Nagler 31mm ep

[djpaul]

 

Does anyone here own a Nagler 31mm ?

Thoughts on this eyepiece would be great.

It seems to be the ultimate stargazing eyepiece to own for wide views according to most sites i have looked on.

 

Paul

[Paz]

I've got one of these and have no complaints! I use it with a f5 reflector and it gives amazing views.

The 31mm is big and heavy but there's not much you can do about that if you want a wide apparent field and a long focal length. Most of my eyepieces for use with the f5 reflector are Delos which are quite a bit lighter.

The eye relief is naturally good at 19mm - long eye relief was a prerequisite for me - hence Delos and a 22mm Type 4 making up the rest of my set.

They are not cheap - I stalked the second hand ads for a very long time before I managed to get one at a second hand price  - after being beaten to it more than once by other equally determined astro-colleagues it was a case of seeing an ad come up in ABS, and then immediately scrambling a message to the seller as fast as I could type!

 

[John]

I own a Nagler 31. I've owned it for quite a few years and used it with lots of scopes. My favourite views with it are of very large deep sky objects under a dark sky with my F/6.5 102mm ED refractor where the big Nagler shows a 3.8 degree true field - wide enough to fit the whole of the Veil Nebula in the same field of view.

The Nagler 31 is very heavy but then so are all the well corrected 30-something mm ultra-wide field 2" eyepieces. It's also very expensive. There are at least a couple of other contenders, at lower cost, which are worth considering if you are looking for this type of eyepiece:

- Explore Scientific 30mm 82 degree (compares very well with the Nagler 31 by all accounts)

- William Optics UWAN / Skywacher Nirvana 28mm 82 degree

Probably other competitors as well.

Don't under estimate the imact that eyepieces such as this can have on the balance of your scope and on the focuser when the scope is pointing anywhere near the zenith. The Nagler 31 weighs around 1kg / 2.2 lbs.

With the moderate light pollution that I have to contend with, I find a slightly shorter focal length eyepiece is often more effective on deep sky objects even if a little ultimate field width is sacrificed. Worth thinking about if you have LP to contend with.

 

[djpaul]

i will be using it with a 120mm refractor f7.5 ed scope 

to replace my 32mm panaview

paul

[djpaul]

I was considering a 35mm panoptic ?

But now considering the 31mm nagler for more mag and more or less the same fov with my scope

[iPeace]

1 hour ago, djpaul said:

i will be using it with a 120mm refractor f7.5 ed scope 

to replace my 32mm panaview

paul

I used the 31 Nagler with the 120ED - great views. What John says about the weight of it is important. Not to discourage, just be aware.

[djpaul]

Hi again all

John i'm sure when i started off i bought a set of televue plossels from you 3 yaers back ...well those have all since been sold other than the Powermate.

An N31 would replace my Panaview 32mm 

Considering the weight i will look into that

Paul

 

[Davey-T]

I have a 31mm Nagler and 21mm Ethos which give similar results but maybe prefer the Ethos from my home and 31T5 from a nice dark site but not much to choose, also the Ethos is even heavier than the N31.

Dave

[MarsG76]

Yes, I have the 31mm Nagler. It is a big and heavy eyepiece but the views through it are amazing... Large FOV, large pupil size and crystal creal and sharp almost edge to edge.

The views through it of large nabulae, especially when using a UHC filter are breath taking.

I complement it with s 2X power mate and the 17mm Ethos. And between those two I do not have a favorite, both of those eyepieces are getting a workout equally in my 14" during a DSO observing session.

The other great thing is views of the moon.... full disc and very good contrast and detail, especially when used with a ND and polarizing filter.

Its expensive but worth it, I wouldn't swap any of them for anything else.

 

[swamp thing]

I have one.

If you are after immense fields of view the big Nagler won't let you down. If you are after a lightweight eyepiece, it will.

IOW seriously nice piece of glass but seriously heavy  .......and expensive.

The competitors John mentions are well worth considering. I've tried both and they compare very well with the Nagler.

[25585]

On 04/06/2018 at 23:24, djpaul said:

I was considering a 35mm panoptic ?

But now considering the 31mm nagler for more mag and more or less the same fov with my scope

The 35mm Panoptic is a great eyepiece. It is cheaper and lighter. If you have access to dark skies the 41mm Panoptic will give a larger field of view akin to the 31 Nagler, but it is heavy like the Nagler.

[ollypenrice]

Our club used to have a 31 Nagler in the UK. In my 10 inch Meade SCT I found it rather hard work, from memory, and preferred the 35 Panoptic. For me the Nagler needed very careful eye positioning and had occasional black out effects as you moved your eye, as you do with such eyepieces. I didn't get on with it. Maybe it would be a good idea to try one, given the cost.

(It makes a great planetary eyepiece, though, if  you have a focal length of 6.4 metres! Hehheh, my last look through a 31 Nagler was at Jupiter in the 0.8 metre Ritchey Chétien at the Observatoire des Baronnies.)

?lly

[John]

The Nagler 31 does take some getting used to, I agree. If you use one regularly it very quickly becomes 2nd nature and the rewards are worth the (small) effort. It's a classic eyepiece IMHO and I'm hanging on to mine despite the Ethos 21 getting more use due to my LP issues. I can still recall the 1st time I saw a Nagler 31 (about 20 years ago) and my disbelief that this massive thing was still an eyepiece

Back then I never thought I'd actually own one someday. I'm glad that did happen though

 

 

 

[S.A.M]

A brilliant eye piece, comes at a cost unfortunately!  If you can afford one (I got mind second hand) I would recommend it, works well with short refractors.

Peter

[alan potts]

I too have owned the 31mm for a good few years and have used it in many scopes. I really don't see how I can enlarge on what fellow Mod John had to say, my views would really be just a copy/paste. I also use a 35mm Panoptic which is about my oldest eyepiece, not much wrong with that either.

I did have a 30mm Meade UWA in the place of the Nagler and this too is a very good eyepiece and heavier, it was only when the scopes got fast that you could tell them apart and even then we were talking subtle differences, the Nagler is a very expensive eyepiece but I have only bought it the once and it was secondhand, If I did wish to sell it I would easily get my money back.

I did write a review on the Meade 30mm and the Nagler 31mm about 5 years ago which will be deep in the review section somewhere.

[Timebandit]

 

 

The 31 Nag, this takes me back. I wanted one of these a few years back but new they were just to much cash for me to justify. I did try to get a second hand one, but these were also going at very high prices.

So an alternative was started to get looked into The 28mm WO uwan was getting some very good feedback and reviews. Luckily a very good condition used example came up ,to which I managed to acquire. A very good performer IMO and was so much cheaper. Looking at today's prices of the 31Nags it is eye watering. If you want a better bang for buck ,then the WO 28 uwan or SW Nirvana (same eyepiece I understand) are certainly worth consideration IMO 

 

 

 

[25585]

ES 30mm 82 deg, on paper, has a few mm more eye relief than Nagler's wallet bomb. I would be interested to know if it allows easier eye positioning tnan the 31.

[scarp15]

I think that might be the other way round Richard, eye relief is 19mm for 31mm nag and around 12-14mm ES 20mm. Eye placement with the 31mm nagler I find to be very comfortable, an eyepiece that works well with each of my scopes. Exit pupil can be a consideration, dark sky use is necessary. I particularly enjoy this for faint diffuse nebula, such as the Merope and other associated nebula in M45 and filtered for the Veil. The Andromeda group are also compositionally accommodated inside the field of view.  

Just read eye relief is 22mm for ES, so my mistake here, although due to recessed top lens element I understand reduces the effective E.R for glasses wearers by up to 9-10mm. 

[25585]

No 30. FLO site shows 22mm er.

[scarp15]

Yes as corrected, quoting from here

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/597469-explore-scientific-30mm-82-series-eye-relief/

 

[John]

Both eyepieces have heavily concave eye lenses as do many UWA designs. If you add a recessed eye lens to that, otherwise generous eye relief can become miserly.

 

[rl]

+1 for the UWAN 28mm also known as the Nirvana 28mm?

These change hands for about £150-£175 secondhand and offer most of the performance of the 31N. They still weigh about 1kg though...

Mine works fine with a 12" F/4 newtonian + coma corrector, well corrected to the edge.

The exit face is massive...there is a knack to looking in with your head slightly askew..but all these massive low power eyepieces seem to have some sort of peculiarity.

Just my 50c...

RL

[Hobbes]

It's also worth considering exit pupil when looking at competing widefield eyepieces. This for me is where the 31 Nagler and 35 panoptic lose out to the 21 Ethos. It's not really a problem for the 120 ED but as soon as you start ramping up the aperture and dropping your focal ratio you very quickly get to the point where you need to have very young eyes to accommodate the exit pupil on the Nagler and Panoptic. As these eyepieces tend to be a "forever" purchase it is worth considering the future (or in my case the present)

[Louis D]

1 hour ago, 25585 said:

No 30. FLO site shows 22mm er.

Remember, that is design eye relief measured from the center of the eye lens which is both concave and recessed.  You'd be lucky to have 12mm by the looks of it.

If you can find an original style 30mm ES-82 with the mushroom top or the 30mm Meade 5000 UWA (identical once decloaked), they have a measured usable eye relief of at least 17mm.  I find it quite easy to hold the view in my 30mm ES-82 original style once you tip your head sideways and swivel your eye to accommodate the wide top of it.  It is much easier to hold the view in it than in either the 12mm or 17mm Nagler T4s.  It is not as well corrected to the edge as either of those, however.  It is far superior to the cheap 30mm Wide Scan III clones as far as edge correction and flatness of field.  In the center, though, I'd give the edge to the WS III as being sharper.  The 30mm ES-82 just isn't pinpoint sharp anywhere, unlike their ES-92 line which is pinpoint sharp from edge to edge.  It may be that the newer 30mm ES-82 is better corrected than the original style, but with its greatly recessed eye lens, I wouldn't be able to judge it because I have such bad astigmatism when viewing through 30mm eyepieces that I need to wear eyeglasses, and I wouldn't be able to with it.

[25585]

The trouble with catalogue ep photos is they do not show the eye lens, just side profile. 

Concave and recessed as shown from pics below.