jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
Reged: 02/28/06
Posts: 4349
Loc: Petaluma, CA
|
|
The appearance of commercial 82-84 degree AFOV eyepieces in the early 1980s marked a revolution of sorts. The tinkerings of Al Nagler in the 1970s lead to the design of the first Nagler introduced in 1982. Shortly thereafter Meade debuted its Series 4000 Ultrawide angle. Prior to that time, "wide field" eyepieces meant decades-old (and in some cases century-old) designs maxing out around 70 degrees.
The 80-degree revolution was borne on genius and ingenuity, and marked a renaissance of eyepiece designing after a many-decade drought. The 80-degree class evolved in the decades from its inception to the present, taking advantage of new glass chemistry to improve eye relief, reduce lens element count and reduce mass.
Fast forward to the present. After nearly three decades of the "80-degree" barrier, the 100-degree era has dawned. We know that Al Nagler's employee, Paul Dellechiaie, designed the Ethos, and that an as-of-yet unnamed Chinese designer(s) designed the 100-degree eyepieces being sold under the Explore Scientific brand. Why? Or more particularly, "Why now"?
Why didn't the 100-degree eyepiece emerge right on the heels of the 80-degree designs? Why nothing for 27 years then suddenly two different, quite competitive 100-degree lines? What happened that enabled the 100-degree revolution?
Regards,
Jim
--------------------
"I do not know what I may appear to the world; but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the seashore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me."
- Sir Issac Newton
|
Luigi
Post Laureate
Reged: 07/03/07
Posts: 4947
Loc: MA
|
|
80 and 100 degree designs go back 50-60 or more years. What's changed is the realization that there are enough people willing and able to pay for them to make them a viable product.
--------------------
17.5" f/5 Dob. IM-715 MCT. 120ED. Lunt 60mm Ha.
Zeiss, Leica, Fujinon, Nikon, Pentax, Bushnell bins
|
BillP
Post Laureate
Reged: 11/26/06
Posts: 3955
Loc: Vienna, VA
|
|
Quote:
What's changed is the realization that there are enough people willing and able to pay for them to make them a viable product.
Bingo!
--------------------
Bill Paolini
XT10i Dob---TSA-102 S-APO---APM80/480 S-APO--- P.S.T.
TMB Supermonos---Meade UWAs---TV Panoptic---AT Titan II ED
To your own eyes be true...
|
MitchAlsup
super member
Reged: 08/31/09
Posts: 186
|
|
And the availability of certain new glass types that makes teh manufacture of these reasonable.
|
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
Reged: 02/28/06
Posts: 4349
Loc: Petaluma, CA
|
|
I don't really buy that.
For ~20 years folks have been willing to pay in excess of $500 for an 80-degree-class 2" eyepieces. The $400 and $500 100-degree units available today surely would have been viable against (and in fact more competitive and differentiated from) the "other guy's" really expensive 80-degree units.
Also, while 80-100 degree designs have been around for a very long time (as I stated in my intro), they have not be commercially produced. I strongly suspect that this was due to difficulty in execution (i.e., the glass working science was not up to the level where mass-production was feasible) rather than simply not being able to persuade people to pay $600 for an eyepiece. Put another way, I don't think an Ethos or Explore Scientific 100-degree units could have been made in commercial quantities and offered for sale anywhere near today's pricing, ten or twenty years ago.
Folks have been paying thousands of dollars for camera lenses and premium APOs for a very long time. There's always been plenty of money in amateur optics markets at the high end. "Market readiness" as the reason for timing doesn't ring true.
I'm wondering whether there's been a revolution in fabrication equipment and/or rare glass type production that has made commercial production of 100-degree eyepieces viable.
Regards,
Jim
--------------------
"I do not know what I may appear to the world; but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the seashore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me."
- Sir Issac Newton
|
cuzimthedad
Just Be Cuz
Reged: 04/09/06
Posts: 3725
Loc: Sonoma, Northern California
|
|
I was thinking that as well Jim. Perhaps the economics of production are much less expensive today than they were a couple of decades ago. Computer science has evolved over the past 15 years much the same way eyepiece design has. Lower cost computers and software make it easier for small companies such as TV to design their product. Production capabilities off shore have led to increased quality over the years and lower cost at both the company and consumer levels.
But I also agree with Bill and Luigi that the desire of the user to be able to see more and be willing to pay for it is part of the overall equation as well.
--------------------
Dan
20" f/5 Obsession
Antares 1529
TV102
Various Naglers, Ethos, UO Orthos and TV Plossls
The Off Fisher Lane Irregulars
|
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
Reged: 02/28/06
Posts: 4349
Loc: Petaluma, CA
|
|
"But I also agree with Bill and Luigi that the desire of the user to be able to see more and be willing to pay for it is part of the overall equation as well."
True, but would a 100-degree "Nagler" have been any less desireable to consumers in 1982 (at the 1982 Nagler price) than the 82-degree Nagler that was introduced? I think not. Had Televue been able to deliver a 100-degree eyepiece in 1982, I believe they would have done so in lieu of the 82-degree model.
The Ethoses today in today's dollars are not really more costly than the 1982 Naglers were in 1982 dollars. I don't think consumer desire for 100-degree fields mysteriously materialized last year. Likewise, I don't think that the economy last year suddenly made paying $600 for an eyepiece palatable. Rather, I suspect that the market for 100-degree, $600 (on an inflation-adjusted basis) eyepieces has always been there. Saying that makers were waiting for consumers to want a 100-degree eyepiece for $600 sounds a little like the tail wagging the dog. Are the companies that hold the cure for cancer simply waiting for the market to be ripe to deliver it? Are automakers sitting on their 200mpg designs, just waiting for consumers to want to buy them? The good-riding 500k mile tires are waiting for folks to want them? Nah. It's da science that's holding up the show!
I have to think that, as you say, the technology (design capability, manufacturing capability, component availability, etc.) arrived, enabling manufacturers to tap into a consumer psychology that's always been there ("I want wider fields and I am happy to pay a supreme premium for them today as I was in 1982!").
How long before we see 120-degree eyepieces? I can virtually guarantee that an $800 120-degree eyepiece would sell as well or better than a $600 100-degree eyepiece. 
- Jim
--------------------
"I do not know what I may appear to the world; but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the seashore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me."
- Sir Issac Newton
|
cuzimthedad
Just Be Cuz
Reged: 04/09/06
Posts: 3725
Loc: Sonoma, Northern California
|
|
Another argument for the arrival of technology would be that if they had it "back then" so to speak, they would have offered the eps during the great economical ride of the 80s & 90s. To offer them during the downturn says, to me at least, that all the stars came in alignment in just the recent few years.
--------------------
Dan
20" f/5 Obsession
Antares 1529
TV102
Various Naglers, Ethos, UO Orthos and TV Plossls
The Off Fisher Lane Irregulars
|
Jim Romanski
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 01/02/05
Posts: 844
Loc: Guilford, Connecticut
|
|
Quote:
80 and 100 degree designs go back 50-60 or more years.
Yes there's been wide field designs going back. But not with the excellent correction that we have now. That's what has really changed. So I think the question is what has made it possible to have these wide fields with such excellent correction.
Glass types and good designs?
--------------------
Jim
17.5" Dob "Project"
13.1" Coulter
8” Cave
NP 101 on a CG-5
25x100 binos
Naglers, Ethos, etc.
|
MitchAlsup
super member
Reged: 08/31/09
Posts: 186
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
80 and 100 degree designs go back 50-60 or more years.
Yes there's been wide field designs going back. But not with the excellent correction that we have now. That's what has really changed. So I think the question is what has made it possible to have these wide fields with such excellent correction.
Glass types and good designs?
And the easy access to optics optimization programs that take the computational drugery out of finding acceptable solutionis to the problems therein.
|
lightfever
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 09/27/04
Posts: 1281
Loc: Macomb Michigan
|
|
Quote:
And the easy access to optics optimization programs that take the computational drugery out of finding acceptable solutionis to the problems therein.
That's what I was thinking. This would make it easier to tweak a design, resulting in fewer prototypes and lessen the cost of bringing a new ep to market.
--------------------
Mark
Tasco 15-TE 76mm
Sky Watcher 80mm ED
AT-111 Triplet
XT8i (with Woden re-figured mirror)
Discovery 12.5" f/5 Premium DHQ (PDHQ Split-tube Dobsonian)
12.5" f/6.3 Dob (Underconstruction)
Celestron CG-5GT EQ Mount
Celestron C4 EQ Mount
"Life is not about waiting for the storm to pass, but learning to dance in the rain" unknown
|
Starman1
Vendor - Scope City
Reged: 06/24/03
Posts: 12230
Loc: Los Angeles
|
|
Yes, don't underestimate the power of computer programs.
Prior to 1995, metal alloys were mixed in the crucible and then tested later to see the results on the alloy created.
Now a designer can plug in the desired characteristics of the end alloy and the computer will give them the mix.
So we can get metal alloys that produce incredible results without the years and years of trial-and-error testing that used to be necessary.
So it is with lenses. Want a flat field at the back of an f/10 catadioptric with no coma and good edge correction? It takes about 10 minutes with a working computer program to design the lens necessary to make it happen. Don't you think Celestron and Meade would have done it in 1985 if they could have?
We're in the computer revolution right now. Amateurs design mirror cells with PLOP, and whole telescopes with NEWT.
I suspect we have many more remarkable things to come.
--------------------
Don Pensack
12.5" Truss Dob, 5" Maksutov, Fujinon Binos
Sustaining Lifetime IDA member
|
bsim
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 01/04/08
Posts: 1060
Loc: New York City
|
|
Quote:
Yes, don't underestimate the power of computer programs.
Uncle Al told me an interesting story about the original Nagler design. Back in the good ol' days of computing, he had to buy time on a primitive mainframe to design the original Nagler EP.
The other component besides cheap powerful computing is the high tech manufacturing revolution. The Chinese can mass produce highly complex designs in a cost effective manner.
|
GlennLeDrew
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 06/18/08
Posts: 1304
Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
|
Back in the '60's a German outfit designed and made a 120 degree eyepiece, ostensibly to be used in submarine (I should say, U-Boat) periscopes. Design-wise, it bore some resemblance to the later Nagler. I can't recall what the focal length of the prototype was, but the largest lens element was 4.5 inches in diameter!!
--------------------
Home-made 11X50 right angle bino, 8.1 deg. FOV
Modified 26X100 bino, 3.5 deg. FOV
Home-made Mk II RA bino, using interchangeable objectives and eyepieces
My Gallery
Mediocre minds discuss people. Good minds discuss events. Great minds discuss ideas.
|
Jim Rosenstock
Post Laureate
Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 3727
Loc: MD, south of the DC Nebula
|
|
Uncle Al is at least as good at marketing strategy as he is at eyepiece design.
Remember, Televue did not enter the market with the Nagler. Rather, they upgraded a long-in-the-tooth eyepiece design--the Plossl--and executed it with the best glass and coatings available. This eyepiece soon became the industry standard...
..THEN they introduced the Nagler (and Nagler prices!  ))
I'm sure Televue has had a marketing plan for the Ethos series long before the first 13mm was shipped!
Jim
|
bsim
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 01/04/08
Posts: 1060
Loc: New York City
|
|
Let's not forget David Nagler. As President, David is responsible for day-to-day operations and much of the marketing strategy. He wrote the TeleVue ad copies and is still involved to this day.
According to Uncle Al, the Plossl design was a way to generate steady revenue for the nascent company, while he was designing the Nagler.
|
MitchAlsup
super member
Reged: 08/31/09
Posts: 186
|
|
Quote:
Back in the '60's a German outfit designed and made a 120 degree eyepiece, ostensibly to be used in submarine (I should say, U-Boat) periscopes. Design-wise, it bore some resemblance to the later Nagler. I can't recall what the focal length of the prototype was, but the largest lens element was 4.5 inches in diameter!!
I have a 30mm 86 dFoV EP that is German, looks like it came from a tank, and is 3.6" in diameter. In an F/10 scope it is as good as a 31mm Nagler, not so in an F/4.
One interesting thing about this EP is the coatings. The coatings are so hard one could throw the EP in the mud and wipe it down with a greasy rag and not scratch the lens surfaces! {Probably some early version of amorphous Diamond coatings.}
|
Luigi
Post Laureate
Reged: 07/03/07
Posts: 4947
Loc: MA
|
|
>>>One interesting thing about this EP is the coatings. The coatings are so hard one could throw the EP in the mud and wipe it down with a greasy rag and not scratch the lens surfaces! <<<
This is certainly true of the coatings on the binoculars I use for hunting. These get extreme abuse that would make any optics lover blanch, like wiping off gritty mud with a wet dirty shirttail.
Optical CAD has been around for at least 35 years that I'm aware of, running on mainframes prior to the advent of PCs. It used to be way expensive, but certainly not out of reach of professionals.
I still assert the only reason we have 80 degree and now 100 degree EPs is that Al Nagler decided to bet on his hunch that there'd be a sufficient market for them to be a viable business proposition. He proved it and it didn't take long for the other mfgs to jump in.
Another very significant factor is that advances in automated optical fabrication have greatly lowered the real cost of producing optics.
--------------------
17.5" f/5 Dob. IM-715 MCT. 120ED. Lunt 60mm Ha.
Zeiss, Leica, Fujinon, Nikon, Pentax, Bushnell bins
|
wirenut
professor emeritus
Reged: 09/21/06
Posts: 566
Loc: m'dale Pa
|
|
why now I cant answer but why 2? where one finds gold others ares sure to follow. al showed there's a way to make it and be profitable.
--------------------
8"GSO dob
8,17 mm hyperions & FT rings
21mm stratus
25,15,9 mm plossls
ultima barlow
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
