TV eyepiece survey

[Don Pensack]

6 hours ago, Voxish said:

I assume the same could be said for scopes, yet my frac has a made in the USA sticker on it.

The lenses in the refractors are from Japan, but the rest of the scope, and the assembly, is from the US.

[Mr Spock]

No politics please. Let's keep the conversation on topic. Thanks.

[mikeDnight]

Perhaps some of the negative feeling towards Chinese made equipment stems from before their entry into the world of telescopes? The term "made in China" used to imply a cheaply made product. Then when the early achromats came along towards the end of the 1990's, some were poorly figured. Being the coward that I am, I talked a friend into buying a 4" F10 Helios refractor (made in China). That night, four of us drove out of town to try this scope out and all four came home amazed by that little scopes performance. Star images were essentially perfect and the scope gave some very memorable views of several Messier objects. The following day three more orders were placed at our local camera shop for three more Helios refractors. The one I bought was a 120mm F8.3, my other friends ordered a 102mm F5 and a 150mm F8. In time my friend with the 150mm F8 decided the scope was too much to handle, so i ended up buying it from him, while he bought a 150mm F5 achromat. That was an awesome RFT! We would probably all be content observing with those scopes today had not some sicko introduced us all to the purity of fluorite. 

[Mr Spock]

I have a Helios 120mm f8.3. It is excellent. I use it for solar with a Baader Continuum - it is sharp!

[maw lod qan]

I'll show my lack of experience with equipment, what do you mean when saying "under cut"?

[cajen2]

42 minutes ago, maw lod qan said:

I'll show my lack of experience with equipment, what do you mean when saying "under cut"?

It's the little 'ledge' on the nosepiece which is designed to stop the EP from falling out of the focuser / diagonal. These can hang up on compression rings, causing much swearing. I use diagonals with Clicklocks or similar and don't have this problem.

[Mr Spock]

I've just hidden another post. If you can't keep on topic the thread will close.

[F15Rules]

On 07/01/2024 at 19:26, John said:

I'm waiting for Orion Optics customer feedback survey 😁

Don't hold your breath John..🙄

Dave

[Don Pensack]

The questions are ambiguously-worded.

For Example:

Having undercuts on the barrels?

--Very important

--somewhat important

--not important

--no opinion.

Hypothetically, if you love undercuts, you'd pick the first response, because you consider it important that they are there.

If you hate under cuts, you'd also pick the first response because you'd rate having them as very important, i.e. it would make a difference to you when choosing an eyepiece.

 

It should have been worded:

Do you want undercuts on eyepieces?

--Yes.

--No.

--no opinion.

[John]

I'm glad that their eyepieces are better than their surveys ! 😁

 

[Bugdozer]

On 07/01/2024 at 15:33, Don Pensack said:

 

I notice they asked whether we considered it important which country was the source of the optics.  Hmmm.

That’s unsurprising for an American manufacturer. Americans are often very convinced that anything made in the USA is automatically superior to something made elsewhere, with the view that certain countries can't make anything good at all. 

It's extremely prevalent in the guitar market over there. I remember shaking my head reading a guitar review that said "I was going to give this five stars, but then I noticed it wasn't made in the USA, so I'm giving it four". 🙄

[Jim L]

9 hours ago, Bugdozer said:

That’s unsurprising for an American manufacturer. Americans are often very convinced that anything made in the USA is automatically superior to something made elsewhere, with the view that certain countries can't make anything good at all. 

It's extremely prevalent in the guitar market over there. I remember shaking my head reading a guitar review that said "I was going to give this five stars, but then I noticed it wasn't made in the USA, so I'm giving it four". 🙄

I can’t speak to the guitar world and I would not take the reviewer you’ve referenced at all seriously, but my experience contradicts the notion that Americans “are often very convinced that anything made in the USA is automatically superior.” In fact, I don’t think I’ve encountered that particular bias for as long as I can remember, so sometime in the 70’s or there about. It’s not really a thing here.

In fact, as far as Televue eyepieces are concerned pretty much anyone who owns or is contemplating purchasing any knows that they’re made in either Taiwan or Japan, and that none are made in the USA. Manufacture in those countries doesn’t seem to hurt either their popularity or reputation here in the States one bit.

 

 

Edited January 15 by Jim L

[Bugdozer]

12 hours ago, Jim L said:

I can’t speak to the guitar world and I would not take the reviewer you’ve referenced at all seriously, but my experience contradicts the notion that Americans “are often very convinced that anything made in the USA is automatically superior.” In fact, I don’t think I’ve encountered that particular bias for as long as I can remember, so sometime in the 70’s or there about. It’s not really a thing here.

In fact, as far as Televue eyepieces are concerned pretty much anyone who owns or is contemplating purchasing any knows that they’re made in either Taiwan or Japan, and that none are made in the USA. Manufacture in those countries doesn’t seem to hurt either their popularity or reputation here in the States one bit.

 

 

My wife is from Massachusetts, so I have spent a good amount of time there, able to observe cultural differences. One of the things that struck me from spending time in the USA is how the term "American" tends to carry with it an undertone of "superior" in many of the contexts it's used in, in a way that just doesn't happen in other countries, especially in advertising. For example to a British person, a product advertised as made in Britain is very rarely assumed to be intrinsically the best simply because it's made in Britain. Whereas in America, advertising definitely leans on the angle "this product is better because it's the one made right here in the USA". This will be less perceptible to Americans because it's just "normal" to them. 

Regarding the eyepieces, yes they may not be made in the USA, but the reason that question comes up in an American survey is overall related to Americans putting a higher choice bias on where things are manufactured than most other countries do. It would be extremely unusual for a British company to ask something like that in a survey. 

[Mr H in Yorkshire]

Better because...

There are many factors involved, not least, design, manufacturing and quality control. A dear and much missed friend of mine founded a company that make microbial culturing cabinets, generally acknowledged to be the world's best. When they wanted to enter the US market, they hired a technical consultant who made them change all manner of components, mainly in electrical side. Simply put, the American components were crap compared to the British sourced items but US requirements mandated these components despite their technical inferiority.  Just because a country has an attitude doesn't mean it's claims are true.

[Mr Spock]

I'm not commenting on the quality of stuff from other countries. However, it's safe to say I am never going to fly in a Boeing 737...

[Louis D]

1 hour ago, Mr Spock said:

I'm not commenting on the quality of stuff from other countries. However, it's safe to say I am never going to fly in a Boeing 737...

The pre-Max ones are fine.  I've been flying in them for almost 4 decades now, and have rarely heard of any issues with them.

Read up on Boeing.  Apparently, their quality control has slipped a lot of late and many companies and countries have taken notice.  Most pundits blame it on trying to maximize short term shareholder return at the expense of everything else.

[Jim L]

1 hour ago, Bugdozer said:

My wife is from Massachusetts, so I have spent a good amount of time there, able to observe cultural differences. One of the things that struck me from spending time in the USA is how the term "American" tends to carry with it an undertone of "superior" in many of the contexts it's used in, in a way that just doesn't happen in other countries, especially in advertising. For example to a British person, a product advertised as made in Britain is very rarely assumed to be intrinsically the best simply because it's made in Britain. Whereas in America, advertising definitely leans on the angle "this product is better because it's the one made right here in the USA". This will be less perceptible to Americans because it's just "normal" to them. 

Regarding the eyepieces, yes they may not be made in the USA, but the reason that question comes up in an American survey is overall related to Americans putting a higher choice bias on where things are manufactured than most other countries do. It would be extremely unusual for a British company to ask something like that in a survey. 

I’ve lived in the northeast, southeast, northwest, southwest, and center of the USA for the past 67 years, so let’s just leave it at we’ll agree to amicably disagree.

As to the question of country of manufacture, which seems of little importance on the CloudyNights website, but appears to be the object of intense interest here, I offer the following possible explanations:

1. The general consensus in the States is that China - and we are talking about China here though limited to its relationship to amateur astronomy - can manufacture pretty much anything you want to any level of quality you desire so long as you’re willing to pay for the effort required.

2. Most of us understand that making the very best of anything doesn’t presently play to the strength of Chinese manufacturing. For example, we can all compile a list of extraordinarily good Chinese eyepieces and telescopes, none of which are generally regarded as the very best available. Those honors go to Takahashi, Masuyama, TeleVue, Astro Physics, etc. The strength of Chinese manufacturing is to make goods that are almost as good as the very best but at a fraction of the cost of the very best, and to sell them in large quantities. It can be characterized as a high-quality moderate-cost high-volume approach, and it is an excellent model.

I am reasonably certain that TeleVue can have eyepieces manufactured in China to the same quality as those currently made in Japan and Taiwan, but there are several impediments. The first impediment is cost, because the quality of Chinese eyepieces won’t match the existing TeleVue lines without additional design, manufacturing, and material resources; all of which add cost. There’s no free lunch.

The next impediment is perception base on understanding of the present Chinese business model and acceptance or rejection on the part of the consumer as to whether they believe China will to be able to pivot from their existing highly successful high-quality moderate-cost high-volume model to the apex-quality apex-cost low volume model with a questionable outcome. I don’t see what’s in it for China, perceptions take time to change, and time is money. I doubt China will be interested.

3. There is a general feeling that buying locally to support your friends, neighbors, fellow countrymen, kindred spirits, etc., is a good thing, and undoubtedly universal throughout the world. There does not have to be a nefarious element to this feeling.

Of the 185 posts in eight pages in CloudyNights about the TeleVue survey there is only a single post that mentions China, and that one does so favorably. Given that the question of undercuts is brought up 84 times I think it’s clear what the folks over there consider to be the important issues raised by the survey. 

[Don Pensack]

I think CloudyNights exhibits the opposite of nationalistic tendencies, actually.

There are thousands of posts about saving money by buying from China directly, which injures the US distribution supply chain and eliminates taxation for the consumer, taxation that pays for schools, roads, police, et.al.

So buying directly from China saves money, but indirectly harms the country where the consumer lives.

If anything, this is anti-nationalism, but does evince a degree of anti-social narcissism.

I give credit to the EU for charging VAT when the item is imported.  The US imposes a tariff only if the order is larger than $2500, and the tariffs are very low.

 

Tele Vue is likely wary of the way Chinese manufacturers now seem to be selling out of the back door directly to consumers.

And the fact they all steal designs and sell them private label to anyone willing to place a large enough order.

If I were the Naglers, I'd be afraid that my designs would end up under other labels and sold directly to consumers by the factory.

Not to mention the steep curve of raising the quality control to the TVO standards.

 

One mystery to me is that Baader has been able to sustain an exclusive on the Morpheus eyepieces for so long.

The Hyperions were likely an adaptation of a previously-existing product, and have been available under other labels, but the Morpheus were and still are unique.

It might indicate that some Chinese companies are willing to be exclusive, so good luck to Tele Vue if they are contemplating this.

[Nakedgun]

~

So, TV posts the survey results:

 

https://televue.com/televueopticstalk/2024/01/25/the-survey-says/?utm_source=Tele+Vue+Blog+Email&utm_campaign=7aa9197ef2-MAILCHIMP_RSS_EMAIL&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6a51c038cb-7aa9197ef2-440061184

 

 

 

 

[Alan White]

Yes and my bug bear of undercuts has a question within the survey.
Interesting that a notable group dont like them and comment more fully than any other group.

I do hope the message has settled in Nagler family ears.

3) Having safety undercuts in the eyepiece barrel?
Our chrome plated 2″ and 1.25″eyepiece barrels include safety undercuts. It turns out only a trivial percentage of respondents had “No Opinion” on the utility of safety undercuts. This left the results evenly split into two camps: the “Very important” and “Somewhat important” respondents versus the “Not Important.” The “Very important” and “Somewhat important” camp has a slim 0.4% lead – but we’ll call it a tie. The “Not Important” group though was distinguished by submitting many more comments on the subject.

[DirkSteele]

Few like undercuts until it saves your bacon.  My Televue 17mm Type 4 is still in one piece thanks to the undercut.

 

[Louis D]

The only time I've ever had a need for a "safety" feature was when a diagonal decided to unscrew itself and rotate upside-down, dumping a lightly tightened eyepiece.  Luckily, my eyepiece went into grassy turf and not cement.  Based on that, I'd say the problem lies elsewhere in the mechanical chain, not in the eyepiece holder.

[JTEC]

I’ve been observing for decades with dozens of different telescopes and dozens of different eyepieces.  Some of the eyepieces had undercuts, some were smooth and some had ‘kerfs’ - which I had to look up for its original meaning.  It never occurred to me to bother which.  I was and remain primarily interested in things like sharpness, contrast, freedom from scatter, aberrations, etc, and the consequent telescopic view. But, having read and studied some of the vast online body of literature and debate devoted to the subject, including on this forum, I understand now that there were more important things to worry about.  As a result, I have gained a fuller appreciation of people’s concerns and reached a better informed conclusion: undercuts, smooth barrels, kerfs - couldn't care less. 🤣

Edited January 26 by JTEC

[Louis D]

I'm happy for you that you've never had any issues with eyepiece barrels.  Many of us have, though.  I, for one, once spent an hour trying to work lose a Tele Vue eyepiece jammed in a focuser with a brass compression ring that worked its way out of its channel and jammed into the eyepiece undercut as I removed the eyepiece.  Had it been a smooth barrel, nothing would have been snagged.

[JTEC]

Hi Louis, sorry to hear that; yes, in all seriousness, I understand that many people genuinely dislike them.  Perhaps I’m fortunate in never having had any real problems. It just feels like an issue that attracts a disproportionate amount of attention.  That said, fit or lack of it crops up all over the place in astronomy.  ATB John

Edited January 26 by JTEC