eyepieces

starfirez · Post by **starfirez** » Sun Oct 26, 2003 2:35 pm

oh wira found a celestron 45 degree diagonal and throw it to me too.. so diagonal shoudn't be a prob.. its the eye pieces.. soBz

harlequin2902 · Post by **harlequin2902** » Sun Oct 26, 2003 2:40 pm

but wanted a good eyepiece with good contrast, high magnification performance,a reasonable wide view and bearing Al Nagler's trademark. I found that in the Radian series. most that have seen through it was impressed by its optics (for $430+, it better be !)

rich

If you ignore Al Nagler's trademark for a while, the old Pentax XL's (about the same price as Radians) and new XW's (more expensive than Type 6 Naglers) are also more or less designed with Radian-like functions (high contrast, long eye relief, wide angle, adjustable eyecup etc..) and I think the new XW's have now gone even furthur into the Panoptics' territory with a slightly larger AFOV plus better eye relief. Hm, maybe one day we will have an even newer series by Pentax to compete against the Naglers in the 82 deg class !

But so far, honestly speaking - of all the eyepieces I've ever used till now, *performance PLUS comfort*-wise, the XL's are very hard to beat (with the exception of the newer XW's of course).

harlequin2902 · Post by **harlequin2902** » Sun Oct 26, 2003 2:47 pm

oh wira found a celestron 45 degree diagonal and throw it to me too.. so diagonal shoudn't be a prob.. its the eye pieces.. soBz

You will still need a 90 degree star diagonal soon so that you won't hurt your neck while observing with your scope pointed at objects higher up in the sky.

starfirez · Post by **starfirez** » Sun Oct 26, 2003 2:56 pm

really ah!! sobz.. can see that i'll be broke for years to come. but diagonal shouldn't be as much problem as eyepieces.. right? i think i better settle them one by one..

Post by **weixing** » Sun Oct 26, 2003 4:05 pm

Hi,
A 45 deg diagonal is not useful for astronomy observation, get a 90 deg diagonal...

Anyway, do you have any eyepiece at the moment to start with ?? I got two eyepiece, a SMA25mm and a SMA10mm, that I didn't use... I can loan it to you, so that you can start to use your telescope... To me the quality of a plossel and a SMA seem not much difference, may be you can compare it and see whether you can see any difference..

gwenyi · Post by **gwenyi** » Sun Oct 26, 2003 7:32 pm

from my own experience, the televue 32mm plossl and the 25mm SMA gives us different views. A few months back, while i was at dempsey, chee chien was kind enough to lend me the 32mm plossl and image showed has a relatively large difference. the 32mm tv plossl gives an image with a darker background, and the stars appear to be brighter.

hope this helps ^.^

Post by **Airconvent** » Mon Oct 27, 2003 1:00 am

gwenyi wrote:from my own experience, the televue 32mm plossl and the 25mm SMA gives us different views. A few months back, while i was at dempsey, chee chien was kind enough to lend me the 32mm plossl and image showed has a relatively large difference. the 32mm tv plossl gives an image with a darker background, and the stars appear to be brighter.

hope this helps ^.^

of course lah...:-)
one is a Televue Plossl while the other is a generic SMA!
But at 32mm, the TCV's magnification is also smaller, so logically should appear brighter also since more light into the scope.

rich

gwenyi · Post by **gwenyi** » Mon Oct 27, 2003 1:05 am

the televue way ~ =p

Post by **Airconvent** » Mon Oct 27, 2003 1:07 am

harlequin2902 wrote: If you ignore Al Nagler's trademark for a while, the old Pentax XL's (about the same price as Radians) and new XW's (more expensive than Type 6 Naglers) are also more or less designed with Radian-like functions (high contrast, long eye relief, wide angle, adjustable eyecup etc..) and I think the new XW's have now gone even furthur into the Panoptics' territory with a slightly larger AFOV plus better eye relief. Hm, maybe one day we will have an even newer series by Pentax to compete against the Naglers in the 82 deg class !
But so far, honestly speaking - of all the eyepieces I've ever used till now, *performance PLUS comfort*-wise, the XL's are very hard to beat (with the exception of the newer XW's of course).

Let's use the car as an analogy. The new Kia Magentis is a 2.0 litre car that cost only $80K+ and you get all the luxuries of the other "big names" like Lexus, Mercedes and BMW. While the Magentis, winning a few awards in the US will perform admirably, people will "feel" they get more value for money paying $100K+ for a BMW or Lexus...I don't think I will get the kind of feel from a Pentax than with a Radian (actual performance aside).
I guess this is part of the dynamics of astro equipment where pure performance is not the only criteria....that's why so many people still buy TV scopes...
But now that I have a "premium" main eyepiece, if I ever need to buy a another EP (and get "suan" by CC,), then I will consider a Pentax..

Post by **Airconvent** » Mon Oct 27, 2003 1:10 am

Hi Starfirez,
But getting back to the topic, Wei Xing's recommendation is good enough.
Why not just buy these "foundation" pieces first, use it for a while and once you are more familiar, you will be able to decide what gaps in your range you need to address...

rich