Panoptic/Nagler Question

I'm about to start acquiring my first Panoptics and Naglers, and I was wondering if I could lend on your experiences with them.
I was wondering if they are good for planetary use. I currently have Televue Plossls and UO Orthos, and I was wondering if they would be comparable to these in detail. I am trying to find out if I should replace what I have with Panoptics and Naglers, or should I keep some of the ones I have and just get Panoptics for lower powers. I am asking because I was planning on selling what I have to finance this upgrade.
Any advice I could get on this would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks a lot,
Mike

Well, I personally own a Nagler 9mm type1 and the whole set of UO Orthos... plus some plossls on the side... ;-)

For planetary detail, IMHO, my UO Orthos are better than the Nagler... (this does not mean I don't love it, but it is just not meant to be a "High detail Planetary" eyepiece... IMHO again)(lets not talk about the FOV!)

If you are going for planets, I think you have some of the best eyepieces already, without going into the Zeiss Orthos or something else that will kill your budget. (unless money is no issue...)

Might also want to look into the Radians, as they are more of the planetary type of eyepiece from Televue... and I heard they are great...


My .02 cents well spent.



Clear dark skies!


Ivan

Well, all this stuff works okay. I'd keep the Plossls and UO Abbes for planetary use and upgrade to whatever you'd like for deep sky, but if there is a focal length where you want dual use for deep sky and planetary, you might want to consider a type 6 Nagler. I use type 6 Naglers for planetary use in my 10" f/5 Newt, but I don't recommend them OVER Plossls and Abbes with Barlows in that scope (or over Plossls and Abbes even without Barlows in somewhat slower scopes).

When switching like this, especially for planetary use, it's best to take it slow and do selected comparisons yourself before going whole hog.
--
Mike

I got a 4.8 Nagler for planetary viewing just so I wouldn't have to keep moving the undriven scope to keep up. So if your scope is hand powered too, the extra field is well worth it. Otherwise, for planets I would be very happy with a narrower Ortho or Plossl field.

Charlie

Michael,

Maybe it would make sense to just buy one T6 Nagler in a focal length about equal to your current best planetary EP, and do a comparison in you own scope. If you decide you want to sell the Nagler on Astromart, you probably lose about 50 bucks to get your question answered. Not too bad.

Steve

Mike,

You didn't mention whether your telescope had a drive. If it does I suggest that you follow the latter course of action. If it doesn't have a drive you may just want to consider a type 6 Nagler or two as well.

Dave Mitsky

If you dont need to wear eye glasses you will be hard pressed to find better planetary eyepieces than the UO orthos. I love them but unfortunately I have to take my glasses off to use them under the 10MM Focal Length. If you are on a budget at all keep what you have and add some longer FL Naglers or Panoptics. The 27MM Panoptic is my favourite low power eyepiece in my 10"/F5. I also like Radians as planetary eyepieces but they are no sharper than the UO orthos, just a wider field and a LOT more eye relief.


Clear Skies
John Bambury