Explore Scientific 82 Degree vs TeleVue Nagler at F/5

[Naemeth]

Thanks Andrew... I had thought of the Pentaxes as they get really good press. If I can get out to a few star parties, the ideal would be to try them. I'm in no hurry to buy.

[scarp15]

I like the compactness of design of many of the naglers, the 16mm T5 is just perfection.

[crazyjedi]

Which ever lens you get, you won't be disappointed. They are both very good optically. The TV Nagler is perhaps the best in its league. But, and this is what stops me chasing the ultimate EP. Do you stop with the Nagler? Or do you shift your sights upwards? If the UWA isn't for you, go for the tighter fov but optical excellence of the Delos range at still more expense. Or, if the ultimate space walk is more your thing, do you up the ante still more and invest in an Ethos?

I would love at least a 9mm T6 Nagler at some point or perhaps the 10mm pentax XW. Maybe one day. At the moment. I'm unable to spend that kinda cash on one lens. If I could I would. If you can I am filled with unspeakable envy but would recommend that you get the best you can afford :-)

[Naemeth]

That's good advice, but for Ethos with focal lengths of over around 15mm (17mm and 21mm), the eye relief is inadequate for me. I need at least 16mm to be comfortable. Below 15mm (around there, it might actually be at 12.5mm) however, and my astigmatism disappears, so eye relief is no longer a concern. I don't think I'd invest in the Ethoi because 100 Degrees, even 110 seems excessive.

[crazyjedi]

I know what you mean about the ever increasing fov of modern lenses. I'm very happy with my 68 degree ES 24mm and I'm not sure I will need much more. Maybe if I try an 82 degree ep I may want to expand my fov but for now, I'm thinkin about the pentax xw as most desirable for me. They're the best I reckon at 70 degrees fov.

[cpsand88]

I just got my 11mm E.S. 82 and I love it. I don't have anything worth mentioning to compare it to but I will definitely end up buying more from this series.

Sent from my DROID RAZR

[Dunkster]

1358037655[/url'>' post='1778087']

That's good advice, but for Ethos with focal lengths of over around 15mm (17mm and 21mm), the eye relief is inadequate for me. I need at least 16mm to be comfortable. Below 15mm (around there, it might actually be at 12.5mm) however, and my astigmatism disappears, so eye relief is no longer a concern. I don't think I'd invest in the Ethoi because 100 Degrees, even 110 seems excessive.

Sounds like you need to stick to the Nagler T4 - 12, 17 and 22mm then... the ER can be too tight for glasses wearers in the other focal lengths until you get to the long ones. Same for the ES82.

If you need ER, best go for the Delos or XW, or the T4.

[Naemeth]

Sounds like you need to stick to the Nagler T4 - 12, 17 and 22mm then... the ER can be too tight for glasses wearers in the other focal lengths until you get to the long ones. Same for the ES82.

If you need ER, best go for the Delos or XW, or the T4.

I was planning on the T4s for the 12, 17 and 22mm, but below 12mm I don't need to wear glasses .

[John]

It's a tough decision. I bought my Tele Vues before ES really got going with their ultra wide fields. I often wonder what I'd do if facing the same decisions today especially as my fastest scope is now F/5.3

Even if I sold my Naglers and Ethos, I'd only raise enough to buy ES replacements rather than having a chunk of cash left over for other things. I guess I'm stuck with the green and black then ......

[crazyjedi]

It's a tough decision. I bought my Tele Vues before ES really got going with their ultra wide fields. I often wonder what I'd do if facing the same decisions today especially as my fastest scope is now F/5.3

Even if I sold my Naglers and Ethos, I'd only raise enough to buy ES replacements rather than having a chunk of cash left over for other things. I guess I'm stuck with the green and black then ......

I can think of far worse things to be stuck with than TV lenses

[Naemeth]

I can think of far worse things to be stuck with than TV lenses

Full set of Huygens eyepieces anyone?

[StarSteve]

Okay, so I'm considering the Explore Scientific 82 Degree eyepieces, my question is:

At F/5, is there anything separating them (Explore Scientific 82 Degree and Naglers)?

Of course there are things separating them otherwise they'd be identical, but I believe what you are really asking is "are the TV's better? should I get those in spite of the (massive) price difference?"

My opinion is that unfortunately that sort of question rarely turn up good answers. People will be automatically dispositioned to defend their investment (consciously or unconsciously). If you have spent a small fortune on whole cases full of green text, are you likely to say "no, it's not worth paying tripple for the naglers"? No.

If you have just recieved a box full of ES82's are you likely to say "yeah, I was an idiot, I should have gone for the expensive naglers"? Nope.

This is the general problem with peer-to-peer consumer reviews and advice. So you will get TV-fans saying "yeah, pay tripple for naglers" and ES-fans saying "are you nuts? you get the same or almost the same performance for 1/3 the cost" and of course you get a lot of people saying "I don't own either but..."

This is the objective information I think you can reasonably extract from this and many other threads on the subject:

- Both are very good eyepieces.

- There is a significant price difference.

- There may or may not be a quality difference that you can detect.

- If there is one it may or may not noticably detract from your observing and/or you happiness with your eventual investment.

If you really want to be sure: buy one of each, make up your own mind, sell the one you like the least and only then drop a significant amout on a whole collection.

Steve

[John]

Interesting and sensible post Steve - rings a lot of bells with me

It's good there there is so much choice in the eyepiece market today. It can be a bit confusing for newcomers though !

[crazyjedi]

Of course there are things separating them otherwise they'd be identical, but I believe what you are really asking is "are the TV's better? should I get those in spite of the (massive) price difference?"

My opinion is that unfortunately that sort of question rarely turn up good answers. People will be automatically dispositioned to defend their investment (consciously or unconsciously). If you have spent a small fortune on whole cases full of green text, are you likely to say "no, it's not worth paying tripple for the naglers"? No.

If you have just recieved a box full of ES82's are you likely to say "yeah, I was an idiot, I should have gone for the expensive naglers"? Nope.

This is the general problem with peer-to-peer consumer reviews and advice. So you will get TV-fans saying "yeah, pay tripple for naglers" and ES-fans saying "are you nuts? you get the same or almost the same performance for 1/3 the cost" and of course you get a lot of people saying "I don't own either but..."

This is the objective information I think you can reasonably extract from this and many other threads on the subject:

- Both are very good eyepieces.

- There is a significant price difference.

- There may or may not be a quality difference that you can detect.

- If there is one it may or may not noticably detract from your observing and/or you happiness with your eventual investment.

If you really want to be sure: buy one of each, make up your own mind, sell the one you like the least and only then drop a significant amout on a whole collection.

Steve

Some very good points made here though I suspect that many of us ES owners (me included) would happily admit that they would love to get their hands on TV lenses but are restricted by budget.

As you can see from my Signiture my collection is a rather mixed bunch from 4 different manufacturers and I'm happy with all of them.

My ES 24mm is optically excellent and I'm chuffed because I got at a bargain price from the states.

My TV Radian is optically excellent and very comfortable to use.

The Meade 5000 super plossls are very good.

The BGO's are excellent in fact considering their price point they are stupidly good value.

I can recommend all of them to others but my advice to anyone would always be - buy the best that you can afford, buy second hand if necessary.

The single biggest constraint that governs most of our purchasing decissions is budget and that is the only reason I don't have a collection full of TV and Pentax lenses (I wouldn't trade my BGO's for anything though).

It is true that the differences in quality between lenses gets progressivelly less noticable the higher the price bracket rises. Those of us on a more restricted budget will struggle to justify spending £300 or more on one lens when they can get two lenses for the same outlay that will only be a little bit inferior to the higher priced premium brands. However if you can afford to spend £300 pound or more on a single lens then you'd have no reason not to and you will enjoy the sparkling performance of your top level kit.

I'd be suprised if anyone has bought a TV lens or a Pentax lens and felt ripped off.

[Moonshane]

Great post by Steve above. I tend to agree with most of it also. My personal position is a little unusual in that I was previously in a job where I could (almost) afford whatever I needed. Thankfully during this period I managed to accrue a good set of eyepieces (all TV bar three BGOs), a Paracorr and three excellent Newts. After redundancy my income shrank by about 50% and funds are now tight.

My decision previously was based on what could I buy (within reason) that would give me the best performance and last/satisfy my needs for a long time. My decisions now are ironically based on the same principles but also tinged with what can I sell quickly and recover most or all of the investment quickly if required. All of these factors still lead me to 'used' Televue.

Although for the above reasons I have never used any ultra wides other than TV, I am more than satisfied with my two TV Plossls and would have no issue reverting to a set of them if required. I am the sort of person that would always wonder 'what if I'd bought the better one, the bigger one etc'. If I don't then I feel that it might detract from the enjoyment. Whether or not there is a reall tangible benefit I don't know but if 'what if' is not a question that bugs you then I would think the Explore Scientific eyepieces will be a superb addition to anyone's kit. If the 'what if' factor affects you then I'd certainly recommend used TVs at about the same price.

It's a complex area really, and each person will always make their own mind up and decide what they want. In terms of price I have always preferred used top to new next to top quality.

[Naemeth]

Great post by Steve above. I tend to agree with most of it also. My personal position is a little unusual in that I was previously in a job where I could (almost) afford whatever I needed. Thankfully during this period I managed to accrue a good set of eyepieces (all TV bar three BGOs), a Paracorr and three excellent Newts. After redundancy my income shrank by about 50% and funds are now tight.

My decision previously was based on what could I buy (within reason) that would give me the best performance and last/satisfy my needs for a long time. My decisions now are ironically based on the same principles but also tinged with what can I sell quickly and recover most or all of the investment quickly if required. All of these factors still lead me to 'used' Televue.

Although for the above reasons I have never used any ultra wides other than TV, I am more than satisfied with my two TV Plossls and would have no issue reverting to a set of them if required. I am the sort of person that would always wonder 'what if I'd bought the better one, the bigger one etc'. If I don't then I feel that it might detract from the enjoyment. Whether or not there is a reall tangible benefit I don't know but if 'what if' is not a question that bugs you then I would think the Explore Scientific eyepieces will be a superb addition to anyone's kit. If the 'what if' factor affects you then I'd certainly recommend used TVs at about the same price.

It's a complex area really, and each person will always make their own mind up and decide what they want. In terms of price I have always preferred used top to new next to top quality.

I think the only thing I can do is compare the two and see if the difference is worth the £££'s to me. Mind you, I'm erring more on the side of getting a large Dob first, as I don't think the Heritage focuser would support heavy eyepieces, and the differences might be a lot less subtle with more light grasp.

Who knows?

I'd just like to ask another question if possible. If I were to get a large dob, (probably going to go with a Sumerian Optics Canopus or similar) and the F ratio was sub F/5, would I be more likely to notice that difference? What about sub F/4, how do Naglers perform then? (I know they're tested up to F/4, but faster than that?)

[Moonshane]

^{if you can move the scope and store it then more aperture will, in my experience, and virtually without exception, improve visual observing more than even the very best eyepieces you can buy.}

[Naemeth]

^{if you can move the scope and store it then more aperture will, in my experience, and virtually without exception, improve visual observing more than even the very best eyepieces you can buy.}

Exactly why I was thinking of a Sumerian Optics scope, they somehow look lighter than Skywatcher large dobs...

[Moonshane]

I suspect they will be more manageable and possibly a little lighter, especially the travel version. Mike73 has just bought a 16" - might be worth checking the weight with him and you might be able to extrapolate down (if that's not oxymoronic).

[Bart]

Of course, the OP referred to the comparison at F5. I have F5 and F4.5 Dobs and the effect on the ESs are noticeable. Little distortion at F5, noticeable at 4.5. Now, at the shorther focal lengths that I have, 14 and 11mm, there is little difference at the F5/4.5, I find. At the longer FLs, 20mm and 30mm, they do suffer at F4.5, but a GSO coma corrector for €60 made a very distinct difference.

HTH

Never looked through a TV so can't compare, but the views through the ESs 82* (and 100* HeHe) are excellent.

Barry

[Naemeth]

I suspect they will be more manageable and possibly a little lighter, especially the travel version. Mike73 has just bought a 16" - might be worth checking the weight with him and you might be able to extrapolate down (if that's not oxymoronic).

The Travel scopes do look great, but, depending on the weight of the large ones and my living situation at the time, a large dob may be the way forward. Of course, it may be that I end up with say a 10" Propus (Travel Scope range), I just don't know as yet.

Thanks for that Barry, I did ask for F/5, but am wondering about sub-F/5 for a large dob.

[Bart]

Well Naemeth, I can tell you they do suffer a bit below 5 People state the TVs are good down to F4. I suppose the only way you're really going to be able to make a decision for yourself as opposed to taking my opinion or others is to try them your self, but it's difficult to try an EP you don't have in a scope you don't have. This, I suppose, is the reason for the multitudes of EP threads!!!! My 'great EP performance' might be substandard to you. Its all about the money. If you have the bobs, get the dear stuff, if you can't, get the second best stuff.

Or you could save loads by taking Homer Simpsons approach, where he once said in a restaurant, give me your second cheapest bottle of wine please...

[Naemeth]

Well Naemeth, I can tell you they do suffer a bit below 5 People state the TVs are good down to F4. I suppose the only way you're really going to be able to make a decision for yourself as opposed to taking my opinion or others is to try them your self, but it's difficult to try an EP you don't have in a scope you don't have. This, I suppose, is the reason for the multitudes of EP threads!!!! My 'great EP performance' might be substandard to you. Its all about the money. If you have the bobs, get the dear stuff, if you can't, get the second best stuff.

Or you could save loads by taking Homer Simpsons approach, where he once said in a restaurant, give me your second cheapest bottle of wine please...

Your experience is very helpful . You actually have the ES eyepieces, and I guess all experience is subjective. With the Coma Corrector in place, how were they at F/4.5 at the edges?

[Dunkster]

Isn't this why TV people by Paracorr? Not trying to be funny, I use SCTs so none of this funky business

[Bart]

Your experience is very helpful . You actually have the ES eyepieces, and I guess all experience is subjective. With the Coma Corrector in place, how were they at F/4.5 at the edges?

I have to go right out to the edge to see the coma, and that is way out in the 100* . Basically, you have to look for the coma, it won't hit you in the face just outside the centre of the FOV

Barry