Sometime's I think it's just not meant to be......the 26mm Nagler saga continues.

[Moonshane]

I think I must be destined never to own a 26mm Nagler. I bought one a while back for a bargain price which was 'like new in box' with a cap missing, numerous thumbscrew marks and countless scratches in the coatings and possibly down to the glass. I sent it back and got a refund.

Trying to resist the 20% sale, but failing, I eventually decided that my dream eyepiece should be bought new. So I ordered a brand new 26mm Nagler under the 20% offer and it was sent to the wrong Fedex depot (by Fedex). A day late it arrived - great I think but no......

Even the great TV eyepieces it seems can have faults. I always check any eyepiece with an eagle eye and when I looked up the wrong end I noticed a black speck on the lens. Oh well, it'll just blow off later, But wait. It's inside the eyepiece. I look closer and suspect it's an actual blemish in the glass rather than a speck of dust or what have you as it seems almost transparent.

This was not likely to affect the view at all (and cannot be seen through the right end, and being a typical Englishman and not good at complaining, thinking 'am I being awkward' etc I ummed and aaaah'd bout what to do. However, I don't see why I should really accept something with a blemish like this from new and I decided to send it back and ask for a replacement.

I am quite shocked that assuming it's not a speck that can be cleaned off by dismantling the eyepiece (not something I wanted to do) that this was not picked up by Televue as they 'check all eyepieces individually' or by the seller (although they say they cannot open eyepieces to check them as people then complain they have been 'handled') before dispatch.

I sent it back today and will hopefully get the matter resolved with a replacement early next week. The seller has been good about me returning it but I was a little miffed they would not cover return postage.

Just venting my spleen really as I had a night of astro planned tomorrow despite the full moon and the edge has been taken off this a bit. I'll still have a good time though assuming it stays clear.

[Nexus 6]

Really bad luck mate, hope you get a replacement asap.

had a fair share of disappoinments myself on that front as well recently so I know what you must be feeling

time to have a look at Saturn

[Moonshane]

cheers Alan

I feel a bit like a moaner but when you pay £360 for an eyepiece it should be spot on at least on the day you buy it.

just had a quick look at the big old moon to make me feel better. even my daughter said 'woah the moon is so cool tonight dad' earlier

[Nexus 6]

cheers Alan

I feel a bit like a moaner but when you pay £360 for an eyepiece it should be spot on at least on the day you buy it.

just had a quick look at the big old moon to make me feel better. even my daughter said 'woah the moon is so cool tonight dad' earlier

totally agree, its not pocket money they are getting after all is it?

still it is a stunning night! hope its the same tomorrow and yes your daughter is right, the Moon is cool

[Moonshane]

totally agree, its not pocket money they are getting after all is it?

still it is a stunning night! hope its the same tomorrow and yes your daughter is right, the Moon is cool

quite right mate. although technically it was pocket money (although many weeks' worth at £20 per week! and the sale of some books ).

[Nexus 6]

quite right mate. although technically it was pocket money (although many weeks' worth at £20 per week! and the sale of some books ).

that reminds me, should really count up my money jars, been filling one of them for 3 years now, only coppers though, might be enough for another TV ep

[Moonshane]

ooooh, 27mm Pan?

[Doug]

Hope it's replaced ASAP you would think that the shop would have checked it out before sending it to you as it's £360.00 Name and shame I say

Doug

Essex

[Nexus 6]

ooooh, 27mm Pan?

or the 22mm Nagler or the 24mm Panoptic or.............?

[tbird]

From the Office of Fair Trading guidance on distance selling :

Returning goods

Only if it is covered in the contract and the written information

can you require the consumer to pay for the cost of returning

the ordered goods. If the consumer then fails to return the

goods, or sends them at your expense, you can charge them

the direct cost to you of the return, even if you have already

refunded the consumer’s money. You are not allowed to

make any further charges, such as a restocking charge or an

administration charge.

If you do not include these details in the required written

information then you cannot charge anything. You can never

require consumers to pay the cost of returning substitute

goods. If the goods are faulty or do not comply with the

contract, you will have to pay for their return whatever the

circumstances.

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/general/oft913.pdf

[ollypenrice]

Very good info above!

I'm really sorry you have had this hassle. I have just bought one of these and when you do finally get it you will be delighted. Bear up!

I'd be inclined to name the vendor who refused to pay return postage on faulty goods.

Olly

[Moonshane]

Cheers for the moral support everyone and for the info. I did look at the OFT site before returning the item (and even discussing it with the vendor) but the vendor's terms do state that I pay for the return of goods. Under the OFT DSRs I think I have an argument if they agree the goods are faulty but maybe not if not. I still won't accept the item back unless they can remove the blemish. In a way though I hoped they would think 'well here's a customer who is spending serious money with us (and probably will again) we'll do what we can to put right what is not right'. Especially as I pointed out to them that the last item I bought from them (a 15mm TV Plossl) had a grease mark on the eye lens which they agreed I could clean off and I did with no problem.

To be fair to them they have been reasonable so far and hopefully will agree to return my postage when they agree there's a fault and replace the item.

I'd sooner give their name when they have had a chance to put the matter right - not after a witch hunt. When I do finish this thread with a summary, it will of course only be facts.

I agree Olly, it will be superb when it is in my sweaty palms for good and I was sorely tempted to take up their offer of weekend use but felt I was risking losing the right to return.

[Moonshane]

or the 22mm Nagler or the 24mm Panoptic or.............?

true enough! I think I read that Panoptics work better in SCTs than Naglers? not sure why though.

[nightfisher]

wow! £360 for an ep! they must be good for that money, i have just ordered a gso 12mm and grumbled at paying £29

on a more serious note i hope that the issue gets resolved in your favour and soon

[Moonshane]

it is a lot of money but it's an eyepiece that will last me forever even if I get a much larger (or even a much smaller) scope and I sold some books which raised the bulk of the funds so there was not too much pain this is also how I see eyepieces; as cash invested. e.g. with this one even a used one (they are rarely sold) would be £300+ and therefore my 'rental' for the time I have it is 'just' £60 for one of the best eyepieces money can buy. the enjoyment they bring is much better than 1% if you are lucky in the bank.

[spaceboy]

It's funny you mention this imperfection Shane. My 7mm Nag arrived with a blemish on the eye lens and some free green paint around the top of the chrome nose piece. Not one to waste endless amounts of cash having to keep returning things I thankfully with some TLC a microfiber cloth and a bit of distilled water did manage to get the blemish out the lens and a tooth pick got the green paint of the nose piece but still for the money they charge for these things you would think QC would be on top of this stuff. I have not seen any image degration in the 7mm compared to my other Nags so there was no sleep lost. BUT! I have got the exact same thing you mention in the 26 nag, in my radian. As far as I can make out it is a multi coatings drip between the top two lens's. It's so small it cannot be seen when looking at the sky but I do notice it when looking at the moon. It's not distracting but it's there. For the price I payed for the radian second hand it doesn't concern me but you have to consider someone at one time payed full money for the EP only to have a flaw in the coatings. What I would hazard a guess at is they are are caused by minute particles of dust or air bubbles on the lens when they apply the multi coatings and are not picked up before the coatings get baked on. Kinda like some new cars get little pimples in the paint work. I think the thing with Televues is some good publicizing and an 82'-100' gimmick that makes them out to be the holy grail in EP's. At the end of the day they are probably made in the same Taiwan factory's as the cheap £30 POS plossls you get free with telescopes. The price tag at the end of the day means nothing if the guy in QC isn't happy with his salary.

SPACEBOY

[Moonshane]

cheers Nick - strange you found this blemish too! In truth had it been pre-owned I'd have probably accepted it and just forgotten about it but a new eyepiece should be perfect (or as near as can be) on day one so I want one that is.

you are probably spot on with your comments about QC but TV advertise that every single eyepiece goes back to their USA offices and is personally checked by their staff who are presumably responsible and efficient (and conscientious) employees. That said, maybe some people would not have noticed this and been happy and perhaps they build this into their QC acceptable parameters?

[John]

Sorry your T5 26mm was not up to scratch Shane

I've bought a number of TV's, probably from the same supplier, and those have all been immaculate. TV state that they test and check every eyepiece before passing it as OK for sale - I hope they have not relaxed that standard to satisfy the demand that the worldwide 20% off promotion has generated

[Dai150PL]

I got a 25mm TV plossl a few months ago that came with a piece of cleaning cloth under the glass. Thought I was seeing things, as I thought that all TV EP's have top quality QC checks. Returned it at my expense which was grating but love using the cloth free one now. ( A strand of cloth about 4mm long, in centre of view )

[astroimpulse]

Looks like you could have been 1 in a million. Shame these didn't go up in value like some items with defects (stamps etc).

But there's no way on this earth that you're a 'moaner' for wanting it changed. No way. You paid top whack for top glass. Anything less just won't do. Even if it was a £50 ep...I'd not be happy. Rightly so too

Looking forward to your happy post on the replacement

[Gadget]

I must admit i was a bit disappointed with TV’S quality control i recently bought a 2.5x powermate only to find when opened the thumbscrew was bent to the point it could not be turned and i don't think it would have been caused during delivery as the screw is quite thick/strong and a knock hard enough to bend it would have showed damage elsewhere but it was changed no problem

Kevin

[spaceboy]

TV advertise that every single eyepiece goes back to their USA offices and is personally checked by their staff .

That's just not good business sense especially in these difficult financial times. TV has to be as competitive as the next company selling EP's. To needlessly increase the costs of there eye pieces due to the added expense of shipping every EP from Twain/Japan to the U.S. and then back out to distributes around the globe would be utter madness. Think how much cheaper a Ethos would be not having to ship the weight of that box around the planet several times! A cheaper Ethos = more sales and so more profit. Surly it would be cheaper to set up offices in the manufacturing country if that was the case. Dose the U.S. own land in Taiwan? I think they do in Japan after the whole WWII thing. If they do I guess they could say they are shipped back to U.S "soil" and they get checked by there staff.

[John]

:eek: That's just not good business sense especially in these difficult financial times. TV has to be as competitive as the next company selling EP's. To needlessly increase the costs of there eye pieces due to the added expense of shipping every EP from Twain/Japan to the U.S. and then back out to distributes around the globe would be utter madness. Think how much cheaper a Ethos would be not having to ship the weight of that box around the planet several times! A cheaper Ethos = more sales and so more profit. Surly it would be cheaper to set up offices in the manufacturing country if that was the case. Dose the U.S. own land in Taiwan? I think they do in Japan after the whole WWII thing. If they do I guess they could say they are shipped back to U.S "soil" and they get checked by there staff.

I understand your point but one of the reasons that people are prepared to pay what they do for TV stuff is the high level of quality control and testing that they apply to everything they sell (clearly not with 100% success though as demonstrated by this thread ).

I believe that all the checking is done at TV's base at Chester, NY.

I've heard it said that a significant slice of the price we pay is for the units that they reject ......

[Rossco72]

Shane,

I had a very similar experience with a 12mm Nagler.

Looking from a couple of inches back from the lens it appeared to have a mark on the glass, either inside or it looked like it might even have been a chip in the glass.

I sent it back to a well established vendor who replaced it but also commented that they couldn't find anything wrong and that what I thought was a mark on the glas was really reflections in the optics due to the concave nature of the lenses and the way the light was hitting the EP because I was far back.

Well in a similar light the new EP was the same, however from close up I couldn't see a thing and in the scope it was flawless.

At least however TH replaced first and asked questions later...

[Moonshane]

Shane,

I had a very similar experience with a 12mm Nagler.

Looking from a couple of inches back from the lens it appeared to have a mark on the glass, either inside or it looked like it might even have been a chip in the glass.

I sent it back to a well established vendor who replaced it but also commented that they couldn't find anything wrong and that what I thought was a mark on the glas was really reflections in the optics due to the concave nature of the lenses and the way the light was hitting the EP because I was far back.

Well in a similar light the new EP was the same, however from close up I couldn't see a thing and in the scope it was flawless.

At least however TH replaced first and asked questions later...

cheers Stuart

I didn't take it home and inspect with a magnifying glass but the more I looked at it, the more it looked like a chip in the glass. I am as sure as I can be that it wasn't reflections but you never know. In fact I recall now that it seemed to cast a shadow on one of the internal baffles so I am sure it was something real.

Let's hope I get a replacement soon.