karlpenney
member
Reged: 01/04/07
Posts: 85
Loc: Halifax, NS
|
|
I've decided that the time has come to upgrade my eyepiece collection. I currently have an assortment of generic plossls (6, 9, 15, 25 and 32mm), a 19mm Antares W70, two BO Planetaries (4 and 9mm) and a 13T6 Nagler. My scopes are an 8" F/6 dob for visual and an 80mm F/6.9 refractor for imaging and visual.
I really like the 13T6 and it definitely gets the most use, so I'm thinking about going the all Nagler route. I am proposing to add 9T6 and 22T4 Naglers for now. Haven't decided the extreme high/low power yet, maybe a 3-6 zoom and a 31T5.
I do have a 1.25" 2x barlow, but I'm likely going to replace that with a 2" 2X Powermate that I can also use for imaging with the 80mm.
Thoughts?
--------------------
Karl
Antares 8" DOB
SV NHNG 80mm
Celestron C8
Vixen GP-DX
Canon 350D
|
MikeRatcliff
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 06/12/04
Posts: 1105
Loc: Redlands, CA
|
|
My first thought is that the 31T5 is going to be heavy for a smaller dob, depending on the details of the mount construction. You can try hanging a 2 lb weight from the focuser to give you an idea of what to expect. (Be ready to catch the scope!) The 22T4 is a little lighter at 1.5 lbs. You can add counterweights.
Mike
--------------------
16" f/4.9 dob
Tele Vue Plossls 32,25,20,15,11
13 Nagler T6
10.5 Pentax XL
Brandon 32, 16
12.5 UO ortho, 9 Circle T ortho
2x TV Barlow
|
BillP
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 11/26/06
Posts: 2209
Loc: Vienna, VA
|
|
Frankly, I found that the T6s barlowed so well, if you are getting a telecentric 2x barlow the addition of the 9T6 may be sufficient as that and the 13 barlowed gives you 2 nice planetary focal lengths of 4.5mm and 6mm.
On the low power side if it were me I'd probably go with the 26 Nagler instead as it gets me close enough to the 31mm to not have to want to add that expense and I myself usually find I like moving to 2x the magnification from my low power EP to the next level (i.e., 26 to 13).
--------------------
250mm f/4.7 Orion XT10i Dobsonian
102mm f/8.0 Tak TSA Super-APO
66mm f/5.9 WO ZenithStar SD APO
40mm f/10 Coronado P.S.T.
|
karlpenney
member
Reged: 01/04/07
Posts: 85
Loc: Halifax, NS
|
|
Quote:
On the low power side if it were me I'd probably go with the 26 Nagler instead as it gets me close enough to the 31mm to not have to want to add that expense and I myself usually find I like moving to 2x the magnification from my low power EP to the next level (i.e., 26 to 13).
Yeah, maybe I should even forget about the 22T4 and look at a 24PAN or 27PAN to cover the low to mid range after the 13T6?
--------------------
Karl
Antares 8" DOB
SV NHNG 80mm
Celestron C8
Vixen GP-DX
Canon 350D
|
AZStarGuy
super member
Reged: 05/05/08
Posts: 152
Loc: Scottsdale AZ
|
|
You have a similar setup to mine. I plan on selling my 6 & 5 Radians and 7mm T-1 Nagler. Add the 9T-6 and a Nagler 6-3mm Zoom plus a 2.5 Powermate. So: 24mm Pan, 13 & 9mm T6 Naglers would be my primary EP's and then 6-3 Zoom for planetary or just not wanting to swap out the ep's... 3.5 - 3mm is past what you or I will probably ever squeeze out of our scopes... but it's there for that 1 rare night I guess. 2.5x powermate would be used with the 13 & 9mm Naglers.
Just my $0.02...
I will say - the 24 PAN is great. Nice eye relief and I can take in the whole field of view without swiveling my head all over. Naglers, I'm tucked in closer and have to move around to see the edges.
--------------------
Ron
8" f6 Eq Newt
24PAN, 13T6,7T1,6RAD,5RAD,4 & 3.2 Planetaries
|
Mr. Mike
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 11/08/05
Posts: 855
Loc: Churchville, NY
|
|
I was not totally thrilled with my Nagler 5mm T6 and parted with it. I have looked through the lower-and middle power Naggies and they are very solid. In the price range for Naglers you have Pentax XWs and a few other killer EPs that should be on the short list. Heck, I'll even dare to say that my Vixen LVWs are superb wide-field EPs. The other huge issue is the lack of eye-relief for the high-power Naglers. I had NO way to take in that whole FOV without mashing my eye into the lens. Thats NOT a fun thing to do. So, my 82 FOV eyepiece was more like 55 FOV since I had to stay "back" from the EP.
So, in my limited, yet valid experience, I would say:
Low to Medium Power = Nagler GOOD
High Power = There are better choices, IMO.
--------------------
Stellarvue NG 80mm ED
Meade 7x50 Binos
Pentax XW 5mm
Meade 5K UWA 8.8mm
Vixen LVW 13mm
Vixen LVW 22mm
Edited by Mr. Mike (08/05/08 08:19 PM)
|
new2view
member
Reged: 07/24/08
Posts: 50
|
|
I have been giving serious thought to that subject as well. Seems you cant go wrong with that call. I called Tele Vue today asking for newbie advice and had the privilege of speaking to Mr Nagler. I informed him of my wanting to purchase a Paracorr and some eye pieces and if he would make a couple of suggestions.
He stated that the Paracorr for my scope (10" Meade f/5) was paramount. He said if cost was no problem to get the 31T, 8 and 13Ethos and forget the Barlow or Powermate. If I wanted a High Power, I could go with the 5 or 6T.
I bought the Paracorr today and the store I bought it from will have the Ethos 8 in tomorrow. I think I am going to get that as well.
But the question I failed to ask him was how much difference really between the 8E and the 7 or 9 T. Is it really worth the difference in price for newbie to see. I may call back tomorrow and ask that question.
|
cuir
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 03/03/07
Posts: 835
Loc: 45° 1'12. N, 73°56'12. W (Qc)
|
|
8E, 13E and 24 Pan for a 200x1200 scope.
7T6, 13E and 24 Pan for a 200x1000 scope.
Radian for lower than 7mm
--------------------
Seb
Latest eyepiece spreadsheet
Choosing the right eyepiece
Main scope: 150mm Skywatcher Maksutov
Favorite ep: 24 Panoptic
Pref'ed filters: Lumicon 0III and UHC
Mounts: EQ6-Pro and Skyview AZ
Just in: C8-S-XLT
|
karlpenney
member
Reged: 01/04/07
Posts: 85
Loc: Halifax, NS
|
|
Well, after some further research I think I will go with the 9T6, 13T6 and 24 Pan and use my existing 2X barlow for higher powers.
--------------------
Karl
Antares 8" DOB
SV NHNG 80mm
Celestron C8
Vixen GP-DX
Canon 350D
|
cuir
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 03/03/07
Posts: 835
Loc: 45° 1'12. N, 73°56'12. W (Qc)
|
|
A very good call on the 24mm Pan. Awsome glass.
--------------------
Seb
Latest eyepiece spreadsheet
Choosing the right eyepiece
Main scope: 150mm Skywatcher Maksutov
Favorite ep: 24 Panoptic
Pref'ed filters: Lumicon 0III and UHC
Mounts: EQ6-Pro and Skyview AZ
Just in: C8-S-XLT
|
Brooklyn
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 07/24/08
Posts: 870
Loc: Central New Jersey
|
|
Quote:
He said if cost was no problem to get the 31T, 8 and 13Ethos and forget the Barlow or Powermate.
WHAT???? WHAT??? OK guys ive been saying this forever now...but so many people on this forum are barlow fans so they say that the powermate/meade telextender are fine to use and that it doesn't soak up a noticeable amount of light.
I havent been into astronomy for very long, and am still using my very first telescope (meade lx90 8" emc).
For some reason I have a big distaste for barlow lenses. I just dont know what it is...I do own a zhummel 2x barlow but every time I use it, it seems to me the picture in the eyepiece does get very very slightly dimmer.
When trying to resolve DSOs i always go by the idea that u need all the light u can get your telescope on!
You have mr nagler himself right here saying dont get a barlow lens, not even the one his own company makes! 
Now i know mr naglers advice was probably specifically pertaining to the 10" f/5 scope the poster is using, but he isn't the first professional astronomer that I have heard telling people do NOT using a barlow no matter what you are doing.
Modern eyepieces like the ethos, or even the cheaper baader hyperions dont suffer from the small pin hole lens that older plossls tortured people with.
The idea that you need to use a barlow with a longer focal length to make it "comfortable" is no longer a viable solution since even the 3.5mm and 5mm baader hyperions have an insane 20mm of eye releif and HUGE viewing lenses.
Now we can use just a telescope, a diagonal, and an eyepiece, getting the maximum amount of light transmission possible, while at the same time reaching very high magnifications in a comfortable setting.
--------------------
Meade 8.25"(209.55mm) LX-90 EMC (SCT)
Albert Einstein =>
“Intellectual growth should commence at birth and cease only at death.”
“If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.”
|
KWB
Postmaster
Reged: 09/30/06
Posts: 7619
Loc: Westminster,Co Elev.1646Meters
|
|
Hi Karl
I really like your choice of supplementing your present 13T6 with the 9T6 and the 22T4 Nagler. Been there,done that with an 8 inch F/6 reflector. Results=high enjoyability for myself. Sometimes 1st impressions are the best choices. You have to make the call.
BTW,Panoptics,as have been recommended, aren't Naglers.
--------------------
Kenny
"When dealing with a mystery,choose the most unlikely of the likely possibilities"-Sherlock Holmes
|
Mike Hosea
Post Laureate
Reged: 09/24/03
Posts: 3226
Loc: "Metrowest" Boston
|
|
Quote:
When trying to resolve DSOs i always go by the idea that u need all the light u can get your telescope on!
Most Barlow use is for imaging or for planetary observation. There are some people who combine big Naglers with Barlows to make medium Naglers, but I wouldn't say that there are so many "Barlow fans" of this ilk out there. Only rarely have I used Barlows for anything other than planetary observation and for globular clusters.
--------------------
Mike
- 7" f/6.7 home-built planetary Newt
- 35mm Panoptic
- 13mm Ethos
- 5mm Tak LE
- 2x TV Barlow
- Canon 10x30IS Binoculars
|
Rob S
sage
Reged: 03/16/07
Posts: 408
Loc: NZ
|
|
Quote:
Well, after some further research I think I will go with the 9T6, 13T6 and 24 Pan and use my existing 2X barlow for higher powers.
The Holy Trinity of 1.25 inch TV.
Rob.
--------------------
8" f5 Dob with Feathertouch
Brandon: 16
Pentax: 7, 10 & 20XW
TMB: 30 Paragon
TV: 8 & 13 Ethos;
5 & 13 NaglerT6;
24 Panoptic;
Leica Trinovid 8x50 BN
|
new2view
member
Reged: 07/24/08
Posts: 50
|
|
Brooklyn -- Mr Nagler didnt say "dont Use a barlow". He was saying that with my scope, I can get more mag with just eye pieces than I can really use, so why would I need a barlow. Mr Nagler feels, I think, that anything over 250 power is useless and you are just magnifying the atmosphere after that.
Disclaimer: But I am not a spokesman for Mr. Nagler 
Edited by new2view (08/06/08 11:33 AM)
|
Island Mike
professor emeritus
Reged: 12/20/04
Posts: 518
Loc: Prince Edward Skyland, Canada
|
|
Hi,
With the F/6 of your Dob, I'd suggest maybe a 40mm Paragon for your lowest power. You'd get the same field as the 31mm Nag, at a lower price and weight.
Sounds like you'll have quite the collection!
Cheers,
Mike
--------------------
Antares 12 Dob
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 