TeleVue Price Increase

[N3ptune]

22 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

It's a thieving rip-off, that's what it is! 

Its a cute eyepiece, but there are plenty of quality eyepieces on the market that will give superior performance to the Nag zoom at a fraction of the cost. 

I think they are an illogical purchase for the average income people simply, for me that's all there is to it. 

[Dave Lloyd]

I've never looked through one so I'm not qualified to comment on their quality vs price but at what point do they exceed ones ability to use them to their maximum potential. With my eyes and equipment probably very quickly. 

[John]

I guess the above two posts can apply to any high end astro equipment - Tele Vue, Takahashi, Leica, Zeiss, Pentax, etc, etc. It's all pretty expensive and there are other much less costly alternatives that will deliver a large % of the performance.

Same in other hobbies as well of course. I'm sure the same questions get asked on cycling, hi fi, photography, fishing, guitars and other forums where equipment is an important part of the proceedings.

My brother has just sold one of his bikes for about twice as much as all my eyepieces cost me. He still has a couple more in the garage though ....

 

[estwing]

Get a fast mirror then see whose make of ep's you buy

[jetstream]

9 minutes ago, estwing said:

Get a fast mirror then see whose make of ep's you buy

You got something against little crosses and seagulls Calvin?

[Daniel-K]

On 7/21/2017 at 16:40, Piero said:

I agree with you. TV eyepieces are nice, but they are overpriced in my opinion. 

- TV Delos borrowed many features from Pentax XW, and the latter are £100 cheaper. Optically? likely a match..

- TV Ethos 13mm costs nearly as much as the Docter UWA 12.5mm. The Docter shows some AMD (and less RD at the edge, something I actually prefer) and to my eye is sharper than the Delos 12mm, suggesting that it may be also sharper than the E13.. 

- Nagler Zoom 3-6 costs 2/3 of a Zeiss zoom 25.1-6.7mm. The latter has also a wider field of view and can be integrated with a high quality barlow. 

- Powermate 2.5x costs about as much as the Baader VIP 2x. The latter is way more customisable, and to my eye noticeably sharper.

Just four examples of other brands. Let's not even consider the Chinese competitors 

 

I am not saying that they should decrease the prices at ES levels, but their prices are approaching the top class, whereas their quality remains the same..

where they used in that F6 scope?

im not having a dig, but TV are extremely good in sub F4 scopes and thats what your paying for. IMHO if your using a F6 scope sticking a TV EP in is pointless. stick with BST'S or vixens dont complain about the price if your not using a scope which demands the performance of  a high end EP. 

[F15Rules]

7 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

Hi Chris,

I was speaking specifically about the 3-6 zoom and iimmediately went into Victor Meldrew mode when I read that it had increased to £406, and although its a very nice eyepiece, its sincerely believe its not worth that kind of money. Its not that i feel they dont perform well, its just that there are so many better non-zoom alternatives available. Televue as a company have probably done more for the modern astronomer/stargazer than any other manufacturer ever, but they are no longer the only ones worth considering. Sadly, high end names don't always deliver high end performance. Takahashi is a case in point! Their eyepieces are grossly overpriced and their performance is mediocre. The Tak LE's are poorly designed and many suffer from stray light washing out the view when a bright object is outside the field. Their long focal length LE's and ortho's look nice but the eye lens is set a third of the way down the eyepiece body, forcing the observer to push his eye into the eyepiece so as to get the full field of view. I love Tak scopes but their eyepieces are not worth half the list price. 

Mike, I agree totally that Tak EPs are overpriced new, no doubt about it. But I can't agree on performance: my Hi-LE 3.6 and LE 7.5mm are superb EPs, right up there with my Pentax's.

The other night my 7.5LE was the pick of the bunch on Saturn. I've also used the 18mm,  again it was excellent.

So I buy them used for around £90-£110 and at that price they are great value IMHO.

Dave

[Piero]

17 minutes ago, Daniel-K said:

where they used in that F6 scope?

im not having a dig, but TV are extremely good in sub F4 scopes and thats what your paying for. IMHO if your using a F6 scope sticking a TV EP in is pointless. stick with BST'S or vixens dont complain about the price if your not using a scope which demands the performance of  a high end EP. 

Well, I do notice eyepiece differences at F6 including TV. If you don't, that's good for you so that you can stick with your BST's and don't need to wonder why something you pay as the very high end EPS is not as sharp as the latter. 

[Stu]

4 minutes ago, Piero said:

Well, I do notice eyepiece differences at F6 including TV. If you don't, that's good for you so that you can stick with your BST's and don't need to wonder why something you pay as the very high end EPS is not as sharp as the latter. 

I agree with that Piero. There are other factors such as contrast and scatter that are not related to the off axis performance which apply in longer focal ratios too I think.

[Piero]

Anyway, to clarify my statement, I cannot be bother about how much TV increase the cost of their eyepieces. It's entirely their business (=as work and literally). If one is happy with TV, that's good for him/her as far as I am concern. 

My point was just that to me those BMW's are approaching the cost of Ferrari's, although they are still BMW's. That's all. Everyone is free to do what s/he wants with her/his wallet. 

[Piero]

36 minutes ago, Stu said:

There are other factors such as contrast and scatter that are not related to the off axis performance which apply in longer focal ratios too I think.

Thanks Stu for your example. It goes straight to the point that I mean and I should have stated earlier in my first post.

On axis I can tell the difference between very good eyepieces and the very top. For example, one eyepiece that let me literally confused is the Vixen HR. At 2.4mm it has basically half exit pupil of a 5mm eyepiece. Nothing new here. What is new is that that eyepiece is nearly as bright as my Vixen SLV 5mm... So, is this impossible? If we assume that the Vixen SLV 5mm has a transmission equal to the Vixen HR 2.4mm (99%), then yes, this is not possible. The issue is that we don't know what the transmission for the SLV 5mm is... I did assume this was very high (>97-98%) but after those observations I started doubting. And I doubted even more because something similar also happened with the Zeiss zoom, Docter and VIP...

Light scatter, contrast, colour tint, light transmission can be different on- and off-axis between eyepieces. To spot these differences, a good scope, patience, limit targets, and good seeing/transparency are required. 

This does not mean that TV or SLV are not good. Not at all. It just means that there is still room for improvement. 

[John]

1 hour ago, Piero said:

Thanks Stu for your example. It goes straight to the point that I mean and I should have stated earlier in my first post.

On axis I can tell the difference between very good eyepieces and the very top. For example, one eyepiece that let me literally confused is the Vixen HR. At 2.4mm it has basically half exit pupil of a 5mm eyepiece. Nothing new here. What is new is that that eyepiece is nearly as bright as my Vixen SLV 5mm... So, is this impossible? If we assume that the Vixen SLV 5mm has a transmission equal to the Vixen HR 2.4mm (99%), then yes, this is not possible. The issue is that we don't know what the transmission for the SLV 5mm is... I did assume this was very high (>97-98%) but after those observations I started doubting. And I doubted even more because something similar also happened with the Zeiss zoom, Docter and VIP...

Light scatter, contrast, colour tint, light transmission can be different on- and off-axis between eyepieces. To spot these differences, a good scope, patience, limit targets, and good seeing/transparency are required. 

This does not mean that TV or SLV are not good. Not at all. It just means that there is still room for improvement. 

I've read reports that TV plossls transmission is 97%-98% so I'd have thought the SLV would be close to that.

I've often read that it's not possible for human eyes to reliably differentiate between less than an 8% difference in transmission.

I don't think I'd claim to be able to spot a 2% transmission difference any more than I would the difference between an 1/8th and 1/10th PV wave primary

Just as well my eyepiece testing days are over - I'm not up to it any more !

 

 

[Charic]

18 minutes ago, John said:

Just as well my eyepiece testing days are over - I'm not up to it any more !

Oh No!

Hopefully John you can still enjoy looking through them rather than at them!

[Daniel-K]

1 hour ago, Piero said:

 If you don't, that's good for you so that you can stick with your BST's 

i only use PRO glass. 

[Piero]

11 minutes ago, John said:

I've read report that TV plossls transmission is 97%-98% so I'd have thought the SLV would be close to that.

I've often read that it's not possible for human eyes to reliably differentiate between less than 10% difference in transmission.

I don't think I'd claim to be able to spot a 2% transmission difference any more than I would the difference between an 1/8th and 1/10th PV wave primary

Just as well my eyepiece testing days are over - I'm not up to it any more !

As a very rough rule of thumb, in life science one would often expect more than 10-15% difference to state that a treatment has an effect against a control. (Variability should be considered too though).  

If this 10% difference in transmission is correct in average, this means that the SLV have around 90% transmission.  And interestingly, after 6 months of comparisons between my Vixen SLV 9mm and Delos 8mm with and without powermate 2.5x, the only difference between the two was a bit colour tint (slightly more neutral in the SLV).  The rest was essentially the same, and that's when I started thinking that the SLV's were kind of baby Pentax XW's. And both the SLV and Delos I have/had, are/were better than the TV naglers T6 I had (always talking on axis). 

Possibly, my eyes are different..?  

 

Some comparison between Delos 12mm and Docter 12.5mm: 

- https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/539425-docter-and-delos/page-4#entry7364972 

- https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/539425-docter-and-delos/page-4#entry7367741 

- https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/539425-docter-and-delos/page-4#entry7368321 

- https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/539425-docter-and-delos/page-5#entry7374793 

[jetstream]

I think "real world" transmission or contrast differences are an interesting thing to study. Over on CN I mentioned that the TV 3-6 zoom had lower transmission than some other EP's (including TV) and I'm not so sure a few liked it and questioned the validity of my findings. I stand by my observation to this day and still like my 3-6 NZ for the role I use it in.

[John]

I've no way of measuring the actual transmission of eyepieces and it's not often done as far as I know.

Pentax claim 96% transmission for the XW's which seems reasonable. Nagler T6's have been measured at 96% as well. The TV 20mm plossl was measured at 98.8% a few years back.

I've seen early Radian's measured at just under 90% with the later ones (newer coatings) at 93%. The TV 3-6 zoom came in at a creditable 96.6%.

I strongly suspect that there are factors other than the pure % transmission that can affect the performance we percieve when viewing DSO's though.

Anyway, back on the original topic, some of the TV's seem to have crept up a bit in price which, given the exchange rates around ATM, perhaps is understandable although annoying if you were just about to buy one.

As a side note, the Nagler 22mm T4 (to take a single example) cost £380 in 2000 and costs around £100 more today. Using the Bank of England UK inflation calculator, the retail price today, if it had kept up with inflation, would be £586.00. Well done Tele Vue for keeping prices in check

 

 

 

 

 

 

[scarp15]

1 hour ago, John said:

Just as well my eyepiece testing days are over - I'm not up to it any more !

 

 

Hope all is well John. I managed to inadvertently wack my right (observers) eye with a mallet today, whilst doing some work on the alltotment (clumsy oaf), I could benefit with an eye patch. My first Televue eyepiece was an 11mm  plossl, which I used with my then 8" F10 Celeston SCT. It made a heck of a difference correcting and sharpening the view of Saturn against a black background, an image still embellished on my mind. Not just invariable price increases, but the UK 20% VAT compounds the means to purchase what we might like. My last Televue eyepiece was earlier this year a 4mm DeLite, purchased during a promotional 15% discount period.  Credit to TeleVue for holding a succession of 15% to 20% discount periods on all of their range (although as I recall their last one was on eyepieces only and up to a particular focal length).

[John]

30 minutes ago, scarp15 said:

...I managed to inadvertently wack my right (observers) eye with a mallet today, whilst doing some work on the alltotment (clumsy oaf), I could benefit with an eye patch....

Ouch - that sounds painful - hope all is OK with you too.

 

 

[F15Rules]

3 hours ago, Daniel-K said:

where they used in that F6 scope?

im not having a dig, but TV are extremely good in sub F4 scopes and thats what your paying for. IMHO if your using a F6 scope sticking a TV EP in is pointless. stick with BST'S or vixens dont complain about the price if your not using a scope which demands the performance of  a high end EP. 

Or maybe don't use a low F ratio scope that can't deliver decent images without a corrector or very highly priced eyepieces! ??.

Or better yet get the best scope AND eyepieces that please you and respect people's rights to make their own, (and maybe different) choices☺.

Dave

[Ricochet]

11 hours ago, Daniel-K said:

i only use PRO glass. 

What's your definition of PRO glass? Specialist research grade oculars? Pentax, TV etc? Where do you draw the line? Or does PRO stand for Plastic Resin Ocular? I think was conned into buying a set of those on eBay when I first started out. 

[Alan White]

23 hours ago, Stu said:

There are other factors such as contrast and scatter that are not related to the off axis performance which apply in longer focal ratios too I think.

Have to agree with this comment by Stu, clearly applies to many other makers, the contrast and control of scatter is very important to me.
Some EP do it well others can be sharp but less contrast and control of scatter.

Anyway, this is way off my observing TV had a price increase and were others about to follow?

[newbie alert]

On 22/07/2017 at 08:13, Alan White said:

Dave

Fully agree on your conclusion, probably brexit playing its part.

 

Doesnt brexit involve leaving Europe and having more trade with the US..as in doller to the pound..rather than the Euro??

[Moonshane]

It's kind of irrelevant to me as I have pretty much all I need (maybe one more Delite - 9mm) so the impact will be very small. I tend to buy used if I can but do on principle buy new if I have the funds as I enjoy their product and like to put some funds straight back into the vein so to speak and support their work. Not a scientific test but I find the 6-3mm Nagler zoom looks very dim compared with say a 7mm Delite when held just to the eye. Mine is going nowhere though for the time being at least.

[jabeoo1]

Whatever it is about Televue, these days they are able to effortlessly generate lots of chitter, chatter, banter & murmurs.  I wish I had a company that could ignite the level of enthusiasm within its target audience just by a distributor adjusting a price point !  Maybe the 3-6 Zoom has a place here in the UK to maximise the current seeing conditions? (Which as we know can be abysmal).  The cost of a ~3mm, ~4mm, ~5mm & ~6mm is going to be an outlay of at least £200 whatever way you go. The cost of filling the 0.5mm gaps (also at £50 a pop) makes for a £400 set.  I am not saying its worth £400, but its a great solution to getting high magnification done as a single unit, leaving only 2 more fixed Ep's to cover the other posts.  I personally love it for this reason, as for the price again, it is a little eye-watering.  I wish I had bought one 5 years ago, or grabbed that one off ebay I missed by a whisker at ~£200.