rdjamieson
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 06/09/04
Posts: 1025
Loc: Wisconsin
|
|
I've been lurking on this page for a while, and am giving serious thought to buying a binoviewer. I want a top shelf unit. I understand that Baader and Televue are highly respected. If money was not a consideration, which of these (or ANY OTHER BRAND) would you buy?
Assuming it matters, I just purchased a Meade RCX400 14", and an inexpensive achromatic refractor (Burgess 127mm).
If you are kind enough to consider my question, I'd ask that you further enumerate the EPs that would give the best viewing. My preference would be to avoid having to purchase a brand new matched pair, and instead simply purchase a twin for one or more of the 1.25 EPs already in my stable: Nagler Type 6 13mm and Nagler Type 6 9mm. (My understanding is that you cannot use 2" EPs in a binoviewer).
Your thoughts are greatly appreciated.
Ray
--------------------
Ray Jamieson
RCX400 14" on Scopebuggy
Burgess 127mm
|
TedKord
super member
Reged: 06/13/04
Posts: 166
Loc: NE USA
|
|
I was recently at a local star party, where there were
3 binos - a Denk standard, a burgess and my homemade
Nikon.
Other than the fact that I'd dropped mine earlier and
messed up the prism alignment (causing unmerged views),
there really wasn't much between the three to distinguish.
Mind you, this was with f/10 SCTs, and medium power
eyepieces. I was using TV 25mm plossls, 20mm and 15mm
GSO Superviews. The Denk owner had 25mm TV plossls in at
one point, too. Not sure what other eyepieces were used
that night. The point is, we didn't approach the point
where vignetting in the Burgess or Nikon would start.
But as far as clarity, brightness, contrast, etc...
I just couldn't see the difference.
Once I figure out how to re-align my prisms, I hope to
do some more comparing. I'm very encouraged that the
views through the Denk and Burgess didn't look any
better than my Nikon did pre-accident.
--------------------
"Don't drop the banana!"
"Why not?"
"Good source of potassium!"
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Ray, I'm sure you'll get lots of responses but I am curious to know if anyone has confirmed that a binoviewer will work fine in an RCX without a corrector. Anyone?
BTW, Siebert optics has a 2" eyepiece BV.
Cheers!
Armand
|
kruzmisl
member
Reged: 09/29/03
Posts: 77
Loc: Thousand Oaks, CA
|
|
Ray;
I have a 10" LX200GPS, so there is a similarity. You ask for the best, and I'd present:
http://www.cloudynights.com/item.php?item_id=887&pr=2x9x41
I have the same 45 mm Elite unit, and I don't want to say "best" but I do say different, but in a good way, but then I have one and have used it and am SPOILED. I've looked through a TV and Denk and Baader and think them equal to each other in quality. I got a 22mm Siebert Black Night 2 years ago, and thought that it was as much as I could ask from a piece of equipment. Through not fault of the 22mm binoviewer, I didn't tighten my diagonal and the bino turned 180 degrees south and dropped 3' to the concrete with a clunk. It never lost its colimation and still works fine today. BUT the 2" however, to my limited observations is in a league of it's own and does not lose anything to monovision, but gains a relaxed view. You are looking through so much glass that you can't see the edges of the eyepieces, and I feel like I have 200 power eyes, or I'm looking into a TV monitor.
It's something to consider seriously, as you have a most serious scope.
BTW, I'm using a Denk Power X Switch Diagonal with it, model R2, with gives me 4 arms with at least 3 usable powers, plus NO correction. Very nice piece of gear which allows you to eliminate a number of extra eyepieces.
From what I've read, a couple people have used binoviewers on RCX400 without correctors. YMMV. While the 1.25 units are trying to figure out if they can use a 21 or 24 mm eyepiece, I'm easily using a 36 mm Siebert, (or a 40 mm) and having the most incredible views I've ever experienced. I use the R2 diagonal to lower this down to about a 10 mm equivalent, but retain the large glass and easy view. My only problem is my 10" is under wraps until we finish our remodel.
If you want contact me at kruzmisl@adelphia.net.
John
Edited by kruzmisl (06/08/05 10:59 PM)
|
Rich N
Post Laureate
Reged: 09/22/04
Posts: 5618
Loc: San Francisco Bay Area, Calif...
|
|
Quote:
I've been lurking on this page for a while, and am giving serious thought to buying a binoviewer. I want a top shelf unit. I understand that Baader and Televue are highly respected. If money was not a consideration, which of these (or ANY OTHER BRAND) would you buy?
Assuming it matters, I just purchased a Meade RCX400 14", and an inexpensive achromatic refractor (Burgess 127mm).
If you are kind enough to consider my question, I'd ask that you further enumerate the EPs that would give the best viewing. My preference would be to avoid having to purchase a brand new matched pair, and instead simply purchase a twin for one or more of the 1.25 EPs already in my stable: Nagler Type 6 13mm and Nagler Type 6 9mm. (My understanding is that you cannot use 2" EPs in a binoviewer).
Your thoughts are greatly appreciated.
Ray
I have a late model AP/Zeiss. Baader bought the equipment to make the Zeiss binoviewers whe Zeiss got out of the amateur astro market. Baader also hired the Zeiss people who made the binoviewer.
If I bought another binoviewer today I would by the Baader Mark V.
Rich
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
The AP is an awesome unit. I looked through one and it is a beautiful piece of gear.
If you want one of the best bangs for the buck for Planets and DSO's the Burgess/Stellarvue are a great chioce. One of these with a low power corrector from Siebert Optics has set me up with all my scopes.
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Hey Ray,
Just curious, what changed your mind about a bino?
|
rdjamieson
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 06/09/04
Posts: 1025
Loc: Wisconsin
|
|
Dunno, I guess after I heard a bunch of people crowing about how the images seem so much more natural, and you feel so much more there, I started reading this index a bit and looking around the internet. It became pretty clear that this isn't just people talking smack about some little gadget they got, but rather that the stereo viewing actually makes an impression on the brain and enhances the appreciation of the image.
I've never looked through one. Being very new to visual astronomy, I worry about the difficulty of getting the bino into focus, now I'm reading about the need for correctors, all that stuff. Intimidating, but I have plenty of time. After a series of recent purchases, my wife would register her disapproval in all kinds of bad ways if I were to drop $1500 on a bino right now.
--------------------
Ray Jamieson
RCX400 14" on Scopebuggy
Burgess 127mm
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
He has decided to come over to the dark side.
I am still on the fence on this one. I really like the idea of a binoviewer and have tried it before. I have been researching for months. There are so many choices and it seems many of the units have strong points. Televue is a great unit with its x2 corrector and I have heard a lot of good things about them. Denkmeier has lots of goodies to go with their units. AP is considered the best of the 1.25" unit. I have also heard good things about Siebert Optics binoviewers. I think they make the only binoviewer that accepts 2" eyepieces if I am reading things correctly. These might be for you since you said money was no issue but for me they are a little out of my price range as are the AP. For those on a budget I think a good starting choice might be between the Siebert Optics 22mm standard, Denk Standard, Burgess 22mm or maybe the Stellarvue also a 22mm unit.
John
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Hey Ray,
First off, yes you can get binos in 2" and the views are spectacular and the 1.25's are not far behind either.
Now, given that you just dove into the deep end, here's a thought. Go head and start with a 1.25" bino and just get another ep/filter kit by Celestron. Then when you're ready to move up, you can pass the 1.25er on to the kids scope.... and start duplicating your 2" naglers.
OR, guilt the Mrs. into giving it to you for your birthday 
|
Rich N
Post Laureate
Reged: 09/22/04
Posts: 5618
Loc: San Francisco Bay Area, Calif...
|
|
Quote:
Hey Ray,
First off, yes you can get binos in 2" and the views are spectacular and the 1.25's are not far behind either.
Now, given that you just dove into the deep end, here's a thought. Go head and start with a 1.25" bino and just get another ep/filter kit by Celestron. Then when you're ready to move up, you can pass the 1.25er on to the kids scope.... and start duplicating your 2" naglers.
OR, guilt the Mrs. into giving it to you for your birthday
What do you mean the 1 1/4" binoviewere are not far behind? Are you just going by field of view?
Thanks,
Rich
|
Jeff Morgan
Post Laureate
Reged: 09/28/03
Posts: 4018
Loc: Prescott, AZ
|
|
Quote:
I've been lurking on this page for a while, and am giving serious thought to buying a binoviewer. I want a top shelf unit. I understand that Baader and Televue are highly respected. If money was not a consideration, which of these (or ANY OTHER BRAND) would you buy?
I owned the TeleVue around six years ago. It was a good unit, but I had a few bad experiences with collimation. First, the good. Optics are what one would expect from TeleVue. Nice and bright views, no feeling whatsoever of loss or compromise in the optical train. Mechanically, they use lots of plastic. Fortunately, it does not feel cheap but it is "relatively" light. That is to say, you are going to still be putting higher demand on your mount and focuser. Now, the bad. Collimation. The merge was easy at low and medium power. At high power it was never quite right (close, but not quite right). Unfortunately, the second or third night out I broke the right eyepiece holder. It was made of plastic (Delrin?) and being worried about an eyepiece dropping out, I overtightened it. It had to go back to TV for replacement and collimation. Service was very fast, cost was $150. The part could have been a little more robust, but I'll take the blame on that one. The enxt time was two months later. I was staying at Star Hill Inn and traveled with the viewer in a Dockosil case as carry-on lugguge. It lost collimation again, which really took a little luster off the vacation. Another $150 trip to TeleVue.
All that being said, I think my experience with TeleVue was atypical. By most accounts it is a very good unit and with TLC I'm sure it would be a good performer. But the market seems to be passing it by and for the money ...
I now own the Denkmeier II with SCD's and PowerSwitch and am thrilled with the purchase. Optics are excellent and the merge is effortless (even for first timers), though I have yet test at high power (over 200) for lack of appropriate eyepieces. Mechanically bulletproof, though it does weigh a bit more than most.
--------------------
Jeff Morgan
Prescott, AZ
Wile E. Coyote School of Telescope Making
|
Jeff Morgan
Post Laureate
Reged: 09/28/03
Posts: 4018
Loc: Prescott, AZ
|
|
Oh, I forgot to mention the PowerSwitch feature and SCD's. The PowerSwitch is the greatest idea to come out in some time, 90% of my observing can be done with ONE pair of eyepieces. Cost and convenience make this a compelling choice. The self-centering diopters are great too. Very well made and allow perfect focus. No rotating eyepieces to achieve collimation.
--------------------
Jeff Morgan
Prescott, AZ
Wile E. Coyote School of Telescope Making
|
rdjamieson
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 06/09/04
Posts: 1025
Loc: Wisconsin
|
|
Thanks, guys. I am getting a little freaked here, though. Collimation? The dope is me says "I don't have to collimate an eyepiece, so why do I have to collimate a binoviewer? Oh yeah, and what is "the merge?" And what are "self-centering diopters"? I've seen these terms before, but I don't know what they mean.
Thanks,
Ray
--------------------
Ray Jamieson
RCX400 14" on Scopebuggy
Burgess 127mm
|
Don W
demi-god
Reged: 05/19/03
Posts: 19226
Loc: Wisconsin, USA
|
|
You should not have to collimate a binoviewer unless you drop it. Merging means bringing the left and right views into one. Self-Centering diopters means that when you tighten the eyepiece in the holder it stays centered as opposed to having it pushed to one side by a thumbscrew.
--------------------
DON'T PANIC!-Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
Don Wyman
Obsession 18" f/4.5 #1166
W/Argo Navis DSC and Torus Primary
|
BWright
super member
Reged: 05/31/05
Posts: 166
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I've been lurking on this page for a while, and am giving serious thought to buying a binoviewer. I want a top shelf unit. I understand that Baader and Televue are highly respected. If money was not a consideration, which of these (or ANY OTHER BRAND) would you buy?
I owned the TeleVue around six years ago. It was a good unit, but I had a few bad experiences with collimation. First, the good. Optics are what one would expect from TeleVue. Nice and bright views, no feeling whatsoever of loss or compromise in the optical train. Mechanically, they use lots of plastic. Fortunately, it does not feel cheap but it is "relatively" light. That is to say, you are going to still be putting higher demand on your mount and focuser. Now, the bad. Collimation. The merge was easy at low and medium power. At high power it was never quite right (close, but not quite right). Unfortunately, the second or third night out I broke the right eyepiece holder. It was made of plastic (Delrin?) and being worried about an eyepiece dropping out, I overtightened it. It had to go back to TV for replacement and collimation. Service was very fast, cost was $150. The part could have been a little more robust, but I'll take the blame on that one. The enxt time was two months later. I was staying at Star Hill Inn and traveled with the viewer in a Dockosil case as carry-on lugguge. It lost collimation again, which really took a little luster off the vacation. Another $150 trip to TeleVue.
All that being said, I think my experience with TeleVue was atypical. By most accounts it is a very good unit and with TLC I'm sure it would be a good performer. But the market seems to be passing it by and for the money ...
I now own the Denkmeier II with SCD's and PowerSwitch and am thrilled with the purchase. Optics are excellent and the merge is effortless (even for first timers), though I have yet test at high power (over 200) for lack of appropriate eyepieces. Mechanically bulletproof, though it does weigh a bit more than most.
I own a Televue unit and have never had a problem with it. The self centering eyepieces holders are made out of Aluminum not ("Delrin")and are tough as nails. I also know a few people who have the TV and also have only the nicest things to say about them. They use about as much Plastic as the Denks and Burgess units I have seen which means very little. With the TV x2 corrector and my Zero multi Magnification corrector I got from Siebert Optics, my TV gives up nothing to the other binoviewers on the market.
Barry
|
rdjamieson
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 06/09/04
Posts: 1025
Loc: Wisconsin
|
|
Thanks for being the dictionary, Don. On Wisconsin! Barry, I've read a lot of nice things about Televue binos, so I am surprised as you to know that there have been some misfortunes, as well. I like to be in the know.
Thanks you guys!
--------------------
Ray Jamieson
RCX400 14" on Scopebuggy
Burgess 127mm
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Jeff
I don't own a binoviewer but have used a few, so I speak mostly of what I have heard. If you prefer one binoviewer over another there is nothing wrong with saying so. I have heard negative things about every one of the binoviewers mentioned here. I even had a few issues with the binoviewers I have used thus far. But me personally I prefer it when I hear people talk about the things they like about their equipment rather then criticize one product before recommending another. It just looks strange.
After hearing what you said about the TV unit, I might be inclined to avoid their unit if I was quick to judge. You did say this was not a typical situation, but your post does raise a question. Most companies have warranties if the product has not been damaged or abused in some way. Did you check to see if their warranty covered the problems you had? I would never buy from a manufacturer until I found out about their warranty policy.
John Marshall
|
Jeff Morgan
Post Laureate
Reged: 09/28/03
Posts: 4018
Loc: Prescott, AZ
|
|
Barry,
I was speculating that the eyepiece hodler was Delrin, not stating it as fact. Whatever it was, the base did snap from my own over-tightening. This is clearly not the behavior of aluminum. This purchase was made in about six years ago, and from what you say aluminum is used in current production. Definitely a question a potential buyer should ask.
And don't get me wrong, I like TeleVue, every eyepiece in my case is from Uncle Al. That being said, I have owned or built perhaps a dozen scopes over the last 20 years, and I would call such a problem a forseeable design flaw.
--------------------
Jeff Morgan
Prescott, AZ
Wile E. Coyote School of Telescope Making
|
Jeff Morgan
Post Laureate
Reged: 09/28/03
Posts: 4018
Loc: Prescott, AZ
|
|
Quote:
Most companies have warranties if the product has not been damaged or abused in some way. Did you check to see if their warranty covered the problems you had? I would never buy from a manufacturer until I found out about their warranty policy.
I tried that, and neither incident was covered. I was very quickly out $300. Whatever unit you buy, I would specifically ask if re-collimation is covered, and for how long. And again, the TV purchase was six years ago. Their policy on collimation (and charges) may be different today. I checked this very carefully before I bought the Denks.
--------------------
Jeff Morgan
Prescott, AZ
Wile E. Coyote School of Telescope Making
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: