Televue eyepiece advice please

[philipheaven]

Hello everyone,
I’m seeking some input on eyepiece purchases I’m considering. My telescope is an 8 inch f/5 reflector on an eq5 mount. My current eyepieces are all Plossls - a 25mm, a 10mm and a 6.3mm, as well as a Televue 2x Barlow. I enjoy both deep space and planetary viewing. I also appreciate decent eye relief (I’m sick and tired of peering through tiny Plossl eyepieces!).

I’ve decided to finally take the step and start a Televue eyepiece collection. I’m attracted to the quality of Televue (I was stunned at the quality of my Televue Barlow), as well as the ability to expand my field of view while at the same time increasing magnification.

Obviously with Televue being such outstanding pieces of equipment they are very expensive. I’ve also taken on the advice that every eyepiece collection should be well planned out and considered. In saying that, I can only purchase three eyepieces to start. With those initial three eyepieces I want to be able to cover a range of magnifications, as well as fields of view, until I can afford to expand my collection and ‘fill in the gaps.’ I’ve decided I can’t afford Ethos at the moment.

I’ve come up with the following three eyepieces to start. I’ve included their apparent field of view, the magnification they would yield, as well as the field of view they would yield in my telescope. I would also be using my Televue Barlow (I will need a 2 inch Barlow for the 17mm).


Nagler 17mm 82°AFV 58.8x 1.39°FOV

Nagler 12mm 82°AFV 83.3x 0.98°FOV

Delos 8mm 72°AFV 125x 0.57°FOV


Does that seem like a good place to start until I can afford more eyepieces? A good range of magnifications and fields of view? Any other recommendations?

[barx1963]

Phillip

That is not a bad selection. Powers are 59x, 83x and 125x and using a barlow you get 118x, 166x and 250x. As the 17mm barlowed would give similar power to the 8mm unbarlowed, a 2" barlow id probably unnecessary.

I am a believer in have a low power EP that gives a nice 4mm exit pupil for at least one EP in a collection. The 17mm will give you 3.4mm which is pretty close.

Also I note you have gone the 12mm which gives better eye relief than the popular 13mm T6.

Overall a good choice.

Malcolm

[philipheaven]

Yep I went for the 12mm due to the eye relief. Do you think the 12mm is still a good choice over the 13mm nagler?

Thanks for the advice Malcolm. I had some doubts about the need for a barlow on the 17mm - think I will put the money towards a 4th eyepiece.

If you were going to add a fourth eyepiece to those three what would it be? Lower magnification and bigger FOV? (Like a 22mm nagler?) or the opposite end of the spectrum, like a 6mm Delos?

[barx1963]

Phillip
The main advantage of the 13 over the 12 is size, The 13 is not much larger than a 25mm plossl, so is a lovely lightweight high end EP.
Personally, I think 3 EPS is enough. I have 5, but really only 3 on any regular basis. If I was going to add one I would think about wider. In an 8" 125x is starting to push it. I found the 6mm Delos quite hard to use in my 12", mind you I find I have little patience for high power observing.


Malcolm

[Allan]

G'day Philip. Every eyepiece I have ever looked through with the green band running around it has been superb. So you are on the right track.

The Delos is a great eyepiece and you won't do better than buy the 8mm. You could even add the 6mm later for more magnification.

The thing that strikes me about Naglers is how comfortable they are to use. I was lucky to observe through the 12 and 17 just recently and they were really nice. So again I'm sure you will be happy with them. And it makes sense if you get those that the 22 will fit into that line up for a really wide, low power view.

That would be 5 eyepieces for a great set.

Now, lets talk about the Ethos. Are you sure you can't afford one? :D

[MortonH]

Hi Philip,

I also have an 8" F/5 Newtonian as my main scope. My sequence of eyepieces for deep sky observing (i.e. non-planetary) are:

22mm Panoptic
14mm Delos
10mm Pentax XW
8.8mm Explore Scientific

The magnification of the 22mm is a bit low so I'm looking to get something in the 17-19mm range.

I think the range of focal lengths you're suggesting would be very good in your scope, although you might find the 8mm gives a slightly dimmer image than you want. So an alternative sequence might be 17mm, 13mm, 9mm. To reduce cost and weight, I would recommend:

17.3mm Delos
13mm Nagler
9mm Nagler

If eye relief is an issue the Delos are great.

Oh, and try to buy them used on Ice in Space. You'll be able to afford at least one extra eyepiece with the money you save! :D

Morton

[philipheaven]

Hi everyone, I very much appreciate all of your input.

Allan – afford Ethos? One day, but not just yet. I’ve got a few more decades of observing ahead of me (hopefully!), so if I went straight to the Ethos where would I go to afterwards? I can’t peak too early! I do like the idea of starting off with the Nagler as well. I’m worried if I went straight from Plossl AFV to an Ethos AFV I’d fall in through the eyepiece!

MalcolmH – I do like the idea of the 13mm Nagler but I think the eye relief of the 12mm appeals to me a bit more. I like the adjustable eye guard function as well. Plus the 12mm will provide me almost an extact 1 degree FOV (not much of reason but I enjoy the round number!).

I was also looking at the Panoptic as well (mainly 22mm). I’ve read nothing but outstanding reviews. The reason I think the 17mm Nagler will be a better option though is because it will provide almost the same size FOV plus increased magnification.

As for the higher weight of particular eyepieces – at what point does that become an issue?

[SingleMalt]

I'm not an expert, but when I started I decided that I wouldn't compromise with eyepieces in the beginning only to have to replace them later on. I went with a 13mm Ethos and was happy with that and my stock plossls till I could afford 21 & 8mm Ethos's... (Ethoi?)

At any rate, Tele Vue make great stuff, I'm sure you'll be happy with whatever you get.

[Shark Bait]

Sorry to highjack the OP's thread but this is something I have wanted to get more info on for a while.

How do you find the Ethos in your 12" Dob?

Are stars sharp to the edge of the FOV?

Regards,
Stu.

[ausastronomer]

Hi,

I have all 3 of the T4 Naglers (22mm, 17mm and 12mm) amongst about 20 other Televue, Pentax and other premium eyepieces. I use these in several different newtonians.

IMO the 17mm and 22mm Naglers don't perform all that well in an F5 newtonian unless used with a paracorr, which by itself is an expensive item. When used in combination with a paracorr these 2 eyepieces perform superbly.

Also be aware that if you have a 1.25" barlow you cannot use it with the 17mm Nagler, which has a 2" only barrel.

Further, I don't think these 3 eyepieces give a big enough range, nor utilise your barlow to it's maximum potential.

Understanding you want long eye relief and good comfort and assuming your barlow is 1.25" and you don't own a paracorr, I would consider going along the following lines.

26mm Televue Nagler
14mm Televue Delos barlows to 7mm
10mm Televue Delos barlows to 5mm

You can't barlow the 26mm Nagler but it gives you a much larger true field of view than the 17mm and doesn't need a paracorr to perform at it's best in an f5 newtonian.

This lineup gives you the following magnifications and exit pupils.

26mm = 38x with a 5mm exit pupil ideal bottom end
14mm = 70x with a 2.9mm exit pupil
10mm = 100x with a 2mm exit pupil
7mm = 140x with a 1.4mm exit pupil
5mm = 200x with a 1mm exit pupil

All of these will work well in your scope without a paracorr.

This gives you a good spread for both deep sky and planetary observing. If you wanted to add a 4th eyepiece into the range then I would do things a bit different to this.

Cheers,
John B

[wavelandscott]

I agree with John and think his advice is sound.

He giving you some suggestions of great glass that will really shine in your scope today but also last a lifetime!

I am a fan of buying the best you can once in your life and then using it forever.

[philipheaven]

Thanks for the advice guys - there is plenty here to consider.

[philipheaven]

How about eyepieces from the Panoptic range? They haven't been discussed yet. Should I consider some of those, or just stick with the 2inch Naglers for achieving larger FOV?

[Gem]

FOV isn't always everything and the Pano are great EPs. Excellent value. My 24mm Pano is my most used EP. To be honest, EP choice really depends a lot on the type of objects you want to be viewing. It is also very subjective. What works for someone, doesn't for someone else.
The best advice is - get some good astro friends and try their EPs in your scope! :)

[barx1963]

I used a couple of Ethos in my old 12' f5 and had no dramas with the sharpness. The field is so large that you really don't notice the edge while observing, but when I have checked it seems sharp. Also when observing, and others have commented on this, the image at the centre is noticeably sharper. That may just be a case of heightened expectations but I am convinced that the image comparing a 13mm Ethos to a 13mm Nag, the Ethos was sharper and more contrasty.

Malcolm

[philipheaven]

Would it be safe to say that a 19mm or 24mm Panoptic would be a better purchase for my 8 inch f/5 Newtonian rather than a 17mm Nagler due to the fact that I do not plan on buying a paracorr anytime soon?

[MortonH]

I'd go for the 19mm over the 24mm. The 19mm gives a more useful magnification and resulting dark background IMO.

[JRC]

Hi Morton it's John. I would very much agree with your picks; i have a 17mm Nagler IV - its a 2" eyepiece - but i just love looking through it, either through the C11 or through the Vixen 102s or the 120NA. ive had it since 2001 and its just wonderful - (i note its also currently about $200 less than i paid for it(note, Mike) but that would be the change in exchange rate) So much so i am thinking of getting a 13mm type 6 some time. I also have a lot of Vixen LVs ( 20, 15, 12, 9, 4) which are cheaper but have really good eye relief. i have a TV 7 mm nagler IV (the older model) which i like on the short focus vixen but not so much on the SCT. I had a vixen LV 9 with me the other night that is probably my favourite vixen!

[Don Pensack]

I think a lower low power would be more useful on an 8" scope. The 26mm Type 5 Nagler would be a great choice as a low-power eyepiece. Alternatively, the 22mm Type 4 Nagler.
If you didn't mind less eye relief, even the 24mm Panoptic would be a great choice.
I think a 17mm is a little high for a lowest-power.

The 12mm would be an excellent middle, and the 8mm Delos an excellent higher power. You could save a bit and get a 12 Delos as the middle power. That would hardly be a sacrifice. If you did that, I'd tend to go for the 22mm T4 Nagler as a low power, since its eye relief is closer to the Delos series and it has a wonderful immersive character to its field.

You'll want a good 2X 1.25" barlow to yield the higher powers. There are many good choices in the market. One of the best inexpensive ones is the 4-element Explore Scientific 2X Focal Extender, which works well with those eyepieces. The TeleVue 2X barlow is also good, but retails for more.

At one point, I owned the 12mm T4 Nagler and the 13mm T6 Nagler. I kept the 13 because it was better in my f/5 scopes in the outer 50% of the field and because it was superbly sharp. In my dob, I balanced its light weight with the 12 ounce brass "Equalizer" adapter from TeleVue. The eyepiece that replaced it, the 13 Ethos, didn't need the extra weight in the adapter.

[philipheaven]

Thans for the insight Don. I think your right about the 8mm Delos being an excellent high power eyepiece. I will lock that one in. I also have a Televue barlow.

As for eye relief, I'm not too fussed about it. I'm think I'm going to go for the 13mm T6 Nagler. I've heard nothing but good things about it - sharp to the edge of view etc.

I've taken on the advice John as well and decided to steer clear of the 17mm Nagler due to how fast my scope is and the fact I don't want to have to purchase a paracorr just to make what is already a $500 eyepiece work superbly.

That means I'm on the hunt for a low power, wide angle eye piece suitable for my f/5 Newtonian. Leaning towards the 24mm Panoptic…….

[Allan]

You could try all these eyepieces mentioned as they come up regularly here in the used market. Keep the ones you like and sell the others for next to no loss. Have a look in 'your eyepiece family' post and you will see an awesome TeleVue collection one of the boys put together from the used market over 5 years of buying.

The 24 Panoptic is another great eyepiece you will surely love. Don't write off the 17 Nagler. It was very good in my scope, but I do use a Paracorr all the time.

Oh and finally, Eeeeethoooos! :D

[SkyWatch]

Hi all, I am weighing in a bit late; but just a couple of comments...
I use the 13mm Type 6 a lot in my f5 12": and it is terrific. The only drawback is the limited eye relief, but I can cope even with glasses on.

I tried the 19mm Panoptic a few years back, but I must have got a Friday afternoon one (made at 4.59pm for a 5pm close I reckon!). Given that it was billed in a number of reviews as "the best eyepiece ever made" it was VERY disappointing. It even had an air bubble in the glass! I sent it back and ended up getting an 18mm Radian at the time. I did look through a 24mm Panoptic, and it was a quantum jump over the 19mm! There was a fair bit of field curvature at the edges in both Panoptics though, and that put me off getting the 24: something I haven't noticed in the Radian or the Nagler.

Regarding the Ethos: I have compared the 13mm Ethos and the 13 mm Nagler head-to-head. The size difference is unbelievable! Both are brilliant eyepieces, but I will stick to the Nagler not only because of the price and the weight (it doesn't unbalance my dob), but also because I can't see the whole 100 degree Ethos field without moving my head around- and that doesn't really appeal...

Personally I think the Delos series have a lot going for them. Good eye relief, a good sized manageable field (no need to move the head around!) that is sharp to the edge- and a lot cheaper than the Ethos.
All in all though, sounds like a lot of fun making the decisions!

All the best,
- Dean

[brian nordstrom]

:sadeyes:, Bummer about the 5th rate 19mm Pan , Dean that does not usually happen with TV's ?
Anyway mate I have a 19 , 22 , 24 and 27 Panoptic and they are my most used eyepieces , very nice .
I also have many Radians 3mm up to the 18mm and yes you are correct it is a very good eyepiece , I mostly use my Radians in my SKY90 , they work well in the Fluorite refractor , and my Pans and Naglers get most use in my 127mm Istar and M210 .
TV's are all I have and use now , love them all .
Brian.

[MortonH]

If you want a 24mm Panoptic, I suggest posting a wanted ad. They don't come up all that often.

[philipheaven]

I will take that as a good sign.

[Camelopardalis]

The 24 Panoptic is a good eyepiece, if you're sticking with 1.25" but if you go 2" you could save a few $$ on the wide field EP to put towards your other EP upgrades by getting a 24mm UWA (Meade, ES...which ever is cheapest)

[MortonH]

I just received a used 19mm Panoptic today. What a little beauty! Ultra sharp in my 80mm f/7 refractor and will hopefully be tested in my 200mm f/5 Newtonian this weekend.

[GrahamL]

I had a 22 nagler for a few yeas, aside the ultra wide view of the 22 which is really nice the edge of field was always a little distracting.I now have a 24 pan which is a great little eyepiece,the 20 t5 is also a nice one if you can handle the eyerelief.

cheers

[ausastronomer]

I would expect that if you used the 22mm Nagler in your Newtonian without a paracorr. In my newtonians both the 17mm and 22mm Naglers without the paracorr, are pretty average eyepieces. With a paracorr they are both excellent performers. However, they are both very heavy eyepieces (17mm is heaviest) and combined with the paracorr it makes a fairly heavy combination to balance at the top end of a smaller dob, especially if it doesn't have a Servocat drive to help hold it in place.

The 24mm Panoptic is a great eyepiece but eye relief is too short to use with eye glasses, hence I don't really use one , when I can help it. The 27mm Panoptic has greater eye relief, which makes it easy to use for eye glass wearers and it has a much larger eye lens which IMO offers a far more submersive view than the 24mm Panoptic. While the 27mm Panoptic is about the same physical size of the 17mm Nagler T4 it is only about 60% of the weight. In addition like the 24mm Panoptic, the 27mm Panoptic works quite well in fast Newtonians without a paracorr.

I actually use the 27mm Panoptic as my low power wide field eyepiece in my 10" Newtonian, in preference to the 31mm Nagler due to its compactness, light weight and great views. The 27mm Panoptic is a 2" only barrel so not able to be used with a 1.25" barlow whereas the 24mm Panoptic can be used with a 1.25" barlow.

Cheers,
John B

[philipheaven]

Thanks for all of your input. I've decided to go for the Panoptic 24mm. It has nothing but excellent reviews, especially from many who use it in fast newtonians. It will handle the inherent coma in my telescope much better than a 17mm Nagler. Many people have said the 17mm Nagler is almost not worth the purchase without a paracorr and I can't afford to buy both the eyepiece and the paracorr just at this moment.

What made the decision easier was a reasliation that I don't want to stop at only 3 or 4 televise eyepieces, I want many more! I've got years of observing so I have put a paracorr on my to-buy list, as I would like to eventually get my hands on a couple of 2 inch Naglers. And Ethos as well!!

I picked up a 13mm Nagler T6 a few days ago but still haven't had the chance to use it - damn Melbourne weather. Looks like I will have a fantastic first light evening coming up, with two Televue eyepieces making their debut at the same time. Can't wait!

[barx1963]

Phillip
So you are ending up with a 13mm T6 Nag and a 24mm Pan? Those 2 were my main go too eps in my 12".
I note you express an interest in having a lot of TV eyepieces. From experience, you will probably find you really only need 3 or 4.
At one stage I had an EP rack on my 12" that contained a 34mm Meade SWA, a 24 Pan,a 17mm Ethos, a 13mm Ethos, a 13T6Nag, a 10mm Ethos, a 7T6Nag, and a TV Barlow.
What I found was I really only used maybe 2 EPs in a session, often times I would only use 1! So spend some time with the 2 you have and enjoy them.

Malcolm

[philipheaven]

Yep I will be spending time with these two. Finances dictate that I must as well! My third EP will be an 8mm Delos but I think that will have to wait now.

Where are you clear skies?

[Camelopardalis]

My sessions tend to echo Malcolm's experience... I might take out a handful of EPs but in the end use only 2, maybe 3... it all comes down to the choice of targets and the viewing conditions (for me).

[Marcus10]

I'm not such a fan of the panoptics - I'm a wide AFOV junkie.

I love the Ethos. They are very expensive but it is genuinely a case of you get what you pay for. The optics are superb and they will last you a long long time. In that context, the cost is perhaps not so high.

[brian nordstrom]

:shrug: So the 72 * field of a nice 24mm Pan aint good enough ? :lol: ,
But I see where you are comming from , saturady night here in Perth we had a ball using Peter's ( Stardrifter_WA ) Ethos's in his 16 inch lightbridge ,, impressive to say the least .:thumbsup: .
Also very nice in my little Tak SKY90 at f 5.5 ( but the 21mm was 1/2 the size and weight of the li'l Tak ) .

Sunday night we found all the Ethos's were perfect in my Istar 127mm f8 refractor , perfect stars all the way to the edge , agian super impressed we were . Ethos and quality refractor ,, nice combo .
But the Delos's were as good , but a smaller field of course .
But Peters 21mm Ethos is worth almost as much as my whole Istar set up , including mount and tripod :question::question::question: .

They are the best ,,,, if you can afford them.
But I will keep and love my Radians, Panoptics and Naglers , thank you very much .

Brian.

[Profiler]

One disappointing aspect of the Ethos eyepieces is once you have spent a decent amount of time looking through one everything else thereafter seems small. Even a 70' widefield fov all of the sudden feels painfully small like looking through a plossl:lol:

[brian nordstrom]

:D Sad but true .
Brian.

[MattT]

No I don't agree. Even though I only have the country cousin ES 100's and 68's I am finding the 68's much nicer to view with….not that there is much of that in Melbourne. Seeing a sharp Field stop is really comforting, some how….
Matt

[ausastronomer]

I don't agree either. I have a 13mm ETHOS and a 14mm Pentax XW. I much prefer the 14mm Pentax XW in my Newtonians combined with a paracorr. It has greater throughput on axis, hence it goes slightly deeper on axis on threshold targets and it has less lateral colour on bright targets. The BIG difference is the additional eye relief making it infinitely more comfortable to use for long observing sessions and to use with eye glasses. Further, I find the ~70 deg AFOV eyepieces like Pentax XW and Televue Delos to be about perfect for my observing style. That's the amount of information I like to digest from the one field of view. If an object is not fully framed within that field I prefer to move the scope slightly and adjust the target position.

Cheers,
John B

[Profiler]

Hi Matt and John

I am not disputing your own personal preferences and indeed your comments are interesting but please appreciate my post was (or was meant to be interpreted as) humorous/facetious - I think Brian got my point.

Anyhow, John - as I have both the Ethos and XW as well your comments are especially useful but as I said before - after I look through the Ethos everything seems small when I look through in the XW:lol::D

[Camelopardalis]

Ethos and XW are both fine EPs as far as I'm concerned, but I tend to use them for different purposes or experiences if you like.

That they have these different qualities is a bonus for us justifying them in our collections :lol:

[Profiler]

Exactly!

I was beginning to think I should sell my XW but in light of Johns comments I now have reason to keep them both:thumbsup:

[ausastronomer]

I can see how people fall in love with the ETHOS series. Excellent optically across a 100 deg AFOV is going to get a lot of votes from a lot of people. It's just not quite my thing. As Matt mentioned there is something about seeing a sharp field stop and I get that with high quality ~70 deg AFOV eyepieces. It doesn't hit me in the face with the ETHOS, I have to go looking for the field stop. In addition my preference is to observe with glasses on which rules out the ETHOS. I could observe without them but I find it a pain to take them off at the eyepiece, particularly when high up a ladder, and then putting them on again to look at the Sky naked eye, to use charts, to look at the Argo Navis; etc etc.

The long eye relief ~70 deg eyepieces like Delos, Pentax XW, Vixen LVW and Denkmeier suit me ideally, but I can't dispute the ETHOS are exceptional performers.

Cheers,
John B

[Camelopardalis]

I thought the point of the Ethos and other similar AFOV glass was to be totally immersed in the view and forget about the field stop :shrug: well, that was the attraction for me anyhow :D

[barx1963]

I think the gist of this thread is that eyepieces are a very personal thing and what suits one person may not suit another.
Unlike John I have never had an issue using my Ethos along with my glasses in terms of eye relief. That may be a factor of the shape of the lenses in my glasses or where I like to position them (I like to have them high on my nose which means the lense is close to my eye)
I have found that the images are noticeably sharper when I observe without glasses however. This has really only become apparent in my 20" with the Ethoi. In my old 12" I simply couldn't tell the difference so I usually just left the glasses on. I now have a "granny strap" so I can remove my glasses while at the eyepiece.
All this tells us that each of us is an individual and the things we do to get the best observing experience will vary.

Malcolm

[MortonH]

First time I looked through an Ethos I tried to see the field stop and couldn't. Felt like I'd see my feet before the field stop!

The 100° eyepieces are nice but I feel no need to rush out and buy one. I find 82° is plenty wide enough.

These days my observing is largly restricted to one night a month (at Katoomba or the Pony Club) so I tend to pull an all-nighter. At 3am I prefer the comfort of 20mm eye relief in a Delos or XW :)

[Stardrifter_WA]

I agree Malcolm, I have no problem, at all, using my Ethos and Delos with my glasses. But then, I do have to observe with my glasses as I have astigmatism, so maybe I just got used to using them. I did buy them with that in mind anyway. They are the best eyepieces for me :)

Cheers Pete

[Gem]

Might I add that it can also be horses for courses? I prefer a larger FOV in my non-tracking dob so that the object stays there longer when asking friends to have a look. My CGEM SCT doesn't have that issue, of course.

As it has been said - it is all personal preference. Not everyone's budget or eyes or likes are the same when it comes to EPs.

My brother told me something years ago... your EP is half your optics. When you think about the cost of your scope, and then relate that to your EP...

[Don Pensack]

8" with 1016mm focal length?
Good set: 50x/100x/150x/200x:
20mm
10mm
6.7mm
good 2X barlow to yield 5mm (and 3.4mm for when seeing conditions are superb).
I won't make specific brand recommendations, but I think you'd enjoy at least 68 degree fields, and maybe wider on the 6.7mm. You can do really well in the $99-$149 range.