RGM
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 09/15/03
Posts: 766
Loc: Burks Falls, Ontario, Canada
|
|
My main bino scope is an 8" SCT with Denk Standards and the WO S2 power diagonal. Most used EPs are 19Pans and 13T6s. I find this combo works great on all objects in our solar system, in our galaxy and Globular Clusters. That is were it ends. On galaxies I find myself always going back to mono. I go deeper and have better definition in mono.
I am wondering if it is just me, or do others also observe galaxies in mono? If not, what scope do you use to get good galaxy performance in binoviewing?
--------------------
Bob
Tak FS78 & Istar 127 f12 R30 on a Losmandy G11
C8 XLT
10" LightBridge
Lunt 60THa B1200
Denk Standards
|
Steve Hopkins
sage
Reged: 03/20/07
Posts: 225
Loc: Manitoba Canada
|
|
I find the same thing there is just a little more definition with a Single Eyepeice when going deep.
But "Heh" Nice to have that option isn't it
--------------------
WinterView Observatory 12'x16'ft Roll-Off
Meade 12" LX200R (His)- Celestron CPC 9.25(Her's)
Meade Series 5000 UWA & Plossl's(Two Complete Sets)
Two sets of Denk 21's and One set Denk 14's
Two sets of Denk II Binoveiwers (His & Hers)
Two Power & Switch Diagonals with Filter Switch
Canon Rebel 450D(XSI)
Meade Series 5000 80 mm ED APO
|
David E
Post Laureate
Reged: 05/25/06
Posts: 4177
Loc: North Carolina
|
|
Quote:
My main bino scope is an 8" SCT with Denk Standards and the WO S2 power diagonal. Most used EPs are 19Pans and 13T6s. I find this combo works great on all objects in our solar system, in our galaxy and Globular Clusters. That is were it ends. On galaxies I find myself always going back to mono. I go deeper and have better definition in mono.
I am wondering if it is just me, or do others also observe galaxies in mono? If not, what scope do you use to get good galaxy performance in binoviewing?
Using binoviewers diminish the available light, much like using a neutral density filter. It varies depending on the binos and other factors but basically you get a light loss of 1/2 magnitude, or about 20% of your aperture. So your 8" scope would have the light grasp of a 6.5" telescope. Still a respectable amount of light, but noticeable to you if you like chasing very dim galaxies. Mono viewing is definately the best for reaching deep.
David E
--------------------
David E
The funniest thing about this message is that by the time you realize it doesn't say anything, its too late for you to stop reading it.
|
MikeS
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 04/06/04
Posts: 1089
Loc: Quakertown Pennsylvania
|
|
I remember reading that 15 inches of aperture is the "magic number" that you need in order to see those faint objects in a binoviewer. According to Todd Gross: "Once you get beyond that, views are equal to, if not better than single eyepiece views in just about every way, on every object."
Since I only have an 8 inch, I can not verify this at all.
He has a good review here: http://www.weatherman.com/nagler3.htm
--------------------
Mike Snisky
8" F5 Newtonian/Moonlite CR2
Orion Sirius EQ-G Mount
Astro-Tech AT6RC Ritchey-Chrétien astrograph
Orion 100mm F6
Orion 100mm ED on LXD55 Mount
Denkmeier Standards
|
Houdini
professor emeritus
Reged: 07/13/07
Posts: 631
Loc: Europe
|
|
The binoviewer is nice on bright objects, but with a 25" I can still see deeper in mono than in bino. For example, the central star of the Ring nebula is easier in mono.
Robert
--------------------
16" f/4.9, 25" f/5 Dobson, 1100 mm f/3.6
Mirror Edge Support Calculator, Telescope Limiting Magnitude Calculator
|
b1gred
Enginerd
Reged: 04/01/04
Posts: 16902
Loc: Castle Rock, CO 6677' MSL
|
|
I have thoroughly enjoyed galaxies in my 9.25 with binos. So, I wouldn't be so fast to write off binos and galaxies. Dark Skies help a lot.
--------------------
"Dark Skies & Great Viewing"
RandyR / W0RDR
GPS 9.25 XLT/Sky Align /FeatherTouch
TV85 w/FeatherTouch
|
David Knisely
Postmaster
Reged: 04/19/04
Posts: 13646
Loc: southeastern Nebraska
|
|
Quote:
My main bino scope is an 8" SCT with Denk Standards and the WO S2 power diagonal. Most used EPs are 19Pans and 13T6s. I find this combo works great on all objects in our solar system, in our galaxy and Globular Clusters. That is were it ends. On galaxies I find myself always going back to mono. I go deeper and have better definition in mono.
I am wondering if it is just me, or do others also observe galaxies in mono? If not, what scope do you use to get good galaxy performance in binoviewing?
Under dark sky conditions, I have tried my binoviewers on a number of galaxies. Generally, they were visible with the binoviewers, but they just lost a tiny bit of brighness over the same power used without the binoviewer in place. If I am really going faint, I will generally not use the binoviewers. However, it was kind of fun to observe NGC 7331 in my NexStar 9.25 with the binoviewers attached. Clear skies to you.
--------------------
David W. Knisely . . . . . . "If you aren't having fun in this hobby, you aren't doing it right."
Hyde Memorial Observatory
http://www.hydeobservatory.info
Prairie Astronomy Club
http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
|
CESDewar
GorillAstronomer
Reged: 01/16/05
Posts: 2085
Loc: Blue Ridge, GA, USA
|
|
From a purely technical point of view, yes, you will lose some brightness with binoviewers, regardless of aperture. The available light is split in half to each eye. Summation (both eyes seeing the same image and combining them) then recovers some of that light loss, but never to the extent of recovering all of it (the usual figure quoted is an improvement of around 1.4 - most likely Sqrt(2).
But there are other factors besides just the technical issue of light loss that are relevant in binoviewing. Viewing with both eyes open involves less strain and improves image detail. If you have a lot of floaters, the merging of two images lessens that annoyance.
So even though there is a light loss penalty, there is a gain in acuity and comfort and for some people that's more than enough to compensate for the light loss. Of course, acuity is less of an issue when viewing galaxies, but comfort is always relevant.
--------------------
|
k5apl
professor emeritus
Reged: 05/19/06
Posts: 743
Loc: Arkansas
|
|
Hi Bob
I spent an hour or so evaluating differences between a bino-
viewed scope and a cyclops scope:
AP160, Maxbright diagonal, 17T4 Nagler
vs.
TEC160FL, Baader MK5, (2)24mm TV Widefield, 1.25X Glaspath, prism
My target was the Double Cluster, looking for very faint stars that could be seen in both scopes for comparison. I
concluded that there was a minute difference in favor of the Mono mode, but oh so slight a difference. The comfort
and "3D" images more than made up for this slight difference.
This was a easy comparison as I decided to not switch any
of the components in the test. BTW the star I was most evaluating was in the "C" asterism of the cluster closer to
Cass.
Later I looked at numerous galaxies, plantaries, and globu-
lars with the Binoviewers, so they do work on faint stuff as
well as the planets and Moon. Several comments about how good the deep sky stuff looks in binoviewers.
Hope this helps,
Wes
|
Matt L
member
Reged: 01/07/04
Posts: 47
Loc: Glendale, Arizona
|
|
The view through my MKVs is superior to single-eye viewing, no doubt about it. Whatever light loss that may exist is more than off-set by comfort and what I perceive as an increase in "spatial perception" offered by using both eyes relative to one.
As always, YMMV. For me, every scope I ever own will have to be BV-capable.
Matt
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 18806
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Quote:
Hi Bob
I spent an hour or so evaluating differences between a bino-
viewed scope and a cyclops scope:
AP160, Maxbright diagonal, 17T4 Nagler
vs.
TEC160FL, Baader MK5, (2)24mm TV Widefield, 1.25X Glaspath, prism
My target was the Double Cluster, looking for very faint stars that could be seen in both scopes for comparison. I
concluded that there was a minute difference in favor of the Mono mode, but oh so slight a difference. The comfort
and "3D" images more than made up for this slight difference.
This was a easy comparison as I decided to not switch any
of the components in the test. BTW the star I was most evaluating was in the "C" asterism of the cluster closer to
Cass.
Later I looked at numerous galaxies, plantaries, and globu-
lars with the Binoviewers, so they do work on faint stuff as
well as the planets and Moon. Several comments about how good the deep sky stuff looks in binoviewers.
Hope this helps,
Wes
How did you manage to equalize the views if you decided not to switch any of the components to do the test. Did this have the binoviewer magnification at higher than magnification without the binoviewer? If so, this increase in magnification alone could be responsible for a difference in magnitude gain. So in this instance you wmight be forcing the mono view to be at a disadvantage. If indeed the mono scope DID show to be a slight favor, this may actually represent telltale data that the mono view is somewhat better for seeing faint objects. This does not address viewing comfort.
When testing two systems to compare faintest objects seen, it is important to use same magnification. That's impossible to do when testing a binoviewer vs mono, unless you carefully match the eyepieces.
My experience testing scopes mono vs bino is that mono mode, at same magnifications shows significantly fainter objects than thru binoviewers, both stars and extended objects. Binoviewers I've tested include the SVB3 and Denk Big Easy. Scopes I've tested in include C8, C5 and WO80.
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
k5apl
professor emeritus
Reged: 05/19/06
Posts: 743
Loc: Arkansas
|
|
Hi Ed
I am sure you are correct. At the time I couldn't change anything around, so the Mono Mode was 71X and the Bino Mode
was 58X. All in all, the views were pretty similar.
Wes
|
RGM
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 09/15/03
Posts: 766
Loc: Burks Falls, Ontario, Canada
|
|
Thanks for all the replies. I agree that there is only a slight difference at best. I was out again last night doing some serious testing. It is only on galaxies on the edge of detection that really need mono. I also concentrated on definition regarding brighter galaxies and found a very slight improvement in mono. I will likely change my viewing habits and now use bino for most galaxy viewing and only go to mono for specific targets.
--------------------
Bob
Tak FS78 & Istar 127 f12 R30 on a Losmandy G11
C8 XLT
10" LightBridge
Lunt 60THa B1200
Denk Standards
|
Dave Hederich
sage
Reged: 09/12/07
Posts: 396
|
|
Switching back and forth between bino and mono mode makes an awful lot of sense. I can comfortably view with one eye for a fair amount of time before tiring, though not nearly as long as with both eyes. Breaking up mono viewing sessions with periods of bino viewing should allow one to enjoy all the benefits of both types of viewing with minimal fatigue.
--------------------
Celestron C4-R 102mm f/9.8 Achromat + GSO 2" Dielectric Diagonal
Tasco StarGuide 4 102mm f/13 Mak + NexStar 60GT Mount
Orion ST80 f/5 Achromat
Stellarvue BV3 Binoviewer + Burgess 1.9X OCA + SV23mm EPs
GSO 1.25" & Astro-Tech 2" 2X Barlows
Astro-Tech 38mm Titan, Orion 9mm & 20mm Expanse
Pentax 20x60 PCF WP II Binocular
|
gewehr43
sage
Reged: 07/07/06
Posts: 356
Loc: Albuquerque, New Mexico
|
|
Dave,
How do you like your SV Binos? I am thinking about getting them for use with my scopes.
--------------------
Daniel Z
10" Meade Starfinder on CI700
SV85S Apo on LXD500B
34mm Celestron Axiom
22T4 Nagler
13T6 Nagler
6.7mm Meade UWA
|
Dave Hederich
sage
Reged: 09/12/07
Posts: 396
|
|
I'm not the best critic because these are the only ones I've ever had, so I have no basis for comparison. I have no doubt that the higher priced ones are better.
Having said that, they work for me. I bought the BV3 because I wanted the collets rather than screws used in most of the other inexpensive units for holding the EPs. As reported elsewhere, one side is slightly darker than the other. So if your eyes can't adjust to that, you could have problems. It's no problem at all for my eyes.
They also operate somewhat stiffly, due no doubt to the legendary Chinese glue-grease. I suspect that cleaning out this grease and lubricating with lithium grease would make a big difference.
The important thing for me is that they greatly improve my viewing experience over cyclops viewing, and do it in a cost-effective way. I just could not justify the much higher price of the better units. So I was willing to accept the known shortcomings compared with the higher-priced ones.
One advantage of these less expensive models is that they are lighter in weight. This could be critical in some applications.
The included 23mm EPs are I think superior to the typical EPs that come with most mainstream scopes. They respond well to increased magnification through the use of optical correctors or Barlows.
If you're going back and forth between the low-priced and high-priced units, it's probably worth trying to view through each before purchasing. If you're trying to select from among the low-cost units, they're all pretty close so it basically comes down to features such as collets vs. screws.
--------------------
Celestron C4-R 102mm f/9.8 Achromat + GSO 2" Dielectric Diagonal
Tasco StarGuide 4 102mm f/13 Mak + NexStar 60GT Mount
Orion ST80 f/5 Achromat
Stellarvue BV3 Binoviewer + Burgess 1.9X OCA + SV23mm EPs
GSO 1.25" & Astro-Tech 2" 2X Barlows
Astro-Tech 38mm Titan, Orion 9mm & 20mm Expanse
Pentax 20x60 PCF WP II Binocular
Edited by Dave Hederich (10/18/07 09:25 PM)
|
Jim Rosenstock
Postmaster
Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 6543
Loc: MD, south of the DC Nebula
|
|
Quote:
Thanks for all the replies. I agree that there is only a slight difference at best. I was out again last night doing some serious testing. It is only on galaxies on the edge of detection that really need mono. I also concentrated on definition regarding brighter galaxies and found a very slight improvement in mono. I will likely change my viewing habits and now use bino for most galaxy viewing and only go to mono for specific targets.
I also find that averted vision--critical for the faintest and lowest-contrast stuff--is easier one-eyed....or to put it another way, merging the averted "sweet spots" simultaneously with both eyes is difficult to maintain.
Bottom line, binos for the brighter stuff, mono otherwise.
YMMV
Jim
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: