Jump to content

stargazine_ep34_banner.thumb.jpg.28dd32d9305c7de9b6591e6bf6600b27.jpg

35mm Panoptic in f5 dob


Recommended Posts

When the focal ratio gets faster than F/5 the Tele Vues really come into their own I think. There is also some satisfaction and confidence that comes from using one, in my opinion at least  :smiley:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Luke and Sarah (members here) were using a 35mm Panoptic with their 12" and then 16" Skywatcher dobs and felt the views with the Pan suddenly seemed "washed out" when they moved to a 21mm Ethos so I r

hi Alan I previously had a 12" f5.3 dob and a 35mm Panoptic. The combination was really good but as I have a fair bit of LP where I observe most (at home) and was going to swap to a f4 scope shortly

Sort of considering the ES 34mm 68. But as my mate Si pointed out, I will always feel that I should of got the TV. Damn their superb optics!!

Without the cc at F5, the 27mm Pan shows a bit of the scopes inherent coma right at the edge of the fov. With the cc in and the scope now acting at F4.5, the Pan shows totally crisp stars edge to edge.  As you say John, that is where TV's come into their own, as the speed goes up.

Now if I could find a way to make the bank manager understand the value of crisp star images......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alan,

Is he not a flexible friend? Your CC makes your scope faster? I was always of the opinion they slowed scopes down a bit or is that just the famous Paracorr from TV.

Alan

Edited by alan potts
Link to post
Share on other sites

If I flex it anymore, I fear it may get a stress fracture!!

Alan, the 0.9 reduction seems to be unique to the Skywatcher CC, even FLO list it as having this property. Quite a nice side effect as it happens. It also works very well at reducing coma.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it worth trying a wanted on Astro B&S and on site? 

It is an interesting point on the CC, if I ever get a Dob it is worth knowing, I have never seen coma that I can remember. I made a 12.5 inch Newt when I was 19 with the help from people at work. This must have had coma but I didn't use it that long before my work changed and I drifted away from astronomy, I also think the fact my eyepieces were not what I have today may well have masked it a bit.

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alan,

I used the 34mm 68 degree Maxi for quite a few months and the seeing at times appeared washed out to me.

I have never experience this washed out view with the 31mm Nagler :smiley:  maybe 0.3mm makes a difference when its borderline but I doubt it.

Edited by Pig
Link to post
Share on other sites

...... I have never seen coma that I can remember.....

Interestingly, coma is an aberration suffered by schmidt-cassegrains as well, according to this web page:

http://starizona.com/acb/basics/equip_optics101_schmidts.aspx

Presumably the relatively narrow field of view means it does not trouble observers too much ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think 7mm is going to waste light.

From the dark site where I live I used to use a 35 Pan in the 20 inch F4 knowing the the exit pupil was too wide, but it was what I had.

Switching to a 26 Nagler everything brightened up considerably. I don't think it was the background sky getting darker because it was dark in the Panoptic. It was the faint nebulae looking brighter.

7mm is kind of marginal since some young or good eyes can manage that.

Olly

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am on the lookout for a used 35mm so that I can try it out without the cost of buying new. I have been given a tip off, and I am awaiting e reply. Annoyingly I missed out on one last weekend on ABS, sold before I saw it on sunday morning. You snooze,you lose!!

I spent some time again last night between the clouds comparing the fov of the pan with the ethos and radian. I definately get on better with 68deg than with 72deg. Such a small amount in it, but enough for me to know that 82 will be too much. Hence the risk is worth taking I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Their is something about seeing the stop that prevents my eye from wandering around too much. I know a lot of people love the wide views, I wish I did, but I must be happy with what is most comfortable. Here you go Mike, the build thread if you are interested. Finished pics on page 5,http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/179535-14360mm-truss-dob/

and it's even better in the flesh...this is a great topic here with top advice from the big guns on this forum helping each other out and avoiding pitfalls along the way...so I'll keep Schtum !
Link to post
Share on other sites

It was the view through your Ethos that got me thinking Calvin. It was fantastic and that next week thought were about getting one. Luckily for me the time spent working out how to pay for it, also gave me time to really think about what suits my eyes. I had noticed that some nights when struggling to find the right guide stars in LP'd skies, my eyes would tire. I also noticed this a bit in the Delos when looking at the moon. I never seem to get tired eyes with the Pan or Radian though.

The advice from everyone is fantastic. I always knew that it was gonna be a borderline thing, but it is good to hear that some people get on with the mix.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The tip on the used one didn"t Pan out!!   See what I did there :wink:  The hunt goes on.....

Sorry to hear that Alan (and I didn't mean the pun !).

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was the view through your Ethos that got me thinking Calvin. It was fantastic and that next week thought were about getting one. Luckily for me the time spent working out how to pay for it, also gave me time to really think about what suits my eyes. I had noticed that some nights when struggling to find the right guide stars in LP'd skies, my eyes would tire. I also noticed this a bit in the Delos when looking at the moon. I never seem to get tired eyes with the Pan or Radian though.

The advice from everyone is fantastic. I always knew that it was gonna be a borderline thing, but it is good to hear that some people get on with the mix.

That is another reason why I also like these two Panoptics. The eye relief on the 27mm, provides relaxed viewing with 16mm of eye relief, the 35mm is 28mm of eye relief which I find to be luxurious. In some ways I feel that this perhaps compensates for a little light loss, since your eye is so relaxed, you can comfortably wonder around the sky searching for longer with your mind fully engaged in concentration and linger for a longer period when a target has been located. For contrast on some objects, I do switch to my 20mm nagler, yet as mentioned previously, for big bright show piece objects, the 35mm panoptic can deliver very satisfying views.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brace yourselves for a sudden raft of 35MM Pans to flood the market.

After a night spent looking through a 36mm 70 deg FOV yesterday, I have decided rather disappointedly, that the gains are not worth it for me. :sad:
Having listened to all the fantastic first hand advice given here, and then speaking to Pete and co in TH, I borrowed a meade 36mm 70 deg ep just to see if I got on with the exit pupil and any issues it may bring. Whilst I appreciate the characteristics of the 2 ep's are not identical, and that the meade is of a woeful quality compared to a Pan, the increase in the actual TFOV is not really enough to justify the outlay at the moment. Add to this the small, but none the less there, decrease in contrast, with a heavy heart and sense of loss I turned my back on the 35mm Pan, for my current set up at least.

If I had a bit more spare cash, I would probably have gone for it anyhow. But as we all know 'scopery funds are hard to come by, and need to be spent well. There is, was, a glaring hole in my ep line up at the 250x mark...........

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's a wise move Alan. It's funny how when one hole is filled, all the stuff (common sense prevailing etc) used sloshes across to create a new hole in your kit list somewhere else........

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.