Quote:
Originally Posted by casstony
Hi Suzy, the shorter focal length ES 82's have similar useable eye relief to the Nagler T6's. The manufacturer's stated eye relief figures are exaggerated and the 4.7 is reported to be tighter than the 6.7. I have the 6.7 and need to fold the eyecup down to take in most of the view, though it's reasonably comfortable to use that way.
The on-axis performance of the longer focal length ES eyepieces is on par with Televue but I haven't had a chance to properly compare the 6.7 and 11 yet.
|
Oh!
Hi Tony, you've been a big help, many thanks for that.
Oh boy, this is turning into a nightmare! The ES4.7mm is supposed to have 15mm of eye relief, having an ep already with that same amount ER I find that I really don't want to go any shorter.
Just a reminder to people that this is a personal choice regarding comfort level and a factor if one wears glasses.
Unless I get to try one in the meantime, I think I'll be giving this a miss and re-look at the Baader which was my second choice.
Quote:
|
I am sadly a refractolic and didn't realise what FL and scope you were meaning.
|
Profiler: no problem at all.
It does get confusing!
Thanks for the link to B&H Photos (I hadn't heard of them before), I went & had a look but they don't seem to do XWs shorter than 10mm. But what a great price on them! $279.96 for the XW10mm converted to au that's $270)- that's fantastic! I've no clue on the shipping costs though.