Baader Hyperions V Televue Naglers

[Doc]

I'm in a dilema of what to do. I have made up my mind to concentrate on visual only and leave imaging until much later mainly due to work. I want to have a selection of good eyepieces. My dilema is this....

My ideal eyepiece collection would be a Nagler set...

31T5 £459

22T4 £ 369

17T4 £299

12T5 £279

7T6 £225

A total of £1634. Now this is going to take me at least 5 years to get.

Or a Baader Hyperion collection....

5mm £103

8mm Already have

13mm £103

17mm £103

21mm Already have

24mm £103

31mm £159

Total £ 571

This would only take maybe 2 years to get.

The above eyepieces would be used in a 16 LB at F4.5.

My question is...

Having never looked through a Nagler

How much better are Nagler's then hyperions. I know one has 82 degree's the other 68 degrees, and everyone raves about Naglers but is it worth the extra considering they are used maybe 3 times a month as I live in Nottingham and not Arizona.

As you can see for the same price of a 22T4 at £369 I could buy a 24, 17, and a 13mm baader and still have change.

What would you do....

[Albireo380]

A difficult decision Mick. I have 16mm, 13mm, 11mm & 9mm Naglers.

Hyperions EPs are reasonable, but there is really no comparison. In the Naglers the satrs are pin sharp right to the edge of the FOV (which is much larger). I use my Naglers on an 8" SCT and 12" f5 Newtonian. Cheaper EPs show stars as "gulls wings" in my 12" f5 Newt - but not with the Naglers.

If you have an f4.5 LB, then I suspect the quality of the EP is going to be more important than in my f5.

If it was me, I would buy the Naglers (okay - more slowly than with the Hyperions) - the Quality will last the rest of you observing life.

Best of luck, whatever you decide.

Tom

[digitaldave]

I'm trying to make a similar decision, but my scope is completely different - it's a TV85, f7. So far, I've looked at the 8, 13, 17, 24 Hyperions or 9, 13, 17, 22 Naglers.

[Helen]

Have you thought of buying fewer but getting a TV barlow or powermate? That'll be cheaper!

OR have you looked at the WO eyepieces? I love my UWANs and I know others do too.

The wider field of view does make a difference with a non-driven mount.

Helen

[Whippy]

Have to agree with Tom here. I've got most of the Hyperions (only the 21 and 24 missing) and whilst they're great EP's for the money, I was very kindly lent a 17mm (I think) Nagler by MartinB at Kelling September before last and there's a real, noticable difference. I think you'd notice it even more in your fast newtonian as I've noticed the Hyperions do 'go off' a bit at the edges at f5 where as Naglers don't.

Tony..

[Astro_Baby]

I can only relate my own approach - maybe theres something in it for you. I am currently on upgrade 2. The first set I bought were Celestron Plossls in the Eyeopener kit to give me an idea what the views would be like and what EPs I may want in the future.

I decided quite quick that given the low level of useage I would go for a stop-gap upgrade and so started buying with that in mind. I got a Sky-Watcher SWA 38mm at a crazy price and the quality was good - I then tried a Hyperion out in 13mm and found also that was good. The EPs I have now are Baader 5mm and 13mm Hyperions and Sky-Watcher SWAs in 26mm and 38mm. The SW ones are nice for wide angle - the Baaders seemed good for more power (to me anyway)

These EPs too are a stop gap - I'll now look at upgrading to Naglers or Ethos BUT - and its a big BUT only as and when finances allow and when someone sells some of the Televues off cheap as possible. I'd like an Ethos in 13mm for a start but I had the same decsion as you - do I spend all the cash on one great EP or spread the cash amongst some good but not groundbreaking ones. I wanted a decent range.

Theres another guide for me which is I like kit to be not too OTT expensive because being portable and mobile means sooner or later something gets dropped.

I wanted the best I could afford now as fast as was possible. You could split your needs in a similar way - you dont have to have all the EPs the same - you could buy mostly Hyperions but perhaps with a Televue for the one you use the most.

For me with very limited use of the scope, nice as Televues may be - I simply couldnt justify it to myself or the finance manager (my partner)

[John]

I think Helen's suggestion is a good one. I'd consider dropping the Nagler 31mm for a lower cost 30-something mm (28mm UWAN ?). Drop the 17mm and 12mm Naglers in favour of a 13mm Ethos. The UWAN will give you 97% of what the Nagler 31 does and the Ethos is so good at so many things it will more than earn it's keep.

I do like the 22mm T4 Nagler though - probably the most immersive Nagler IMHO.

I've tried a lot of eyepieces over the years and Naglers are darned good and the Ethos slightly better !.

My set is:

31mm Nagler T5

22mm Nagler T4

13mm Ethos

9mm Nagler T6

7mm Nagler T6

5mm Nagler T6

3.5mm Nagler T6

The last two are really only used in my F/6.5 refractor of course.

John

[FLO]

The 82-degree FOV is handy when using a Dob and an f4.5 light-cone is demanding. Helen and John are right, you really ought to try a UWAN before making a decision as their performance is ever so close to a Nagler.

Either that or stick with Naglers but limit yourself to three: low, med and high magnification.

[ZOG]

Mick,

I've never looked through a hyperion and the only Nagler I have is an old 13mm T1, but it outclasses all my other EP's by a mile. So much so that I intend to build a Nagler only collection, no matter how long it takes or what the cost is.

[FLO]

Zog, what other eyepieces are you using?

Doc, this article on the Televue website might help:

Tele Vue Optics Article Page

[ollypenrice]

TeleVue. The best are the best! However, do try the 31 Nagler thoroughly before you buy it. I prefer the 35 Panoptic.

Olly.

[Doc]

Thanks for your input guys.

What I do notice on my Hyperions are that stars in the centre FOV are pretty damn good but going outwards the star starts showing coma and the curvature on the edges is very noticable.

I want to get away from this as I feel this scope can deliver alot more through the eyepiece. But on the other hand it's very hard to warrent spending £300 a time to the missus when money is a tad tight in this economic climate.

Helen I'm not a great fan off barlows but then I've never used a TV one so not 100% sure on this.

If I slimlined the nagler collection to a 22T4, 17T4, 12T5 with a 2X powermate

22T4- x83 mag, 4.81mm Exit pupil and 0.99 degree FOV

17T4- x107 mag, 3.72 mm exit pupil and 0.72 degree FOV

12T5- x152 mag, 2.62mm exit pupil and 0.52 degree FOV

So by adding a powermate I'm covered from 22,17,12,11,8.5,and 6 focal lengths.

Sorry to talk out load, I find it easier then doing in my head.

I will now go and look at the WO UWAN collection but something in my head says Naglers. To me scopes can change but eyepiecs should stay.

Another question would I need a coma corrector. If so Parracor or MPCC.

[Doc]

TeleVue. The best are the best! However, do try the 31 Nagler thoroughly before you buy it. I prefer the 35 Panoptic.

Olly.

Both the eyepiecs give exit pupils greater then 6mm. 31mm gives 6.78 and the 35mm gives 7.65.

So if I do go the nagler route maybe a 26mm at 5.69 might be better.

Thanks for the link Steve. It made a great read.

[johninderby]

Instead of the 17 and 12 Naglers get the 13mm Ethos as it will give nearly the same FOV as the 17 but with nearly the mag of the 12, not to mention being a better eyepiece anyway.

John

[Doc]

Instead of the 17 and 12 Naglers get the 13mm Ethos as it will give nearly the same FOV as the 17 but with nearly the mag of the 12, not to mention being a better eyepiece anyway.

John

So what you are saying John is keep the 22T4 and go with the 13E and what higher mag nagler would you say.

[James]

Just to throw my two pennies worth into the mix... I've owned Naglers and whilst they're stunning I've sold them and I've settled for a collection of Pentax XW's. The only way which these eyepieces concede anything to Naglers is the field of view. The Pentax's have a 70 degree field of view rather than the Naglers 82 but personally I don't need that extra bit of field of view. I actually find the view nicer through a Pentax and appreciate the extra eye relief.

Another thing to consider is that even the best of the best eyepieces will show coma and aberrations at the edges in a fast scope. Whilst the Naglers are virtually perfect I'm quite happy to sacrifice the last 12 degrees of a field of view to ensure perfection to the very edges

Given that you're using a fast Dob don't forget to put some real effort into collimation as the advantages of a fantastic quality eyepiece can be easily eroded by collimation that isn't quite right.

There you go, 2 pennies worth

FWIW, I currently use a 24mm Tele Vue Panoptic and 10mm & 7mm Pentax XW's and a 2.5x Tele Vue PowerMate. I'm still looking for that elusive eyepiece in the 13-17mm range that I really like; I've tried an Ethos and 17mm Nagler. Whilst pretty damn nice they didn't quite work for me.

James

[johninderby]

As to highest mag you could use the 5mm or 7mm Nagler, or use a 2x Powermate with the 13mm Ethos.

One other eyepiece to consider as a temporary measure is the WO 6mm SPL, only 55 degree FOV, but not that far behind a Nagler in sharpness and contrast and fairly cheap and better than a Hyperion for lunar as it has less glare and light scatter than the Hyperion.

John

[John]

I've used a 2.5x Powermate to achive high powers with my T6 Naglers and, apart from the slight hassle of actually adding the extra componant to the setup in the dark, it gives nothing in performance away to an eyepiece on it's own as I found out when I obtained a 3.5mm Nagler T6 - the only benefit was not having to fit the powermate.

I've not tried a Pentax XW's but everything I have read about them tallies with James's views on them. Cost-wise though you are faced with the same sort of figures as Naglers.

One thing about all these wonderfull eyepieces is that they don't overcome the natural coma that fast newtonians display - many would argue that you should also invest in a coma-corrector such as a Parracor or the Baader MPCC to get the very best out of your investment.

John

[Ben Ritchie]

I think Helen's suggestion is a good one. I'd consider dropping the Nagler 31mm for a lower cost 30-something mm (28mm UWAN ?). Drop the 17mm and 12mm Naglers in favour of a 13mm Ethos. The UWAN will give you 97% of what the Nagler 31 does and the Ethos is so good at so many things it will more than earn it's keep.

Agree totally with this (which is why I own both ) - the UWAN is 95% of the 31T5 at half the price used. You do really need a MPCC though. The Ethos is expensive but simply superb, and I feel no need for any eyepiece to fill the gap between the two. Another plus point for the Ethos is that it barlows very well, the 13E + 2x TV Big Barlow is excellent.

As for XWs, i'm a huge fan at higher powers but they're not cheap. The 7XW and 10XW are two of the best eyepieces i've ever used. As it happens i'm heading back down this route...

How about looking towards the used market for a 28UWAN, 13Ethos and 1.6-2x, 2" barlow? I have this, and paid less than your Hyperion budget in total. There are a few gaps, but despite only being two eyepieces (and the 28UWAN + 2x barlow being an effective duplicate of the Ethos) it's a very, very capable setup.

[Viking]

I think you should consider the whole optical train. No good having top end eyepieces with poor diagonals/barlows.

John

[Macavity]

Well, I've only looked through a Televue Zoom and made some (not enough) use of my Hyperions. I sense with a price disparity of 3x, the answer as to which is "best" must be fairly "obvious". <tongue in cheek> Yet so many other things come into this. Isn't the only real way, to (somehow!) compare them for yourself?

As someone with less practical experience of Astronomy, than many, but rather a LOT of experience of general scientific measurement, I quickly became concious that not all... Eyepiece Reviewers were seeing (anything like) what I saw. Not being TOO unkind, hopefully, but e.g. "sharp to the edge" was clearly a subjective criterion?

Moreover, I prefer to wear glasses... sometimes, so longer eye relief is a BIG factor. Yet, paradoxically, here too, the quoted figures for this have not guaranteed that I cannot e.g. use SOME short eye-relief eyepieces - AND the exact inverse! "Blackout" is another fairly unquantified phenomena to which I seem to be particularly sensitive. Howver, another thing I have learned is that expensive eyepieces tend to adhere a bit closer to their paper specifications than their cheaper brethren?

Inverted snobbery, a (misguided) sense of adventure, "life's too short", a vague Eurocentric prejudice made prefer Hyperions at this stage. If I were "rich", I'd probably buy a brace of Naglers in a heartbeat - As indeed a US-made GIBSON Les Paul [Guitar], not a (perfectly adequate) Japanese copy etc. Sorry to be "philosophical" rather than offering any practical advice! But it is an interesting question...

[FLO]

e.g. "sharp to the edge" was clearly a subjective criterion?

It depends a great deal on the telescope used when assessing the eyepiece. A fast telescope with a steep light-cone will be more demanding of an eyepiece whereas a slow SCT with a light-cone that is long and narrow will look good with almost any eyepiece.

[The Warthog]

There is some pressure to buy the very best in any hobby or life in general, when the merely excellent will give excellent results.

I would suggest that if it's foing to take you five years to acquire your set of Naglers, you would do better with Pentaxes or Meade Series 5000s or WO UWANs or Hyperions. Eps in the range of about 7mm, 18mm, and 32mm with a 2.5x Powermate would give you a great range of eps to choose from, and excellent results with your scope, for much less than the cost of Naglers.

[PaulG]

There is some pressure to buy the very best in any hobby or life in general, when the merely excellent will give excellent results.

To buy the very best the cost is high but the actual gain becomes smaller. I've been down this road many a time with different hobbies/pursuits. I'm not even sure if my eyesight is even capable of detecting the subtle differences of premium quality eyepieces.

Paul

[Doc]

Agree totally with this (which is why I own both ) - the UWAN is 95% of the 31T5 at half the price used. You do really need a MPCC though. The Ethos is expensive but simply superb, and I feel no need for any eyepiece to fill the gap between the two. Another plus point for the Ethos is that it barlows very well, the 13E + 2x TV Big Barlow is excellent.

As for XWs, i'm a huge fan at higher powers but they're not cheap. The 7XW and 10XW are two of the best eyepieces i've ever used. As it happens i'm heading back down this route...

How about looking towards the used market for a 28UWAN, 13Ethos and 1.6-2x, 2" barlow? I have this, and paid less than your Hyperion budget in total. There are a few gaps, but despite only being two eyepieces (and the 28UWAN + 2x barlow being an effective duplicate of the Ethos) it's a very, very capable setup.

Spooky Ben

I was just considering this combination today at work. I came home and starting reading the threads and you had came up with the same idea.

28 UWAN

13E

2x Big Barlow

MPCC Coma Corrector

I think this would be a great start and then maybe one day a 17E to join them.

Just like to say a big thanks to everyone.

And also is anyone going to Darren's Star Party in August who has either Naglers, Ethos or a 28 UWAN that wouldn't mind popping into my focuser so I can have a peep.