Image of the day

Captured by
Douglas Rollain

M20 Trifid Nebula in LRGBHa

My Account

New to Astromart?

Register an account...

Need Help?

Observing Report 24 vs 22 Panoptics

Started by Milt, 01/05/2003 06:07PM
Posted 01/05/2003 06:07PM Opening Post
I recently received my new 24Pan from ATWB (<1 wk!) The following comparisons used my only scope, a TV-101 (4" f/5.4). To start with, there are several non-optical advantages for the 24Pan: Parfocal with most other TV EP's, less than half the weight of the 22Pan, compact size, and a more comfortable (for me) smaller diameter eye cup.

My observing was done over two mild (45F) clear nights in AZ. Reviewing my notes, I realized that every difference I noted related back to the 10% change in FOV and/or Mag - not the optics themselves, which are both excellent.

CONTRAST: M31/32/110 is a beautiful sight in either EP. I used the outer reaches of M31 and shape & orientation of M110 to test contrast, and after much swapping back and forth decided I could see no difference. Likewise, on a last look at the Veil (only brighter half visible w/ Orion UltraBlock), I could detect no difference.

COLOR: For bright objects, I waited until after 11pm to use Jupiter and Sirius. When centered in the field of either EP, Jupiter had a sharp limb with bands visible and Sirius was a dense white ball. However, when either object was moved to the edge of the field in any direction, they produced inward magenta fringing. This effect was identical in the 22Pan and 24Pan, suggesting that it may be coming from the scope itself.

10% FOV DIFF: In my 101 I can't quite fit all 3 stars of Orion's belt into the FOV of the 22Pan, but I can comfortably with the 24Pan. When focused on the center star Alnilam, both outer stars remain focused, and the wide double Mintaka is a sharp split just inside the field stop. Similarly, with the Double Cluster at the edge of the FOV, the huge Stock 2 cluster doesn't quite fit in the 22Pan, but does in the 24Pan. The stars are pinpoint throughout the field - beautiful.

10% MAG DIFF: No one is going to use these EP's to split tight doubles, but I tried the lovely 10" double Almach anyway. Here, the 22Pan was marginally better at showing a white protrusion off the orange globe.

So I would definitely give the 24Pan the edge, but for factors other than image quality. I have to wonder if the 24Pan would even exist if Meade had not one-upped TV with their 24.5 SWA ;-)

Clear Skies, Milt
Posted 01/06/2003 05:01AM #1
Well, on the one-upped business, the 24.5mm Meade SWA was a contemporary of the 24mm Tele Vue Wide Field. Some say it was a derived product, but at the least I think you could say that the Meade SWA's were "inspired" by the Wide Fields. Tele Vue's decision to introduce 22mm and 27mm Panoptics to begin with may have had something to do with the Panoptic line topping out at 35mm instead of 40mm like the Wide Fields. I'm sure that all the reasons, whatever they may have been, were deemed good at the time, especially with the big Dob revolution in full swing and generating, no doubt, a lot of demand for high-end eyepieces with 2" barrels. But for the long haul at least, Tele Vue had discounted too much the value of generating the widest possible true field in a 1.25" focuser, and it had to end up costing them sales. I'm sure they realized this soon enough, but perhaps only after Al had successfully shrunk the 9mm and formerly huge 13mm Naglers to their Type 6 versions did a 24mm Panoptic for 1.25" focusers seem like a logical next project.
--
Mike