DSO premium eyepiece advice?

iceman (Mike) · #1 14-03-2005, 09:50 AM

Hi guys.

I'm bitten. After viewing through Robby's 16mm Nagler Type 2 over the weekend when we went galaxy hunting, I love it.. the wide field of view, stars crisp to the edge, good contrast..

So, I want it.. well, one like it. I was going to hide it so he went home without it, but in the end I gave it back to him

I'm after an eyepiece for use in an 1250mm FL F/5 10" dob.

Primary use would be for DSO work - galaxies, globs and planetary nebs, smaller open clusters.

So i'm guessing something in the range of 13mm - 17mm with a wide field, would be the best magnification in my 1250mm FL scope (mag around 96x - 73x).

Firstly, would you agree that an eyepiece of that focal length would be best?

Secondly, what eyepiece would you recommend?

Thirdly, it's unlikely i'll be able to afford something new - so a second hand purchase is most likely.

I've seen some Nag 16 type 5 on sale at astromart for around $300, i'm not sure if that's a good price or not.

I'm interesting in replies from the guys who use or have used these type of eyepieces for DSO's..

Thanks!

Starkler (Geoff) · #2 14-03-2005, 11:36 AM

What did I tell you Mike? One look and you'll never want to use plossls again

I'll summarise what I know about a few of the contenders.
For DSO use only I would get the 12nagt4, if you want a double duty ep you can barlow for planetary, the pentax XL is way ahead of the naglers.

12mm Nagler type 4:
One of the best of the entire nagler range. Easy eye placement compared to some other naglers . Didnt perform well with my barlow. Should be able to get for approx $280US + ship on Astromart.

Pentax XL 14mm :
not as wide as a nagler but awesome eye relief and barlows well for me giving less light scatter and sharper image than a shorter nagler type 6 unbarlowed ! Approx $200-220US Astromart.

13mm nagler type 6:
Smaller than both EP's above and with tighter eye relief.
I havent looked through this one personally.

Meade UWA 14mm series 4000
Excellent EP with nagler type field and currently selling for $185US new, a fantastic bargain ! Once stock are sold to make way for the S5000 Meades you will only get them on the 2nd hand market. Downside they are one the biggest and heaviest eyepieces out there.

Striker (Tony) · #3 14-03-2005, 12:50 PM

Geoff...how about the Pentax XW's instead of the XL's...wont they give a wider field like Mike is after then the XL's...?

The Pentax XW 3.5, 5, 7, 10, 14 and 20mm all sell for $399 New.

Starkler (Geoff) · #4 14-03-2005, 02:13 PM

The XW's get 5 degrees wider field and a much fatter price tag.
The XL's are discontinued and only available second hand.

65 degrees vs 70.

The 80 degree field of a nagler can give a feeling of sticking your head out into space, versus viewing through a large window with the pentaxes.

With a wider field you can go shorter on focal length and get a darker sky background, but the eye can only critically examine a field of 60-70 degrees at any one time with the rest being perepheral vision.

The pentax is definately sharper with less scattered light on planetary viewing even with a barlow. The 12mm nagt4 was absolutely horrible barlowed ! Pentax coatings are second to none and I reckon give sharper views than short focal length nag type 6's.

My 14 and 10.5mm pentaxs, coupled with my ultima barlow give me effectively four premium eyepieces and superior planetary views IMO.

Dave47tuc Im sure will have some valuable input here as he has looked through my pentaxes and has tried nearly every nagler known to man

Its a personal preference thing and id love to have both.
Naglers or Meade UWA for DSO's, but definately not dual purchase barlowed.

P.S. Anyone contemplating purchasing premium eyepieces should do it now while the Aussie dollar is in such a strong position.

iceman (Mike) · #5 14-03-2005, 02:35 PM

Thanks Geoff for your thoughts, i'm keen to hear Dave47Tuc's opinion.

Do you think the 14mm Meade UWA would not be good barlowed for planetary?

Starkler (Geoff) · #6 14-03-2005, 02:41 PM

Cant comment on the 14UWA barlowed, except that its a huge heavy 2 inch eyepiece. How it would perform in a cheap GSO barlow is anyones guess.

Striker (Tony) · #7 14-03-2005, 03:14 PM

Yes I have sent Dave many PM's about high Quality eyepieces...and he has been great......Dave has already mentioned your Pentax range to me.....too bad we cant find much about the longer focal length Pentax's.....?

Short FL Pentax's get great review where the longer FL don't seem to get the good reviews......eg...2" 30mm & 40mm....something to do with the curvature?

gbeal · #8 14-03-2005, 04:44 PM

Ice,
I know the aforementioned Nagler 16/type 2 well, as Rob will have mentioned.
If I did it all again (and I just might), I would go the 12mm T4, and the 17mm T4, as in my dob (10" f5 newt, so essentially the same as yours) the 16mm was sweet, and on rare occasions I could have used a touch more mag.
My main gripe is the weight change that you get (and I certainly got), when switching from say a Nagler 9mm to the likes of the 17mm, or 16mm. Forget the older 20mm T2, it truly was a grenade.
THe weight shift was the prime reason I went from Naglers and into a set of Tak LE's. I may be back though.
Lastly, sounds a bit snobby perhaps, but my feeling is forget the Naglers etc for planetary. I use nothing but orthos, and on odd occasions the Tak LE's. My opinion only though, and one that is bound to stir a hornets nest.
Gary

Striker (Tony) · #9 14-03-2005, 05:14 PM

Gary.......I have had heaps of converations about High Quality eyepieces with Retailers and Amateurs with a lot of experience.....I hear that alot....dont worry about Nagler for planetry.....you dont need the extra FOV just for planetry....even the Radian was mentioned alot for planetry....so what your saying is well recommended by alot astronomers anyway.....

So Mike are you after Planetry or DSO as originaly asked...?

Starkler (Geoff) · #10 14-03-2005, 05:29 PM

When your pushing a dob tracking planets at high power the extra fov of a widefield ep is nice to have.

ausastronomer (John Bambury) · #11 14-03-2005, 06:57 PM

Hi Mike,

When we met on Friday night at SPSP I wasn't aware that you were chasing a premium medium power eyepiece or did that desire grow over the weekend

When we get together in the near future for an observing session I will be happy for you to try my 14mm and 10mm Pentax XW's, I also have the 7mm and 20mm if you want to try them as well. All the Pentax XW's have 20mm of eye relief and a 70 deg AFOV which I find perfect for me. The 14mm Pentax also barlows very well in the Televue 2.5X powermate giving a nice planetary magnification of 220X with 20mm of eye relief. This is in my 10" F5 dob which is the same as yours.

Clear Skies
John Bambury

Starkler (Geoff) · #12 14-03-2005, 07:03 PM

Welcome to our community John.

I have read many of your posts on the yahoo groups over the last few years and its great to have you aboard.

wavelandscott (Scott) · #13 14-03-2005, 07:14 PM

Ice, I've got an 11 MM T6 Nagler and I enjoy it a great deal...

It is pretty "bright" in my backyard so its mostly been used for planets to date so I won't comment much on DSO...the wide field helps a bit with the tracking for sure...

RAJAH235 · #14 14-03-2005, 07:32 PM

Once again, There is a heap of info. avail. Mike. Ya just have tu make up your mind, put your hand deeply into your pocket, grin and say, I'll have THAT one!!

and then...

L.

Dave47tuc (David) · #15 14-03-2005, 08:26 PM

Mike ,
My opinion is the same as Geoff's.

We can yap on about eyepieces forever. I just sold the 16mm Nagler type 2. Ken seems very happy with it.

I do like the 17mm Nagler new one. I plan on getting this one next.

You really have to get a eyepiece that gives you 2/2.5 mm exit pupil. This will give you the best contrast and brightness in a DSO.

So in your scope a 10" F/5 FL 1270. You need something of the highest quality.

So a 10mm to 13mm.

Any of the Nagers 13-12-11mm all top QL. 12mm is a little heavier than the others.

I would definetley look at the 10mm Pentax. I think once you look through on of these you may say bingo this ones for me.

Eyepieces are a very personal choice. We all have different eyes and see things differently.

Everyones opinions here have been spot on. As you were at the Star Party you no doubt had a chance to test a few eyepieces.
So by now i guess you have found the one

Best of luck

ausastronomer (John Bambury) · #16 14-03-2005, 11:40 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Starkler
[B]Welcome to our community John.

I have read many of your posts on the yahoo groups over the last few years and its great to have you aboard.

Thanks Geoff,

I didn't realise until I met Mike at SPSP on Friday night that this website existed. I think its a great idea to have an OZ/NZ astronomy website such as this. I notice my friend Hector didn't waste any time in joining either

Clear Skies
John B

iceman (Mike) · #17 15-03-2005, 06:43 AM

Guys, thanks for all the feedback.

Quote:

So Mike are you after Planetry or DSO as originaly asked...?

DSO's. If it barlows well for planetary, that's a bonus, but as Gary suggested i'll most likely be looking for a dedicated planetary eyepiece after this purchase.. and will probably look at Orthos, though hope to try out a few different combinations at the next combined observing session with some other locals i've recently met at the SPSP.

Quote:

When we met on Friday night at SPSP I wasn't aware that you were chasing a premium medium power eyepiece or did that desire grow over the weekend

Hi John, it was great to meet you, and great to meet more locals! I wasn't really looking for a premium EP until after using Robby's 16Nag all weekend..

The thought of going back to the plossls doesn't excite me

Quote:

When we get together in the near future for an observing session I will be happy for you to try my 14mm and 10mm Pentax XW's, I also have the 7mm and 20mm if you want to try them as well. All the Pentax XW's have 20mm of eye relief and a 70 deg AFOV which I find perfect for me. The 14mm Pentax also barlows very well in the Televue 2.5X powermate giving a nice planetary magnification of 220X with 20mm of eye relief. This is in my 10" F5 dob which is the same as yours

Thanks John, i'm definitely looking forward to our next observing session! Especially getting an eyeful through Andrew's 20"!

Quote:

I didn't realise until I met Mike at SPSP on Friday night that this website existed. I think its a great idea to have an OZ/NZ astronomy website such as this. I notice my friend Hector didn't waste any time in joining either

Thanks, hopefully we can spread the word a bit more to get more Aus/NZ amateurs joining up!

I've decided for my DSO eyepiece it's going to be a choice between the Pentax XL 14mm, and the Meade 4000 UWA 14mm. Does anyone have any specific comments or comparisons between these two?

I can get the Meade for around AU$300 (new from Aus) and the Pentax for around AU$260 (2nd hand from the US).

Comments?

ausastronomer (John Bambury) · #18 15-03-2005, 12:44 PM

I've decided for my DSO eyepiece it's going to be a choice between the Pentax XL 14mm, and the Meade 4000 UWA 14mm. Does anyone have any specific comments or comparisons between these two?

I can get the Meade for around AU$300 (new from Aus) and the Pentax for around AU$260 (2nd hand from the US).

Mike,

May I suggest before you rush out and buy yourself an expensive eyepiece that you try my 10mm Pentax XW and specifically compare it to the 14mm Pentax XW. I do 80% of my DSO observing with the 10mm Pentax XW as opposed to the 14mm Pentax XW. The 10mm in my 10"/F5 GS Dob gives 120X with a 35' TFOV and creates a 2mm exit pupil, the 14mm gives 90X with a 47' TFOV and creates a 2.8mm exit pupil. In my case I am prepared to sacrifice the TFOV of the 14 for the greater contrast and magnification given by the 10. Whether your budget can stretch the extra $100 to the Pentax XW series isn't really the issue, the 10mm Pentax XL may in fact be a better option for you than the 14mm Pentax XL. Bear in mind of course that the Pentax XW's are superior eyepieces to the XL's. Just some more food for thought before you spend your hard earned

Clear Skies
John Bambury

Dave47tuc (David) · #19 15-03-2005, 08:31 PM

Mike,
John has made a very good point about the 14 to the 10.
Have a look before you buy. I think you would prefer the 10mm.

iceman (Mike) · #20 15-03-2005, 08:59 PM

Thanks for the advice John and Dave. I spoke to John tonight as he was driving home, and it has convinced me to hold off, and test both the 10mm and the 14mm before I buy.

I'm going to head up to John's house in a few weeks (last quarter moon maybe) and try them out, so I can make a more informed decision.

Thanks for everyone's input, it's been a good learning process for me.