The Perfect Eyepiece Spread for a C-14?

Greetings:

My head's spinning from reading the hype (and anti-hype) about various brands and designs of EPs. I've tried out a number of expensive and "bargain-priced" EPs and decided that Panoptics or Naglers would be best for me.

Since EP performance is affected by the design of the scope and I have a C-14, I'd like to get some feedback from folks with 10" and larger SCTs. Many of the eyepiece reviews I've read were written by folks using fast Newts, small refractors or smaller reflectors. It's great to read that stuff, but I've found that my mileage "varies." That said, the budget IS an issue if I want to remain married.

For planets, my old orthos and Plossls will work fine. Deep sky observing dominates my interest, so the EP purchase is mostly for that type of observing. If I were to buy two EPs, a Barlow, and maybe a focal reducer for my C-14, what "set" of EPs would give me the most versatility (from a magnification standpoint) without overlap? Or do these EPs not work well with Barlows and focal reducers? I'm thinking of going Panoptic, but a Nagler with a fair amount of eye relief would be considered. Or, is "Nagler" and "long eye relief" an oxy-moron? Thanks for any ideas!

- Chuck

Chuck --

I have a 16" f/10 SCT which has almost the exact same focal length as your 14" f/11. I've also gone the Pan/Nagler route.

I use the Panoptics at the longer focal lengths because I find the Naglers somewhat cost-prohibitive. I've got a Panoptic 41 and 27 to cover that end.

I have a Panoptic 19 and Nagler 11 T6 to cover the shorter focal lengths, but I find their eye-relief a bit too short. I'm currently replacing them with 12 and 17mm Nagler T4s. (The T4's have plenty of eyerelief, while the other designs are more focal-length-dependant.)

I originally got Tak LEs for planetary, but I'm replacing them with volcano-top UO orthos. I like the color-free views of the orthos, and they don't fog as readily as the Taks do.

I like to keep things as simple as possible in the dark, so I avoid barlows. Even my variable polarizer bugs me, but I've found it's pretty much required for the planets with 16" of aperture.

If I had to do without one of those, it'd be the 12mm T4. You could get a lot done with the P41, P27, and 17T4.

-- Jeff.

Hi Chuck,

I tried many an eyepiece for my C14 to get the best out of it as I'm a purely visual observer. I kept away from focal reducers as I wanted to see the objects the best I could, if that mean't sacrificing FOV then so be it. Out of the many, many eyepieces I looked through I would highly recommend these eyepieces
41mm Pan ( gives 95x mag ) for max FOV, the 35mm Pan ( 112x ) is a very nice eyepiece also but is limited on objects like the double cluster where you need the max FOV of the 41mm Pan, If you go with the 35mm you would sometime down the line ask yourself why didn't you go with the 41mm.
Either ( I kept both ) 22mm Nagler Type 4 ( 178x ) or 17mm Nagler Type 4 ( 230x ) both have good eye-relief and are great medium power eyepieces. I have never viewed any globular cluster with any eyepiece I have tried better than with these 2 Naglers, they just seem to frame them perfectly.
If binoviewing, ( I must add that I used the Denk II with dual arm powerswitch ) again I tried lots of pairs but the best all-round performer I found for both deep-sky and planetary viewing are the 19mm Pans.

Good luck in which you decide to choose!

Mark.

Hello:
The scope I mostly use these days is a 12.5" f/15 cassegrain, which in many respects is similar to your C14. As a wide field finder eyepiece, I recently got a 55mm plossl. For my main observing, I use a 31mm and 17mm Naglers. For planetary observing, I use plossls from 26mm to 12mm with a barlow. I really like the 31mm "grenade" for deep sky observing since it gives about as wide a field of view as is possible in a 2" eyepiece, yet also gives a high enough magnification (150x) to see real detail in galaxies. I use the 17mm in cases where I'd like more magnification. For deep sky observing, these two are about all I use, with the 31mm getting the bulk of the action. Both of these eyepieces have plenty of eyerelief, and I regularly observe with my glasses on. I haven't tried these with a barlow since the 17mm typically gives plenty of magnification for deep sky work.

Cheers
Mike Connelley