Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

17mm Type 4 Nagler

pbyrne

By pbyrne
in Member Equipment Reviews

Recommended Posts

pbyrne

pbyrne

Posted
Posted

Hi all

I picked this eyepiece up on Astromart, it is an eyeiece that I have been after for some time and I jumped when I saw it for sale.

4951505361_da4990d310_b.jpg

Now, the first thing of note about this eyepiece is that it's big, really big:eek:, it dwarves my 27mm Panoptic and towers over my 13mm Nagler.

4951502623_a88186e8b9_b.jpg

4951524959_b7d8d9e293_b.jpg

Some stats:

17mm focal length.

2" diameter barrel.

FOV 82 degress.

Eye relief 17mm

6 elements.

Weight of 1.6 lbs.:o

It has what's called Instadjust, which means that the top of the eyepiece can be pulled into 3 different positions for optimum eye position, I used it at it's lowest, I like to get up close and personal with my glass.:D

So last night it was partially clear, there were clouds in the west and they were approaching, I grabbed the 12" dob, set it up and tried to see what it could do. I pointed the scope in the direction of Cygnus and popped in the eyepiece, it gives a magnificarion of x88. With eager anticipation I looked in, the centre 50% was crystal clear, the outer 50% was blurred.

The first thought that ran through my head, "oh God, I've bought a pup."

Getting the panic under control I thought about it, I checked the scopes collimation, and it was way out. Collimation adjusted I went back to the eyepiece, with some trepidation, the thought of the outlay hanging heavy in my mind. The scene was beautiful.:) Across the FOV the stars were pinpoint, the Milky Way was beautiful and the sense of relief almost made me go weak at the knees.

I have my 13mm as my favourite EP, now it was time to test the 17mm against it. The 13mm fives a magnification of x115 as opposed to the 17mms x88. Swinging to M13 with the 17mm I could see stars to the core, switching to the 13mm the view was very similar, the globular being slightly larger. M57 again was similar in both EPs, as were M27, the nebula was huge and the amount of space surrounding it was impressive, M56 and Albireo, the colour correction of the EP was perfect. In all views the only difference was the ever so slightly larger object in the 13mm.

Overall I would judge the pair of them as equals.

In a demanding scope like the f/4.9 dob the 17mm performed superbly, it gave me sharp views across the huge FOV, there was no sign of kidney beaning or blurring to be seen, and shows the importance of proper collimation.

The one drawback for some scopes will be the weight, as mentioned it comes in at 1.6lbs, the dob can handle it, but I wonder how it would perform in an 80mm grab n go? I would imagine that balance could be a big issue.

I can finish by stating that this is a first class eyepiece, the optics are superb, the build is solid and it has all the quality you come to expect from Televue.

Thanks for hanging on this long and I hope this review has been helpful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Moonshane

Moonshane

Posted
Posted

great review Paul. I bet you were relieved when you checked the collimation!

I thought long and hard about getting this and a 12mm T4 or the 13mm Ethos. There's probably not a great deal in them all but I felt the need to reduce my numbers. Sounds like a great addition to your 'family' though!

Balance is an issue in my small dob and I may even end up with a small set of eyepieces more suitable for this :o. You can never have too many as we keep telling ourselves eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted

Nice review Paul :)

I had the 22mm Type 4 for a while and really enjoyed it. I eventually decided that a 20mm Type 5 would fit into my eyepiece set better and was a little lighter and more compact. The T4 has better eye relief and a larger eye lens than the 20mm T5 which does make for comfortable viewing.

Tele Vue do make some wonderful products :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Moonshane

Moonshane

Posted
Posted
Lucky man getting a second-hand Nagler 17T4!! I have the 22T4 which is great, and want to replace my 14 Meade UWA with the 17T4 and / or the 12T4. The 17 by all accounts is one of the greatest in a great line up. The T4s are just great for those of us with specs.

I had this dilemma when I had a 14mm and an 18mm Radian; both superb eyepieces. I seriously considered the T4 12mm and 17mm but then thought why not get a 13mm Ethos for the same money (a bit less than both the T4s) and ended up selling the two Radians for £100 each and getting the 13E for another £150. The 13E covers about the same field as both the 12mm and 17mm T4s. Still no way near cheap but not as expensive as they first appear if you consider field of view and what the 13E replaces overall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
michael.h.f.wilkinson

michael.h.f.wilkinson

Posted
Posted
I had this dilemma when I had a 14mm and an 18mm Radian; both superb eyepieces. I seriously considered the T4 12mm and 17mm but then thought why not get a 13mm Ethos for the same money (a bit less than both the T4s) and ended up selling the two Radians for £100 each and getting the 13E for another £150. The 13E covers about the same field as both the 12mm and 17mm T4s. Still no way near cheap but not as expensive as they first appear if you consider field of view and what the 13E replaces overall.

For me the EPs in the Ethos range have too small eye-relief (all ethos-clones have the same problem). They have a great reputation, but I will stick with the Nagler T4s, and Radians for planetary work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
  • 3 months later...
nightvision

nightvision

Posted
Posted

Nice review, I bought the 17T4 with my 12" dob about 6 years ago, impressive eyepiece.

It's very non-astronomer friendly giving good views even when viewed off-centre, easy viewing for that quick 'ooh wow!' response. I also like to get close for that 'look around' effect. The vulnerable bulging lens surface at the base is probably the only part I don't like, as a result I am always very careful when handling it in the dark.

Just picked up a SW ED100 on astro-B&S, took it out for first light last night. Yes the 17T4 did cause balance problems compared to my collection 1.25" Plossls, adding 2x barlow pushed things even further back. I am going to try fabricating a longitudinal balance system from some old mount parts.

Also have other 17mm EPs for comparison. Tried the ED100 on M81 and M82 through bad LP and a light mist, at first I thought the 1.25" Plossl view was just slightly brighter and not much different (centre field). It soon became apparent that the 17T4 was showing structure especially in M81. Swinging round to M3 the 17T4 showed a fuzzy patch and then intermittent speckles with averted vision, the other EPs didn't reveal the speckles. I think LP and mist are great levellers, often reducing the benefits of high-quality EPs.

Just for fun I recently modified my old Meade 4504 F8 114m Newt to take 2" eyepieces. Inserting the 17T4 I was amazed how well the combination performed on the moon and open clusters with bright sharp and contrasty views.

When using the heavy eyepieces in refractors you really have to double check everything is screwed in tight, a 17T4+Barlow+Star-diagonal weighs 3lb 12oz (1.7kg). As I was moving the ED100 round the zenith last night I went past vertical and heard the sound of the Nagler sliding out of the Barlow :), scary! I guess 6 years with the dob has made me a little complacent about locking the eyepiece in place.

Tony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.