View Single Post
  #25  
Old 18-09-2019, 07:07 AM
Don Pensack's Avatar
Don Pensack
Registered User

Don Pensack is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 507
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonius View Post
But doesn't it seem strange that Pentax had the luxury of designing *any eyepiece they liked* to match their scopes, but settled on an 'inferior design'?


It implies they either didn't know, (the eyepieces are not cheap - they could have used a different design) or that the design is not actually as problematic as people say it is.


I have to say, I'm not as experienced as some, but I bought my set based on A/B Nagler comparisons and I found the Pentax to be a shade more contrasty, though it was splitting hairs.


But field curvature has never been an issue for me. Perhaps because the eye is an imperfect instrument. Curvature in a photographic setting is terrible, but in a visual observing scenario where you're trying to keep your eye centred on a <5mm exit pupil... field curvature has to be quite extreme before it's even noticable. It's far less noticable than other abberations, IMO.


All I know is that I don't go from a 20mm to a 5mm and suddenly go 'yuck!'.



-Markus
Markus,
The ability to accommodate field curvature diminishes with age. Older observers may not be able to accommodate the FC of certain focal lengths of the XW.
Reply With Quote