Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu uh, User

Equipment Discussions >> Eyepieces

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | (show all)
Levine
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 03/24/06

Loc: 40° 47' 52" N / 85° 49' 14" ...
Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan
      #5841651 - 05/05/13 01:09 PM

Is one clearly superior to the other, objectively speaking?




Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
csa/montana
Den Mama
*****

Reged: 05/14/05

Loc: montana
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Levine]
      #5841739 - 05/05/13 01:58 PM

I had both at the same time; and had a very difficult time choosing which one to keep. They are both very excellent eyepieces, excellent contrast! I finally decided on the 22Pan, as it just seemed to be more "submersive" while looking thru it; meaning it seemed that you were drawn into the view moreso than with the 24Pan. Both are winners!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Levine
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 03/24/06

Loc: 40° 47' 52" N / 85° 49' 14" ...
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: csa/montana]
      #5841763 - 05/05/13 02:17 PM

Quote:

I had both at the same time; and had a very difficult time choosing which one to keep. They are both very excellent eyepieces, excellent contrast! I finally decided on the 22Pan, as it just seemed to be more "submersive" while looking thru it; meaning it seemed that you were drawn into the view moreso than with the 24Pan. Both are winners!




Others have commented on this feature of the 22.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
SteveG
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 09/27/06

Loc: Seattle, WA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Levine]
      #5841836 - 05/05/13 03:08 PM

I had them both.
22 pan has good edge correction and great eye relief.
24 pan has great edge correction and poor eye relief.

Take your pick!

I went with the 22 pan because I use Dioptrx and need the eye relief.

If I didn't need the Dioptrx, I would get the ES 24 mm 68 deg.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
csa/montana
Den Mama
*****

Reged: 05/14/05

Loc: montana
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Levine]
      #5841858 - 05/05/13 03:17 PM

Quote:

Quote:

I had both at the same time; and had a very difficult time choosing which one to keep. They are both very excellent eyepieces, excellent contrast! I finally decided on the 22Pan, as it just seemed to be more "submersive" while looking thru it; meaning it seemed that you were drawn into the view moreso than with the 24Pan. Both are winners!




Others have commented on this feature of the 22.




I still have the Pan22.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Levine
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 03/24/06

Loc: 40° 47' 52" N / 85° 49' 14" ...
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: SteveG]
      #5841909 - 05/05/13 03:49 PM

Quote:



22 pan has good edge correction and great eye relief.
24 pan has great edge correction and poor eye relief.






So far, it sounds like choice comes down to which performance characteristic is most important to the end user: eye relief, or edge correction.



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: csa/montana]
      #5842040 - 05/05/13 05:06 PM

Quote:

I had both at the same time; and had a very difficult time choosing which one to keep. They are both very excellent eyepieces, excellent contrast! I finally decided on the 22Pan, as it just seemed to be more "submersive" while looking thru it; meaning it seemed that you were drawn into the view moreso than with the 24Pan. Both are winners!




In the common parlance, this characteristic is called "immersiveness", though I like your implication just fine.
With a coma corrector, I would have said the same thing about the 22mm. It's too bad it's been discontinued a long time. I guess the market preferred a smaller eyepiece and wasn't that enthusiastic about the 2" skirt (I loved it, sigh).


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
russell23
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 05/31/09

Loc: Upstate NY
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Levine]
      #5842245 - 05/05/13 06:55 PM

Quote:

Quote:



22 pan has good edge correction and great eye relief.
24 pan has great edge correction and poor eye relief.






So far, it sounds like choice comes down to which performance characteristic is most important to the end user: eye relief, or edge correction.






Yes - that is the way to do it with any eyepiece purchase choice. Figure which performance characteristic that is different between the options matters more to you and use that to make your decision.

Dave


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike B
Starstruck
*****

Reged: 04/06/05

Loc: shake, rattle, & roll, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: russell23]
      #5842341 - 05/05/13 08:01 PM

Quote:

22 pan has good edge correction and great eye relief.
24 pan has great edge correction and poor eye relief.




Sounds to me like it's about ER... & possibly immersiveness.

Have had the 24mm... was a fine EP, optically, but had neither ER or "I" for my eyes.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ibase
Vendor Affiliate
*****

Reged: 03/20/08

Loc: Manila, Philippines 121*E 14*N
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Mike B]
      #5842375 - 05/05/13 08:17 PM

Noticed in the forum that the Pan 24 is The Legend. Then not as much raves for the 22. Have the Pan 27, reckon it has great edge-correction and great eye relief too, a favorite that will keep.

Best,


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Starman1]
      #5842452 - 05/05/13 09:06 PM

Quote:

Quote:

I had both at the same time; and had a very difficult time choosing which one to keep. They are both very excellent eyepieces, excellent contrast! I finally decided on the 22Pan, as it just seemed to be more "submersive" while looking thru it; meaning it seemed that you were drawn into the view moreso than with the 24Pan. Both are winners!




In the common parlance, this characteristic is called "immersiveness", though I like your implication just fine.
With a coma corrector, I would have said the same thing about the 22mm. It's too bad it's been discontinued a long time. I guess the market preferred a smaller eyepiece and wasn't that enthusiastic about the 2" skirt (I loved it, sigh).




It is interesting to read about the 22mm Panoptic. I have had one for a few years now, rarely use it. It just seems like the 20 mm Type 2 Nagler is an overall better performer, bigger, wider field of view, better corrected in a fast scope.

Of course the 22mm Pan is better if you drop it on your toe...

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
csa/montana
Den Mama
*****

Reged: 05/14/05

Loc: montana
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5842479 - 05/05/13 09:19 PM

Quote:

It is interesting to read about the 22mm Panoptic. I have had one for a few years now, rarely use it. It just seems like the 20 mm Type 2 Nagler is an overall better performer, bigger, wider field of view, better corrected in a fast scope.




Jon; that may well be, however the OP asked only about the 22 vs 24 Pan.

Both of these eyepieces are excellent, and very difficult to choose a winner. Like most eyepiece choices it comes down to personal preference.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JMW
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 02/11/07

Loc: Nevada
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: csa/montana]
      #5842604 - 05/05/13 10:30 PM

I have a pair of Pan 24 for binoviewing. Went with the 24 for maximum true field of view in a 1.25 inch format. I also use if for my very wide field of view finder when combined with the Stellervue 80mm finder. In my main scopes I stick with the 2 inch eyepieces. I don't wear glasses and don't mind glueing my eyeball up to the glass.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
John F
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 02/16/04

Loc: Washington State
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Levine]
      #5842775 - 05/06/13 12:34 AM

They're both great eyepieces and I think most users would be happy with either one of them. The major reason I switched to the 24mm Pan when they first came out around 10 years ago was because of their much smaller size and lighter weight advantage which made them much more suitable for use with a binoviewer than the 22mm Pans were. Another disadvantage of the early Pans (i.e., their 22mm & 35mm models) is that they required you get a special adapter from Tele Vue in order to with a Barlow. I never did use mine with a Barlow so me me that was a non-issue.

The 24mm Pan also has a 8% wider TFOV at 16% larger true field area which is another advantage they have over the 22s.

Even thought both are rated as having 15mm of eye relief I agree with others that the 22mm seems to have provide a little advantage in this area. I also agree that it seems to provide a little more immersive view. And the 22mm Pan also provides a little more magnification and a slightly darker sky background. The 22mm Pan has one other property I like and that is I think it is the best looking eyepiece that Tele Vue or any other manufacturer has ever produced. It is instantly recognizable classic Tele Vue but it is not so large in size as to appear ungainly.

If I had to choose between the two I'd probably pick the 22mm if I was buying it just for single eyepiece viewing and if its heavier weight was not going to be an issue with the scope I was using it with. However, if I had present or future binoview use in mind as well, then I'd pick the 24mm.

John Finnan


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Levine
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 03/24/06

Loc: 40° 47' 52" N / 85° 49' 14" ...
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: John F]
      #5842841 - 05/06/13 01:27 AM

Great comments, John. Thanks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Paul G
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 05/08/03

Loc: Freedonia
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Levine]
      #5842965 - 05/06/13 06:12 AM Attachment (49 downloads)

Other than the differences one would expect because of the small difference in fl, the only noticeable difference is the 24 has a bit better edge correction. I used the 22 Pans to binoview and they were great performers but they are large, could be a problem if one has a prodigious proboscis. The other binoviewing issue is that the 2" skirt can interfere with the locking mechanism in some binoviewers. I went to the 24's and am very happy with my decision, but I would be a happy camper with either.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Levine
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 03/24/06

Loc: 40° 47' 52" N / 85° 49' 14" ...
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Paul G]
      #5843050 - 05/06/13 07:54 AM

NICE pic!



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff Morgan
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 09/28/03

Loc: Prescott, AZ
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Starman1]
      #5843201 - 05/06/13 10:13 AM

Quote:

Quote:

I had both at the same time; and had a very difficult time choosing which one to keep. They are both very excellent eyepieces, excellent contrast! I finally decided on the 22Pan, as it just seemed to be more "submersive" while looking thru it; meaning it seemed that you were drawn into the view moreso than with the 24Pan. Both are winners!




In the common parlance, this characteristic is called "immersiveness", though I like your implication just fine.
With a coma corrector, I would have said the same thing about the 22mm. It's too bad it's been discontinued a long time. I guess the market preferred a smaller eyepiece and wasn't that enthusiastic about the 2" skirt (I loved it, sigh).





The 2" skirt just threads off for those interested in 1-1/4" only operation. However, it does not change the weight very much (judging by feel alone).

A few years back I had the 24 Pan, 22 Pan, and 24 Brandon in house. Long story short, the 24 Pan was the one that got sold off. It was a great eyepiece but since all my scopes have 2" focusers the max true field aspect of the 24 never held any weight for me. Too easy just to pop in a 2" eyepiece and get even more field.

In addition to the 22 Pan immersiveness, I suppose a great deal of my opinion on this eyepiece is sentimental. The 22 Pan (along with the 9 mm T1 Nagler) was my first foray into the premium wide field world 20 some years ago. The 22 Pan was absolute magic in my f/9 Newtonian. It has never disappointed me in any other scope over the years.

As many have pointed out time moves on. A short while ago a nicely-priced 22 Nagler T4 came up on the 'Mart so I snagged it. I'm sure the A/B comparison will leave me very conflicted.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike B
Starstruck
*****

Reged: 04/06/05

Loc: shake, rattle, & roll, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jeff Morgan]
      #5843279 - 05/06/13 11:05 AM

Quote:

The 2" skirt just threads off for those interested in 1-1/4" only operation.



Just for reference, i understand this same skirt will *NOT* come off with the 12-T4 Nagler, even tho they appear similar.


Quote:

A short while ago a nicely-priced 22 Nagler T4 came up on the 'Mart so I snagged it. I'm sure the A/B comparison will leave me very conflicted.



Since i already have one of these, i wouldn't even THINK of trying the 22-Pan... but i'm sure it would be a fun comparo.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Mike B]
      #5843284 - 05/06/13 11:11 AM

Quote:

Quote:

The 2" skirt just threads off for those interested in 1-1/4" only operation.



Just for reference, i understand this same skirt will *NOT* come off with the 12-T4 Nagler, even tho they appear similar.


Quote:

A short while ago a nicely-priced 22 Nagler T4 came up on the 'Mart so I snagged it. I'm sure the A/B comparison will leave me very conflicted.



Since i already have one of these, i wouldn't even THINK of trying the 22-Pan... but i'm sure it would be a fun comparo.



I did that comparo and sold the 22 Panoptic. That was a long time ago, too, like early '90s?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
csa/montana
Den Mama
*****

Reged: 05/14/05

Loc: montana
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jeff Morgan]
      #5843358 - 05/06/13 11:49 AM

Jeff; yes, I'm very sentimental about my 22Pan. That & the 24Pan were the very first quality eyepieces I got. Interesting, I was a new member; and another member had listed both for sale. I wasn't sure which one would be the best for me; and this fantastic member sent me BOTH, to try for as long as I wished, until I made up my mind. She would not take payment at the time. Because of her trust in me, and that I really couldn't make my mind up quickly; I purchased both from her.

I've never forgotten that, so the 22Pan has another sentimental memory for me!

However, aside from this, the 22Pan is an awesome eyepiece that will thrill most looking thru it!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scanning4Comets
Markus
*****

Reged: 12/26/04

Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: csa/montana]
      #5843399 - 05/06/13 12:02 PM Attachment (22 downloads)

I did a shootout of both eyepieces a ways back. In my F/4.7 reflector the 22mm Pan had more of an "immersive" feel to it, and it had better eye relief. However, the 24mm Pan was a LOT sharper off axis. I prefer the 22mm LVW in my short FL scope as it is a LOT better off axis and everywhere else than the 22m Pan. Eye relief in the 22mm LVW is better as well once you take off the rubber eye guard.

I would take the 22mm LVW over both any day of the week.

Cheers,


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike B
Starstruck
*****

Reged: 04/06/05

Loc: shake, rattle, & roll, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Scanning4Comets]
      #5843447 - 05/06/13 12:21 PM

Same here!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: ibase]
      #5845261 - 05/07/13 10:26 AM

The 22mm Panoptic is not very popular, really. Having sold approximately 80 eyepieces in the last year or so, I have a feel for where the market is based on how quickly eyepieces sell and how many nibbles I get. I've listed and relisted a 22mm Panoptic multiple times, even offering various trade options, with just a nibble or two, but no serious buyers. So whatever the sentiment about this out-of-print eyepiece, once you have it, you'll likely be stuck with it for quite a long while, so be sure that you really love it before taking the plunge.

Here is a partial list of eyepieces that sold much, much faster and garnered much more interest than the Panoptic:

Pentax XLs
Nagler Type 6s
ES 100s
ES 82s
Tak LEs
Tak MC Orthos
Meade 5k SWAs
Meade 5k UWAs
TMB Planetaries
TMB SMs
Celestron Ultimas
Vixen LVs
Vixen LVWs
etc.

It's not a bad eyepiece, really, but I much prefer the 22mm LVW to the 22mm Panoptic. I don't much care for the 24mm Panoptic. The shorter focal length Panoptic have poor ergonomics (24mm, 19mm and 15mm) due to the short eye relief wide field combination.

Regards,

Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #5845323 - 05/07/13 11:12 AM

Quote:

Here is a partial list of eyepieces that sold much, much faster and garnered much more interest than the Panoptic:




I think the 22mm Panoptic is a hard sell, it's competing against eyepieces that are considerably cheaper like the Meade Series 5000 SWAs that can be had for under $100. One has to be clear that spending close to $200 for the 22mm Panoptic is worth it. It comes down to separating the performance of the eyepiece versus the value of the eyepiece. A great deal is a good deal but not necessarily a great eyepiece.

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scanning4Comets
Markus
*****

Reged: 12/26/04

Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5845551 - 05/07/13 01:11 PM

Quote:

The 22mm Panoptic is not very popular, really. Having sold approximately 80 eyepieces in the last year or so, I have a feel for where the market is based on how quickly eyepieces sell and how many nibbles I get. I've listed and relisted a 22mm Panoptic multiple times, even offering various trade options, with just a nibble or two, but no serious buyers. So whatever the sentiment about this out-of-print eyepiece, once you have it, you'll likely be stuck with it for quite a long while, so be sure that you really love it before taking the plunge.




It doesn't work all that good in a fast scope. I have mentioned this several times but some people just don't get it. The 22mm LVW is much better in a fast scope. I was going to trade my 22mm LVW for a 17mm LVW, but now I see how wickedly awesome it is, I am keeping it.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Scanning4Comets]
      #5845619 - 05/07/13 01:32 PM

Quote:

It doesn't work all that good in a fast scope. I have mentioned this several times but some people just don't get it. The 22mm LVW is much better in a fast scope. I was going to trade my 22mm LVW for a 17mm LVW, but now I see how wickedly awesome it is, I am keeping it.




I find the 22mm Panoptic is a good performer in a fast telescope. The stars are reasonably round and sharp across the field of view in my 12.5 inch F/4.06 when used with a Paracorr to correct the mirror's inherent coma, that's F/4.67. It's also performs well in my NP-101 which is F/5.4 and essentially free of any off-axis aberrations of it's own.

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scanning4Comets
Markus
*****

Reged: 12/26/04

Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5845650 - 05/07/13 01:44 PM

No Paracorr here....I have mentioned that dozens of times also. The 22mm LVW performs almost perfect w/o a Paracorr, the 22mm Pan does NOT.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Scanning4Comets]
      #5845697 - 05/07/13 02:03 PM

Quote:

No Paracorr here....I have mentioned that dozens of times also. The 22mm LVW performs almost perfect w/o a Paracorr, the 22mm Pan does NOT.




At F/4.7 there is coma to be seen, an eyepiece does not make coma disappear, or more accurately, if it makes coma disappear in a scope with coma, it makes coma appear in a scope without coma.

We have been through this before. You first say that some people just don't get it but there you are using a fast Newtonian without a coma corrector. I think I have my ducks in a row, a scope operating at F/4.67 with a coma corrector, a refractor at F/5.4 that is free of field curvature, coma and astigmatism...

I find the 22mm Panoptic to be a reasonable off-axis performer in a fast telescope.

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scanning4Comets
Markus
*****

Reged: 12/26/04

Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5845707 - 05/07/13 02:07 PM

I'm not going to argue with you any more.

Edited by Scott in NC (05/09/13 09:07 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5845737 - 05/07/13 02:14 PM

Jon:

The Paracorr also acts as a 1.15x Barlow, and cleans up off axis astigmatism even in simple eyepieces like Kellners. It's no surprise that it helps with the off axis issues in the 22mm Panoptic as well.

Regards,

Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #5845828 - 05/07/13 02:51 PM

I used to use the 22 Panoptic in a 6" f/5 but the edge of the field wasn't very good (though the center was superb).
In an 8" SCT, the edge was better, but still not perfect.
Both of those scopes have some field curvature.

I had occasion to try it in my 12.5" f/5 scope with Paracorr, and the edge was very good. Just about zero field curvature in that combination.

It's my belief that the 22mm Panoptic eyepiece didn't have a completely flat field, so, by defocusing the stars a bit at the edge, the aberrations of edge stars were exacerbated.

Which probably explains why the Paracorr cleaned it up by flattening the field AND correcting the inherent coma in the scope and lengthening the focal length on my scope to 1825mm (a very flat field).

It's likely that the LVW has a very flat field inherently, and likely to be anastigmatic, in which case all that would be left is coma. And coma is not the largest aberration at the edge of most eyepieces. A lot of people aren't bothered by it when it is the only aberration left.

Then we're only left with the visibility of coma, which depends a lot on factors like sky darkness, apparent field, f/ratio, etc.

So neither Markus' nor Jon's results are particularly surprising. Marcus is obviously not particularly bothered by coma in his scope (and keeping the apparent field at 65 degrees helps), and the LVW may, indeed, have a better edge than the 22 Panoptic. Field curvature is one of the reasons I no longer own a 35 Panoptic, as well. FC makes coma appear worse, astigmatism appear worse, and poor seeing appear worse. it all adds up.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #5845857 - 05/07/13 03:01 PM

Quote:

Jon:

The Paracorr also acts as a 1.15x Barlow, and cleans up off axis astigmatism even in simple eyepieces like Kellners. It's no surprise that it helps with the off axis issues in the 22mm Panoptic as well.

Regards,

Jim




Jim:

True but the scope in question is an F/4.06 which operates at F/4.67 with the Paracorr...

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Starman1]
      #5845869 - 05/07/13 03:04 PM

Quote:

Field curvature is one of the reasons I no longer own a 35 Panoptic, as well. FC makes coma appear worse, astigmatism appear worse, and poor seeing appear worse. it all adds up.




The 35 Panoptic is good performer in the NP-101... Not quite the 31mm Nagler but is definitely a winner.

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5846129 - 05/07/13 05:26 PM

Doesn't matter what level of amplification the Barlow generates, whether it's 1.15x or 5x. The way eyepieces like Naglers correct for off-axis astigmatism is by bolting a Barlow-like low amplification Smythe lens in the lower barrel. A Barlow of *any* amplification will similarly quell astigmatism with even very simple eyepieces in a very fast scope. You could practically use Ramsdens in a Paracorred f/3.5 scope with okay off-axis results.

Regards,

Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #5846246 - 05/07/13 06:07 PM

Quote:

Doesn't matter what level of amplification the Barlow generates, whether it's 1.15x or 5x. The way eyepieces like Naglers correct for off-axis astigmatism is by bolting a Barlow-like low amplification Smythe lens in the lower barrel. A Barlow of *any* amplification will similarly quell astigmatism with even very simple eyepieces in a very fast scope. You could practically use Ramsdens in a Paracorred f/3.5 scope with okay off-axis results.

Regards,

Jim




I have to disagree on that. Have you tried a Ramsdems or Huygenian in a fast Newtonian fitted with a Paracorr? The Barlow changes the light cone angle so that the eyepiece sees an effectively slower scope. 1.15x is not much of a change.

I can provide a very good example of an eyepiece that does not perform well with the mild Barlow effect of the Paracorr. The 20mm Celestron Erfle is very poorly corrected in an F/4 or F/5 Newtonian with or without a Paracorr. Add a 2x Barlow and it cleans up very nicely.

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
FirstSight
Duke of Deneb
*****

Reged: 12/26/05

Loc: Raleigh, NC
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Scanning4Comets]
      #5846300 - 05/07/13 06:30 PM

Quote:


It doesn't work all that good in a fast scope. I have mentioned this several times but some people just don't get it.




When I was searching for a better, wider-AFOV eyepiece than the stock plossl for my f/3.75 Stellarvue SV60 finderscope, I was hoping to find a used 24 Pan, but one night at a club observing session a fellow club-member mentioned that he had a 22 Pan he'd let me try out, and if I liked it he'd be willing to sell it to me for $200. I first tried it in my f/4.9 12" reflector, and really liked it, especially the way the large eyelens made its 68 deg AVOV seem more generously expansive than most other 68 deg AFOV eyepieces. However, then I tried it out in the SV60 finderscope...yeeow! what a smeary, comatic mess the outer half of the FOV was, totally unsuitable for its intended main use as a finderscope EP. Well ok, f/3.75 is rather stressfully fast, especially in a small achro refractor.

I wound up finding a used 24 Pan for $240 that works splendidly in the f/3.75 SV60, far better and far less affected by visible aberration than the original stock 50 deg AFOV eyepiece. In that particular scope, the 24 Pan does create a lesser version of the "floaty" eye relief effect the 28RKE is noted for, but in a finderscope application this is a useful feature rather than a bug, since I'm using the view somewhat like a dynamic finder-chart.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5846335 - 05/07/13 06:44 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Field curvature is one of the reasons I no longer own a 35 Panoptic, as well. FC makes coma appear worse, astigmatism appear worse, and poor seeing appear worse. it all adds up.




The 35 Panoptic is good performer in the NP-101... Not quite the 31mm Nagler but is definitely a winner.

Jon




Yeah, I believe that the sign of the FC in the eyepiece matches that of the newtonian, so that even when the newtonian's focal length is large enough to have a nearly flat field, the combination can still be a problem.
I couldn't accommodate the FC in the 6" f/5, but I could in the 12.5" (with Paracorr) by focusing between center and edge.
On the other hand, no such accommodation was required for the 31 Nagler, and it was a better exit pupil choice for me as well.

The NP101 has an extremely flat focal plane. I love the scope for that reason. All that's left is the FC in the eyepiece.

Now I'm thinking I might be ready for a smaller maximum exit pupil than the 31 Nagler.
Ah, the vicissitudes of aging.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike B
Starstruck
*****

Reged: 04/06/05

Loc: shake, rattle, & roll, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: FirstSight]
      #5846369 - 05/07/13 07:00 PM

Quote:

Well ok, f/3.75 is rather stressfully fast, especially in a small achro refractor.



For a while i also enjoyed the use of a SV finder- the F3.75 "F80". And yes, it was a grueling EP tester!

IIRC, the 24mm pan did well with this, as did the Vixen LVWs i tried. Others faring not so well included various Erfles, Plossls, an older Meade 24.5mm SWA, and a 24mm Siebert Ultra.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
csrlice12
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 05/22/12

Loc: Denver, CO
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Mike B]
      #5846396 - 05/07/13 07:13 PM

I gotta stop going by the scope shop to say hello on the way home from work....I just said hello to a 22Pan in Mint condition with box, bags, and paperwork, and the paperwork has Al's autograph! Guess now I'll have to go do my own deathmatch....except in mine, noone dies or gets sold away.....yea, I'm Randy, and I'm an eyepiece junky (not sure I want to be cured though).

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
csrlice12
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 05/22/12

Loc: Denver, CO
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Mike B]
      #5846398 - 05/07/13 07:13 PM

I gotta stop going by the scope shop to say hello on the way home from work....I just said hello to a 22Pan in Mint condition with box, bags, and paperwork, and the paperwork has Al's autograph! Guess now I'll have to go do my own deathmatch....except in mine, noone dies or gets sold away.....yea, I'm Randy, and I'm an eyepiece junky (not sure I want to be cured though).

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: csrlice12]
      #5846427 - 05/07/13 07:25 PM

Quote:


I gotta stop going by the scope shop to say hello on the way home from work..






You struck my funny bone...

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike B
Starstruck
*****

Reged: 04/06/05

Loc: shake, rattle, & roll, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: csrlice12]
      #5846460 - 05/07/13 07:45 PM

Quote:

I just said hello to a 22Pan in Mint condition...




Yeah, but what didya say "goodbye" to?

...aside from rational thot, anyway...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
helpwanted
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 07/04/07

Loc: Phoenix, AZ
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Mike B]
      #5846687 - 05/07/13 09:38 PM

I have had both, kept the 24. The 22 just didn't do it for me, I felt the view was soft.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Blake Andrews
sage
*****

Reged: 07/31/08

Loc: Iowa
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #5846921 - 05/07/13 11:53 PM

Quote:

The 22mm Panoptic is not very popular, really. Having sold approximately 80 eyepieces in the last year or so, I have a feel for where the market is based on how quickly eyepieces sell and how many nibbles I get. I've listed and relisted a 22mm Panoptic multiple times, even offering various trade options, with just a nibble or two, but no serious buyers. So whatever the sentiment about this out-of-print eyepiece, once you have it, you'll likely be stuck with it for quite a long while, so be sure that you really love it before taking the plunge.





Hi Jim,

While I agree it takes a little more effort to buy/sell a 22Pan, for me it didn't take much more. Through a couple of trades and deals, I ended up with two of the buggers. I kept one, and took the other to our local astronomy club's public night. Long story short, I passed it around and it sold itself that night. The new owner is still very happy a year later. I sold it for $160 - the same price I figured I had into it.

Cheers!
Blake


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff Morgan
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 09/28/03

Loc: Prescott, AZ
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Blake Andrews]
      #5846929 - 05/08/13 12:06 AM

There certainly are newer designs in the 20 mm class. Two Naglers and an Ethos come immediately to mind, and no doubt people's mindshare is there.

But perhaps one needs to look at it from the other side of the coin. Tele Vue certainly sold boat loads of 22 Pans, especially considering the 22 was the launch focal length of the Panoptic line.

With thousands of these out there, how often do they come up for sale?

The answer of course is not very often. It would seem there are many very satisfied owners out there.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scanning4Comets
Markus
*****

Reged: 12/26/04

Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jeff Morgan]
      #5846957 - 05/08/13 12:28 AM

In the central area, the 22mm Pan is super sharp, no doubt. Eye relief and immersiveness is awesome as well. I have never dogged this eyepiece in a sense that rendered it "useless".

In fact when I did my comparison a while back, (which is on here), I preferred the 22mm Pan over the 24mm Pan for comfort and immersiveness, and it barlows excellently. However, over time the edge softness kept niggling at me and biting my heels so I let it go. I prefer not to see "blobs" that appear to be DSO's near the edges when I am scanning for an object.

I then discovered the 22mm Vixen LVW and stars are super sharp all over the field. Stars are still pin points right next to the field stop in fact. I don't know what they did when they designed this eyepiece, but they sure did something right to correct coma as seen from the mirror.

This is WHY I still have it and the 22mm pan is gone. This is WHY Jim Barnett has an ad still looking for one to trade for his 22mm Pan. It is truly an EPIC EYEPIECE indeed. Yes, a TV eyepiece gets bested by an LVW. Does this anger some TV users? Youbetcha. I have no idea why.

http://www.astromart.com/classifieds/details.asp?classified_id=794849

Hmmmmm, no takers. I wonder why?

Cheers,


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Scanning4Comets]
      #5847041 - 05/08/13 02:14 AM

Markus,
1) the LVW doesn't correct coma. I've used them in a lot of different newts and they do reveal coma.
2) At f/4.7 the star images at the edge of a 30mm field stop are nearly 15X as large as they are at the center. That should make coma quite visible unless the magnification is ultra-low, which it isn't in your scope.
3) So if the coma isn't visible at the edge of the field, there is another reason for it other than #1 or #2--some reason you're not seeing it.
I have some ideas about that, related to where, perhaps, you observe.
I suspect it's not very dark.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
csrlice12
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 05/22/12

Loc: Denver, CO
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Mike B]
      #5847276 - 05/08/13 08:08 AM

Quote:

Quote:

I just said hello to a 22Pan in Mint condition...




Yeah, but what didya say "goodbye" to?

...aside from rational thot, anyway...





Yea, I know, out $220, but It's all good....


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Starman1]
      #5847288 - 05/08/13 08:19 AM

Quote:

I suspect it's not very dark.




I think the key to seeing off-axis aberrations clearly is to critically observe relatively bright stars off-axis. Often off-axis sharpness is evaluated by the quality of a star field which can be overly optimistic, particular if there is a significant amount of light pollution.

Using a relatively bright star, probably magnitude 2-4, allows one to clearly see any aberrations even when there is substantial light pollution.

I did spend some time last night with my 22mm Panoptic, urban skies.. I was using my NP-101 which is a tough customer because it's relatively fast at F/5.4 but it has essentially no aberrations of it's own so what you see are issues with the eyepiece. This combination provides about 25x with a 4mm exit pupil.

Viewing star fields and the M-35, I could see no edge aberrations. So, with Porrima at magnitude 2.7 and high in the sky, I spent some time observing Porrima as a widefield test star. At the edge of the field, the star itself could be seen to be a point, clean and round but there was a slight aberration if I looked closely with the star right at the field stop. A poor performer would show the stars as astigmatic blurs that shifted by 90 degrees as one passed through focus, I saw none of that.

Next time I have a chance, I will give it a work out under dark skies in my 16 inch F/4.42 = F/5.07 with the Paracorr.

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff Morgan
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 09/28/03

Loc: Prescott, AZ
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Scanning4Comets]
      #5847392 - 05/08/13 09:36 AM

Quote:

In fact when I did my comparison a while back, (which is on here), I preferred the 22mm Pan over the 24mm Pan for comfort and immersiveness, and it barlows excellently. However, over time the edge softness kept niggling at me and biting my heels so I let it go. I prefer not to see "blobs" that appear to be DSO's near the edges when I am scanning for an object.




I'm not going to doubt your observations. Mine are somewhat different. The telescopes in question are a Newtonian of f/6, and three refractors. An f/12 achromat, and f/6 and f/8.5 apochromats.

In my eyepiece collection the 22 Pan sits between the 31 Nagler and 14 Delos (which replaced a 13 Ethos). Being the methodical person I am after locating an object in the 31 Nagler I virtually never skip an eyepiece as I ramp up the magnification to whatever a particular night allows.

Over the years of these line-ups, in normal use I have never felt any dramatic "fall-off" in performance from the 22 Pan despite the high-rent neighbors. Perhaps if I dedicated an hour to intense comparison I could but apparent field aside, the 22 Pan fit right in. Interestingly the 13 Ethos gave me very nearly the same true field (25 mm field stop vs. 22.3) but I never found reason to skip the 22 Pan.

Quote:

This is WHY I still have it and the 22mm pan is gone. This is WHY Jim Barnett has an ad still looking for one to trade for his 22mm Pan. It is truly an EPIC EYEPIECE indeed. Yes, a TV eyepiece gets bested by an LVW. Does this anger some TV users? Youbetcha. I have no idea why.

http://www.astromart.com/classifieds/details.asp?classified_id=794849

Hmmmmm, no takers. I wonder why?

Cheers,




Well, since you're inviting speculation ....

I would guess that of the three 22 LVW owners in North America you're the only one aware of the ad.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Blake Andrews]
      #5847618 - 05/08/13 11:57 AM

Mine has become a club "loaner" eyepiece for new observers who don't have the scratch or commitment to make a big eyepiece investment yet. It's fine in that role. I think of it as an "improved" Erfle. And it's a large eyepiece. Very impressive to someone whose starter scope came with a couple of Plossls.

Regards,

Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scanning4Comets
Markus
*****

Reged: 12/26/04

Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: jrbarnett]
      #5847639 - 05/08/13 12:08 PM

Quote:

Markus,
1) the LVW doesn't correct coma. I've used them in a lot of different newts and they do reveal coma.
2) At f/4.7 the star images at the edge of a 30mm field stop are nearly 15X as large as they are at the center. That should make coma quite visible unless the magnification is ultra-low, which it isn't in your scope.
3) So if the coma isn't visible at the edge of the field, there is another reason for it other than #1 or #2--some reason you're not seeing it.
I have some ideas about that, related to where, perhaps, you observe.
I suspect it's not very dark.

--------------------
Don Pensack




Eh?

Star images in my 22mm LVW are still pinpoints right to the edge. I see no coma which is all that matters. FYI, it is quite dark. You can try to rationalize all you want, but I KNOW what I am seeing. I am done arguing here. You don't see what I see, and nobody else does either. You can do all of the math you want here for eons and it won't change what I see.

This is all that matters.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Scanning4Comets]
      #5847772 - 05/08/13 01:27 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Markus,
1) the LVW doesn't correct coma. I've used them in a lot of different newts and they do reveal coma.
2) At f/4.7 the star images at the edge of a 30mm field stop are nearly 15X as large as they are at the center. That should make coma quite visible unless the magnification is ultra-low, which it isn't in your scope.
3) So if the coma isn't visible at the edge of the field, there is another reason for it other than #1 or #2--some reason you're not seeing it.
I have some ideas about that, related to where, perhaps, you observe.
I suspect it's not very dark.

--------------------
Don Pensack




Eh?

Star images in my 22mm LVW are still pinpoints right to the edge. I see no coma which is all that matters. FYI, it is quite dark. You can try to rationalize all you want, but I KNOW what I am seeing. I am done arguing here. You don't see what I see, and nobody else does either. You can do all of the math you want here for eons and it won't change what I see.

This is all that matters.




When Don put the 22mm LVW in Newtonians, he was able to see the coma from the mirror...

So the question becomes, you know where you stand but where do the rest of us stand? Is someone to believe that somehow the coma disappears? Myself, I can see coma with any eyepiece in my 10 inch F/5 Newtonian if I use it without a coma corrector, it's not that difficult to see. A bright star at the edge of the field is not clean, round and tailless.

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike B
Starstruck
*****

Reged: 04/06/05

Loc: shake, rattle, & roll, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5848156 - 05/08/13 04:35 PM

While i've been observing the heavens with telescopes since i was a young pre-teen (ie. pre-1970), i am fairly recent to fast(ish) Dobs, so "coma" was a fairly new experience- at least in the helpings dished out at F4.55!

So it's been a li'l while since i've tried viewing w/o a ParaCorr in place, and have NEVER done so with this specific EP (LVW-22)... i will have to give that a go, and see what the coma looks like. Maybe then i'll have a better idea of what Markus is or isn't seein'?

It took me a while to become cognizant of coma's presence... i *DO* distinctly recall feeling that the 24mm Pan was largely "unaffected" by it. Then i picked up a used ParaCorr... and began to see differently.


I no longer have ANY Panoptics, but i *DO* have a couple o'LVWs... particularly the FL in question. So we'll see what can be seen- hopefully soon...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike B
Starstruck
*****

Reged: 04/06/05

Loc: shake, rattle, & roll, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Mike B]
      #5854738 - 05/12/13 01:56 AM

Quote:

So we'll see what can be seen-




Okay, finally managed to get out! Among many, many EP trials & comparo's, i remembered to stick the 22-LVW into the Dob's focuser (f4.55 native, no ParaCorr).

Yes, there was coma. Stars were pretty sharp over the inner two-thirds of field diameter... but noticeable degradation developed beyond that. At the outer 10% of field, the comatic flair plus lateral color was quite noticeable. Same effect was seen no matter what edge the bright star (Spica) was slewed into.

If one looks straight ahead into the FoV, the 65* field is wide enough that this aberration isn't overwhelming- only if you go looking for it. The "view", as a whole, is wide enough- and sharp enough over the central two-thirds, that it is a very pleasant viewing experience... but as good as the Vixen LVWs are, they aren't magical. There is coma to be seen, if left uncorrected.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff Morgan
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 09/28/03

Loc: Prescott, AZ
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jeff Morgan]
      #5854829 - 05/12/13 04:26 AM

Tonight I had Round 1 of 22 Pan vs. 22 T4. The scope was an Astro-Physics Star 12, a 4.7" f/8.5 refractor. The test area was the region between Beta and Gamma Lyrae, and the area around Gamma Cygni.

Good news and Bad News (from the perspective of the sentimental favorite and Old Reliable 22 Pan): Good news is they are relatively close to where one would ask "is it worth the cost difference to switch?" The bad news is that the 22 Pan is clearly fighting this battle from behind.

But it wasn't all roses for the 22 T4 either. Firstly, after selling off my last Instajudst eyepiece 5 years ago, I now remember how much I disliked that particular feature. Well, I learned to ignore it before, I can learn to ignore it again. Also, since acquiring the T4 I had forgotten to tape over the "safety" undercut, so I experienced quite a few snags during eyepiece swaps. Must be the fault of that cheaply made Astro-Physics MaxBright diagonal (sarcasm font in use).

The telling area was near Gamma Cygni. The dark lanes that lace the region seemed a bit more apparent in the T4, but that needs more trials to be sure. Sadly, I also noticed some field curvature. With Gamma centered, I looked at the cluster just to the north (NGC 6910). It was near field edge in both eyepieces (of course much nearer the edge in the 22 Pan). When I focused for the faintest stars in the cluster, Gamma at center was a bit defocused. I noted this in both eyepieces. Oh well - as I tell some of the younger people I work with: Age has many surprises in store for you, and not many of them are pleasant.

I was also putting the Howie Glatter Parallizer through it's paces tonight. One of the tests was Izar. I focused it sharply in a 8 Delos (127x) and slewed to place it right on the field edge - no curvature noted! It was very nearly as sharp as it was in the center. Perhaps my eyes were not to blame for the curvature noted in the 22 mm eyepieces - I can only hope. And it confirms again what an amazing job Tele Vue did with the Delos.

Funny thing was, I also ran the Izar test with the 8 Brandon - an eyepiece I expect to dominate central field performance, but fall off as the edge is approached. It was actually very good until very close to the field edge - call it 90% - before distortions (appeared to be astigmatism) became noticeable. But even then, the split was clean. Not as good as Delos in that respect, but better than I expected.

Of course no decisions were reached tonight between the 22 mm eyepieces, I promised myself I would spend most of the summer making up my mind. I'm happy the 22 Pan acquitted itself so well in Round One - I was expecting a wipe-out. OTOH, it means I have to agonize a bit more over the decision on which eyepiece to part company with.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Blake Andrews
sage
*****

Reged: 07/31/08

Loc: Iowa
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jeff Morgan]
      #5855178 - 05/12/13 10:41 AM

Hi Jeff,

Awesome report. Thanks!

I also have the 22Pan, 22T4, and 24Pan. We were out with the Scouts camping this weekend. We had pristine skies last night, but no time to observe. Hopefully, later this spring I'll be able to add more to this discussion.

Cheers!
Blake


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scanning4Comets
Markus
*****

Reged: 12/26/04

Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Blake Andrews]
      #5855832 - 05/12/13 03:58 PM

Quote:

Okay, finally managed to get out! Among many, many EP trials & comparo's, i remembered to stick the 22-LVW into the Dob's focuser (f4.55 native, no ParaCorr).

Yes, there was coma. Stars were pretty sharp over the inner two-thirds of field diameter... but noticeable degradation developed beyond that. At the outer 10% of field, the comatic flair plus lateral color was quite noticeable. Same effect was seen no matter what edge the bright star (Spica) was slewed into.

If one looks straight ahead into the FoV, the 65* field is wide enough that this aberration isn't overwhelming- only if you go looking for it. The "view", as a whole, is wide enough- and sharp enough over the central two-thirds, that it is a very pleasant viewing experience... but as good as the Vixen LVWs are, they aren't magical. There is coma to be seen, if left uncorrected.




Hmmmmmm....

I guess I wasn't using a bright enough star then! I did use a bright star when I tested my 22mm LVW...but maybe it wasn't bright enough! But then again, one doesn't really do then when observing all of the time anyways. I tried the same thing last week with my 28mm ES 68 and saw quite a bit of coma as well. I used Arcturus in Bootes. I didn't do the same with the 22mm LVW which I will do next time I get out there.

Thanks for doing that, and I STAND CORRECTED about what I said earlier.

Maybe it IS time for that dreaded Paracorr! (Wish they were not so expensive) !!!

Cheers,


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Don Taylor
professor emeritus


Reged: 07/12/09

Loc: South TEXAS
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Scanning4Comets]
      #5855921 - 05/12/13 05:12 PM

I've used paracorrs for years. I resisted too but it does make a big difference once you know what to look for. See if you can find a late type 1 (used) as it should be less that 1/2 the price of a new type 2, and will work very well in an f4.5 scope

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff Morgan
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 09/28/03

Loc: Prescott, AZ
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Blake Andrews]
      #5855933 - 05/12/13 05:15 PM

Thanks. After a few hours sleep I have had a chance to think more about last nights observations.

Firstly, it was a brief look. The spring sky primarily offers up galaxies and with a 4.7" refractor, well you get the idea. I had to wait until nearly the end of session for a complex Milky Way field to get to a respectable (workable) elevation above the horizon. By that time I was a bit fatigued. Had I been thinking more clearly I would have repeated the Izar test with the 22 mm eyepieces (although a wider double would be required at that low magnification).

The field curvature was a surprising result, I have never noted it before in Tele Vue products. But I should say that it was slight - I never lost the faint members of NGC 6910. The AP refractor serves up such fine diamond-point star images that I was able to make out the very slight softening. Had I not been looking very hard for differences between two equal focal length eyepieces (that is to say, doing more normal observing), I might have missed it.

In my refractor a 22 mm eyepiece only yields 46x. My Newtonian is almost finished with rebuild, and the increased focal length it will push the magnification up to 127x which will be more revealing.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scanning4Comets
Markus
*****

Reged: 12/26/04

Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Don Taylor]
      #5855938 - 05/12/13 05:17 PM

Hi Don, (and others here),

IIRC, I will need a bit of "In focus" when using a Paracorr, is that correct? If that's the case, I will be good to go because when using all of my eyepieces, my focuser is almost racked all of the way out. I just might save up and look for a Type II. I've been observing for years without one, so waiting for one won't be so bad....but then I *DO* get one, I will like it a lot more!

Also, a few other questions here:

I am at F/4.7 and 1200mm FL.

What would a Paracorr Type 2 put me at? Would it be F/5.1 and 1295mm FL?

Cheers,


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scott in NCAdministrator
80mm Refractor Fanatic
*****

Reged: 03/05/05

Loc: NC
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Scanning4Comets]
      #5855953 - 05/12/13 05:25 PM

Mark,
Save your money and get a gently used type 1 rather than a type 2 Paracorr. At f/4.7, that's probably all you'll really need, especially if you don't really see much coma to begin with in your particular setup.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scanning4Comets
Markus
*****

Reged: 12/26/04

Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Scott in NC]
      #5855968 - 05/12/13 05:32 PM

Thanks Scott.

Looks like some great advice. Now I know why I have been flipping eyepieces so much. I've been in denial for years, LOL!

So, I keep the eyepieces I have now, and save up for a Paracorr then. Now all of the people who have been telling me this will be clapping their hands, jumping up and down and saying "Wow, he finally saw the light"

Let's hope my eyepiece flipping stops. Is there a 12 step program for eyepiece flipping?

Cheers,


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Scanning4Comets]
      #5855981 - 05/12/13 05:42 PM

Quote:

Thanks Scott.

Looks like some great advice. Now I know why I have been flipping eyepieces so much. I've been in denial for years, LOL!

So, I keep the eyepieces I have now, and save up for a Paracorr then. Now all of the people who have been telling me this will be clapping their hands, jumping up and down and saying "Wow, he finally saw the light"

Let's hope my eyepiece flipping stops. Is there a 12 step program for eyepiece flipping?

Cheers,



Been there, done that.
"Hi!, My name's Don, and I'm an ocularholic."
"Hi, Don!"

The used Paracorr 1 is not a bad idea. If you can't find one, well........


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike B
Starstruck
*****

Reged: 04/06/05

Loc: shake, rattle, & roll, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Scanning4Comets]
      #5855995 - 05/12/13 05:51 PM

Quote:

But then again, one doesn't really do then when observing all of the time anyways.




Ya see, that's precisely the thing! You view & observe for what seems like a long time, never being bothered by coma. THEN you finally decide to specifically TRY & go lookin' for it.

When you finally DO notice the coma, it starts gnawing at your mind. It's now EVERYwhere, in just 'bout every EP you've been enjoying.... up until now. The death-blow- for me, anyhoo- was actually trying a ParaCorr for the first time- it was 30mm SWA type EPs i was getting bugged about. For the better ones, the PC cleaned up the coma nicely, and they had no other (major) aberrations of their own... the view was now stunning in a whole new way! For lesser-corrected EPs, there might still be some astigmatism or possibly field-curvature- but the coma is now gone, so they ain't so bad as before.

But the ParaCorr takes good EPs & really releases them to fly at their ultimate potential... and once you're sensitized to this, and have seen the difference, there's prob'ly no goin' back!

Give one a try- see what ya think. Who knows, maybe we P/C fans are all just conked on the Koolaid.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scanning4Comets
Markus
*****

Reged: 12/26/04

Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Mike B]
      #5856049 - 05/12/13 06:22 PM

Great ideas Don & Mike!

Gonna giv'r a try if one pops up at the observing area I go to. In the meantime, I'll be saving and looking for a P/C Type 1.

Cheers,


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
csrlice12
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 05/22/12

Loc: Denver, CO
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Scanning4Comets]
      #5856081 - 05/12/13 06:42 PM

"Is there a 12 step program for eyepiece flipping?"

Uh, buy a 13th eyepiece?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scanning4Comets
Markus
*****

Reged: 12/26/04

Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: csrlice12]
      #5856124 - 05/12/13 06:59 PM



Cheers,


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike B
Starstruck
*****

Reged: 04/06/05

Loc: shake, rattle, & roll, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: csrlice12]
      #5856127 - 05/12/13 07:02 PM

I'm just guessin', but lookin' at his sigline i'd say Randy's kicked that twelve-step-program habit... a few times over...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Don Taylor
professor emeritus


Reged: 07/12/09

Loc: South TEXAS
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Scanning4Comets]
      #5856283 - 05/12/13 08:35 PM

As in my earlier post a type 1 will work great and cost a lot less if you can find one.

IIRC both type 1 & type 2 paracorrs increase focal length (and therefore focal ratio) by 1.15


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scanning4Comets
Markus
*****

Reged: 12/26/04

Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Don Taylor]
      #5856345 - 05/12/13 09:07 PM

Thanks Don!

Cheers,


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Scanning4Comets]
      #5856425 - 05/12/13 09:57 PM

Quote:

Thanks Don!

Cheers,




Markus:

I definite recommend the Type 1 as well. I have owned my 12.5 inch F/4.06 Discovery for 12 or 13 years so I have been dedicated user of the Paracorr for a good number of years. My first Paracorr was the 1.25 inch model. Even at F/4, the type 1 does a very good job and at F/4.7 it really will be close to perfection...

Just make sure you use the proper spacing, that is the proper setting of the tunable top.

I should add that I spent some time Friday night with my 22mm Panoptic in my 16 inch F/4.42. I tried it without the Paracorr, lots of coma. With the Paracorr, it was much better but it did not stand up to the 20mm Type 2 Nagler in terms of off-axis correction or just the majesty of view...

Jon

Edited by Jon Isaacs (05/12/13 10:02 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scanning4Comets
Markus
*****

Reged: 12/26/04

Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5856477 - 05/12/13 10:31 PM

Thanks Jon!

Will do! I agree. The 20mm T2 is legendary!

Cheers,


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
chuckscap
professor emeritus


Reged: 07/18/09

Loc: Colorado Springs, CO USA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Starman1]
      #5868108 - 05/17/13 08:43 PM

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 ...

Edited by chuckscap (05/17/13 08:44 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff Morgan
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 09/28/03

Loc: Prescott, AZ
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: chuckscap]
      #6112505 - 10/02/13 05:51 AM

Quote:

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 ....


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
SteveG
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 09/27/06

Loc: Seattle, WA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jeff Morgan]
      #6113086 - 10/02/13 12:51 PM

You must not be using a Paracorr.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff Morgan
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 09/28/03

Loc: Prescott, AZ
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: SteveG]
      #6113383 - 10/02/13 03:34 PM

Quote:

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


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Deep13
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 01/25/05

Loc: NE Ohio
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jeff Morgan]
      #6114535 - 10/03/13 03:38 AM

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

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jeff Morgan]
      #6114559 - 10/03/13 05:05 AM

Quote:


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


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
SteveG
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 09/27/06

Loc: Seattle, WA
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #6115166 - 10/03/13 01:16 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.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff Morgan
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 09/28/03

Loc: Prescott, AZ
Re: Celebrity Deathmatch: 22 Pan vs. 24 Pan new [Re: Jeff Morgan]
      #6320458 - 01/18/14 12:56 PM Attachment (6 downloads)

Quote:

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.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | (show all)


Extra information
22 registered and 18 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  ausastronomer, droid, Scott in NC 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 2363

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics