|
Joe,
Here is a follow up email exchange I had with Tom Trussock:-
*********************************** ****************************
John,
EXTREMELY close performance to the naglers. If you'd choose a
nagler over a panoptic, I'd get a UWAN. Otherwise get the Pano.
I spent the better part of an hour comparing the 16 uwan to the 16t5,
last night at f7, and performance was so close that I forgot which
eyepiece I had in. I thought I had the nagler and went to grab the uwan
only to find that I already had the uwan in there.
Performance is extremely good down to f5 on them as well. Haven't done
the f4.5 thing yet.
If money is a bigger factor then: I liked the 32mm MK-80 better than the
Widescan III, and both should perform well at f10 (in all honesty,
performance was similar and I wondered how close the optical design was
- however, I liked the ergonomics of the MK-80 better - it just seemed
to dissapear). If he never sees himself using the eyepiece on a fast
scope then save the dough and go for one of the cheaper eyepieces
otherwise I'd go for the UWAN or Pano.
T
John and Sue Bambury wrote:
>Thanks for that Tom,
>
>I hadn't thought of those as they are new. I have a friend who is the WO
>distributor in OZ, I will check the price with him but I am thinking it
>will be well at least $AUS 650 at which price he can buy a 35mm panoptic. Is
>it as good as the 27mm/35mm Pan's ?
>
>The UO 32mm MK-80 and the Widescan III are both in the $AUS 300 to $400 bracket.
>
>CS-John B
|