Jump to content


Photo

Explore Scientific binoviewers

  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 denis0007dl

denis0007dl

    Mariner 2

  • ***--
  • Posts: 273
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2012
  • Loc: Croatia

Posted 28 November 2012 - 03:05 PM

I have asked ES support if they consider to produce binoviewers, and the answer was:

"I have forwarded your request in regards to binoviewers over to the engineering folks. They tell me that they are in the beginning stages of designing an Explore Scientific binoviewer. It will probably come out sometime next year."

I hope that this product will be also great an affordable as all their products are! :)

#2 avenger

avenger

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 66
  • Joined: 08 Jan 2008
  • Loc: USA

Posted 28 November 2012 - 05:29 PM

Thanks for the info., it was only a matter of time before ES would start thinking about bringing a binoviewer on the market. It should be a good one.

#3 johnnyha

johnnyha

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6500
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2006
  • Loc: Sherman Oaks, CA

Posted 28 November 2012 - 05:51 PM

Good news! There is definitely a big market for a premium $500-$600 binoviewer to take on the pricey Denk IIs and MkVs.

#4 Eddgie

Eddgie

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12683
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 28 November 2012 - 06:41 PM

There are already two binos in the $500 space.

The Seibert Optics Black Knight is $500, and the Denkmeier Standard is $537 (though you need to add a 1.25" or 2" nose but I don't think that costs very much).

The problem will be that very soon, the market will be crowded.

While we on the forum think Binoviewers are the bees knees, not everyone does, so we are talking about a niche item, and for a major company to produce them, they will want sufficent volume to make it worth while.

And that is why premium binos are so expensive to make. The volume is just to low to make get the economy of scale required to lower the price.

The specialty makers like Denkmeier, Earthwin, and Baader don't have stockholders to make happy.

#5 JohnMurphyRN

JohnMurphyRN

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 290
  • Joined: 09 Sep 2012
  • Loc: Near St Louis

Posted 28 November 2012 - 06:45 PM

Good news! There is definitely a big market for a premium $500-$600 binoviewer to take on the pricey Denk IIs and MkVs.


Used (excellent) TeleVue BinoVue is about in this range..

#6 killdabuddha

killdabuddha

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1137
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2011

Posted 28 November 2012 - 10:50 PM

I think it can only be good. First BVer we ever saw was Siebert's 2" and that knocked us for a loop cost-wise. Maybe that's what they'll be offerin?

#7 Messyone

Messyone

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 561
  • Joined: 02 May 2012
  • Loc: Down Under

Posted 29 November 2012 - 07:27 AM

To make it worth my while buying ES binos they would have to include a sweetener.... like a pair of 24mm 68* eyepieces :lol: I do like the ES eyepieces for mono viewing.
Matt

#8 MikeBOKC

MikeBOKC

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4512
  • Joined: 10 May 2010
  • Loc: Oklahoma City, OK

Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:29 AM

I think with the growing popularity of binoviewers we will soon start to see some manufacturers (and ES would be a logical one) offering scope packages that include their proprietary binoviewers with one pair of eyepieces as standard equipment . . . say an ES 102 refractor with BVer, diagonal, a pair of 24mm eyepieces and perhaps a single 9mm. The price of course would reflect that, but it would not susprise me to see a lot of scopes in 5-10 years coming with a BVer as standard just like many now come with diagonals, finderscopes and a small selection of eyepieces.

#9 faackanders2

faackanders2

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2255
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2011

Posted 03 December 2012 - 07:58 PM

Maybe it will be a 2" to compete with siebert in the high end?

#10 dr.who

dr.who

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 1325
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2012

Posted 20 December 2012 - 03:31 PM

For what it's worth I happened to run into Scott Roberts while at my local shoppe a few weeks ago. He was on his way to China and popped in.

I was there to take a look at a used Denk. One of the store employee's, Scott, and I took one of the original ES 127's out in front of the store to see if it would reach focus without the OCS in the 127.

As an aside we looked like three Irish terrorists setting up a rocket launcher at rush hour on the side of a busy street which drew quite a few stares. I was holding the tube on my shoulder, Scott was trying to focus, and the other guy was holding various parts and pointing at a house. It was truely a comedic moment.

Anyway long story short it would not reach focus without the OCS but Scott did mention the new 127's were 2" shorter than the original so it shouldn't have any problem reaching focus. He also mentioned that he was seriously considering manufacturing a ES Bino, was not concerned about the costs of manufacture or development, and became very interested in the Denks so this is for sure on the horizon at least in prototype stage. I believe he said he was targeting the latter part of next year for it and that it was a market segment that was not "crowded" yet and there was a need for something to compete against the Denks and Televues at the price point of the Baader.

#11 BadClams

BadClams

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 386
  • Joined: 09 Apr 2010
  • Loc: Bossier City, LA

Posted 20 December 2012 - 03:41 PM

For what it's worth I happened to run into Scott Roberts while at my local shoppe a few weeks ago. He was on his way to China and popped in.

I was there to take a look at a used Denk. One of the store employee's, Scott, and I took one of the original ES 127's out in front of the store to see if it would reach focus without the OCS in the 127.

As an aside we looked like three Irish terrorists setting up a rocket launcher at rush hour on the side of a busy street which drew quite a few stares. I was holding the tube on my shoulder, Scott was trying to focus, and the other guy was holding various parts and pointing at a house. It was truely a comedic moment.

Anyway long story short it would not reach focus without the OCS but Scott did mention the new 127's were 2" shorter than the original so it shouldn't have any problem reaching focus. He also mentioned that he was seriously considering manufacturing a ES Bino, was not concerned about the costs of manufacture or development, and became very interested in the Denks so this is for sure on the horizon at least in prototype stage. I believe he said he was targeting the latter part of next year for it and that it was a market segment that was not "crowded" yet and there was a need for something to compete against the Denks and Televues at the price point of the Baader.


This would be GREAT!

#12 denis0007dl

denis0007dl

    Mariner 2

  • ***--
  • Posts: 273
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2012
  • Loc: Croatia

Posted 20 December 2012 - 04:43 PM

Of course it would be great, and that ES bino support ES 24mm 68" eyepieces without vignetting, with CA of bino approx 28-30mm!!!!!!!

#13 Erskin71

Erskin71

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 636
  • Joined: 13 Dec 2010

Posted 20 December 2012 - 10:36 PM




As an aside we looked like three Irish terrorists setting up a rocket launcher at rush hour on the side of a busy street which drew quite a few stares.

Anyway long story short it would not reach focus without the OCS but Scott did mention the new 127's were 2" shorter than the original so it shouldn't have any problem reaching focus. He also mentioned that he was seriously considering manufacturing a ES Bino, was not concerned about the costs of manufacture or development, and became very interested in the Denks so this is for sure on the horizon at least in prototype stage. I believe he said he was targeting the latter part of next year for it and that it was a market segment that was not "crowded" yet and there was a need for something to compete against the Denks and Televues at the price point of the Baader.


1. You meant Irish rebels of course :cool:
2. ES binos would be cool. I've been looking into binos. Guess I will save my money and see what happens.

Thanks for the report.

#14 Grandpa Jim

Grandpa Jim

    old fogey

  • *****
  • Posts: 411
  • Joined: 04 Aug 2012
  • Loc: GREAT AMERICAN DESERT

Posted 21 December 2012 - 11:15 AM

:poke:If it's got a rocket launcher, and it's NOT wearing a uniform.................:poke:

#15 johnnyha

johnnyha

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6500
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2006
  • Loc: Sherman Oaks, CA

Posted 21 December 2012 - 11:29 AM

I would love the MKV bino T2 system with the Denk II diopters - that would be a real winner imho.

#16 dr.who

dr.who

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 1325
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2012

Posted 24 December 2012 - 05:18 PM



As an aside we looked like three Irish terrorists setting up a rocket launcher at rush hour on the side of a busy street which drew quite a few stares.


1. You meant Irish rebels of course :cool:


Actually up until about 1979 my Gaga (grandmother) would have said freedom fighters. Then there was the murder of Lord Mountbatten, his grandson, a local teen, and Lady Brabourne followed up by a loss of focus and a move to more traditional mafia style pursuits like prostitution, drug sales, protection, etc at which point the Sinn Fein were NEVER mentioned again and the Provo's if mentioned at all were mentioned with much contempt bracketed with several curse words in either Gaelic or English as well as a movement of saliva from the mouth towards to floor! :lol:

2. ES binos would be cool. I've been looking into binos. Guess I will save my money and see what happens.

Thanks for the report.


Cheers. I am on the fence at the moment as well. Looking at Baader and Siebert but frustrated by what I see (light at the end of the tunnel courtesy of Eddgie) being able to do with them but I can depend on ES to produce a product that will work with their lineup which is 1/2 of my problem. The other half but much easier to fix being that C11 of mine.

#17 Eddgie

Eddgie

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12683
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 24 December 2012 - 06:28 PM

Just saw activity in this thread and wanted to address the 2" Issue.

While the thought of a 2" system is appealing, there is kind of an upper limit.

First, the IPD can be a limit because the 2" eyepieces may have trouble getting a small enough IPD.

But here is a bigger limit... Mosts refractors won't reach focus even with a 1.25" Binoviewer. So to compensate, we use Glass Path Correctors or OCSs.

But when you do this, ever millimter bigger you make the prisms means that the light path lenght creeps up, which means that you need more OCS or GPC to reach focus.

And every step in GPC/OCS means that the focal lenght is longer, so now your 2" eyepeices are giving higher and higher powers.

And if you use a 2" eyepeices, you have to go to a bigger diagonal to fully illuminate, and now you have and even longer light path, and need even more OCS!!!

And most SCTs start to get such long focal lenght increases that once again, it negates the benefit of the bigger prisms, and when you get too big, the systems start to loose aperture.

So what good is it to have a 32mm prism if I need a 2x OCS to get it to come to focus?

And if I can reach focus using a Maxbright/T2 Prism in a refractor, I can get a wider true field with a 20mm ES eyepeice, then why would I spend so much more on a 2" biniviewer that could not give me as wide a true field?

A 2" binoviewer only makes sense when the scope has been designed to accomdate the necessary back-focus. It doesn't make sense for most refractors or SCTs because the back focus makes it require more and more OCS in the refractor, or leads to effective aperture loss in the SCTs.

Anyone that does the math on this will quickly realize that there really isn't much advantage for a 2" system. I can get fields almost as wide using 1.25" systems (wider in some cases).

Here are two examples...

My 6" APO would not reach focus with the Baader/T2 Standard without a GPC. In fact, I had to add the 1.25x GPC in front of the diagonal where it give I think about 1.44x. So now, my 1216mm telescope is working at 1750mm! With a 19mm Panoptic, I could get a field that was .7 degrees and 92x!

By comparison, I can get a .67 degree true field at 94x using a freaking C14!

But when I went to the Mark V, the light path was 10mm Longer, and I am out of in-focus.. So now, I have to go to a 2X GPC configuration!!! Now, the focal length of the scope goes to... Wait for it... 2400mm. OMG!

But even if the 1.7x GPC actually gave 1.7x, this would still make the focal length 2067mm, in which case the 24mm Pan (which I can now use without vignetting) will give .75 degree at 86x.

In other words, the increase in GPC requirements means that by the time I get to the eyepeices, the true field of the system using a much smaller eyepeices is just about as big as the field in the Mark V!!!

If I add a 2" diagonal and require a 2x OCS to reach focus,
my 6" APO now becomes 2400mm in the 6" APO, I have a narrower field than with the EdgeHD which can reach focus with no OCS!!! If I could use a 27mm Panoptic, this configuration will give a true field of .73 degrees (Smaller than the Mark V/T2) at 89x.

So three differnt configurations, each used with progressivly bigger binoviewers and eyepeices with progressicly wider field stops, but the user gets about the same size true field and about the same magnification!!!

And most SCTs will start to loose aperture once the back focus goes past about 200mm. Even the Mark V/T2 turned my C5 into a C4.8. I can't imagine what would happen with a 2" diagonal and a bino with a light path of 130mm or more.

My spreadsheet though says that with 260mm of back focus (a conservative estimate for a 2" diagonal and 2" binoviewer) a C14 would be working at 4200mm.

The aperture would be reduced to 13.5", and the obstruction would go to 34%. The 27mm Pan would give 155x and .42 degree field.

The 24mm Pan in the Mark V/T2 wold give a focal lenght of about 3950mm (using the Baader SCT adapter) and with the 24mm Pans, you would get 164x and .39mm field.

But remeber, you would be using a C13.5 with a 34% obstruction. Would it be worth sacrificing planetary performance for a very slightly larger true field of view???

A 2" binoviewer sounds like a good idea, but when you do the math, for most scopes, it is an expensive proposition (by the time you add the 2" widefield eyepeices) that offers little improvement in true field unless it is being used in a scope that is optimized specifically for binoviewers (cut down refractors, Newt with oversize secondary and shortened truss tubes, etc).

Now there may be scope/bino combinaations out there that might do a litte better than this, but I have run the numbers on a lot of different refractors and in any case where you have to move up one step in OCS to reach focus, the Maxbright and a 21mm Hyperion pair can actually give a wider true field than the Mark Vs with a 24mm Pan.

And in general, 2" diagonals should be avoided when using binoviewers with SCTs (C11 is the exception) because most will start loosing aperture once the back focus goes past 200mm.

#18 faackanders2

faackanders2

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2255
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2011

Posted 25 December 2012 - 11:59 PM

Very Interesting.
Does the same analysis holf true for Sieberts 2"?

#19 dr.who

dr.who

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 1325
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2012

Posted 26 December 2012 - 01:45 PM

Aye. Very interesting. Thank you Eddgie.

As an aside I did hear back from Mr. Siebert and per his email:

Me: Thank you for the quick response and for resending! I am a bit confused on something and I hope you can help. I would rather not have any magnification in the viewer so I can use my EP's at their native levels, for example if I use a 1.3 then I would take my 11mm EP's down to 8.46 mm (11/1.3=8.46), so I would want the one that is x1 and it would work fine in my ES refractor?


Him: If it has a 2" standard refractor diagonal then yes.

Me: I ask because I picked up a Baader from my local shop today and in order to make it work I had to use a Denkmeir nosepiece threaded into the front part of my 2" diagonal that goes into the focuser instead of the standard Baader 1.2x corrector threaded into the binoviewer attachment to the diagonal. There wasn't enough inward focus travel (the focuser was racked all the way in and still no focus) without it.

Him: The 1x OCA is a full compensation corrector and will not require in-travel once setup correctly in your scope. These can be used with my BN25mm binoviewer.


Me: So based on that information will that 1x work with the ES 127 or do I need something else like an actual diagonal like what Baader makes?

Him: A standard 2" refactor diagonal will do. My correctors are stand alone and will always solve these type of focus issues. The 1x OCA can come with a male T2 top to screw into the female T2 at the bottom of the Baader binoviewer. It can also come with a universal connector to interface with a standard 1.25" nosepiece that most binoviewers come with including my BN25mm.

Does this make sense or did I ask the questions in the wrong way...?






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics