX"...your choice for whatever the "SX" stands for (?)

Edited by FirstSight (01/31/13 10:51 AM)

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

A 25mm Ethos would've been nice, but only if Televue had been able to maintain the image quality of the 21mm Ethos and 31mm Nagler.

---

It's probably technically feasible to make a 25mm Ethos and satisfy all the same performance characteristics required of the rest of the line. What's probably not feasible is to do so without requiring an unacceptably bulky, heavy package size. It seems that for any given AFOV, past a certain focal length the required bulk and size begins to ramp up exponentially...consider how dramatically the 31T5 bulks up compared to the 26T5 or the 21E compared to the 17E. Would you buy and use a 25E only slightly smaller and lighter than a pony keg of beer? OK, so that hypothetical is a bit of an exaggeration in degree, but is correct in principle.

---

The ES 100 25mm is now out, sells for $600, and weighs in at 2 lbs, 10 oz., that is to say heavier than the 21mm Ethos but lighter than the 31mm Nagler. So, the weight is competitive and the price is competitive. The remaining question is how well it performs, or put another way whether is truly fills the void left by Televue not releasing a 25mm Ethos. The tidbits I've read about the 25mm ES 100 in other threads sound encouraging, but I don't know of any thorough reviews as of yet comparing it to other wide-field long focal length eyepieces, so it remains to be seen how it stacks up to the Ethos, Nagler or even other ES 100 eyepieces. I know I'd love to compare one to my 31mm Nagler...

I don't pretend to know enough about eyepiece design to speculate whether Televue should be able to make a 25mm Ethos that would perform as well as the rest of the line while weighing less than a bowling ball. It may well be that making one now isn't feasible for different reasons, but might be in the near future. I do see another problem for now--price. The 21mm Ethos is $900 and I'm almost afraid to ask what a 25mm Ethos would go for...

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

What improvements would be sufficiently non-incremental to justify introduction of an additional eyepiece line or additional "type" for an existing line (e.g. T7 Naglers, or T2 Panoptics?)

---

The issue of the need to update the coatings was mentioned. I believe TeleVue just does this as a matter of course, incremental improvements are made without renaming the line.

Jon

Post Extras: