PDA

View Full Version here: : new eyepiece - Televue 24mm Panoptic


kitsuna
06-04-2011, 09:13 AM
Hey all, just thought I'd give a little impromptu report on my first ever 'premier' eyepiece.

Those of you who've been following some of my earlier threads will know that I recently bought a 10 inch Skywatcher Black Diamon dobsonian (f4.7). I'd been using the standard issue plossl eyepieces, and had been enjoying my new scope immensely.

Last night my new Televue 24mm Pan turned up.

I'd been reading about various eyepieces on the web (and on this site) and I'd been hearing that it was an exceptional eyepiece (at least, when it first came out).

Now I must confess that I'd never actually used this eyepiece before (either in my own scope, or checking it out in someone elses), so I basically took a punt.

I got home late last night, so I didn't have time to set up my scope properly. I basically dropped it on the lawn outside, spent maybe a minute collimating and brought out my 25mm plossl and the Pan. I didn't have time to wait for the scope to cool down. I knew that I wouldn't be getting the best viewing, but considering both eyepieces would be subject to the same mediocre conditions, it'd still be a fair comparison. It'd also be a blind test because the plossl is the only eyepiece I've ever used in my scope. So it's my only basis for comparison.

I knew it wasn't going to be a fair fight, because the plossl is a budget item issued with the scope, whereas the Pan has Televue and Al Nagler behind it. Nevertheless;

Seeing was quite good last night. I have no doubt that if I had time to properly collimate and wait for the mirrors to cool, it would have been excellent.

I took a look at Omega Centauri thru the plossl. Still nice, if a little dim in my light polluted area.

Then the Pan.... :eyepop:

I suddenly came to understand what people meant by "the spacewalk experience."

Just amazing. The stars were more sharp, more easily resolved and as far as I could tell, coma had effectively been eliminated across the FOV, even with my lazy collimating.

I couldn't believe what I was seeing, so I put the plossl back in, and found Sirius to do a coma comparison.

Keep in mind, I'd done a lazy collimation job and hadn't let the mirrors cool. When I've bothered to do it properly, I know the plossl can do better than what is written below;

In the plossl, Sirius was a sharp pinpoint of light. I pushed it to the edge, and found that there was noticable coma at about 1/3 of the way from the edge of the FOV, and quite bad coma 1/4 of the way from the edge.

I barlowed it (2x) to make it more obvious. I had noticable coma probably 4/9ths of the way from the edge, and quite bad coma 1/3rd of the way from the edge.

With the Pan, and no barlow Sirius was sharper, and I couldn't readily identify ANY coma even right to the edge of the FOV. I SUSPECT there may have been SOME, perhaps in the last 1/10th or 1/20th of the FOV, but as I said, I couldn't readily identify it.

I barlowed it to try and find some flaws. Even under barlow the image was sharp. At the very edge of the FOV, it was still quite sharp, though it did look as if Sirius had developed a small blue tail pointing towards the centre of the FOV.

I should also point out that this was just a generic 2x barlow of perhaps dubious quality, rather than a specialty item.

My incredulity grew when I put Saturn in view. I did this on purpose because I figured that as the plossl was punching outside its weightclass anyway, I might as well point it at an object that the Pan isn't really designed for. I'd had quite good views in the plossl of Saturn, so I thought it might be a bit more of a close match. Right? :shrug:

Wrong.

With the barlow or without, the Pan demolished the plossl. Saturn stayed in view longer, so I didn't have to do the "dob nudge" as much (that alone made it infinitely more enjoyable to look at). The rings were more easily resolved, and I saw far more colour and atmospheric detail. There was much more colour contrast in the rings and disc. The other thing was that the 68 degree FOV meant that not only could I see Saturn better, I could see it with the background stars and objects in view, making it much more of a celestial object, rather than a disk painted on a black background (as with the plossl).

The conclusion I've come to is that I'll probably never use the plossl again except as a paperweight. It was seriously outclassed. I can't recommend it highly enough.

I'm so pleased with it, I've now put in an order for a Televue Radian.

Happy watching all. :thumbsup:

erick
06-04-2011, 09:31 AM
Panoptic :thumbsup: (I own 35mm, 27mm and 19mm)

Paddy
06-04-2011, 09:59 AM
The 24 Pan is a great eyepiece. A very good choice indeed and how wonderful to view through such good glass.

AG Hybrid
06-04-2011, 11:18 AM
Enjoy the 'Majesty Factor". Next time buy an ethos to overload on "Majesty Factor"!~!

I'm a bit jealous you have a sky clear enough to warrant you to take your telescope out.

Don't forget to enjoy the "Majesty Factor" :P

ciao

kitsuna
06-04-2011, 12:17 PM
Oh I'm definitely enjoying it. As for the Ethos? certainly appeals, but unfortunately the eye relief might be a bit short for me. I have to wear glasses to view (I have astigmatism in my eyes). A pity, because I'm not aware of any other brand that offers 100 degrees at such high quality.

AG Hybrid
06-04-2011, 01:31 PM
:question: Really?

Why don't you head over to the Cloudy Nights forum and check out the eyepieces they talk about I can name 3 other 100 degree field eyepiece brands. 1 of them (ES) is very similar optically(literally) to the Ethos. Nikons new 102 degree eyepieces are something to behold.


But only a TeleVue Ethos has 'Majesty Factor':rofl::rofl::rofl:

kitsuna
06-04-2011, 02:12 PM
I stand corrected. Having looked at the ES and Nikon offerings, I'm still caught by the same problem. Shortish eye relief, or prohibitive cost. I wouldn't be taking a punt on these eyepieces, not for the money required. :lol:

cookie8
06-04-2011, 02:20 PM
Enjoy reading your report. Have you considered writing a review for the forum?

kitsuna
06-04-2011, 02:53 PM
To be honest? No. I don't feel I have the requisite experience as an astronomer to give a suitable review. I can count the number of nights I've viewed the stars in a scope, and the number I've eyepieces I've sampled on one hand. A blind butcher's hand. :lol:

While I'm happy to extoll the virtues of my first premier eyepiece, it would be misleading for me to write a review, as I do not have a reasonable basis for comparison, and don't yet have the viewing experience to mull the minutae of comparable eyepieces.

Perhaps after I have a few years of consistent viewing under my belt, and have sampled a wider range of eyepieces, might I be confident and experienced enough to give a meaningful review. :thumbsup:

Liz
06-04-2011, 03:08 PM
Woohoo!! Great to hear it was a success Adam. :thumbsup:
Yes, I like the Pans too. ;)

kitsuna
06-04-2011, 03:17 PM
So do I. for the money, I was very impressed. I think it is a great first premier eyepiece (obviously, or else I wouldn't have bought it). I bought it with the intention of it being an acceptable 'all rounder' to tide me over until I bought more eyepieces for specific purposes (planetary viewing, faint fuzzy finding etc). What I hadn't considered, and found as an unexpected bonus, was how forgiving it was. It seems to correct the vast majority of the inherent coma in my scope, which is a boon to new astronomers (including myself) who haven't developed the skills to collimate perfectly, and the FOV is nice and wide, meaning I can look for longer before having to move my scope. Again, a bonus for someone who hasn't learned to move a manual dob smoothly yet. :lol:

Miaplacidus
06-04-2011, 03:50 PM
Ah, the 24 Pan! That eyepiece is a keeper. The ultimate work horse, it can pretty much do anything. No wonder you never see them come up on the second hand market...

DiamondDust
06-04-2011, 04:44 PM
Yes, been looking at that one myself.....too exy atm. Thanks for the report though, as I suspected, it's a must have.

RobF
06-04-2011, 06:21 PM
The other thing you don't really grasp until you experience a Pan, Nagler or Ethos is the extra "magnification/degree FOV" you enjoy across the wide FOV Adam. That's probably bollox how I've said it, but great to hear you're enjoying your first top notch eyepiece :)

barx1963
06-04-2011, 06:50 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the 24mm Pan is just about the king of eyepieces on a value for $ basis. Great for all sorts of targets.
I'd reconsider writing the review. Many who are considering new EPs, or should consider them are new observers with similar amount of experience to you and similar equipment. I know before I purchased my first premium EP I waffled for weeks, to know that it will produce results even for inexperienced observers would certainly make a difference.

Malcolm

mr bruess
06-04-2011, 08:35 PM
Televue 24mm Panoptic would be good for my 10 and 12inch dobsonians.
your description is like an unofficial review

Deeno
06-04-2011, 08:56 PM
Nice report.

The 24 Panoptic was my first qualty eyepiece and still spends more time in the focuser than the rest combined.......

Brundah1
06-04-2011, 09:30 PM
Adam,

You have already written an excellent first hand review of this premium eyepiece.

I've been only at Stargazing for two years. Fortunately I bought a 19mm Panoptic early very early (from an IIS member). It helped that I had read Backyard Astronomer's Guide cover to cover.

One good night with that EP and I was hooked! So nearly 2 years later my EP kit contains 19, 24, 27mm Panoptics plus 12 & 17mm Nagler T4s. Recently added 2X and 4X Powermates for gear changing views depending on conditions. :prey2: :stargaze:

See reviews elsewhere - these are lifetime investments. You may upgrade your scope/s, but you will keep these EPs (if you have a champaigne income then some Ethos EPs may be tempting.)

http://www.weatherman.com/nagler.htm

BTW Televue 20% discount ends 17th April.

No commercial affiliation etc.

David :cloudy:

kitsuna
06-04-2011, 09:57 PM
Funnily enough, The Backyard Astronomer's guide was where I got my first practical, solid information about equipment too. It's also why I avoid Naglers as a general rule. I have no doubt that they are excellent EPs, but reading up on the section about eye relief indicated that at least for me, I should give those EPs with shorter eye relief a miss.

I should probably write up a review of that book for the site as well. It's a solid investment. :lol:

There seems to be a common theme among the responses here. As a general rule, it looks like many people have gotten a lot of mileage out of this eyepiece. I am completely unsurprised by this fact. I knew it was going to be good, I just hadn't realised HOW good.

I definitely agree with Malcolm's comment as well. For someone new to the hobby, I reckon this is a brilliant eyepiece to have. It does many things fabulously, and several things better than it ought to, given what it's designed for.

It gives excellent detail (which is good for those still learning to pick out individual stars and nebulae features etc), is forgiving (in that you don't need micrometer perfect collimation to get good results), and the "Spacewalk" experience, I can see this eyepiece giving budding astronomers the confidence, ease of use and WOW factor to keep them going during the tricky early stages. Given it's versatility, it's pretty hard to go wrong with this EP.

I'm also reconsidering suggestions that I write up a proper review for the site. I'm still umming and ahhing about it, but I can see why it'd be useful to have a novice's opinion. Given that it's generally accepted to be a good eyepiece, I would be hard pressed to write an inaccurate review.

I'll give it a bit more of a thorough road test, hopefully at my astronomy association's next viewing night. That way I can test it out under proper dark skies, against a variety of targets, in the company of much more experienced astronomers (to make sure I point the scope the right way up :rofl:).

We shall see what we shall see. :question:

Brundah1
07-04-2011, 09:53 PM
Yep! The "Backyard Guide" is still spot on for most any subject for amateur astronomy (beginners and those further along). A tad expensive in OZ, $95. Mine came as a birthday present from my son - a child of the internet age, so he shopped on-line USD 13! (new unused). Most of my books non-fiction books now sourced on-line.

Don't overlook the 27mm Panoptic, this is a bright crisp "space walk", on first view I thought "I could climb through this huge window". Also works a treat with the 2X 2in Powermate if you don't like the 12mm Nagler eye relief.

May seem a bit one eyed, but my only other EPs have been garden variety, so no offense to the TMBs, WOs etc.

BTW if anyone is using a 8" or 11" SCT, the Baader Zoom is the easiest way to introduce kids to the wonders of Stargazing. No swapping EPs or refocusing, doesn't have the Nagler gloss but it works! May seem a bit dim
under light polluted skies.

David

kitsuna
07-04-2011, 10:40 PM
I got lucky. bought my copy of the Backyard astronomer for about $40 bucks express delivered from amazon. It's kinda nice when the USD takes a swan dive. :D

There's something else that springs to mind from that book. It advises that the lowest power you can reasonably achieve for a scope with an obstruction is to multiply the focal ratio by 7mm (the size of a relatively youthful, dark adapted pupil). in my case, I have a f/4.72 so the lowest I could go is 33mm.

Saves me buying superwide pineapple EPs that won't work properly (Televue 41mm Panoptic anyone?) :lol:

Suzy
09-04-2011, 03:25 PM
Yep and that's the very reason I don't go over 30mm eyepieces myself. ;) And also regarding Naglers, the short eye relief is the very reason I had to stay clear of them.
I own Pentax XW's and they are very highly regarded. 70 deg fov and 20mm eye relief and you can also adjust the height of the eye cup, waterproof too. And so so so comfortable. :D I'll be buried with these eyepieces, yep yep. :lol: The 7mm sell here in Aus for $720, but I got mine from the U.S. for only $340 incl. shipping. :D Makes no sense to me why here in Aus the 10mm sells for around $500 (compared to the $720 tag of the 7mm), but in the U.S. they are the same price as the 7mm :shrug:.
The dollar is very nice at the moment :D:D. For planetary observing in particular, the 10 & 7mm's gives the most amazing contrast and detail and tac sharp right to the edge.

Great review Adam, and am very glad you are enjoying your new "premium" eyepiece. Impossible to look through mediocre or plossl eyepieces after looking through them. The scope can only do so much, good glass does indeed make a difference. Buying good quality, premium eye pieces will probably ending up saving you lots of money anyway as you've gone straight for the best right up.

I will be anxiously waiting for your review of "Backyard Astronomers" book. Come in to the Astronomy Media & Books section and give us some information on it! :D

kitsuna
11-04-2011, 08:43 AM
I've been looking at those Pentax EPs. They will probably be my next point of call. Not until i've had a chance to actually try one though! Good to know they can still be picked up overseas without the ridiculous AU markup too.

As for the backyard astronomers guide? I may well have to do that. It's an excellent resource for someone who's done a little star hopping, maybe learned a few of the constellations, and is then looking towards their first binocs or telescope. Very very comprehensive, and exceptionally useful. :thumbsup: