televue panoptic 24mm vs nagler 22mm

[John]

I used to have a 22mm T4 Nagler and then decided that a 20mm T5 would fit into my set a wee bit better so I sold the T4 and bought a T5.

Of course I now miss the longer eye relief and large, comfortable eye lens of the T4. I do believe that the T5 is a tiny, tiny bit sharper though and the extra magnificiation does darken the background sky a little, but we are talking barely detectable here - I only had the opportunity to try them "back to back" a couple of times.

So the 22mm T4 Nagler is a great eyepiece IMHO - and probably the most "immersive" Nagler there is.

In your case you may also find it more natural having all 2" format eyepieces through the range 35mm - 22mm - 13mm - it means you don't have to worry about the 1.25" adaptor until you get to medium to high power.

The 24mm Panoptic is a great eyepiece as well of course - you certainly want to think on the options before letting it go.

Hope that helps a bit

[Mr Spock]

I use a 22mm T4 and I can tell you it's a much better eyepiece than the T6 versions. Great widefield views in my 80mm f7.5 with excellent contrast. With a short f ratio Newt you will need a coma corrector though.

[Chris H]

Have you tried a Nagler type 4? A hundred quid to change is a fair bit of money and they 22mm might not be to your liking. I have the 12T4 and it's a great ep but took a little getting use too. It took a while to overcome the blackouts due to incorrect pupil placement (still have occasional probs with it) it also took a few months to finally settle on how best to use the instadjust. But having said all that it is a great ep it just takes a bit of learning and if it came down to it you could always sell it.

Have you read this? CN Report: The Nagler Eyepieces, Part II - The Type 4's - CN Report

[Moonshane]

I used to have a 22mm T4 Nagler and then decided that a 20mm T5 would fit into my set a wee bit better so I sold the T4 and bought a T5.

Of course I now miss the longer eye relief and large, comfortable eye lens of the T4. I do believe that the T5 is a tiny, tiny bit sharper though and the extra magnificiation does darken the background sky a little, but we are talking barely detectable here - I only had the opportunity to try them "back to back" a couple of times.

So the 22mm T4 Nagler is a great eyepiece IMHO - and probably the most "immersive" Nagler there is.

In your case you may also find it more natural having all 2" format eyepieces through the range 35mm - 22mm - 13mm - it means you don't have to worry about the 1.25" adaptor until you get to medium to high power.

The 24mm Panoptic is a great eyepiece as well of course - you certainly want to think on the options before letting it go.

Hope that helps a bit

cheers John, yeah, helps a lot - throwing in another choice for me

I did think about the 20mm T5 too and did briefly use one once (it IS extremely sharp) but I think it's so close to the 24mm in most respects that it may not be worth it but I take the point about the 20mm being darker and more contrast than the 24mm Panoptic. I also think that with my longer focal length tubes, the 22mm is a better fit than the 20mm but I might see which comes up first - I can always 'rent one' for the cost of postage and see.

I like the idea of the click stop adjuster on the T4s as they work well on Radians.

your 'immersive' comment is interesting as I was considering this instead of the 17mm Ethos which is just too expensive.

cheers for the feedback - it's genuinely appreciated.

[Ben Ritchie]

The 20T5 is my favourite of all the Naglers, but i'd agree with John, the 22T4 is very good indeed.

However, I found the 13mm Ethos largely removed the need for this focal length completely, in both my 8" and (now departed) 12" Dobs I just jumped from 13E to 28UWAN or 31T5. Main reason I currently have a 24mm is that it maximises the 1.25" format, which I use for 'grab and go'. So I'd also consider going for the 26T5 instead - in my experience that has all the advantages of the 20T5 and 22T4 (FOV, immersiveness, sharpness, ease of use) and is a larger jump up in TFOV from the 13E. You might well find it displaces the 35mm Panoptic too...

[Moonshane]

cheers Ben

even more food for thought.

at least people are mentioning the eyepieces I have considered myself so I am thinking along the right lines. I think I'll wait and see what comes up first at a decent price as the eyepieces I have currently are no slouches. like you, most of the time I go from the 35mm to the 13mm (and often only the 13mm). I do like the wide field of the 35mm and the 26mm is not far off that, if only I could buy all three and then sell what I don't feel 'fits' after testing them and seeing which I use least

I don't really have/want a grab and go (unless you count my 6" dob - planetary/lunar only) apart from my 15v70 bins so am not really worried about weight but the 35 Pan/26 Nagler at 1.6lbs are the heaviest I'd consider.

thanks again

Shane

[Ben Ritchie]

I do like the wide field of the 35mm and the 26mm is not far off that, if only I could buy all three and then sell what I don't feel 'fits' after testing them and seeing which I use least

It's a good option if you can spare the cash, you give up a bit in TFOV with the 26mm but it's not a huge issue (TFOV is still big!) and the higher magnification is nice. There's really no substitute for comparing a couple of eyepieces side-by-side under the same skies.

Another approach that's quite useful is to just leave the 24mm Panoptic indoors for a few observing sessions. If you find yourself not reaching for it, then off it goes. But if you find yourself feeling there's something missing between the 13E and the 35Pan - or there's nothing missing as such but one of them is a touch off from what you'd prefer - then it's a pretty good guide to what you need to adjust in the collection.

[Moonshane]

I've just had a thought actually along the lines of my last post. why not buy some used 2" UWA eyepieces at 20mm, 22mm and 26mm which I bet I could get for total £100 tops and then see which fits best?? OK the field might not be as wide as a Nagler or as sharp but I'll get a good idea about what fits best and when I get the Nagler that matches, I'll have a better and wider view in the knowledge I have the right choice for me. Once I decide I can sell them and go for there.

I'll report back once I have done this (if the eyepieces I am after even exist/come up for sale!).

[Moonshane]

I use a 22mm T4 and I can tell you it's a much better eyepiece than the T6 versions. Great widefield views in my 80mm f7.5 with excellent contrast. With a short f ratio Newt you will need a coma corrector though.

Have you tried a Nagler type 4? A hundred quid to change is a fair bit of money and they 22mm might not be to your liking. I have the 12T4 and it's a great ep but took a little getting use too. It took a while to overcome the blackouts due to incorrect pupil placement (still have occasional probs with it) it also took a few months to finally settle on how best to use the instadjust. But having said all that it is a great ep it just takes a bit of learning and if it came down to it you could always sell it.

Have you read this? CN Report: The Nagler Eyepieces, Part II - The Type 4's - CN Report

Sorry guys, I missed these two replies

I have been doing some thinking since I last posted on this and have borrowed a 20mm T5 Nagler from a mate. I am concluding that the 20mm and the 26mm T5s might be a better option for me as they will give more range and the 26mm will also be better at home where LP is an issue.

I have used the 20mm briefly and it's a gem to use, you literally just look. there's no blackouts and the field is pin sharp. I'll do some more testing before I consider buying it but it's looking likely for now.

thanks for the article Chris - very interesting. as you say, TV always sell at the right price so there's no great risk in this. I have sold the Panoptic and although the 20mm is quite close to the spec of that, I feel the 82 field and higher contrast of the 20mm is worth paying the (very) little extra for. as John said, not messing about with the sizes is also a good thing.

I might not even need the 26mm but I'll have plenty of time. the negative about going to the mates house was that I was helping him with the final woodwork preparation for his 22" 1/10PV 16% obstruction f5 dob. he also has just bought a full set of Ethos except the 3.7mm which he got a 3.5mm Nagler to 'replace'.

I have to say, the 8mm and the 10mm are virtually 'normal' size and weight. beautiful eyepieces.

[ahlberto]

They are two diferent eyepieçes and the 24 is more confortable to use and ligth and the kidney effect on the 22 nagler is really annoying.that sayd i preffer the 22mm because is a better eyepiçe and you will see more with a wider field.EIts only a oppinionven with a massive polueted sky,my 8 f5 dob sowed mi allot of ddep sky objects...Its only a oppinion based on personal taste,nothing more.Have you tried the baader hyperion asferic or the baader 24mm 68 degrees?They are cracking eyepieçes and allot cheapper than televue.My favourite?35mm panoptic and the 55mm TV plossl is even better...personal taste people not a review....

[John]

... and the 55mm TV plossl is even better...personal taste people not a review....

Do you use the 55mm plossl with your 8" F/5 Ahlberto

Thats an 11mm exit pupil - you must have eyes like Gollum !.