Nagler zoom 3-6 v Ortho

[Timebandit]

                Hello. I am wondering how the nagler zoom performance is when compared to the Ortho eyepieces. My main concern is the quality of view of detail on planets / moon at higher magnification. Obviously a wider field  of view is helpful in an eyepiece but the main priority is the amount of detail that can be observed at higher magnification and the crispness of this image. From my experience of televue they do make some quality products. But I am just wondering if what seemingly is a glorified eyepiece in a barlow so to speak can hold its own, or can clearly be superior to Ortho eyepiece that are not so expensive (I know with the nagler zoom you are getting numerous magnifications so in essence i suppose it could be considered good value). Obviously there are a lot of members out there with a great deal more experience and a great deal more eyepieces than me who have probably spent hours observing with quality eyepieces that would either be able to answer this question definitely or give an interesting opinion to the experiences with nagler zoom against orthos . The type of Ortho that I would be interested in hearing your views how the nagler zoom performs against are the likes of hutech ,Fujiyama , BCO, BGO , circle t ?

 From  my knowledge I think the ZAO and TMB supermono are considered  probably some of the best Orthos around.  How does the nagler zoom stack up against top class eyepieces like these ?  Is it a worthy competitor or does the nagler just get completely out classed by this type of Ortho.

 Thank you for taking the time to read this and hopefully some interesting views will be posted about these high magnifications eyepieces and how they perform☺

[John]

I've owned both the Nagler zooms (3-6mm and 2-4mm) and I have compared their performance with quality orthoscopic eyepieces of the equivilent focal lengths.

I've also owned a TMB Supermono 5mm so I'm aware how those perform as well.

My assessment is that under the normal sort of viewing conditions that we get in the UK, the Nagler zooms perform pretty much as well as a good orthoscopic but have the benefit of more eye relief and the instantly variable focal length of course. If the viewing conditions are good to excellent then the best orthoscopics show a little less light scatter around bright objects and present a slightly "cooler" image.

Under the very best viewing conditons (ie: perhaps 10% of viewing sessions lets say) I found that the TMB Supermono would allow the subtlest planetary details to be glimpsed a little more easily than a quality orthoscopic such as a Baader GO or University Optics HD but the differences there were very slight and the same details and contrast were visible in both eyepiece types.

I didn't hang on to the Nagler 3-6mm zooms that I've owned for other reasons but I've found my current Nagler 2-4mm an excellent high power eyepiece especially with my refractors which have focal lengths from 663mm to 1200mm. Despite my fondness for orthos (I don't wear glasses when observing of course !) I don't think I'd go back to them over the Nagler zoom now and might try another 3-6mm at some point although I do have other eyepieces covering those focal lengths.

In summary I feel the Nagler zooms are little gems and any tiny performance differences, for me, are more than made up by the facility to instantly change the focal length to tease the best from the target / conditions. They are not low cost items but the range of focal lengths covered offsets the initial costs somewhat.

Edit:

It's worth noting that the Nagler zooms don't bear any resemblance to the Nagler UWA 82 degree eyepieces in optical design - they are simpler (5 elements) and have a consistent 50 degree AFoV across their zoom range.

Edit 2:

The TMB Supermonocentric is a 3 element design with all 3 elements cemented in a single group. It's not an Abbe Orthoscopic design although they are largely orthoscopic in terms of optical characteristics. The AFoV is around 30 degrees.

 

 

 

 

[spaceboy]

Ortho are hard to beat regards sharpness and contrast of views. I chose fujiyama orthos over my TV 3-6 zoom and sold the zoom. That said I have recently purchased another 3-6 zoom 3 years later due to the versatility the zoom offers at high magnification. The reasoning behind it is 1) better eye relief 2) 50° fov 3) dial a mag for seeing 4) it works out cheaper to buy one zoom over several quality fixed focal length EPs 5) not many ortho go as short as 3mm and if they did I'm guessing it would be like looking through the eye of a needle 6) the views are VERY close to the views of an ortho.

It is worth noting that unlike the time I sold the zoom in preference of the orthos I have no intension of letting the orthos go now I have another zoom.

[faulksy]

if you want a ortho with 70* try the pentax xw i find them stonking and good eye relief, but some say they have black outs

[Highburymark]

My high power options are a Nagler 3-6, Leica ASPH zoom barlowed with Baader VIP and Delos 6mm. Apart from a narrower fov and shorter eye relief, neither of which are a problem with high mag planetary work, the Nagler delivers views that are just as rewarding as the others - had wonderful views of Mars and Saturn with the Nagler at 3mm - 166x - in my Equinox this summer. It's a remarkable little eyepiece - but I have not compared it with an ortho - I just find high power orthos and plossls incredibly difficult to use. 

[Timebandit]

Hello. And thanks for the reply and information on the nagler zoom. It does seem a very good performer high magnification eyepiece.

I was seriously thinking to bite the bullet and buy one next week. But as always in this hobby things come onto the market at the most unexpected times . And some Pentax xw came up for sale. I see fulksy suggest these and it sticks in my memory from an article before that they are supposed to be a highly rated eyepiece. Therefore i made the decision to purchase these instead. I think I will be happy with the 7mm and 10mm as these are the sort of magnifications that I will use a great deal more than the really high magnification of the nagler zoom. So unfortunately the nagler zoom will have to be put on the back burner for a while. Hopefully the pentax xw will be worth it.  

[John]

I've been using Pentax XW's for a couple of years now at 3.5mm and 5mm and more recently have acquired the 7mm and 10mm as well. They are really excellent - I think of them as 70 degree orthoscopics with a comfy 20mm of eyerelief and a lovely big, inviting eye lens  

I think you will be pleased with your aquisitions.