Do you use a Zoom and if so, why?

[Highburymark]

1 minute ago, Alan White said:

Just the reason I asked my question Mark.
Wondering how minimal an EP collection you can have with quality views assured?

Perfect travel kit - One low power EP - say 24mm Panoptic or ES. Decent midrange zoom, and the little Nagler zoom. If we weren't so addicted to eyepiece collecting, these three would cover most bases ?

[jabeoo1]

1 hour ago, Alan White said:

Just the reason I asked my question Mark.
Wondering how minimal an EP collection you can have with quality views assured?

Here in the UK very likely to be assured, given the limited opportunity and seeing conditions.  If I lived in the Atacama Dessert then I would consider otherwise  

[25585]

1 hour ago, Alan White said:

Just the reason I asked my question Mark.
Wondering how minimal an EP collection you can have with quality views assured?

Less FOV & eye relief on zooms. They will also always be a compromise over prime eps - but arguably have a fun factor only zooms can give. I bought the Pentax because of reviews being favourable, and liking my XWs enough - also covering focal lengths beyond my 10mm XW. It has the edge over a Vixen LV/Tele Vue 8-24 I tried once.

Volume & weight apart, zooms when travelling mean less financial loss in accident, theft or mis-directed luggage etc

[Stu]

24 minutes ago, 25585 said:

Less FOV & eye relief on zooms

Overall true, but the Leica has 18mm eye relief and between 60 and 80 degrees afov which stacks up pretty well.

[25585]

1 minute ago, Stu said:

Overall true, but the Leica has 18mm eye relief and between 60 and 80 degrees afov which stacks up pretty well.

That is very impressive. Better eye relief than Leica binoculars usually give! How is it for eye placement tolerance?

[Mark at Beaufort]

I have tried a number of zooms over the years Hyperion Zoom Mk 2 (good but got black paint flakes inside), Pentax XF 6.5-19.5 (had two - mainly for binoviewers but did not really work - very good for solar), Nagler 3-6mm zoom (felt the eye relief was too narrow - I don't wear glasses) and finally the TeleVue 8-24mm Zoom (still have it - really good - excellent with my PST).

My quick grab and go is my Heritage 130P and my main EPs for this scope is 24mm ES68, TeleVue 8-24 and a Baader 2.25X barlow.

[Piero]

30 minutes ago, 25585 said:

They will also always be a compromise over prime eps.

I disagree and I don't even see any basis behind this affirmation, except than a personal opinion. 

[25585]

This is a good review of zooms, including the TV & Vixen (that look very similar!)

http://www.astrosurf.com/luxorion/reports-tvzoom.htm

[Stu]

18 minutes ago, 25585 said:

That is very impressive. Better eye relief than Leica binoculars usually give! How is it for eye placement tolerance?

Very good, no issues

[AdeKing]

I use a Zoom with both of my grab and go scopes. 

A Lunt 7.2-21.5mm Zoom with the ZS66 and a Bader Mk IV with the ST102.

I mainly use them for convenience so I don't have to carry a case full of eyepieces.

I know that people say that the zoom eyepieces are a compromise and maybe they are to those used to more expensive glass than myself, but I have no complaints about my zooms and the convenience wins hands down.

Ade

[Floater]

4 hours ago, Pig said:

May be you should consider letting me have it ?

PM sent. But first time I’ve used the ‘squiggly lip’ emoji thingie! Hope it means what I hope it means ...

[jetstream]

7 hours ago, Pig said:

I use the Leica ASPH on my frac ...... the Nagler 3-6 is a fantastic piece of kit ? I like the convenience of a zoom for those hassle free kind of sessions ? they are also very useful for fine tuning the alignment with goto scopes.

Shaun, how did the original Leica zoom you had compare to the Leica Aspheric? I've heard their original narrow zoom was excellent...

[Stu]

31 minutes ago, Floater said:

PM sent. But first time I’ve used the ‘squiggly lip’ emoji thingie! Hope it means what I hope it means ...

I'll pretend I didn't see any of that but......

[Piero]

1 hour ago, 25585 said:

This is a good review of zooms, including the TV & Vixen (that look very similar!)

http://www.astrosurf.com/luxorion/reports-tvzoom.htm

 

Maybe it was a good review 15 years ago, but is certainly outdated.

Besides, the eyepiece world has also moved on from the "ideal competitors" (as they are referred to in that review): TV Radian 14mm and Pentax 14 mm SMC XL.

[Pig]

31 minutes ago, jetstream said:

Shaun, how did the original Leica zoom you had compare to the Leica Aspheric? I've heard their original narrow zoom was excellent...

Hiya Gerry ..... The original Leica (vario) I had was great visually and very compact, it sure packed a punch on all our solar system buddies. In fact it is what inspired me to buy another Leica, the only differences betwitx the two are the extra FOV and smoother focusing the ASPH has ? The range was slightly different also.

[Highburymark]

1 hour ago, 25585 said:

That is very impressive. Better eye relief than Leica binoculars usually give! How is it for eye placement tolerance?

Great - adjustable eyeguard and very comfortable. Performs like an XW or Delos zoom. Only negative is some owners have reported brightness at edge of fov - I've only seen this once - during a humid night in Spain. Otherwise a perfects eyepiece

[John]

I found the Leica comfortable to use but the fiddling around with the Baader VIP barlow to get the short focal lengths I needed eventually became annoying rather than fun I found plus the "form factor" of the barlowed unit was starting to get ungainly when I achieved the amplifying factor that I was seeking. The optical performance of the zoom was generally excellent when used in it's "native" form and when barlowed but I did find that there were some circumstances where my Pentax XW's and, perhaps more surprisingly, the Nagler 2-4 zoom, showed things just a little easier than the zoom did, notably splitting Sirus and observing the moons of Neptune and Uranus. These are "pushing the envelope" challenges for me at home so I feel a good test of optical quality. The Leica was not far behind the XW's and the N zoom on these but I just had to work that much harder, be more patent to get the glimpses, and could not hold these targets for as long with the zoom as I could with the XW's and N zoom. Not a big difference but coupled with the hassle factor (for me) of getting the barlowing right, enough for me to decide to move the zoom and the barlow to a new owner, who was very pleased with it I'm happy to say

Thanks to the used equipment market I only needed to invest a relatively few £'s to gain this experience and I'm glad that I did having read frequently about the Leica ASPH zoom here and on the the CN forum over the past few years. It was an itch that I needed to scratch

"YMMV" really does need to be said with this experience, of course

 

[Alan White]

What started off as an innocent enquiry has now turned into another very expensive want, hmmmm.

As a keen terrestrial photographer I highly rate Leica, Zeiss, Nikon, Pentax lenses and now see a single zoom may be a good but expensive option.

Mixed with my burning desire for a Tak, Berlebach etc.and a paupers Budget it might take a while.

So far I look to have set off a flurry of Nagler zoom sales and a lot of talk about other zooms, not bad for wet and snowy Sunday afternoon.

 

 

[Highburymark]

13 minutes ago, John said:

I found the Leica comfortable to use but the fiddling around with the Baader VIP barlow to get the short focal lengths I needed eventually became annoying rather than fun I found plus the "form factor" of the barlowed unit was starting to get ungainly when I achieved the amplifying factor that I was seeking. The optical performance of the zoom was generally excellent when used in it's "native" form and when barlowed but I did find that there were some circumstances where my Pentax XW's and, perhaps more surprisingly, the Nagler 2-4 zoom, showed things just a little easier than the zoom did, notably splitting Sirus and observing the moons of Neptune and Uranus. These are "pushing the envelope" challenges for me at home so I feel a good test of optical quality. The Leica was not far behind the XW's and the N zoom on these but I just had to work that much harder, be more patent to get the glimpses, and could not hold these targets for as long with the zoom as I could with the XW's and N zoom. Not a big difference but coupled with the hassle factor (for me) of getting the barlowing right, enough for me to decide to move the zoom and the barlow to a new owner, who was very pleased with it I'm happy to say

Thanks to the used equipment market I only needed to invest a relatively few £'s to gain this experience and I'm glad that I did having read frequently about the Leica ASPH zoom here and on the the CN forum over the past few years. It was an itch that I needed to scratch

"YMMV" really does need to be said with this experience, of course

 

Interesting John. Agree about the VIP - not as user friendly as the Leica extender

[John]

8 minutes ago, Highburymark said:

Interesting John. Agree about the VIP - not as user friendly as the Leica extender

I was considering purchasing a Leica extender but by then I think my enthusiasm for the zoom had waned slightly so it was difficult to pursuade myself to invest a further largish chunk of money

 

[jetstream]

High mag views of Jupiter with the Leica zoom is a sight to behold. Its tone compliments this planet very well IMHO and has held over 400x sharp in the 15" dob under good seeing. My 3-6 Nagler zoom is a warm toned eyepiece that suits many targets well-DSO excepted, its poor on these- and lacks the degree of "sharpness" or fine color differentiation that the Leica offers. The ice toned Zeiss offers the best sharpness in my telescopes revealing fine detail in Saturn's rings that the others could not.

All this said, I love Izar in the 3-6 zoom, its presentation is really nice and is now in the H130's eyepiece case as it excels in this scope (too).

[iPeace]

I use zooms for high mags on not-quite-sure nights and mid-range for general observing in Galileo mode, just finding out what's out there for myself. They save on space and weight for travel. And they're fun! Great for terrestrial observing as well.

I had a Pentax XL, which was very nice but to my eyes not much better than the Baader Mk. IV. The Baader is smaller and lighter, so I passed the Pentax on. I now have two Baaders, a 2-4 Nag and a 3-6 Nag. I certainly will use the Baader in my 150 Mak (lunar), while they all get used in the TV-85, the TV-60 and the Borg 71FL.

I seem to be settling in to using certain fixed focal lengths with certain scopes, though, so I regard the zooms as additional tools. Conversely, they would very likely be last to go...

[25585]

Pentax zooms are meant for their spotting scopes having magnifications for each focal length on their barrels. I have not seen or tried the XF but some here may have. 

 

[F15Rules]

13 hours ago, jetstream said:

Shaun, how did the original Leica zoom you had compare to the Leica Aspheric? I've heard their original narrow zoom was excellent...

If by "original narrow zoom" you mean the Leica Vario, with a range of c7-22mm, I owned one of those and thought it was very good. Quite lightweight and easy to use, mine came also with a 2" nosepiece as well as  1.25".

I wasn't wholly convinced by the robustness of construction, (was similar to  the Baader zoom buildwise, maybe a tad better), but to be fair I never had any problems with it.

Optically it was excellent and it was parfocal from either end of the scale to within about 1mm.

I think the aspheric came along with a 60-80 degree fov, which was much larger than the Vario's 38-68. A very nice zoom all round, and much cheaper than the aspheric. I think I sold mine over 3 years ago for around £260☺.

Dave

[Highburymark]

1 hour ago, 25585 said:

Pentax zooms are meant for their spotting scopes having magnifications for each focal length on their barrels. I have not seen or tried the XF but some here may have. 

 

I think virtually all of the top rate zooms were designed for spotting scopes. Much bigger market than astronomy. XF zoom - great for solar, otherwise disappointing. There is another slightly cheaper Pentax zoom available now too - but haven't read any reports yet.