John

Is the Baader Eudiascopic 35mm basically the same as the Celestron Ultima 35mm / Orion Ultrascopic 35mm ? If so beware the amount of inwards focuser movement needed - I ran out of inwards focuser movement in a number of scopes I tried to use one in and that was in cyclops mode. If you can ge tthem to focus they are nice eyepieces although holding the correct eye position can be a challenge. If the Eudiascopic is an entirely different design then ignore the above !

I felt the same for a long time on the plastic washers Russell but I've tried it and it works really well and holds the secondary collimation without any problems. The guy that came up with the idea is a member here I think. I use a light shade on my dob for the reason you suggest. Because I have a fair amount of stray light to contend with it's worked wonders with contrast. Again it's a low cost fix and easy to implement yourself.

If Apertura are a good brand they ought to fit adequate collimation springs to even their base models. The scope is a GSO though (same as the Zhumell) and certainly the 12" GSO's have known to have weak collimation springs for years. Something so easy to sort out and yet year after year they don't These are all low cost modifications and I don't think justify a $230 premium. The washers upgrade refers to plastic ones fitted beneath the adjustement screws on the diagonal boss. That costs nothing to do oneself, apart from a little time, as the washers are cut from plastic milk cartons.

Hyper for myself I fear

Tele Vue make green and black braces just for this sutuation Just £199.99 for a set. Do you want wide, ultra wide or hyper wide ?

At F/4.7, away from the central area of the field of view, there is going to be coma (scope produced) and maybe some astigmatism (eyepiece produced) or a combination of both. Eyepieces that are well corrected in fast scopes, ironically, help to show off the coma that the scope produces ! The wider angle eyepieces show more off axis field so, apart from any astigmatism that they produce, you will also see more coma. Unless you decide to use a coma corrector of course. Coma tends to make stars look a little comet shaped with the "tail" pinting away from the centre of the field of view. Astigmatism tends to extend star images into an enlongated "seagull" shape with the "wings" appearing to point around the edges of the field of view. The degree to which some people notice or are bothered by these issues does vary I think

Those Celestron "Halloween" plossls seem to be gaining in popularity again

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