|
Dobman, I wouldn't worry about the field of view in a big panoptic. The bigger they are the harder it is to find the field stop. Tonight through my 22mm panoptic I found it quite difficult to see the field stop when looking in the center of the eyepiece. I have to move my head to look around to the edges and at that point it is uncomfortable anyway.
Panoptics are generally slightly sharper than naglers but is all a bit of swings and round abouts. There's not much in it. Naglers are wider, slightly warmer, but have slightly less field curviture (but it's only really noticable during the day if you ask me, or, if you look though the eyepiece at a magazine which is a stupid idea anyway).
You will also get less kidney beaning in large panoptics. I find it hard to use the 31 nagler, but people that wear glasses love them. I think the advange of naglers becomes more apparent when you get into lower focal lengths because the eyerelief is better.
But as Geoff said, the pentax might be a good option at lower focal lengths. I have not compared them, but I have heard the the penax eyepieces have a more natural color tone than naglers and radians.
But having said that I'm about to get a 4mm radian and 35mm panoptic. I would try them first if possible because you might like something better. I think panoptics are the best (at the moment).
|