Satisfied
member
Reged: 02/14/08
Posts: 43
Loc: Colorado
|
|
Hi everyone,
I'm thinking about buying one of the two EP's mentioned in the subject as my default EP for my 8" SCT. I currently have a 2" diagonal and have a 40mm WO as my only 2" EP. I've demoed the 17mm Nagler and was pleased with it. However, since they both have an 82 deg AFOV, why not get the 16mm as it is less money and weight? Other than magnification and eye relief, would I notice any difference between the two? I don't know the difference between T5 and T4.
Thanks!
--------------------
8" LX90 ACF
ETX 105 AT
|
Shrader
member
Reged: 07/26/06
Posts: 51
|
|
Hello,
Eye relief is the biggie between these two EPs. The 17 has plenty, even enough to wear glasses if you need them, but the ER is tight on the 16. Some folks like to cram their eyeballs into an EP and some don't.
FWIW, I find the 17 is more immersive, giving more of the impression of being in space rather than the impression of looking into an EP. But that is very subjective...
My 0.02, Eric
|
Mark Jenkins
sage
Reged: 06/25/08
Posts: 312
Loc: Wisconsin
|
|
The 17 T4 is one of my favorite eyepieces.
Never looked through a 16 T5.
Maybe I shouldn't? 
--------------------
AP 105mm f6 APO (Traveler)
TEC MC200/15.5
AP Mach1 GTO
EarthWin PFS-B
Canon EOS 50D
DFK21AU04.AS
|
amys
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 06/12/06
Posts: 1768
Loc: Groton, CT
|
|
I have the 16T5 for my 7" Mak and love it. Super sharp, easy to use, terrific contrast. I don't have a problem with the eye relief. I have not looked through the 17T4 but I prefer the smaller eyepieces. However, on really humid nights, I do get moisture forming on the eye lens, which I don't get with the Pentax XW 14mm.
--------------------
Amy
|
Shawn H
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 05/16/07
Posts: 1132
Loc: Southern France 43°56'N-4°50'E
|
|
I'm too scared to look through an Ethos, because then the 17mm Nagler t4 might not be my favorite ep anymore! Shawn
--------------------
xt10i with Telrad on 4" risers & feather touch focuser & huge Boston Red Sox decal
Starblast
15x70 Celestron Skymasters
35Stratus
27Pan
13 Ethos
8 Ethos
Orion ultrablock
Astronomik OIII
Tele Vue 2x barlow
Antares 1.6x barlow (2")
CATSEYE collimation tools
|
Bob W6PU
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/23/04
Posts: 2191
Loc: Springer-N.E.NM
|
|
Quote:
Hello,
Eye relief is the biggie between these two EPs. The 17 has plenty, even enough to wear glasses if you need them, but the ER is tight on the 16. Some folks like to cram their eyeballs into an EP and some don't.
FWIW, I find the 17 is more immersive, giving more of the impression of being in space rather than the impression of looking into an EP. But that is very subjective...
My 0.02, Eric
DITTO!
I've owned both, and my T5 lasted one week. IMO the 16T5 is just not in the same league with the 17T4!
I now own all of the T4s, and I just won't put up with the short eye relief and small eye lenses of the T5 and T6 Naglers.
An exception for me would be the 26T5 and the 31mm Naglers, which I understand have good eye relief and big eye lenses
It's my feeling that large eye lenses add to the "lost in
space" immersive experience that the 17T4 and 22T4 are famous for! Of course, the Nagler's 82 degree AFOV is a given...LOL!
My passion is DSO observing, and for this, my 22T4 is my most often used eyepiece followed closely by my 17T4!
Cheers!
Bob
12" F/4.9 Intelliscope with COL
10" F/5.0 Coast Instrument Treckerscope, circa 1956
Stratus 35mm, Naglers 22T4, 17T4, and 12T4. BO/TMB 7mm and 5mm. TeleVue Paracorr
Barlows: GSO 2"ED 2x, Orion Shorty Plus 2.2x, TeleVue 2.5x, Coast Inst. 3x
Edited by Bob W6PU (08/08/08 03:28 PM)
|
Albie
Post Laureate
Reged: 02/22/05
Posts: 3520
Loc: Alberta,Canada
|
|
I had the 17T4 and sold it to get the 16T5(because I was curious) and I have no regrets at all.The 16T5's small size and weight make it very easy to use/handle.It is a very sharp and contrasty ep perhaps more so than the 17T4.The 17T4 had a slightly more immersive(spacewalk) feel to it and that's all it had over the 16T5 for me.
Even though the 16T5 has less eyerelief(10mm) than the T6's(12mm) I find it much easier to use.You just plop your eyeball into the eyeguard and view,no blackout issues at all.The T6's as well as the T4's can be a little tricky at times to get optimal eyeplacement without blackout problems.Out of the 7 naglers I've owned (5,7,9,13,16,17 and 26) I would place them in order of preference 26T5,16T5,13T6,17T4,5T6,7T6 and 9T6.The 9 is last because it seems trickier to use,blackout issues although really not that serious.
Either eyepiece is excellent so in my mind it boils down to eyerelief needs and weight issues.
--------------------
Skywatcher 10" f/4.7 Dob with Moonlight CR1
Televue 2x barlow and 5T6,7T6,9T6,16T5 and 26T5 Televue Naglers.
SkyMaster 15x70,Regal LX 8x42 and Noble 10x28
Edited by Albie (08/09/08 11:37 AM)
|
helpwanted
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/04/07
Posts: 1757
Loc: Phoenix, AZ
|
|
keep in mind Tom T's comments about the 16T5 and the WO UWAN 16... i would get the 16mm UWAN after reading the article!!
--------------------
|
RAKing
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 12/28/07
Posts: 819
Loc: Clouds-ville, Virginia
|
|
I am a DSO guy and my three favorite eyepieces are the T4 collection (22, 17, and 12). Great views with good eye relief and the immersion factor cannot be denied.
Either of your two choices is a great eyepiece. I have my favorites and you can have yours. You cannot lose either way. 
Ron
--------------------
Time spent looking at the stars is added to your life.
Orion XT10i / Moonlite CR2 -- The New "Time Machine"
"Hi Def" TV-102
C925-CF SCT
Ethos and Naglers
GM-8 GEM / A-P Portable Pier
|
Jeff Morgan
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 09/28/03
Posts: 1531
Loc: Prescott, AZ
|
|
The only Type 4 to Type 5 comparison I could offer is my 17 Nagler Type 4 to the 31 Nagler Type 5. Not closely matched at all, but I will say this. I'm slightly underwhelmed by the 31. And if I could only have one eyepiece, it would be the 17 in a heartbeat. Just weld it into the focuser.
Of course, that brand-new 13 Ethos in my closet waiting for its first night under the stars could change things a bit ....
--------------------
Jeff Morgan
Prescott, AZ
Wile E. Coyote School of Telescope Making
|
F.Meiresonne
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/22/03
Posts: 2957
Loc: Eeklo,Belgium
|
|
Quote:
The 9 is last because it seems trickier to use,blackout issues although really not that serious.
Strange you mention that Albie. For me i can see no difference between the N13T6 and N9T6. Eye placement is a bit critical, though, no real issue but for me there is no difference between them for that matter.
--------------------
Freddy Meiresonne
Obsession 18 inch #1638
Orion Optics 8 inch F/4.5 -1/8 wave optics -Vixen GP-E
20x80 Helios Stellar Binos
10x60 Helios Quantum 4(= Obie Mariner)
10x50 Helios Nature sport plus
8x40 Helios Nature sport plus
Eyepieces in use :Pan 35,24,19, N13T6, Pentax 10 XW, N9T6, Ultrascopic 7.5, TV2, baader ortho 12.5 and 9 mm
|
Downward Bound
Adrenaline Junkie
Reged: 03/29/06
Posts: 2135
Loc: Seattle
|
|
I prefer more eye relief so I chose the 17T4 and have never had any issue with eye placement. It is my second favorite and used EP just behind the 10XW. I have 2 T4s, 2 T5s and one T6 and I like the eye placement and "feel" of the T4s the best.....but that's just me, I know other have differing experiences.
Any clubs or buddies around whon can provide a live comparison with you before you take the plunge?
--------------------
Bill
'flector: Vixen R200SS, Webster 22" f/3.6 (on order)
'fractors: TV-85, NP-127, PST-2X
Orion 15x63, Minox 10x52 HG, GO 22x85 HD
Sphinx, Telepod, EZ Touch, G-11 (waiting)
|
Scott Watson
super member
Reged: 05/26/06
Posts: 176
|
|
I love my 17mm T4. Best eyepiece I own.
|
Paul G
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 05/08/03
Posts: 1765
Loc: Freedonia
|
|
Quote:
Hi everyone,
I'm thinking about buying one of the two EP's mentioned in the subject as my default EP for my 8" SCT. I currently have a 2" diagonal and have a 40mm WO as my only 2" EP. I've demoed the 17mm Nagler and was pleased with it. However, since they both have an 82 deg AFOV, why not get the 16mm as it is less money and weight? Other than magnification and eye relief, would I notice any difference between the two? I don't know the difference between T5 and T4.
Thanks!
I have both. The images are identical in terms of sharpness, contrast, etc. The feel is very different, 17t4 has much more of a "floating in space" feeling. If you think binoviewing is in your future, get the 16t5; if not, the 17t4 is more enjoyable to use.
--------------------
Gus
|
kfred
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 11/11/03
Posts: 2005
Loc: Dayton, Ohio
|
|
The 16T5 has too short eye relief of me; 17T4 is an great EP, with lots of eye relief.
Fred
--------------------
River Cam - Cambridge England
|
Albie
Post Laureate
Reged: 02/22/05
Posts: 3520
Loc: Alberta,Canada
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
The 9 is last because it seems trickier to use,blackout issues although really not that serious.
Strange you mention that Albie. For me i can see no difference between the N13T6 and N9T6. Eye placement is a bit critical, though, no real issue but for me there is no difference between them for that matter.
To be honest I have no real problems with any of these eyepieces and trying to decide on which one I like better or which ones perform better was/is hard to do because they all perform so well with minimal fuss.With the 9mm I found that it was just a little less forgiving(I'm knitpicking severely here) if you leaned into it too much.
The 16T5 is just lovely.It's small,light,very sharp from edge to edge and if you don't have to wear glasses it's quite cozy with no blackout issues at all.There's no hovering over the ep to find that optimum eye placement,no fussing with an insta-adjust or pupil guide, just plop your eyeball into the eyeguard and you're good to go for some fabulous 82° viewing. Then again these are my personal feelings YMMV.
--------------------
Skywatcher 10" f/4.7 Dob with Moonlight CR1
Televue 2x barlow and 5T6,7T6,9T6,16T5 and 26T5 Televue Naglers.
SkyMaster 15x70,Regal LX 8x42 and Noble 10x28
|
Albie
Post Laureate
Reged: 02/22/05
Posts: 3520
Loc: Alberta,Canada
|
|
Quote:
keep in mind Tom T's comments about the 16T5 and the WO UWAN 16... i would get the 16mm UWAN after reading the article!!
A quote from that article."While I couldn’t tell the difference between them in longer scopes, at f4.5 the 16t5 was clearly superior in edge correction."
--------------------
Skywatcher 10" f/4.7 Dob with Moonlight CR1
Televue 2x barlow and 5T6,7T6,9T6,16T5 and 26T5 Televue Naglers.
SkyMaster 15x70,Regal LX 8x42 and Noble 10x28
|
jcjr
professor emeritus
Reged: 01/06/08
Posts: 563
Loc: TN, USA
|
|
Albie, do your eyelashes touch the eyelens of the 16T5 when you are in optimum viewing position?
--------------------
CPC 1100, C102SLT, SV F80, Meade 70 & 60 AZT
Q70 38mm, Pan24, Meade 5K 18mm UW, Axiom LX 15mm, Nagler 13T6, Axiom LX 10mm, Expanse 20mm, 9mm, 6mm, BO/TMB 5mm, 2.5mm
|
Starman1
Vendor - Scope City
Reged: 06/24/03
Posts: 10957
Loc: Los Angeles
|
|
Quote:
I've owned both, and my T5 lasted one week. IMO the 16T5 is just not in the same league with the 17T4!
I now own all of the T4s, and I just won't put up with the short eye relief and small eye lenses of the T5 and T6 Naglers.
Bob
Hmm. I just did an extensive comparison between the 16T5 and the 17T4 in my 12.5":
--the 16 was sharper everywhere in the field of view. I expected to see more seeing issues (because the magnification is higher), but saw tinier, more pinpoint stars.
--the 16 was uniformly illuminated to the edge of the field, while the 17 did not seem so. The edge of the 17 seems to have a different shade of gray in the background of the star field.
--the 16 showed no astigmatism at the edge, and no field curvature, while the 17 had both (small quantities compared to cheap widefields, but there nonetheless)
--the 17 needs to have the eyecup pulled up a bit to avoid having your eye drift accidentally too close to the lens (producing blackouts or kidny beaning), while the 16 is just fine exactly as is.
--I could see color in star images more easily in the 16. This could be magnification.
Having seen that, I'm keeping the 16 and selling the 17 (see S&S Forum). I should note I do not wear glasses, and the distance vision in my observing eye is 20/15, and I have zero astigmatism in that eye.
I agree they are not in the same league--the 16 is better. 
--------------------
Don Pensack
12.5" Truss Dob, 5" Maksutov
Sustaining Lifetime IDA member, TeleVue junkie
|
Jason B
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 06/21/04
Posts: 2070
Loc: Mid-Michigan
|
|
I have the 16mm and love it. It replaced the 22mm LVW as it offers about the same FOV but more magnification.
I think it is slightly better than the 17mm, IMHO. It seems a bit sharper at the edge. The ER definetly is better on the 17mm though.
Jason
--------------------
Jason
Discovery 12.5" F5 PDHQ
GSO 6" F5 Newt.
Vixen 80mm F8 APO (FL80S)
Vixen GP and Astro-Tech Voyager Mounts
MX 716 and Canon Rebel XT
Volunteer Administrator for Fox Park Observatory
16" and 12" LX200's
10" Meade and Parks Dobs
|
Albie
Post Laureate
Reged: 02/22/05
Posts: 3520
Loc: Alberta,Canada
|
|
Quote:
Albie, do your eyelashes touch the eyelens of the 16T5 when you are in optimum viewing position?
I've never felt my average length lashes hitting the lens and have never seen eyelash oil on the lens.
Because I don't wear glasses I don't worry too much about short eyerelief although the stated eyerelief of the 16T5 did have me a bit concerned before I bought it. I believe an expensive widefield like a Nagler should have at least enough er to allow you to see the entire fov comfortably and I feel the 16T5 does.Obviously if you have to wear glasses while viewing the 17T4 is the one to get,that's if it's a Nagler you want.
--------------------
Skywatcher 10" f/4.7 Dob with Moonlight CR1
Televue 2x barlow and 5T6,7T6,9T6,16T5 and 26T5 Televue Naglers.
SkyMaster 15x70,Regal LX 8x42 and Noble 10x28
|
Satisfied
member
Reged: 02/14/08
Posts: 43
Loc: Colorado
|
|
Wow, great feedback. Thanks, guys. I'm not familiar with Tom T's article about the WO 16mm UWAN. Can someone post the link?
--------------------
8" LX90 ACF
ETX 105 AT
|
Albie
Post Laureate
Reged: 02/22/05
Posts: 3520
Loc: Alberta,Canada
|
|
Here's a link Uwan Review
--------------------
Skywatcher 10" f/4.7 Dob with Moonlight CR1
Televue 2x barlow and 5T6,7T6,9T6,16T5 and 26T5 Televue Naglers.
SkyMaster 15x70,Regal LX 8x42 and Noble 10x28
|
Covey32
professor emeritus
Reged: 12/09/04
Posts: 642
Loc: Georgia
|
|
The 16 T5 has a concave top lens, which helps greatly in keeping eyelashes from brushing it. This helps compensate for the shorter eye relief.
--------------------
Hank
12.5" Mag1 Portaball
Orion 120mm F5 Refractor
Skywatcher 120ED F7.5 Refractor
1982 Celestron C8 Orange tube
Edited by Covey32 (08/11/08 12:26 PM)
|
Albie
Post Laureate
Reged: 02/22/05
Posts: 3520
Loc: Alberta,Canada
|
|
The Uwan would be an excellent alternative to the Nagler for 82° views,probably the closest to Nagler-like performance IMHO.I have only owned the 7mm Uwan.It was a very nice ep.The build quality was excellent as well as the performance.My biggest gripe would have to be the slight staining around the eyelens surround from the grease used for the adjustable eyecup.I don't know why that is the way it is considering the quality of the ep.
I believe that if I hadn't been bit by Naglers and their surrounding hype I probably would have been quite happy with a set of Uwans even though they should have made a few more focal lengths.
--------------------
Skywatcher 10" f/4.7 Dob with Moonlight CR1
Televue 2x barlow and 5T6,7T6,9T6,16T5 and 26T5 Televue Naglers.
SkyMaster 15x70,Regal LX 8x42 and Noble 10x28
|
KWB
Postmaster
Reged: 09/30/06
Posts: 7634
Loc: Westminster,Co Elev.1646Meters
|
|
I wouldn't say the 17T4 has plenty of eye relief for eyeglass wearers across the board because it doesn't have enough for this eyeglass wearer. The 22T4 better in this regard.
FWIW,Bob,the 26T5 doesn't have great eye relief IMO,not near enough for my eyeglasses. Nagler eyepieces are terrific for those that can properly use them. To me the expense is worth it.
--------------------
Kenny
"When dealing with a mystery,choose the most unlikely of the likely possibilities"-Sherlock Holmes
|
coutleef
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 02/21/08
Posts: 822
Loc: Montreal and St-Donat, Québec,...
|
|
I had to make the same choice not long ago.
The difference in weigth is quite significant between these two and as well as eye relief.
It may be that, as nicely written above by Don, the 16T5 is a better performer than the 17T4. Also, some of us just can not use the 17T4 because they have difficulty placing their eye at the rigth place and experience blackouts. Which is not my case. But it may be a problem for you.
What is in favor of the 17T4 over the 16t5 is not 'rational' and cannot be described in numbers of standard description of the quality of an EP. It is the immense immersive feeling the 17T4 has and that the 16T5 just does not have. Don't get me wrong, the 16T5 is a great EP.
It is a little bit like comparing the 9T6 with a 12T4. The immersive feeling is just not there with the 9T6 or the 16T5 compared to the T4 EPs. It is a very personnal feeling that perhaps not everybody has. But for me, it made the 'superiority' of the 16T5 completely irrelevant. I just like that 'immersive' feeling and would never change my 17T4 for a 16T5 unless weigth starts beeing a problem.
With a 16T5, you have a great EP. With a 17T4, you have a unique and 'immersive' experience.
I suppose you have to try it to know if this is also true for you.
Francois
--------------------
François
Nexstar 8 SE
50mm StellarVue finderscope, Astronomik UHC-E and Orion OIII filters
WO Swan 40mm; TV Pan 22mm; TV Nagler 9T6, 12T4, 17T4; TV Plossl 11mm and 15mm.
WO 2" dielectric diagonal retrofitted with Denk Power Switch (and now reach the zenith with the shorty adapter).
|
jcjr
professor emeritus
Reged: 01/06/08
Posts: 563
Loc: TN, USA
|
|
The 'feeling' from an EP does seem to have psychological perceptual factors. Have had a 24 Pan and 13 T6 for a little while. For some reason they seem more immersive with the eyecups folded down. Keeping the same eye distance.
With the eyecup up, the image seems 'framed' or 'contained'. With the eyecup down, the image just 'looks bigger' though I know its gotta be an illusion. With eyecups folded down, the image looks like it is 'floating suspended in the air'.
My other psychological impression is that usually the AFOV of the Pan 24 and 13T6 appear to be about the same size, though I do not doubt that the 13T6 is actually wider than the Pan 24. Some cultures supposedly only have 3 numbers, 1, 2 and Many. Perhaps my brain does this on EP's-- narrow, medium, wide.
17T4 seems perhaps too heavy, and the 16T5 is the perfect size but am concerned about the eye relief.
Perfect geometric mean between 24mm and 13mm is about 18mm [(13 * 24)^0.5]
Meade 18mm UWA is a good likely, but it is a little heavy, and is fat enough that it might get 'crowded' on some small diagonals.
Currently am thinking maybe just get 19mm Pan and WO 16mm UWAN, about 13mm eye relief both locations, and about the same weight/size as 13T6 and 24Pan. 'Bracket' the geometric mean on both sides.
--------------------
CPC 1100, C102SLT, SV F80, Meade 70 & 60 AZT
Q70 38mm, Pan24, Meade 5K 18mm UW, Axiom LX 15mm, Nagler 13T6, Axiom LX 10mm, Expanse 20mm, 9mm, 6mm, BO/TMB 5mm, 2.5mm
|
Starman1
Vendor - Scope City
Reged: 06/24/03
Posts: 10957
Loc: Los Angeles
|
|
Francois,
You just explained why the 13 Ethos is such a powerful eyepiece: the sensation of immersion in the scene.
Jcjr,
I feel the same way about eyecups. In the winter, I pull them off to help avoid fogging up the lenses, and I'm getting in the habit of either leaving them off or folded down all the time now. I agree that this helps the feeling of "immersion".
--------------------
Don Pensack
12.5" Truss Dob, 5" Maksutov
Sustaining Lifetime IDA member, TeleVue junkie
|
coutleef
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 02/21/08
Posts: 822
Loc: Montreal and St-Donat, Québec,...
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: