I need a Tele Vue Nagler 6 11mm like I need a hole in the head?

[Nigele2]

I'm after viewing DSOs with what I have below.  Yes I have a BST 12mm and it has taught me what a useful size a 12mm is.  But surely a Nagler 11mm would improve the view.  At almost no cost.  Buy now secondhand, sell later for almost the same.

But for £100 more could I buy a better fit?  I don't know I'm in two minds about it 

Last time I was tempted to spend I got some great advice here.  Critical but fair.  I bought in  the end but for the right reasons.  And what a buy it turned out to be.    Any help gratefilly received 

[John]

I really like the Nagler's, having owned many of them but I have to be honest and say that I don't think you would see any more in terms of DSO's than your current BST 12mm shows you. You will get 35% wider field of view but the eye relief of the Nagler will be tighter (closer) which is not to everyones taste. The Nagler 12mm Type 4 might be more comfortable and "immersive" than the Type 6 13mm.

I agree though that buying used, trying and then selling on if it's not for you is a great way to see for yourself. With Tele Vues especially, as long as you pay a reasonable price, you can usually get most or all of your investment back if you choose to re-sell.

I don't want to put you off these excellent eyepieces but they are not "magic bullets" 

[Paul73]

Are the BST's really that good??

I would expect some sort of step change in image quality for more than 4x the price!!!

I do realise that the following statement may be regarded as bordering on heresy. But, I have the 8mm which I am struggling to love. I'm not saying that it is bad for £50. However, I would be looking for my money back if I had paid over £100.

Paul

[AlexB67]

Paul. I do wonder if John mainly means when it comes to contrast and transmission as much as anything. Many will argue that if you are going to be looking at faint fuzzies anyway without much detail in a smaller scope contrast and transmission count to get that little bit of extra. When and how much these factors come into play for any combo is hard to say.

Personally, from my limited experience good transmission and contrast really does count that little bit.  Comparing say a 10mm sw plossl to  a costly eyepiece I have ( albeit it is slightly different focal length) at 10.5mm, DSOs do pop out more in it, and very noticeably too in some cases due to darker background as much as anything, sometimes a whole galaxy will show that little bit more around the core. 

The BSTs IMHO I own do a pretty decent job in that department too I would say, but I have no comparable focal length to really say with any authority, background darkness is very well rendered though in all the BSTs I own. I find them very pleasant to look through for that.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

The 12T4 is a wonderful EP. I have not used BSTs so cannot comment on quality, but although there will be some increase in terms of image quality (and quite massive terms of FOV), there will only be a marginal increase (if any) in the number of DSOs you can see. The latter has more to do with transmission (which percentage of light gets through) than correction of aberrations, especially for extended sources. As an alternative to the Nagler 12T4, the Delos 12mm is also highly rated, especially in terms of transmission but also has the edge over the Naglers in terms of sharpness (people report). Moving from 60 deg to 82 deg is an increase of roughly 35% in linear terms (apparent diameter of the FOV), but about 85% in sky area. 

[Moonshane]

On DSO's the differences in quality are even smaller than on planets but there are there. It's things on the edge of visibility that are affected most as always.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

On DSO's the differences in quality are even smaller than on planets but there are there. It's things on the edge of visibility that are affected most as always.

True. I found there was a slight difference in transmission and clarity even between two top-rated EPs like the TV Radian and Pentax XF. The latter just showed the Trapezium F star where the former could manage. 

[John]

Are the BST's really that good??

I would expect some sort of step change in image quality for more than 4x the price!!!

I do realise that the following statement may be regarded as bordering on heresy. But, I have the 8mm which I am struggling to love. I'm not saying that it is bad for £50. However, I would be looking for my money back if I had paid over £100.

Paul

What I was trying to get at and what the other posters have said is that there are improvements but they are subtle rather than major step changes as you put it. 

Thats not to say that such improvements are not worth pursuing as we can see by the number of folks who do make the investment in such eyepieces, including myself.

I was just trying to be level headed about what the additional investment actually gets you having used and compared these exotic expensive gems and much more modest but still competent ones

[Nigele2]

Well thank you one and all.  As always interesting thought provoking stuff.  At first I thought "no one is saying - no you need the Devos".  And most seem to agree for a few bucks you get a little more.  And a wider FoV would help with clusters like M35-M38 that I'm studying at the moment.

But reading the posts carefully I am leanng towards waiting till something like an Ethos comes along.  As the step ups give less benefit the higher you go maybe best to look for a big step up.

Of course if a high quality 10-14mm Tele Vue came along at the right price I'm an addict     

[AlexB67]

Nigele. Just my two pennies worth.  Looking at you sig also unless I am missing something. Given the sort of price range you are looking at, have you considered the thought of buying a DOB if you are okay with the size/handling/transport. When you are spending that much with an interest in DSOs, those Newtonian photons are not all that expensive  in comparison  . An 8 inch Dob would capture a  lot more versus something in the 130-150 range, eyepieces aside that is cheaper than an ethos. Of course an ethos in such a DOB would also be nice  no doubt 

[Nigele2]

Nigele. Just my two pennies worth.  Looking at you sig also unless I am missing something. Given the sort of price range you are looking at, have you considered the thought of buying a DOB if you are okay with the size/handling/transport. When you are spending that much with an interest in DSOs, those Newtonian photons are not all that expensive  in comparison  . An 8 inch Dob would capture a  lot more versus something in the 130-150 range, eyepieces aside that is cheaper than an ethos. Of course an ethos in such a DOB would also be nice  no doubt 

Alex stop it!!!

No seriously I really like refractors and for the next 3 years I'm happy with what I have got tube-wise.  We have only a small house in the UK and no garage so space is at a premium.  But I do have a dark spot up a muddy hill not far away, plus a small patio where EP is not that bad, so on the whole good viewing.

After that I will move to Spain (my wife is Spanish)  but up a mountain and not in ex pat country.  Hopefully a small country village with dark skies and a roof patio.  I will most likely then invest in a big tube once we are settled.  The present scopes may not travel to Spain but of course all my beloved EPs will come with me.  So I want to make the most of now but with half an eye to the future 

But thanks for the thought and yes it would make economic sense if I had space.

[Nigele2]

Sorry that should be my patio where LP is not that bad.  It doesn't suffer from a lack of incoming EPs that is for sure  

[AlexB67]

I'll stop it right now Makes sense, good luck 

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Of course, if physical size of a scope is limited, the C8 gives an 8" in a very compact package. It has bagged me around 700 DSOs (the other 100 or so were in bins from the southern hemisphere). Good deal more expensive of course, although I have seen C8 OTAs going for less than an Ethos secondhand. It is lighter and more compact than your 5" tubes.

Just playing the devil's advocate

[Joves]

My line of thinking is that Televue EP's will give you the peace of mind that what you are seeing is about as good as your equipment and sky conditions will provide (there are arguably better, but not by much). If more subtle detail and possibly higher contrast, combined with peace of mind, is what you are after, then go for it. If a completely different image, with not so subtle detail, is what you are hoping for, then I would recommend spending your money elsewhere.

I'm a firm believer in choosing Televue over most other EP's when making a choice between toe eyepieces, but replacing your current eyepiece and expecting the view to be a whole different sight would be a disappointing venture.

[Paul73]

Ellequently put gentlemen.

I shall adjust my expectations accordingly.

Liked Joves' comment about knowing that you have the best view possible. At least then I could concentrate on honing my observing skills rather than blaming my kit. Valuable lesson there.

Paul

[John]

Liked Joves' comment about knowing that you have the best view possible. At least then I could concentrate on honing my observing skills rather than blaming my kit. Valuable lesson there.

Thats the thinking that has driven me to invest in Tele Vue and Pentax over many years. The differences are subtle but, as you say, you can get on with looking rather than worrying whether the eyepiece is getting in the way at all.

My first post in this thread was by way of "expectation management" I guess. Tele Vue plossls were the 1st proper eyepieces I ever bought and my initial expectations were a little unrealistic I suppose so I sold them and then went through a period of trying many other eyepieces as a gradually realised the true but subtle qualities that the Tele Vue's had possessed. Having reached that point I then owned a couple of sets of TV plossls (the older "smooth sides" and then the current design) before getting bitten by the wide field bug and progressing to Naglers and now to the Ethos.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Ellequently put gentlemen.

I shall adjust my expectations accordingly.

Liked Joves' comment about knowing that you have the best view possible. At least then I could concentrate on honing my observing skills rather than blaming my kit. Valuable lesson there.

Paul

My approach has always been more-or-less the reverse: I honed my observing skills on (very competent) Plossls, and only when I noticed their limitations did I upgrade to better kit. I did notice that the arrival of the first really good EP did make me notice deficiencies in the remaining more average quality EPs.

There is no hard an fast rule as to what is best. If you can afford to try the higher-end EPs, by all means do. They can become addictive, however.

[Joves]

I agree, Michael... They can become somewhat addictive.

[Naemeth]

My approach has always been more-or-less the reverse: I honed my observing skills on (very competent) Plossls, and only when I noticed their limitations did I upgrade to better kit. I did notice that the arrival of the first really good EP did make me notice deficiencies in the remaining more average quality EPs.

There is no hard an fast rule as to what is best. If you can afford to try the higher-end EPs, by all means do. They can become addictive, however.

Indeed they can be. I agree with looking at a C8, especially if space is limited. The good thing about good quality eyepieces is that they will last a lifetime of observing without necessarily needing to be upgraded .