Pentax v Nagler Wars?

[Stephen65]

The Pentax v Nagler wars are back on over in the CN Eyepiece forum. What started as a routine thread asking about XWs which largely drew fair comments and comparisons with the Naglers has deteriorated, now I am reading that XWs show a "mushy" image and lack contrast, that a 16mm Nagler shows a darker sky background than a 5XW etc.

I'm not so much interested in the merits of the specific points, which we can all debate in that thread if so minded, but more the general issue - why is it that whenever a thread on CN contains praise of the XW a few (and I emphasise a few) Nagler fans feel compelled to bag it with exaggerated criticisms? That sort of thing never happens here.

Is it simple patriotism (US company v Japanese company), familiarity only with the US product, the need to justify large expenditures on Naglers or what? Regardless its an interesting cultural phenomenon particularly from the perspective of someone who is neither American or Japanese.

[StarLane]

Yep, You have to be careful what you say about XW's over at CN. Not sure why some people need to bag XW's. They seem to think there is only one EP, the Nagler. I reckon half the people that rip off Pentax have probably never tried one.

They are both very nice EP's, but also very different. Not sure they can really be compared to each other anyway. For one, the Nags are 82's and the XW's are 70's, ER is different (apart from the longer Nagler focal lengths), XW's have twist up eyecups etc etc.

As usual it comes down to personal preferences. Everyone is different and our eyes are also very different. What performs great for one person may not perform the same for someone else.

I have looked through afew Naglers and I was impressed, but for me, I don't need the 82 degrees, I prefer more ER and user comfort over long viewing sessions, the XW's deliver this.

I guess the Americans are just protecting their home made brand.

[casstony]

I know people who will stick with their opinion regardless of the evidence to the contrary. At first it's frustrating trying to reason with them, then it becomes painful watching them come up with all sorts of convoluted ideas to support their view, or they might even attack on some unrelated front. I don't bother arguing once I work out that someone's like that. The last such discussion I recall was about who saved us from the Japanese in WWII, the British or the Americans: answer seems obvious to me.

[Starkler]

Al Nagler is seen by some as the great home grown hero who brought wide field viewing to the masses, and can do no wrong in the eyes of some.
To buy a nagler is the patriotic thing to do, and to buy a Japanese product is the exact opposite for some of the older ex war horses.

Its a strange phenomenon. Newbies starting out with plossl eyepieces and feeling the need to upgrade, see the naglers held up as being the ultimate viewing experience. I personally dont agree that this is always the case as different nagler types and focal lengths have very different characteristics.

Its taken a good few years, but finally there are those willing to be open minded enough to consider alternatives like the Pentaxs and Vixen LVW's.

It all goes to show that in astronomy forums it pays to do your research, work out whos opinions can be trusted and then see for yourself.

[tnbk00]

even more ironic that the naglers are made in japan or Taiwan anyway. Patriotism at its shallowest.

[ausastronomer]

I am not even going to comment on whether a Pentax is better than a Nagler. Suffice to say, they are both premium products and absolutely outstanding. I own several of both. The drivel I just read where one idiot commented that a 10mm Pentax XW gives "mushy" views and the other stating that "it lacked contrast", is just plain poppy cockk.

That sort of rubbish is the very reason I rarely waste my time posting on Cloudy Nights or any internet forum for that matter these days. Too many people that haven't got a clue expressing an uninformed opinion, making it very difficult for the newbie to sort the wheat from the chaff.

Cheers,
John B

[GrahamL]

Sorry I don't see anymore than a healty debate going on there in regard
to eyepiece choices ... personal experiances and opinions all figure in
>imho<.. If theres a little intolerance to respecting others views in there isn't our side of the pond more than a little guilty as well ?.

[ausastronomer]

Here's a link to an article in OEG magazine about a new gunpowder sold by America's leading gunpowder manufacturer and distributor.
http://www.oegmag.com/Hodgdonsbenchmarkpowder.asp

Picture the number of guns in the US and you get a handle on how much gunpowder this company sells annually.

The new powder sold by Hodgdons is called "Benchmark". Read the spiel and you could easily think it's all Hodgdons work. What they clinically omit to tell you anywhere in the article (not by Hodgdons), is that this powder is actually manufactured in Australia at the Mulwalla plant by Australian Defence Industries, for Hodgdons; and has been sold very successfully in Australia for many years as "ADI Benchmark 2". The yanks thought it so good they asked ADI to make it for them and allow them to sell it under their own name. ADI also manufacture several of their other powders for Hogdons. For example, ADI's AR2208 is sold in the USA by Hodgdons as "Varget" and is one of the top US sellers. Unfortunately, they rarely receive acknowledgement of its Australian design and manufacture in any literature :)

Cheers,
John B

[skies2clear]

I have to agree with most of the others in labelling that discussion as drivel. It's so typical of the way these comparisons somehow threaten the reputation of Naglers, even though we all know Naglers are excellent products, but somehow, nothing else is accepted as excellent too, or possible preferrable to some. And usually even though no one has even suggested Naglers are anything less than premium optics. To me, it's boring and tiring. Now if the discussions were around the more subtle differences between the 2 types and opinions about their virtues in a balanced and truthful way, then fair enough. "Mushy?" That guy hasn't really looked through one I suspect. And he's a "photographer"...so what! I know photographers who are colourblind, or not artistically inclined at all.

Clear skies,
Nick

[circumpolar]

[quote=casstony;266277]I know people who will stick with their opinion regardless of the evidence to the contrary. At first it's frustrating trying to reason with them, then it becomes painful watching them come up with all sorts of convoluted ideas to support their view, or they might even attack on some unrelated front. I don't bother arguing once I work out that someone's like that. [quote]

I now what you mean. The logical fallacies are endless. Almost every forum has a handfull of them.
The bottom line is that they are different EPs. Sure, you can compare them but you must consider the parameters of the test and relate your findings accordingly. Consider different telescopes and seeing conditions, different peoples eyes and comfort. I suspect that most of these critics haven't looked through different scopes to see if there is a difference with these EPs.

[tnbk00]

It seems that people are more often than not arguing opinion on subjects such as this.
The Golden rules (IMHO ahh the irony) are:
1. If it cuts it for you great!
2. If your not sure if it will, be prepared for contradicting responses.
3. If you have spent the money and are trying to justify your purchase, then be prepared for further information that will make you question your purchase.

And most of all remember that people's judgment on the performance of any given thing is a matter of perspective.

Daniel

[Tannehill]

I'm with ausastronomer. I, too, own both, and enjoy them both greatly. More often than not mushy views are due to a mushy telescope or mushy collimation! I will pitch that the Naglers may be a bit less good high power planetary scope because of all their optical elements, but wow that is a subtle call when one is at the eyepiece without the luxury of several comparable mag EPs to make quick comparisons....

I would also point out that internet forums -Cloudy Nights and IIS included - have a small minority of incidiary posters who account for the vast majority of the confrontational posts (those we read and say, why did he say that, does he realize how he comes off? geesh?). But we shouldn't generalize about a forum, a country or any group of people based on the actions of a few. Every punchbowl has a few turds. Folks with unreasonable opinions written with poor etiquette. The more populated forums - like CN - will make that a more common problem with that forum, despite the noble efforts of the moderators.

And....another forum poster said something regarding such discussions that I still laugh about, because it is so true. He said, "When I first got into astronomy in 1953, I thought it was a science. But as the years have passed, I've come to realize it's a religion."

Regards, and here's looking to new moon....

[janoskiss]

I prefer the XWs in general. But having owned both types of EPs (incl Nagler T4,5,6s) and now having parted with the lot for financial reasons, astronomy has not stopped for me at all. I am using relatively inexpensive EPs but I don't feel that I'm getting less out of astronomy as a result - I enjoy it just as much. I thought I'd really miss these pricey EPs when I sold them (esp the XWs) but I have no urge to repurchase them anytime soon - and I'm not sure if I ever will.

[Mark]

I own some Naglers. I want some Pentax XW's.

If you own a Pentax and feel you need to get rid of it because Naglers are better, send your XW's to me immediately. I will give it a good home and you won't feel dirty anymore.

[ballaratdragons]

Last Novembers SV Astro Camp, I was presented with an XW.
That night was spent on the observing field with the 'XW', and 'Nagler', and 'Takahashi ED' EP's in and out of the scopes regularly.

The outcome: No easily discernable difference!
Actually, the owner of the Nagler felt a bit ripped off coz his Nagler cost a lot more.

We observed a lot of different objects to do the comparison properly.

My own opinion: They were all great, and no favourite was chosen. They were all . . . ummmm . . . amazing! :thumbsup:

But I still also use my GS EP's, and they keep me happy too.

[dugnsuz]

Simple choice for me...

none!:(

I can't afford either.:rolleyes:

Money is a great leveler don't you think!:lol:

Keep fighting the good fight guys

Doug:thumbsup:

[ngcles]

Hi All,

Yep, I'm with you all too on this issue. I happen to own several Naglers but the Pentax eyepieces are every bit as good. In the end I think it boils down to whether you want the extra field or not and personal choice.

I've looked through several Pentaxes and they were without exception brilliant. I've looked through a lot of Naglers and they were without exception brilliant. The UWANs are also sensational -- the 28mm particularly.

Having said that, I own a 20mm T II and in my experience _for me_, it is the best eyepiece of all -- full stop. That's not to rubbish the others, I guess it just suits my 'scope and my vision.

It is astonishing to see how far eyepieces have come in the last 30 yrs. Back then the best you could hope for was a good orthoscopic with Mgfl2 coatings.

Best,


Les D
Contributing Editor
AS&T

[Alchemy]

i only own one half decent eyepiece, it is a televue, because bought locally and only because it matches field of view for canon camera.

Cant see the fuss. its a bit like holden vs ford,, every one has their favourite sometimes one wins sometimes the other.

[rwong]

I own 35 Panoptics, 17 Nagler, 10 XW, 14 XW and 17 XW Pentax. They are all excellent EPs. Pentax offers a standard 20mm eye relief (from memory). That suits me as I wear glasses during observing.

I would not part any of these EPs.

Clear skies
WWP

[gts055]

Hi,

The tiresome eyepiece debate will never end. Competing products have followers, many of whom can be very narrow minded with no authority or qualification to pass comment. Its the same deal for Holden vs Ford, or Toyota 4WD vs Nissan 4WD, or Meade Vs Celestron and countless other products. Do some research for pleasure and take most of the bulls...t . you read with a grain of salt, but glean the valid non emotive points. Make your own decision as to what suits your eyes, the objects you wish to view, and the characteristics of instruments you will use. The crappiest eyepieces I own are the two in my head, but then they were free, so I can't complain :)

Have fun , Mark

[CoombellKid]

I can tell you one thing. It doesn't matter how good your ep's are, or how big
or expensive brand name scope you have. It isn't going to help you up here
on the north coast at present. Cloud is Cloud and no good with anything
astronomical.

Personally I like both these days and I can see the merits for my personal
like and dislikes. For instance most would know me to be pretty much a XW
geek, But I wouldn't think of swapping my 20mm t5 for a 20mm XW. I prefer
the shorter focal length of the XW and the longer focal length of the T5's
for me there is more merit in having the width in longer focal length naglers
and the cool crisp contrasty views of the shorter FL XW's. But neither can
give me the view of M31, LMC & SMC, the Milky Way that my $200.00
20x80's gives me. Everything suits a purpose. Some say the 14mm XW is
mushy at the EFOV and it's true in my 8" f/6, is it in your face and
distracting? No! I tend to use it over my crisp to the edge 10mm XW, Just
look at a cresent or quarter moon through a 8" f/6 newt and tell me it aint
beautiful, dont see any mushy bits there, excellent in the PST too. But I
sure the nagler eqivilent would work just as well. Not many folks probably
own one but on good nights the 3.5mm XW is an awesome planet ep. But
I must admit I dont use it very often, usually just quick checks.

Either way premium ep's are an investment no matter what flavour they are.
The resale value will always be good. And they'll perform over many different
types of scopes that may pass through your hands. Your premium ep's will
last a life time, enjoy them.

regards,CS

[CoombellKid]

Another thing, it's always good to walk around star parties with a 10 &
14mm XW in your pocket. Folks always wont to try them and you get to
look through more scopes : )

regards,CS

[rwong]

Thanks Rob

I will take yr advice of taking my 10XW and 14 XW to ASV's March star party.

As I do not intend to bring my own scope, I can choose which scope I want to have a look :)

Clear skies
WWP

[Starkler]

Heres a tip, try it with a paracorr.;) No more EOF mush as the paracorr works nicely as a field flattener. My 14XL and 20XW work very nicely to EOF now :)

[CoombellKid]

Geoff,

Yeah I've heard the old parrcorr does wonders, even for some naglers.
When the EOF starts to worry me I will most likely look into one. Presently
I've just got my scope back up and running, so seeing anything is a bonus
after a 3 month scopeless stint.

Mushy is probably too strong a word. Too me star look slightly bloated at the EOF.

regards,CS