Nagler but which one??

[mdhardy01]

Hi all

Thinking of getting a angler workhorse ep but don't know weather to go to the 11. 9. Or 7mm

I have a 200p explorer

Want something that will work well on planets and globs

All ideas welcome

And alternatives as well

Thanks

Matt

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[John]

Something suitable for both planets and globular clusters is a tough requirement from a single eyepiece but, if you have to go for just one, I reckon the 7mm Type 6 Nagler would be the one to go for. It gives 143x with your scope but still shows over half a degree of sky which is ample to frame globulars.

The William Optics UWAN's / Skywatcher Nirvana's do offer 90% or more of the peformance of a Nagler at a much lower cost though, which might be worth bearing in mind.

[Damo636]

I agree with John, the 7mm would probably be your best bet. I would also recommend either the 10 or 7mm Pentax XW. The fov is smaller at 70° but they outperform the Nagler inevery other aspect.

[John]

I feel the difference between XW's and Nagler Type 6's is very slight, at most. But there you go

I'm still in two minds over whether to move back from a 5mm XW to a T6 5mm - it's that close for me and the extra field of view is not insignificant.

At this level we tend to "split hairs" I reckon

[Damo636]

I agree John at this level the differences are very subtle at best. I am going on memory here but I remember comparing my 13mm Nagler with the 13mm Ethos that replaced it and the first thing that hit me was the sharp, bright contrasty view through the Ethos. To my eyes the Ethos and XW are about equal in that respect. Imho, if an 82° fov is important than the Nagler would be the way to go, but for out and out performance I reckon the XW's have the edge.

Ps. Can I please have first refusal on your 5mm XW if you decide to switch back to the Nagler John

[spaceboy]

This may offer some advice http://stargazerslounge.com/showthread.php?t=117135&highlight=finally+firm It will at least show you what a slippery slop you will be stepping on to.

[johninderby]

How about the Delios eyepieces. Narrower FOV than the Naglers but optically as good as the Ethos.

John

[mdhardy01]

Ok so if I took planetary out of the equation the best for up close globs would be????

Also where is the best place to purchase?

Matt

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moonshane]

in my larger scope ( do most of my observing with it) the focal length is 1840mm. The most used planetary eyepiece is my 10mm Radian. This gives 184x and is usually OK to use. My 9mm BGO, and 8mm Radian also often get used but less so. For globs I find my 13mm eyepiece (141x) is most pleasing. In your scope which I am pretty sure has a focal length of 1000mm? you'd need a 6mm for planets and a 7mm for globs approximately so really a 7mm would probably do it but I fear you'd sometimes be left suspecting you'd get more if you tried at 143x on planets.

If you are set on Naglers then I'd get the 7mm but you could also maybe consider e.g. used Radians and get an 8mm and 6mm for the same price as a new Nagler.

[spaceboy]

I have an explorer 200P and the best views I ever got of globulars was through my 6mm radian x166 and this was also good for planets but would often depend on what the seeing conditions were like. I no longer have the radian as it was replaced with the Nagler 3-6 zoom but at only 50° AFOV my globular EP is now a 7mm Nirvana which dose the job equally as well as my 7mm T6 did but at a fraction of the cost. If you want a Nagler your best bet is http://www.telescopehouse.com/acatalog/TeleVue_Ethos___Zooms.html or wait for S/H to come up on http://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview.php or go with a nirvana from FLO http://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-eyepieces/skywatcher-nirvana-uwa-82-degree-fov.html

[mdhardy01]

So are the nirvanas that good? Or the wo uwans? Has anyone got both nagler/ uwan/ nirvana ?

Thaw saving in ££££s is substantial

Matt

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[John]

I currently have some Ethos, Naglers and a Nirvana and I've owned / used the 16mm UWAN and 28mm Nirvana in the past. The UWAN / Nirvana's are really good and do deliver very "Nagler-like" performance, even with quite fast scopes.

[mdhardy01]

Ok so a rethink considering the difference in ££££s

Looking at the nirvana/uwan 7mm what would be the better ep??

Is there a difference in build quality I know that cost wise there's not much in it

I want to make the right choice as I want this one to be a keeper

Matt

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Charon]

For planetary I like the 8mm Radian.

[mdhardy01]

Looking more for globs and fuzzies now

Matt

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ags]

I'll just throw this one in because you are obviously not confused enough already... How about the Speer WALER range as an option? My 9mm performs well on planets and gives me the 80 degree experience. As a range they are compared not unfavorably with naglers. If you want to spend nagler money, you could get the Speer WALER 8-5mm zoom.

[mdhardy01]

Confused now??

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[John]

Some of the Speers-Waler eyepieces, nice though they are optically, need a lot of inward focus travel to come to focus. Fine if you have a mak or an SCT but can be problematical for newtonians and some refractors where inwards travel is limited.

The Nirvanas and UWAN's are identical so get the lowest priced. Their fit and finish is firmly in the quality bracket as far as I'm concerned - similar to the Explore Scientific eyepieces.

[spaceboy]

Looking more for globs and fuzzies now

Matt

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

May I ask what did you mean by fuzzies ?

[mdhardy01]

May I ask what did you mean by fuzzies ?

Sorry faint fuzzies ie galaxy's

Matt

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[spaceboy]

I did think that. Exit pupil is key to viewing galaxies and a 7mm EP is not really going to offer enough.

[Mr Spock]

For galaxies somewhere between x90 and x110 is about right. Globulars require more, around the x160 - x170 range.

I used to have a 7mm T6 Nagler when I had a 250mm Newt. That gave x171 and was excellent at resolving globulars.

[Ags]

The exact exit pupil you need depends on (1) the specific target, (2) your eyes and your brain, (3) levels of light pollution and transparency - it's very hard to make blanket statements about what exit pupil is best. For globulars with an admittedly small scope, I find very high mags allow me to resolve the stars in bright globulars like M3 and M13 by darkening the sky background, but those same mags make the diffuse glow of the globular less visible... It depends on the observer's preferences as to how much of the glow is to be sacrificed in favor of star resolving. With a larger scope you don't have to make that choice for M13, but you do have to for dimmer globulars.

[spaceboy]

The exact exit pupil you need depends on (1) the specific target, (2) your eyes and your brain, (3) levels of light pollution and transparency - it's very hard to make blanket statements about what exit pupil is best. For globulars with an admittedly small scope, I find very high mags allow me to resolve the stars in bright globulars like M3 and M13 by darkening the sky background, but those same mags make the diffuse glow of the globular less visible... It depends on the observer's preferences as to how much of the glow is to be sacrificed in favor of star resolving. With a larger scope you don't have to make that choice for M13, but you do have to for dimmer globulars.

My reference was to galaxies not globulars Ags. If I am wrong I will happily hold my hands up and admit I am.

[mdhardy01]

Ok I will hold my hands up and admit to being a newb and not understanding what an EXIT PUPIL actually is?

I've heard it talked about so could someone explain in simple terms please

I am beginning to finally get the idea that different ep perform different tasks even at the same mag

So for example if they made one a 8mm nagler/nirvana would be used for a different purpose than a 8mm bst for example

Does anyone know of a thread that explains this for me

I would be very grateful for all the help and knowledge

Many thanks

Matt

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD