<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Accessories</title><link>http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/forums/12.aspx</link><description>Eyepieces, mounts, and more</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2007 SP2 (Build: 20611.960)</generator><item><title>Re: zoom eyepiece Quality</title><link>http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/forums/thread/385018.aspx</link><pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:56:29 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">5cad643e-09e9-4c3f-b1be-205e244b4f67:385018</guid><dc:creator>andybyrd</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/forums/thread/385018.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=12&amp;PostID=385018</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;Thank you Jeff. thats what I needed to here I think I&amp;#39;ll go with the televue first and try that. you&amp;#39;ve been right on all the other advice you gave me so thanks alot for your time. and I&amp;#39;m still around but man I tell you this astrophotography is some kind of tough adictive stuff.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; and trying to perfect it has its ups and downs . &amp;nbsp;thats pretty much where I&amp;#39;ve been.&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;I guess it&amp;#39;s a good thing though because I&amp;#39;ve been waiting almost 2 years now on my 20&amp;#39;&amp;#39; dob.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; discovery bought all new polshing and coating&amp;nbsp;equipment I&amp;#39;ve been told and it&amp;#39;s just now up and running so it won&amp;#39;t be long I hope.&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;but learning and shooting so much&amp;nbsp;as kept my mind&amp;nbsp;ocupied.&amp;nbsp; and if it weren&amp;#39;t for that I&amp;#39;d probably be pretty mad and mader about waiting this long for my dob.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; I know there is gonna be a difference between the views and the eyepieces in 20&amp;#39;&amp;#39; f/5 and the 12&amp;#39;&amp;#39; sct. and the 20&amp;#39;&amp;#39; is gonna be my primary viewing scope.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Thanks Andy&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Re: zoom eyepiece Quality</title><link>http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/forums/thread/385010.aspx</link><pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:22:38 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">5cad643e-09e9-4c3f-b1be-205e244b4f67:385010</guid><dc:creator>chipdatajeffB</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/forums/thread/385010.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=12&amp;PostID=385010</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;Where&amp;#39;ve you been, Andy? LOL&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#39;ve had several zooms over the years. Those two, in particular, are good ones. I&amp;#39;d be hard-pressed to choose between them.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;There are others you might find attractive, but I think the Televue and Pentax are better. I also have the Nagler 3-6mm zoom for my scope, and love it, but it would give you too much magnification.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As to quality relative to Naglers and Radians, the answer is no. Close, but not equal. Those two are good, really good. But any zoom will represent a compromise. You will not have the field of view you like in your Radian, but you might like the field of view better than your Nagler, since you don&amp;#39;t want a wide one.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>zoom eyepiece Quality</title><link>http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/forums/thread/385009.aspx</link><pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:16:28 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">5cad643e-09e9-4c3f-b1be-205e244b4f67:385009</guid><dc:creator>andybyrd</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/forums/thread/385009.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=12&amp;PostID=385009</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;hello fello astronomers.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;I&amp;#39;ve got a question about zoom eyepieces.&amp;nbsp; now I&amp;#39;ve tried all sorts of eyepieces I mean I bet I have bought and sold over 50 eyepieces in the last&amp;nbsp;2 years trying to find what I thought was the best for my 12&amp;#39;&amp;#39;&amp;nbsp;lx200. and I have stayed with a 18mm radian and I just sold my 26mm nagler.&amp;nbsp; now the nag.was&amp;nbsp;the best clearest edge to edge eyepiece I&amp;#39;ve ever looked through but the fov was just to wide for me I had to walk my head from one side to the other to see the whole field. so I thought about getting a 22mm nag. then I thought about the zooms. now take the televue&amp;nbsp;8-24 zoom and the pentax larger zoom. I don&amp;#39;t know the mm it just gives powers in the refractors. but the question is. is the quality as good as the nag and radians, and is the pentax and televue as good as each other or is one better than the other. I would like to buy one so I could sure use some advice here. thanks Andy.&amp;nbsp; and&amp;nbsp; these will be mostly used in my 20&amp;#39;&amp;#39; f/5 Dob when disscovery decides to polish the mirror after 2 years.&amp;nbsp; I&amp;#39;m using the 12&amp;#39;&amp;#39; now&amp;nbsp;with my cameras&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp; Thank Ya&amp;#39;ll&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Andy&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>