Posts Made By: William Rose

Hi Steve,
I've had a PST with Double Stack filter for a year+ now. Having tried about ever eyepiece manufactured with the combination I have similar feels to Bob. The Coronado eyepieces are hard to beat. The next best tend to be simple design (fewer elements) eyepieces. Think 'Planetary'. Interestingly my Zeiss Abbe Orthos do not seem to preform as well as my Pentax SMC EPs. Don't know why but a couple people have done a direct comparison and made the same remarks.
Generally I've found anything below 12mm in an Ortho/Kellner only gives you a portion of the Sun, anything less than about 8mm starts to loose detail depending on conditions even at high altitude (Above 6,000'). I tried my Zeiss Barlow once for fun and it worked fine. I have on occasion been able to use a 5 or 6mm when transparency allowed but not often.
To be honest, except for FOV, I've found little difference between a good 6mm ortho and a 6mm Radian. The ortho has maybe a bit more detail.
Just for fun, try any decent plossls, orthos, or Kellners you may have handy. The results may just surprise you.
Clear Skies, Bill

Jason Paoletti said:

Does anybody use a Barlow before the diagonal. I am set to get my first refractor around July. I will be using a 1.25" diagonal. I would like to use my 2x TV Barlow before the diagonal for an effective 3x. I will be using orthos. Will I have any issues with focus? Too much in or out focus?
Jason

Hi Jason,
As noted, the Barlow in front of the eyepiece or Diagonal/eyepiece will work if you have enough focus travel to accommodate the application in your refractor. I have an AP Barcon which is designed to be used in front of or after or even with extension tubes to provide varying magnification. I've used other Barlows in a similar fashion really just to see how it works. On scopes such as TV Genesis, NP-127, AP Traveler, and AP 152 StarFire it works fine. On other scopes such as some of the less expensive wide fields (80mm f/5.6) there isn't enough travel in the focuser to bring them to focus.
So it really depends on your refractor & eyepiece used. Let us know which refractor and what ortho's and we might be able to give you a better idea if it'll work.
Clear Skies, Bill

“ . . Okay, with that as background, I have a question. Certain of the older Naglers (*cough* 20mm Type 2 *cough*) are quite collectible and often raved about. Various reviews tout the coatings on the newer Type 5s and 6s as being superior to the coating son the older units, and the better size efficiency of the Type 6 in particular is undeniable. There is no comparison in contrast and throughput between my old Nagler knock off 14mm UWA and my new 7mm Type 6. How do the newer Naglers stack up against the old favorites? Is there any reason other than sentamentality to own the older designs?”

Hi Jim,
Due to a ‘trade deal', I have recently acquired several of the “older”/“original” Naglers. Before shipping them off I wanted to add them as baseline of a comparison test I’m working on. I have tested several 4.8mm, 7mm, 9mm, and the 20mm Naglers in the last couple months. As an example I have tested at least 2 each of the 4.8mm with ring & ‘Circle-N’ trademark, the 4.8 smooth side with ‘Circle-N’ trademark, the smooth side from Japan without the ‘Circle-N’ trademark, the early 4.8mm from Taiwan, and the current manufacture 4.8mm, T1. Similar tests were made with the 7mm & 9mm Naglers and the 4.8 & 7mm, T1 against the 5mm & 7mm, T6. Regarding your specific question about the 20mm T2 versus the T5, I have both but not matched pairs for Binoviewing. *Cont*

Some general impressions without going into detail:
The Earlier T1 eyepieces do seem to give better through put. The light transmission overall is consistently better although there were a few cases where those from ROC seemed to at least match a specific 1980’s manufacture. Reading the first part of your post I could use similar adjectives about being able to see & feel the nebulas a little better.
The current manufacture eyepieces do better in Light Pollution & with bright sidelight. They seem to hold up better with a bright object near the object observed. I’ve taken them into parks in Denver and found the current manufacture at least equal the original T1’s & T2’s when the Bortle Dark-Sky Scale is Class 7 and higher. When viewing a DSO on a brightly lit night (Full Moon, etc.) I found the same thing. Interestingly, I also found viewing a DSO within a degree+ from something like Jupiter equaled the playing field. So if you usually observe from a Bortle Dark-Sky Scale Class 5 to 4 or better site, you’ll probably see a difference as long as the Moon cooperates and there isn’t a planet next to the DSO you’re after.
I can also tell you the quality of the optical chain plays a part in defining the differences observed between the two models. In a quality f/8 refractor the early manufacture Naglers just tend to perform a little better assuming the viewing and transparency conditions allow for very good seeing. *Cont*

With an achromatic like a C4R it’s hard to see much difference. There was no doubt for 3 of us using a 12.5” StarMaster & binoviewer that the early 4.8 thru 9mm where more pleasing than their current T1 & T6 counterparts. We all had the same reaction to the 20mm T2 & T5 EPs but also agreed the ergonomics of the T5 out weighed the hassles of the T2 for average viewing.
To directly answer your question, “Yes”, there are reasons beyond sentimentality for seeking out a well cared for original Nagler in several of the focal lengths. But that’s only if you have a scope, site, and conditions that will make use of their traits. For most people they’ll never see a difference.

Your narrative implies that your observing habits & capabilities have grown to a stage where you can appreciate the nuances of high quality optics and their interplay with conditions. That also means you’ll start noticing differences between combinations of optics and conditions. That leads to multiple telescopes & eyepieces and many hours of observing to determine which combinations work best on what objects under the existing conditions. Hopefully your budget will allow you try a few of the ‘Oldies’ and make your own decision. I would suggest that you do a side by side comparison with the same telescope on the same night. The differences between a 7mm, Smooth Side & a 7mm, T6 are subtle and can be dependant on other factors. *Cont*

Good luck, have fun and most of all Enjoy!

Clear Skies, Bill

For the record, the Nagler eyepieces mentioned were compared over a period of a couple months mostly at a Bortle Class 4 to Class 3 site @ 6,600’ El. using the following scopes/equipment:
TAK 60mm FC-60E
Meade 277 Refractor
Vixen 80mm MCT
Vixen BT-80M-A
TV Genesis – 102mm
AP Traveler – 102mm
Meade ETX-125
Vixen BT-125 HFT
TV NP-127
AP 152mm StarFire (Super Planetary)
7" f/15 MCT
Celestron C9.25 SCT
12.5” Starmaster w/ZOC
Celestron/Denkmeier, Nikon, and Baader MaxBright Binoviewers
The eyepieces are just a sample I snapped a pic of for John D. one night before going out to observe with the BT-125 HFTs.

Alan French said:

Marj and Roland Christen of AP brought two binoculars to NEAF. One was a 10.5x70 and the other was a 15x70, both made by a small company in China that makes military optics.

I assume these are the binoculars he started a thread on in early Feb.
http://www.astromart.com/forums/viewpost.asp?forum_post_id=414576&poll_id=&news_id=&page=

(I haven't tried posting a link before so if it doesn't work it's message #414576 posted 2/9/2006 @ 6:14PM )

Clear Skies, Bill

Jeffrey Kurtz said:

Anyone use this...curious to get comments...does it work as well as the Kendrick products.

I ran across a Gentleman in Kentucky who owned one. The night we used it wasn't a particularly cool/damp evening but it seemed to work acceptably. Sorry I can't give you a better or more direct comparison to Kendrick's. From the one night using the Thousand Oaks, it does seem to work well.
Clear Skies, Bill

Floyd Blue said:

I can not get down to three. Seriously. I just have too many favorites.

I agree with Floyd! That’s a tough question. The problem is different objects require different types of eyepieces. Limiting it to say 5 eyepieces I’d probably choose my Zeiss A-4 or A-6, 5mm Nagler, Zeiss (or Pentax SMC) Zoom, 16mm Nagler, and Leitz 30mm 88°. Add in an 11mm Nagler with a 20mm Nagler & 24mm Panoptic and that’s about 75% of what I use overall when I’m not doing planetary or Lunar observing.

So OK, we’re limited to 3. Because of varying situations I’ll give you some scenarios of Location & Telescopes then give you a couple price range choices as my answer.

At home & our cabin (dark site in Pike National Forest)
12.5” StarMaster, C9.25, and TV NP-127:
1st choice: My 10mm Zeiss Abbe Ortho, Zeiss (or Pentax SMC) Zoom, Leitz 30mm 88°
Mid Price: 8mm or 10mm Carl Zeiss Jena Ortho, TV 8-24 Zoom, Clavé 30mm 2” Barrel.
Modest Price: 8mm or 10mm Baader Ortho, Vixen LV Zoom, Siebert 36mm Observatory Grade. (You can substitute any of the several good 8-10mm Orthos or even the 9mm TMB/Burgess for the 1st)

TV Genesis, A-P Traveler, 7” MCT:
Same as above because of the 2” focuser but because of the shorter focal length I’d go with a 4mm to 6mm Ortho.

Clear Skies, Bill

Jeff Terry said:

Hi All,

I recently purchased a Canon 15 x 50 is binocular. It appears to drain the battery when not in use.
I put in fresh lithium batteries, use if for an hour, and come back the next day to find the batteries drained.

This is a bit of an annoyance. I shut off the IS and it has a 5 minute shut-off feature anyway so I don't know
what could be draining the batteries overnight.

Has anyone else seen this?

Thanks,

Jeff

Hi Jeff,
My apologies for taking so long to respond. I had to find a Canon 15x50IS to check, etc.
If you have not already sent them back, do so. I can confirm that the pair I tested have no battery drain when switched off either manually or through the automatic shutoff. The electronic meter I attached to check current drain actually draws more power to take a reading than the Binoculars themselves in the "Off" mode.
You definitely have some kind of issue with either the Binoculars or a bad battery pack. Either way, since they're new, you shouldn't have a problem getting the issue resolved.
Clear Skies, Bill