TeleVue Nagler Zoom Review

[DirkSteele]

Considering the the Nagler Zooms have been available for almost two decades, there is a real lack of reviews online, though I often see threads asking about them.  Having bought the 3-6mm zoom as part of my travel set up with my APM LZOS 105/650 triplet back in 2012, I have quite a bit of experience with it (and the shorter focal length sibling, the 2-4mm which I purchased a few years later), so I have decided to put fingers to keyboard and summarise my thoughts on this unusual eyepiece.  Review is on the link below:

http://alpha-lyrae.co.uk/2020/05/16/tele-vue-nagler-zoom-eyepiece-review/

Feedback always appreciated, and I hope those who are curious, find it useful.

Clear skies,

Edited May 16, 2020 by DirkSteele
typo

[johninderby]

I have owned the 2-4 zoom and now have the 3-6 zoom. I find it’s performance to be so close to a top quality ortho that it’s hard to decide which is better and the ability to adjust the magnification to the optimum is invaluable. 

As often noted the only downside is the cost £££££ but as is also often said you get what you pay for. 👍🏻

Edited May 16, 2020 by johninderby

[JeremyS]

As usual, an highly informative review Matthew. Thank you. 

I love my TV NZ 3-6, especially for travelling. Really useful on my 3 month India trip earlier this year.

However, on nights of good seeing my Vixen HR 3.4 just pips it (when set at a similar fl).

I wish you hadn’t said the NZ 2-4 complements the 3-6, tho 🤣

[andrew s]

11 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

As usual, an highly informative review Matthew. Thank you. 

I love my TV NZ 3-6, especially for travelling. Really useful on my 3 month India trip earlier this year.

However, on nights of good seeing my Vixen HR 3.4 just pips it (when set at a similar fl).

I wish you hadn’t said the NZ 2-4 complements the 3-6, tho 🤣

Another purchase @JeremyS? If only you had enough eyes for all you scopes and eyepieces!

Regards Andrew 

[JeremyS]

17 minutes ago, andrew s said:

Another purchase @JeremyS? If only you had enough eyes for all you scopes and eyepieces!

Regards Andrew 

Do you think @Stu would lend me one of his 4?

[Stu]

1 minute ago, JeremyS said:

Do you think @Stu would lend me one of his 4?

I seem to need all mine Jeremy!

[John]

What a great review Matthew

I've owned a couple of the 3-6mm Nagler zooms and currently I have the 2-4mm version.

For some odd reason I didn't take to the 3-6mm ones but now I really love my 2-4mm. They performed consistently well though so perhaps it's me that has changed !

I didn't think that I would use the 2-4mm that much but my refractors seem very able to soak up high magnifications so it's used practically every time I have a refractor out and reasonably often with my 12 inch dob as well.

If a 3-6mm came up I might be tempted again - there is something about their form and function that is very appealing

What drew me to these zooms was an old 2004 Tom Trusock review where he compared the 3-6mm with TMB Supermonocentrics. The latter did just about beat the Nagler zoom for planetary observing but it was very close I seem to recall and that made me think that the zoom flexibility (which is seamless of course despite the click stops) pulled the overall verdict back towards the Tele Vue, even if not all the way there. Remarkable 5 element design that Al Nagler managed to come up with.

Here is Tom's review for any that are interested:

https://www.cloudynights.com/documents/tmb2.pdf

 

[JeremyS]

10 minutes ago, John said:

What a great review Matthew

I've owned a couple of the 3-6mm Nagler zooms and currently I have the 2-4mm version.

For some odd reason I didn't take to the 3-6mm ones but now I really love my 2-4mm. They performed consistently well though so perhaps it's me that has changed !

I didn't think that I would use the 2-4mm that much but my refractors seem very able to soak up high magnifications so it's used practically every time I have a refractor out and reasonably often with my 12 inch dob as well.

If a 3-6mm came up I might be tempted again - there is something about their form and function that is very appealing

What drew me to these zooms was an old 2004 Tom Trusock review where he compared the 3-6mm with TMB Supermonocentrics. The latter did just about beat the Nagler zoom for planetary obsering but it was very close I seem to recall and that made me think that the zoom flexibility (which is seamless of course despite the click stops) pulled the overall verdict back towards the Tele Vue, even if not all the way there. Remarkable 5 element design that Al Nagler managed to come up with.

Here is Tom's review for any that are interested:

https://www.cloudynights.com/documents/tmb2.pdf

 

That’s interesting you got on with one and not the other, John. Any particular reason?

[johninderby]

I didn’t get on with the 2-4 zoom and prefered the zoom range of the 3-6 but that was probably more to do with the scopes I had at the time.

Edited May 16, 2020 by johninderby

[John]

8 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

That’s interesting you got on with one and not the other, John. Any particular reason?

I didn't own both at the same time so I suspect it was more that I was going through a period when I wanted more AFoV and a larger eye lens than the zoom offered.

Maybe I've "grown up" a bit since then

I think the performance of the two is pretty much identical.

 

[DirkSteele]

I guess it goes to show, a bit like binoculars, eyepiece enjoyment is also a slightly personal thing. One observers treasure is another’s trash.

[DirkSteele]

32 minutes ago, John said:

 

Here is Tom's review for any that are interested:

https://www.cloudynights.com/documents/tmb2.pdf

 

That is a fantastic comparison review. Never come across that before. Tom really knew how to test them and write it up.

[Stu]

Thanks @DirkSteele I’ll have a proper read later. I’ve always liked my 3 to 6 Nag zoom and use it a lot these days; it split Zeta Herc for me last night in the 4” Vixen Fluorite, so must be pretty sharp.

I do quite fancy one of the 2 to 4’s now, either for the FC100DC or the Genesis, should be good in either. Finding one is the hard bit I guess.

[RT65CB-SWL]

18 hours ago, DirkSteele said:

Considering the the Nagler Zooms have been available for almost two decades...

Crikey! have they been out that long? - I will have to take my 3-6mm to the next Antiques Road Show for a valuation.

I must have been one of the first in GB/UK to buy one. I remember doing a split-payment to Venturescope. The proprietor was very understanding when I made payment, (I do not think the 'bank manger' at the time was impressed; i.e. my girlfriend at the time; as she had no interest in astronomy whatsoever or little else, apart from me paying her utility bills). Fortunately she was not with me when I did  pay for it.

Seriously, they are tight on eye-relief, a bit like my 6mm Ortho's. The views are are tack sharp throughout the 3-6mm range, though I do get the odd reflection depending on eye placement. I have not had any issues of mine freezing up when changing the focal length, as the CN reviewer says his does when cold. It is one of the the few eyepieces in my astro-kit that is not secondhand.

Edited May 17, 2020 by Philip R

[John]

54 minutes ago, Philip R said:

Seriously, they are tight on eye-relief, a bit like my 6mm Ortho's.....

The Nagler zooms have 10mm of eye relief. A 6mm ortho has around 5 mm.

 

 

 

[Alan White]

The one eyepiece that remains constant in my case is my 3-6 zoom,
it just does what it says on the tin and does it very well indeed, so well it feels most unthreatened.

I did have to chuckle reading Matthews review, which is as well written as normal and very informative.
The chuckle came from the ‘Naked Astronomy’,
I suppose you were in the desert and darkness after all, so whatever floats your boat fella 😂

Edited May 17, 2020 by Alan White

[Mark at Beaufort]

Brilliant review Matthew. Like John I owned the 3-6 zoom which I sold preferring the larger FOV and eye relief of the Ethos range. In hindsight that was possibly a mistake.

[DirkSteele]

56 minutes ago, Alan White said:

The one eyepiece that remains constant in my case is my 3-6 zoom,
it just does what it says on the tin and does it very well indeed, so well it feels most unthreatened.

I did have to chuckle reading Matthews review, which is as well written as normal and very informative.
The chuckle came from the ‘Naked Astronomy’,
I suppose you were in the desert and darkness after all, so whatever floats your boat fella 😂

Whoops! Got to love the typos. Even reading it through several times, some still slip past. Perhaps it was Freudian? 😉

[Alan White]

9 minutes ago, DirkSteele said:

Whoops! Got to love the typos. Even reading it through several times, some still slip past. Perhaps it was Freudian? 😉

Yep, typos, the bain of my life.

[John]

One thing I would add is that I use the 21.5mm-7.2mm zoom + Baader 2.25x barlow combination a lot for high power observing. The optical performance of that is pretty good - it gives me a 9.5mm - 3.2mm zoom. Probably not quite as good as the Nagler 3-6 would be but pretty close and for about 30% of the price. 

[DirkSteele]

3 minutes ago, John said:

One thing I would add is that I use the 21.5mm-7.2mm zoom + Baader 2.25x barlow combination a lot for high power observing. The optical performance of that is pretty good - it gives me a 9.5mm - 3.2mm zoom. Probably not quite as good as the Nagler 3-6 would be but pretty close and for about 30% of the price. 

 

That looks nice. Would quite like to give that a try.

[jock1958]

Cheers Matthew @DirkSteele an excellent review of these quality eyepieces.

Bought my 3-6 Nagler Zoom off this forum last year and has been the mainstay in my high powered department ever since. 

Those reassuring 'clicks' between powers make it so easy to use, I've found it brilliant on double stars, globular clusters (M13 especially), moon & planets!

Apart from magnification would the 2-4 NZ give you much more than the 3-6 NZ? 

[Alan White]

I should add that my Nagler 3-6 has allowed me to start to see some marking in Venus atmosphere,
taken 2-3 years but it shows it, so honed observing skills and a fine eyepiece combined.
 

Edited May 17, 2020 by Alan White
typos of course missed a t out!

[RT65CB-SWL]

A few years back I did a 'swap'. My 3-6mm for the 2-4mm, for a few weeks from a member of my local astro. society/club. The member used his 2-4mm with the TV60. We did the 'swap' to see which was the better one! - I tried the 2-4mm in my TV Ranger. It was good, but not as good as the 3-6mm in my opinion.

I am not a zoom e/p advocate; but the 3-6mm ticks the boxes. I am contemplating the Baader mklll or mklV 'zoom kit' as my next major purchase.

I have a cheap/unbranded 7-21mm and a cheap/unbranded 18mm WA e/p that were purchased from AstroBoot. I mainly use these when I travel light or 'white-light' solar observing with a solar wedge in the TV Ranger.

Edited May 19, 2020 by Philip R

[DirkSteele]

2 hours ago, jock1958 said:

Cheers Matthew @DirkSteele an excellent review of these quality eyepieces.

Bought my 3-6 Nagler Zoom off this forum last year and has been the mainstay in my high powered department ever since. 

Those reassuring 'clicks' between powers make it so easy to use, I've found it brilliant on double stars, globular clusters (M13 especially), moon & planets!

Apart from magnification would the 2-4 NZ give you much more than the 3-6 NZ? 

Just a bit extra magnification really. I bought for my Tak FS-60 which could easily support the extra power, but also used it with my FC-76 as well.