John

I have some silica gel sachets under the foam in each of my cases.

This thread has been going on long enough to have some retro revivals. Here is my post from 5 years ago: http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/57027-show-me-your-eye-piece-cases/?p=561737 I still have the same case and the Nagler 31. Everything else has moved on though

I still think the eyepiece storeage area that Tim Wetherell made for his fantastic 8" refractor is the best I've seen. Come to mention it the scope is one of the best I've seen too

I feel guilty that I've not spent £70 on an eyepiece case

My cases have pluck foam but I don't remove the cubes. I break a section of cubes a little smaller than the eyepiece away from the adjoining cubes then push the eyepiece down onto that section, which depresses, and the eyepiece is pressed in place by the foam spikes in the lid of the case. After a few days the depression has taken the shape and countours of the eyepiece but, if you need to change things around, you can pull the whole section of cubes out and it soon resumes the original level ready for a different configuration.

That was a great read Alan, apart from the feeling of envy that I've acquired reading it I'm so glad the scope and 1st light has been very positive. You make the investment, you wait, and wait for delivery, then for clear skies and when you get to use it any doubts you had just fall away

All is revealed here Agnes : http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/57027-show-me-your-eye-piece-cases/?p=2589086

Thats a great set Mike - Tele Vue Naglers and Pentax XW, very nice What do you put in the binoviewer ?

Thanks Derek. I'd like to take a peek

Very nice Derek I have the 31 Nagler and the 21, 13, 8 and 6mm Ethos. I've wondered about the 17mm but I don't find a large gap between the 21 and the 13 with my scopes to justify it I think. Similarly with the 10mm Ethos which is reputedly one of the nicest in the range. I've Powermated the 8mm and 6mm Ethos so I can see the appeal of the Ethos SX 4.7mm and 3.7mm's. I currently cover those focal lengths with Pentax XW's but I might be tempted by a 4.7mm Ethos if one "came along" I've owned the Nagler zoom 3 times but for some reason I've never really taken to it for reasons that I can't quite fathom out

Or add a further 9 to get to 40 ?

I moved from the 13mm T6 Nagler to the 13mm Ethos. More of a difference there in terms of immersiveness I found. Huge size and cost difference though Oddly, about the same time I moved from the T4 22mm Nagler to the T5 20mm Nagler. Comparing the Pentax XW's to Naglers was the catalyst that prompted me to ultimately be disloyal to them. Like all these comparisons at this level we are talking about very small "differences" rather than better or worse and personal preferences are probably stronger motivations than any actual performance differences.

The Maplins ones are popular and are the ones that I use. There will be other sources as well I guess. The Pelican cases seem to be very well thought of.

Blimey - I sold my T1 7mm Nagler for £75 including insured delivery !. That was in 2007.

I've owned Nagler T1's T4's, T5's and T6's. No T2's though My last remaining Nagler is my 31mm T5.

Nice piece Shane and some interesting photos. Interesting because you can see the varying coating tints that Tele Vue has used over the years. These older TV's can be real bargains The Nagler "dynasty" can be confusing with the 6 types but no type 3's ever produced. There was a type 1 11mm but it is very rare. At the end of the day through they are tools rather than collectables - very good tools too

The tube on mine is the OO standard of 326mm. It's the top ring around the tube and it's lip that reduce the actual aperture 308mm +/- a mm. That the same as the VX range use now.

I'd better drop a line to Orion Optics then - they have been making them like that for the past 30 years

Jason, I have just measured the aperture at the top of my Orion Optics 300mm F/5.3 optical tube and is is just 7mm wider than the primary mirror diameter.

Interesting stuff Jason I might be wrong but I think Stu (the original poster) is talking about an Orion Optics scope. Their tubes and their top openings tend to be narrower than many so I wonder if, in this case, the offset approach is more appropriate ?

When I look down on my secondary it's offset exactly the way that Shane has demonstrated. Not a large amount though because my scope is F/5.3 so the offset should be 2.97mm for my 63mm diameter secondary.

I found this formula used on more than one source: Offset = Diameter of Primary x Diameter of secondary divided by 4 x FL of primary

Happy New Year to you Warthog - it's good to hear from you again ! Sounds like you have had a rough time of it but I'm pleased that you are picking up now. Your piece on eyepieces is a "classic" in my humble opinion and has deservedly been one of the most visited sections of the forum Hope to see you on the forum again from time to time !

I think Don is referring to air at normal air pressure Yong

I can do Iota Cass with my 4" refractor and it's one of my favourites in that part of the sky The seeing conditions have been all over the place lately though so what should be straightforward has not always proved so