Telescope Reviews: A review of the 31 Nagler vs. the 32 Edmund Erfle

· 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

You are not logged in. [Login]

Entrance · Main Index · Search · New user · Who's Online
FAQ · Calendar

Announcements and News >> Discussion of CN Articles, Reviews, and Reports

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | (show all)

Jon Isaacs
Postmaster

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Re: A review of the 31 Nagler vs. the 32 Edmund Er new

[Re: Tom Trusock]
#3979077 - 08/12/10 03:16 PM

Quote:

Jon,

I remember that article and am in agreement with you. FWIW My comment was directed towards Marks statements - not yours.

Sorry for any confusion.

T

Tom:

Now that I read your post more closely, it is not confusing at all, I see the mistake was mine and caused by reading what you had written too quickly.

I bought several of the standard Taiwanese Celestron Plossls after reading that review, I still have the 32mm plus a second identical 32mm, they severed me well.

Jon

Post Extras:

KWB
Postmaster

Reged: 09/30/06

Loc: Westminster,Co Elev.5400 feet

Re: A review of the 31 Nagler vs. the 32 Edmund Er new

[Re: Jon Isaacs]
#3979194 - 08/12/10 04:20 PM

"Go to the weatherman web site and read the review by Bob Luffel comparing the 30mm Leitz 88 degree eyepiece in which he said that the 30mm Leitz was in his estimation about 20 to 25% sharper on axis than the 31mm Nagler. He gave the edges to the 31 Nagler.

I am not the only one with eagle eyes."
-----------------------

To be totally fair,this thread isn't about the Leitz eyepiece nor anothers review of that eyepiece or any other eyepieces that aren't germane to your review. This thread is about your review of Nagler and the Edmund and IMO only about those 2 eyepieces. I'd rather only hear about these 2 eyepieces being discussed and compared.

Post Extras:

Alex Gastélum
super member

Reged: 06/04/08

Loc: Tijuana, México

Re: A review of the 31 Nagler vs. the 32 Edmund Er new

[Re: Tamiji Homma]
#3979247 - 08/12/10 04:43 PM

Hi Daniel,

Can you bring your Nagler 31 and Leitz 30 to NUTS star party this weekend? I'll bring my Edmund 32 Erfle, XW 30, something near 30 that I have

Tammy

I will appreciate your opinions on that comparison very much.
The best and more objective eyepiece reviews that I have read were written by Danien Mounsey.

Post Extras:

Mark Swanson
member

Reged: 03/09/07

Loc: Irving, Tx

Re: A review of the 31 Nagler vs. the 32 Edmund Er new

[Re: Tom Trusock]
#3979329 - 08/12/10 05:35 PM

I should not haven taken that tone with John and will be more careful in the future.
With regard to the Ultima versus TV Plossl, I will be more specific. It is my opinion that the 5 element Ultima,Ultrascopic,original meade smooth side 5 element plossls,are better performers than the 4 element Plossls such as the Sirius by Orion, 4 element Meade,4 element Televue, 4 element anything. In this case I was not so much having a problem with the Televue, as I think that the 5 element ones, which are a highly corrected Erfle really are better.There must be something to this because you almost can't give away these 4 element versions on A-mart, cloudynights, etc.Post a 5 element version and you have immediate interest. I have a 35mm Rini 5 element that is like these other 5 element versions and it performs better than my 32mm Meade 4 element plossl. Better contrast and sharpness across the field. It is better on edge than the meade also.

Mark

Post Extras:

spaceydee
Postmaster

Reged: 04/16/04

Loc: Where the Kittens Are

Re: A review of the 31 Nagler vs. the 32 Edmund Er new

[Re: Mark Swanson]
#4016591 - 08/30/10 11:18 PM

Folks, I've unlocked this thread and have removed a number of posts. Please keep posts civil, polite, and respectful. From the TOS:

* Play Nice
* Share
* Be Polite
* Be Honest
* Respect other members & the administrators and moderators who are working to keep this board a useful resource.

Posts that are not respectful of other individuals (be they members or not) are not welcome here.

Please follow the TOS or this thread may become locked again and/or posts deleted.

thanks!

Post Extras:

Jim Romanski
Carpal Tunnel

Reged: 01/02/05

Loc: Guilford, Connecticut

Re: A review of the 31 Nagler vs. the 32 Edmund Erfle new

[Re: Olivier Biot]
#4018953 - 09/01/10 12:05 AM

I read this review a while ago. I have to wonder if perhaps what was being observed was the effects of field curvature. If that's the case it would be useful to compare the two eyepieces in a scope known to have a very flat field such as a petzval refractor. Otherwise it's hard to say how much field curvature is from the scope versus the eyepiece. Sometimes certain eyepiece and scope combos cancel out the field curvature while others add up to more curvature. SCT are known to have curved fields.

Post Extras:

Alex Gastélum
super member

Reged: 06/04/08

Loc: Tijuana, México

Re: A review of the 31 Nagler vs. the 32 Edmund Er new

[Re: Daniel Mounsey]
#4019672 - 09/01/10 12:08 PM

Quote:

Hi Daniel,

Can you bring your Nagler 31 and Leitz 30 to NUTS star party this weekend? I'll bring my Edmund 32 Erfle, XW 30, something near 30 that I have

Tammy.

Quote:

No problem, I'll bring both.

Hi Daniel:
Did you made the comparison, I am interested on your opinion.

Best regards.

Post Extras:

Daniel Mounsey
Vendor - Vixen Optics

Reged: 06/12/02

Re: A review of the 31 Nagler vs. the 32 Edmund Er new

[Re: Alex Gastélum]
#4021058 - 09/01/10 10:46 PM

Hi ALex,
Unfortunately I am not allowed to comment, but Tammy might be able to share his thoughts.

Post Extras:

Alex Gastélum
super member

Reged: 06/04/08

Loc: Tijuana, México

Re: A review of the 31 Nagler vs. the 32 Edmund Er new

[Re: Tamiji Homma]
#4021479 - 09/02/10 06:30 AM

Hi Daniel,

Can you bring your Nagler 31 and Leitz 30 to NUTS star party this weekend? I'll bring my Edmund 32 Erfle, XW 30, something near 30 that I have

Tammy

Hi ALex,
Unfortunately I am not allowed to comment, but Tammy might be able to share his thoughts.

Hi Tammy:
Can you comment about that comparison?

Post Extras:

Frank Marino
member

Reged: 03/25/09

Loc: Penticton, BC

Re: A review of the 31 Nagler vs. the 32 Edmund Erfle new

[Re: Olivier Biot]
#4734510 - 08/07/11 12:30 AM

Hi all,
The FOV indicated for the 32 Edmond Erfle is 82 degrees. Isn't it 60?
Also it's described as a 6 element eyepiece. isn't it a 5-element?
Any takes on this?

Post Extras:

PJ Anway
Carpal Tunnel

Reged: 06/04/03

Loc: North Coast

Re: A review of the 31 Nagler vs. the 32 Edmund Erfle new

[Re: Frank Marino]
#4969180 - 12/16/11 08:32 AM

Quote:

Hi all,
The FOV indicated for the 32 Edmond Erfle is 82 degrees. Isn't it 60?
Also it's described as a 6 element eyepiece. isn't it a 5-element?
Any takes on this?

By measuring the true field and calculating the apparent field, I got 72°. Closer to the stated 68° AFOV listed on Edmund's site. Also, according to the diagram on Edmund's site there are six elements in three groups. Here's the link:

http://www.edmundoptics.com/products/displayproduct.cfm?productid=2074

By the way, I really like this eyepiece in my 4" f/10 refractor! f/10 is so very forgiving when it comes to aberrations.

Post Extras:

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | (show all)

Extra information

0 registered and 4 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator: droid, iceblaze

Print Thread

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

Thread views: 12701

Jump to

CN Forums

Home

Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics