Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Eyepiece Help Pentax vs Panoptic

Expand Messages
  • John Bambury
    ... to ... 10 . ... do ... Hi Phil, I own several Pentax XW s in the shorter focal lengths and have a 27mm Panoptic as my low power widefield, in addition to a
    Message 1 of 13 , May 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In skyquest-telescopes@yahoogroups.com, "planzme" <planzme@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > Hi All
      >
      > I'm looking to expand my eyepieces with a premium 2".
      > I currently have several pentax xw eyepieces and love the feel and
      > comfort I have with them.
      > I also have a panoptic 24mm which I like also. This pan might begin
      > to see dedicated service on my short tube 80mm which I am attaching
      to
      > my DSH-10 as a super finder.
      >
      > My question is which do you folks think would be better on a GS
      10".
      > A Panoptic 27mm or a Pentax XW 30mm. Forgetting the price
      > difference, I know the pentax is more than the panoptic, but which
      do
      > you folks think would perform better in these scopes of ours.
      >
      > Thanks
      > Phil Lanz


      Hi Phil,

      I own several Pentax XW's in the shorter focal lengths and have a
      27mm Panoptic as my low power widefield, in addition to a 30mm GSO
      superview for the kids and public. I would love to try the 30mm
      Pentax XW but can't find anyone that owns one to compare it with my
      27mm Panoptic. I have read that the 30mm Pentax XW has some minor
      field curvature which the 27mm Panoptic does not have. On the other
      side of the fence the Panoptic has some rectiliniear distortion but
      you have to know what your looking for to pick this up. The 27mm
      panoptic is a fine eyepiece in an F5 scope. It doesn't get much
      better. To get better you have to spend the extra $$$$ and get the
      26mm Nagler T5 which IMO is the best low power eyepiece money can buy
      for use in scopes of F5 and faster. It is superb in every respect. I
      may well mortgage the wife to exchange my 27mm Pano for a 26mm NT5 in
      due course, but the 27mm Pano is a great 2nd prize and will do for
      the time being :) IF you can stretch the budget to the 26mm NT5 its
      the best option.

      CS-John B
    • Robert Bruce Thompson
      ... Assuming he can put up with only 11mm of eye relief. At 16mm, even the 27 Pan is a bit short of eye relief for many eyeglass wearers. -- Robert Bruce
      Message 2 of 13 , May 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        On Mon, 2006-05-01 at 13:40 +0000, John Bambury wrote:

        > IF you can stretch the budget to the 26mm NT5 its
        > the best option.

        Assuming he can put up with only 11mm of eye relief. At 16mm, even the
        27 Pan is a bit short of eye relief for many eyeglass wearers.

        --
        Robert Bruce Thompson
        thompson@...
        http://www.ttgnet.com/thisweek.html
      • jrbcupertinopetaluma
        ... 22 a while back. I ended up selling it. Now, before the legions of Televue defenders rise up in defense of this eyepiece let me confirm it is a nice EP I
        Message 3 of 13 , May 1, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In skyquest-telescopes@yahoogroups.com, Jim Brand <jbrand@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 23:23:32 -0000
          > From: "planzme" <planzme@...>
          > Subject: Eyepiece Help Pentax vs Panoptic
          >
          > Hi All
          >
          > I'm looking to expand my eyepieces with a premium 2".
          > I currently have several pentax xw eyepieces and love the feel and
          > comfort I have with them.
          > I also have a panoptic 24mm which I like also. This pan might begin
          > to see dedicated service on my short tube 80mm which I am attaching to
          > my DSH-10 as a super finder.
          >
          > My question is which do you folks think would be better on a GS 10".
          > A Panoptic 27mm or a Pentax XW 30mm. Forgetting the price
          > difference, I know the pentax is more than the panoptic, but which do
          > you folks think would perform better in these scopes of ours.
          >
          > Thanks
          > Phil Lanz
          > -------------------------------------------
          > I have a collection Pentax XLs - similar to your XWs. I added a Pan
          22 a while back. I ended up selling it. Now, before the legions of
          Televue defenders rise up in defense of this eyepiece let me confirm
          it is a nice EP I ended up selling it for a few reasons. Some of them
          may apply to you question - some may not. The eye-relief is noticeably
          less. I don't know what the published figures are - but when they are
          side by side, there is no question. I wear glasses, so this is
          important to me. I really had some issues with the funky dual skirt
          arrangement - this is more or less unique to this ep. The ep (due at
          least in part to the aforementioned skirt, was not even remotely
          parfocal to the pentaxes. So much so that I found myself simply not
          swapping it in and dealing with the focus.
          >
          > The views themselves were very nice. But to some extent you (or at
          least me) need to consider it in context of you other eyepieces.
          >
          > My use was primarily, although not exclusively in a 10" dob
          >
          > Jim
          >

          Even though I am not among the legions of Televue defenders and
          apologists, I would go with the Televue. I have a 27mm Panoptic, and
          while it is not perfect, it has the best coatings in terms of
          throughput I've ever experienced. Unquestionably better throughput
          than a 21mm Pentax XL with SMC I also have. For example, despite the
          Pentax's higher maginifcation, there's much more visible nebular
          detail (waves, knots, etc.) in M42 in the Panoptic than in the Pentax.
          I understand that the XWs are updated from the XLs, but there are
          head-to-head reviews of XW vs. XL on Cloudynights, and the net-net
          seemed to be that there wasn't a huge amount of improvement in the
          throughput department when moving from XW to XL at the tested focal
          lengths.

          In the "not perfect" department, the 27mm Panoptic does show
          aberration (astigmatism and coma)in the XT12i on the outer 15% or so.
          Not horrible by any means, but there nonetheless.

          One final thing to keep in mind is that the Pentax XW eyepieces start
          more expensive than the Panoptics and depreciate more through time.
          If you chose to sell them, you will get less than you will for a
          comparable used Panoptic. On the resale front Televue is very
          customer friendly. By raising prices 3% per year, they insure good
          value retention on used models. They also will repair broken eyepieces.

          Regards,

          Jim
        • Phil Lefever
          ... The 22mm Pan is possibly the least liked eyepiece in the line (except for maybe the 15mm...). For a medium long focal length eyepiece its eye relief is
          Message 4 of 13 , May 1, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            >I have a collection Pentax XLs - similar to your XWs. I added a Pan 22 a
            >while back.

            The 22mm Pan is possibly the least liked eyepiece in the line
            (except for maybe the 15mm...). For a medium long focal length
            eyepiece its eye relief is annoyingly short. Also the funky
            unnecessary 2"/1-1/4" barrel arrangement is a pain too. Its
            much more usable if you treat it as a 1-1/4" eyepiece (which
            is really is) and always set it up high in an 2" adapter.

            The 27mm Pan is a totally different animal so basing ones judgement
            of it on the 22mm Pan is a bit of a mistake. I have never had any
            complaints with eye relief on the 27mm Pan. The only issue is that
            it requires a bit more outward focus travel then some of the XT
            scopes have. This depends on primary mirror's actual focal length
            in the scope in question. In my XT10 the 27mm Pan is fine but some
            other people need to lift it up a bit with a parfocal ring, usually
            no more then 1/8"-3/16".

            I agree with John Bambury that the 27mm Pan is a great second choice
            low power eyepiece in an f/5 scope. Where I disagree is that I really
            don't like the 26mm Nagler! Unless you own an f/4 scope I see no
            advantage buying the 26mm Nagler, one pays nearly as much, gets a
            narrower TFoV and shorter eye relief to boot. The 31mm Nagler in my
            XT10 is a glorious experience, if I ever scratch off a good ticket
            I WILL add one to my collection!

            Clear Skies,

            PL

            --------------------------------------------------------------------
            Phil Lefever - Burnsville, MN
            Amateur Radio Callsign - KB0NES EN34jt
            C8-SP XT-10 C102 80WV
            MNAA & MAS Member
          • Phil Lefever
            ... I m not sure that A. They have historically always raised their pricing 3% per year, and B. That this is why their resale value is so good. I would state
            Message 5 of 13 , May 1, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              >By raising prices 3% per year, they insure good value retention on
              >used models.

              I'm not sure that A. They have historically always raised their
              pricing 3% per year, and B. That this is why their resale value is
              so good. I would state that their resale value remains high because
              they are the eyepieces to which all others are compared today. I'd
              wager that the Pentax eyepieces have increased in price about the
              same amount as the TeleVue models, XL-XW change not factored in.

              >They also will repair broken eyepieces.

              An excellent point Jim! One that isn't often mentioned. A great
              example I often like to state is I once had a customer that had
              a Meade Series 4000 40mm SWA. It had rolled off a table and the
              2" barrel skirt hit the ground and was deformed to the point it
              wasn't usable. I called up Meade and asked if I could simply buy
              a replacement barrel, they said they don't sell replacement parts
              for eyepieces... I then asked for an RMA number for service and
              they said they don't service eyepieces... I then got to inform my
              customer that his $300 eyepiece was unrepairable. I'll bet that
              he now shares my opinion of not buying from the "evil empire".
              Fortunately I believe he found a local machine shop that was
              able to help him out.

              I had another customer to who I sold a 35mm Pan. When he was
              unwrapping it at home it rolled out of the bubble wrap onto the
              floor. TeleVue replaced the broken glass and made it as good as
              new for a reasonable charge!

              Pentax will likely repair their eyepieces too, but I'm not sure
              who or where the work would be done. At least with TeleVue it would
              go through the same inspection that every new eyepiece gets after
              the repair.

              Clear Skies,

              PL


              --------------------------------------------------------------------
              Phil Lefever - Burnsville, MN
              Amateur Radio Callsign - KB0NES EN34jt
              C8-SP XT-10 C102 80WV
              MNAA & MAS Member
            • planzme
              Hi Well, I want to thank everyone for the great responses. I thought I had made up my mind to go with the Pentax XW 30mm, but after being able to get a Pan 27
              Message 6 of 13 , May 3, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi

                Well, I want to thank everyone for the great responses. I thought I
                had made up my mind to go with the Pentax XW 30mm, but after being
                able to get a Pan 27 on AstroMart for about $225. less than the
                Pentax, I went with that.

                I'm sure these are both great eyepieces, but having three Pentax XW's
                already, I was really leaning toward the 30, just because of the
                style. I like the large eyecups and I never have any trouble with
                blackouts or anything.

                But, I do have tried a Pan 27mm before and have had no trouble with
                that either.

                So for now, its the Pan 27 and maybe in the future I'll get that
                Pentax 30 or who knows if I get to try that big nagler.......maybe
                I'll just have to have it ;-)

                Thanks again
                Phil Lanz
              • RapidEye
                ... Dang Phil!!! =-) Seriously, that 27 Pan is a dandy - no two ways about that! But being a fellow Pentax driver (I ve got 4) I was hoping someone would take
                Message 7 of 13 , May 3, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  On 5/3/06, planzme <planzme@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > So for now, its the Pan 27 and maybe in the future I'll get that
                  > Pentax 30 or who knows if I get to try that big nagler.......maybe


                  Dang Phil!!! =-)
                  Seriously, that 27 Pan is a dandy - no two ways about that!
                  But being a fellow Pentax driver (I've got 4) I was hoping someone would
                  take that 30mm out for a comparison to the Panoptic and/or GSO and report
                  back - guess I'll have to wait a while longer for that feedback on the 30mm
                  Pentax =-(....

                  Enjoy, and buy that Pentax anyway <G>

                  <RE>


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.