Nagler 17mm T4 - all hype and hubris?

[MartinB]

A guy once asked me to listen to his new hi fi speakers. What do you think about the awesome spatial clarity of the sound stage he asked. I told him that I didn't think Lemmy, Motorhead and "The Ace of Spades" were the best showcase for his system :?

Just as there are audioplhiles there seem to be opticophiles, people who spend hours peering through refractors (it's usually refractors) using a range of very expensive eyepieces observing nuances of astigmatism, edge of field distortion and the like. This makes it very difficult for your common or garden stargazer, who just wants to look at stars and stuff, to know what is worth having and what isn't.

I've gone and got myself quite an expensive curiosity in this departement so finally had to get one of those Nagler eyepieces that opticophiles rave about. Surfing through Astro buy and sell I spotted a 17mm type 4 - nearly new and pristine £70 off the new price of £320.... take some time out for a deep breath :sunny: :sunny: :sunny:, better now? Now this isn't just any Nagler, it is the one that many opticophiles say is their all time favourite because of it's combination of sharpness across the field, contrast and eye relief (see I'm learning the lingo).

Quick primer, the types are numbered in the order of introduction, so type 1 is the earliest, type 6 the latest (oddly there was never a type 3). They are all variations of design with slightly different characteristics. One type isn't better than the other. T4 17 and 12mm are still available new. Oh it's all so complicated!

Well I'm a bit of a sceptic about these views that will "blow you away" so I am going to serially review this eye piece with the mind of a hardened cynic. I'm going to learn it's ins and out and probably bore you to tears with the details of my observations. I have a few problems though - I am an inexperienced observer who doesn't have the vernacular to describe optical distortions and the like (but I'll try to blag it!). Also I don't have a lot of other eye pieces to use for comparison - a budget Moonfish UWA, a few Celestron plossls and a couple of Baader orthoscopics.

So, starting with the physical - it's big (the T5 and 6 ranges are significantly smaller). It's a similar size than my Moonfish and slightly heavier. It's in immaculate condition without any blemishes. It has the Nagler rotating, adjustable eyeshield. This is a sheathing around the upper half of the EP with a rubber eyecup at the top. It can be rotated and moved up in a series of clicks to give good adjustment of the eye shield for the individual observer. It does give the impression that the EP is about to fall apart :shock:

First light then. I was planning on using an Skywatcher ED120 (x53) initially and then trying my Nexstar 8" (x118). At F7.5 and F10 respectively neither of these scopes provide a tough work out for eyepieces. A fast sub F5 reflector will show faults at the edge of the field of view much more. Maybe I've wasted my money!! In the end all the observations below were with the ED120. A lot of cloud and an early start at nightfall. My first view through the Nagler wasn't exactly a jaw dropping, road to Damascus experience. It was a peep at Jupiter through a Laurel hadge. All it told me was that I need to trim the hedge. Still in the half dark (I was excited) I looked at a few bright stars which were uninspiring (not surprisingly). One thing I did notice though is that eye shield placement is quite critical. The EP "kidney beans" if the eye is too close (ie areas of the view black out - very unpleasant). Move too far way and you are beyond the eye relief and loose the 82 degrees of apparent FOV. With the eye shield just right you can put your eye up to the EP to get the full view without the blacking out. Much less user friendly than the Moonfish in this respect though.

I had to wait for gaps in the cloud but the good news was that the transparency between the low cloud was good and the seeing was fairly steady with nice round out of focus diffraction rings. The bad news was that although the forecast was for a generally clear night there was also a high risk of showers. I wasn't going to hang around. I found enough of a gap to observe M57, not an ideal low power target. Still not fully dark the ring was slightly better defined through the Nagler than my 15mm plossl. Easy to see it as a ring rather than a disc. The stars were sharp to the edge of the FOV. I looked hard for any distortions but they weren't there, not to my untrained eye anyway. Surprisingly the Moonfish was also very good although the stars were getting stretched a small amount right out at the periphery. This surprised me because the Moonfish doesn't perform especially well with the F7.5 ED80.

I was following cloud gaps and moved up to the North American Nebula area. Still not dark enough to make out any nebulosity, just pleasing views of star fields. The Naglers are renowned for their so called immersive viewing - the space walk effect. This didn't have any wow effect for me since I am used to it with the Moonfish which also gives a similar FOV. It is a lovely way to observe though. Some people feel that this FOV is wasted because the eye can't take it all in at once however, for me, this is part of the attraction. I enjoy looking around at the view.

Next stop Alberio. Rather disappointing initially with poor colour but the sky was now starting to blacken up and within 10 minutes the clours of the double were very vivid. My 15mm plossl showed a little light dispersion around the star which diminished the contrast. The view was quite clearly less dramatic than with the Nagler

Finally the sky was properly dark and the whole of the Summer Triangle area had opened up very nicely. I moved onto M27 and popped in the Nagler. Ooooh hello, never seen M27 look like this before - the core shape was sharp and clear with detail showing within it. Lots of contrast. Even more surprising was that I could make out surrounding nebulostiy in the OIII "ears" region. Was it the scope, the conditions or what. Quickly aligned the NS8 and popped in the Moonfish to compare thinking that at x67 this would be of the same order of magnification.

And guess what . 90% cover and black stuff heading my way so I was off.

That view of M27 has really stuck in my mind. I've recently been imaging it and I feel I know it's every nook and cranny. So was I like the music lover who listens to Beethoven's 9th and a tinny radio but still hears it in all it's glory inside their head? Was my brain filling in the gaps? I don't think so, I think the Nagler might actually be something a bit special.

I'll add another observation report to this thread as soon as I get the chance.

[moondog]

I have a few problems though - I am an inexperienced observer who doesn't have the vernacular to describe optical distortions and the like (but I'll try to blag it!).

Martin - as far as I'm concerned the 'blagging' worked !

Excellent, interesting review. The Naglers usually get good reviews and the Cloudy Nights web site seem to worship the name ! Nuances of colour in visual observing don't interest me as much as lack of kidney beaning, good eye relief, sharpness and contrast. I can also live with a bit of softening at the edges of the FOV.

Look forward to your continuing reports on the Nagler, particularly with the darker skies.

Incidentally, don't you need a Hi Fi amplifier that has the volume control set to '11' to listen to Motorhead ?

MD

[Macavity]

I think, for me, it is "warts and all" reviews, by people with courage to occasionally differ with the conventional opinion/mindset re. the expensive optics that are the MOST helpful! (And those who review less expensive equipment!) So often I find myself *not* seeing the rave reviewers "sharp to the edge" etc. and more besides. That it "depends on the observer" is clear though! Do love the Motorhead (established favourite) allusions though (Hey, I too love a bit of Beethoven too, albeit my late Dad's Vinyl!). Astronomy does sometimes remind me a bit of "Guitar Forums" too. Every 14 year old owns a "Strat" or Gibson, these days. Some can make good use of them and... some can't? Even from a distant (shop window!) view, I can tell some have really AWFUL necks/actions. But it does seem a LAW that, if you pay "Good Money" for something, it is probably not going to be completely useless... I do have a certain sympathy for those who do labour to produce the elusive "perfect" eyepiece. Though doubtless, they laugh all the way to the Bank?

[John]

Thanks for a very interesting and balanced report Martin - I look forward to more reports on this eyepiece in due course.

I think it is very sensible to be sceptical about these "legendary" items of equipment and there is no substitute for seeing for oneself if you get the chance.

John

[jonifive]

Well written and informative Martin,

All I can say is that if I spent that much on an eyepiece Mrs JV would remove a much needed part of my anatomy......with a spoon. :shock:

I recently purchased the revelation ep set from Steve, and was amazed at the difference compared to my old plossls. I cannot imagine what the view through the Nagler is like compared to them. But, at that price I want to actually feel the heat of the stars through the eyepiece!!!

JV

[FLO]

I think, for me, it is "warts and all" reviews, by people with courage to occasionally differ with the conventional opinion/mindset re. the expensive optics that are the MOST helpful!

Couldn't have said it better

Good review Martin and I look forward to reading more.

[John]

Lemmy's got lots of warts

[jakey]

Well written and informative Martin,

All I can say is that if I spent that much on an eyepiece Mrs JV would remove a much needed part of my anatomy......with a spoon. :shock:

JV

I have been well and truly bitten by the nagler (and pentax xw bug) If my wife knew what I spent on them I would be subjected to the same punishment but with a pair of scissors

The way I got around it was to tell her indoors the prices are in dollars, that way the female mind divides the cost by two and then thinks thats the cost in pounds. Yes I know its deviouis and dishonest and very much underhand but thats what the male mind is like.

When I bought my 14 inch delux dob from oo I pulled the same stunt and so far I have got away with it.

I am so pleased that this site does not say where you live, the black mail would come thick and fast :nono:

[jcm]

Excellent review , Martin.

A good review can save you money. It took me ages to get the correct high power barlow for my APO. I did try three different ones

In the end I ended up with the TV 5X Power Mate. Which I should have bought in the first place as I needed about F30 to get a good image size for Saturn.

John

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Nice review, I am looking into Naglers at the moment, but given their price really would like to know if they are worth it.

Thanks

Michael

[Astro_Baby]

Good review - like your style there and its good to get reviews from people who have bought the gear and have a sceptical view of some of it.

[John]

Nice review, I am looking into Naglers at the moment, but given their price really would like to know if they are worth it.

Thanks

Michael

For some they are wonderful (including me !) but I do know others who really don't get on with them at all so it might be an idea to see if you can try one or two before you commit.

One thing you will notice though is that they tend to get snapped up pretty quickly 2nd hand which means that if they don't suit you there will always be someone who will buy it from you, often at little or no loss if you bought it used in the 1st place

Of course if you use a slow scope (eg: F/8 or slower) then the case for expensive wide field eyepieces is weaker as less expensive alternatives will do just as well ....

[oceanheadted]

Thanks for putting up your thoughts. I've never been entirely convinced by those audiophiles and their bemusing loud speaker/turntable reviews. The extra you get between a mid range piece of gear and the super expensive equivalent is usually lost on me.

I bought a cheap 2nd hand 7mm Nagler recently, but reminded myself before I dropped it into the diagonal that it isn't going to break the laws of physics so all you can expect is a nice view without much distortion. It does that in spades, although the eye relief issue takes some of the icing off the cake (to give Teleview their due is is miles better than my 6mm plossl). I'd like to try some UWANS/Nirvanas but find myself strangely (and irrationally) drawn to the green writing....

[Wizz]

The 17mm Type 4 Nagler is a great eyepiece, just wait until you've popped it in and viewed a few globulars! One of my all time favourites, nearly as good as the 22mm Type 4.

[matt c]

A very interesting read Martin, definately put what I thought Naglers would be into perspective I still want one but it'll be second hand and under the radar of the missus

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

For some they are wonderful (including me !) but I do know others who really don't get on with them at all so it might be an idea to see if you can try one or two before you commit.

One thing you will notice though is that they tend to get snapped up pretty quickly 2nd hand which means that if they don't suit you there will always be someone who will buy it from you, often at little or no loss if you bought it used in the 1st place

Of course if you use a slow scope (eg: F/8 or slower) then the case for expensive wide field eyepieces is weaker as less expensive alternatives will do just as well ....

I have a C8 (F/10) at the moment, but will add a 12"F/5 at some point in time. I think I will go for a 22mm T4 (nice eye relief) to replace my ancient 26mm Plossl. I will keep the 14 mm Meade UWA which I rather like for now, and only replace it if the Nagler blows it away on the new scope

[Wizz]

You will probably want to keep the Meade 14mm UWA as well as the 22 Nagler as there will be quite abit difference in magnification on your scopes. Unless you barlow the Nagler but if funds allow keep them both.

[John]

I have a C8 (F/10) at the moment, but will add a 12"F/5 at some point in time. I think I will go for a 22mm T4 (nice eye relief) to replace my ancient 26mm Plossl. I will keep the 14 mm Meade UWA which I rather like for now, and only replace it if the Nagler blows it away on the new scope

That sounds like a plan

I have the 22mm T4 - it's a really nice eyepiece but watch for the instajust feature it feels a bit wierd until you get used to it.

Your 14mm Meade UWA is probably very close to Nagler performance, even at F/5 so you may decide to hang on to that one - they have a great reputation

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

My main issue with the Meade is the eye relief. The rated 16 mm does not sound too bad, but it is not nearly as comfortable as the Paragon or the two LVs I have.

[russ]

Great review Martin. You have a good writing style that makes for good reading. I'm envious of your writing style and that 17mm Nagler.

What i would say is if you really want a Nagler but simply can't afford the price of entry then take a look at the William Optics UWAN or Skywatcher Nirvana. They are very nearly as good as the Nagler but for a lot less. I swapped from the Nagler 16mm T6 to the UWAN 16mm and was a very happy chappy.

Russ

[ollypenrice]

It's good to test the top stuff in this way and really see if it does perform. Unfortunately I usually find that it does! A friend once argued that all wines were more or less the same and organized a blind tasting between (French prices) a pound a bottle and a tenner a bottle. The dozen people in the room simply lined them up in near perfect order. He lost, big time.

I think you will end up liking the Nagler very much but a lot of money goes a very short way in astronomy...

I will try to write an equally unprejudiced comaparison of the Meade 127 and Tec 140 when I get my hands on the Tec. We are lucky to have so much good, cheap kit available today ... but Martin is also lucky to have a nice Nagler in his box as well!

Olly

[russ]

I will try to write an equally unprejudiced comaparison of the Meade 127 and Tec 140

Look forward to reading that Olly

Russ

[Spaced Cadet]

I am seriously looking into purchasing a Nagler 17mm T4, so the more reviews, the better!

Thanks!