Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums
Privacy Policy |
Please read our Terms
of Service | Signup and
Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu.... uh, User
Glassthrower
Vendor - Galactic Stone & Ironworks
Reged: 04/07/05
Posts: 14686
Loc: Hurricane Alley
|
|
Well, last night was mostly clear. Clearest night since I got my GO 22x85.
Last night I learned something.
I cannot tolerate the condition of my eyeglasses any longer.
My glasses are so scratched up, that observing with them on is a futile exercise in frustration. The numerous scratches cause profuse spiking/flaring on just about every star in a given field. So, I tried my wife's glasses. Her prescription is close to mine, just a bit weaker. But, her glasses are in much better condition with few, if any, scratches. I figured I would just re-adjust the diopters to compensate for the prescription. Wrong.
I sat there for over a half-hour trying to focus in on various stars and doubles, but I could not get a TIGHT pleasing focus no matter what I did. So I gave up on the wife's glasses and went back to my own.
But, I quickly gave up on my glasses again due to the distracting scratches. So, I decided to take my glasses off and observe with no glasses on. The GO 22x85 appears to have enough diopter travel to compensate, but again, no matter what I did, I could not get a TIGHT CLEAN focus.
So back to my glasses again. I tried and tried, but by this time, eye strain was setting in. Now I had a killer headache and my observing for the night was done. I was having problems merging images and nothing would come into clean focus, glasses or no glasses.
I could have almost CRIED! Then I got angry. Then I started questioning my preference for binocular astronomy.
So, now I have some thinking to do. Whenever I haul out my lowly 60mm refractor, stars in the center of the field can be focused to tight little sharp balls without flaring - even with my scratched glasses. So, I am beginning to think that perhaps my viewing tastes far outweight my wallet's ability to deliver when it comes to binoculars. I have Tak Astronomer eyes and a Celestron bank account. I just don't know if I can get the type of view aesthetic I am seeking out of a sub-$5,000 binocular. It seems the fast focal systems of binos lend themselves to spiky stars and focus issues. (I am also discovering that I have had a long secret and repressed DISLIKE for Individual Focus eyepieces.) ..... so, now I am pondering sending these GO 22x85's back and purchasing a scope with the same money.
My entire belief in binocular astronomy has been shaken.
Well, regardless of what happens, I have an appointment in a couple of weeks at the eye doctor to get an exam and new glasses/contacts. Perhaps I am developing astigmatism as I age, and stars will never focus to clean little balls for me?
I know it sounds ridiculous, but the AESTHETIC of the view is my primary concern when it comes to stargazing. I cannot and will not tolerate ANY spiking or flaring, except on Sirius and the brightest of point sources. If this means I have to start saving up thousands of dollars for a Tak 22x60 or a Tak/Televue scope, then I might start doing just that - socking back money. Some may find those little radial spikes/flares to be just distracting, to me they ruin the view utterly.
I don't know. I have a lot of thinking to do.
Clear dark bewildered skies...
MikeG
--------------------
Michael Gilmer - Member of the Meteoritical Society & Collector of Falling Stars.
Galactic Stone & Ironworks - Buy/Sell/Trade Meteorites, Moon Rocks, Mars Rocks, & 35 different falls and types!
|
KennyJ
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10146
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Mike ,
I was wondering why this week's CN bino forum hadn't been all but tripping out on overload as a result of daily 5,000 word tales of eyegasmic bliss !
This seems almost TOO dramatic a turnaround in such a short period of time to believe .
First of all , eyeglasses can EASILY be prescribed to rectify the dreaded astigmatism -- I KNOW because my prescription glasses do precisely that !
Even CONTACT LENSES can be made to rectify the problem , although I was advised very recently of how tricky it can prove keeping them in correct perfect orientation for something so critical as stargazing .
So my advice would be to take a step back and a few deep breaths , get through this eye examination and see what transpires ( no pun intended ! ) when you have your new glasses .
Personally , I find INDIVIDUAL Focussing binoculars MUCH easier to get into perfect focus for astronomy than I do central focus models .
Also , for your information , only a few weeks ago , here in the UK , I was offered a Takahashi 22 x 60 fluorite AS NEW for the equivalent of just over $1000 US , but opted instead for what I considered to be a far more VERSATILE , and hence more USEFUL , brand new Nikon 10 x 42 SE , which cost only slightly less .
Good luck with all this Mike .
Clear skies and clear eyes ,
Kenny
--------------------
If everyone is thinking the same thing , no-one is thinking - General George S.Patton
Zeiss 7 x 42 BGAT
Captain's Helmsman 7 x 50
Nikon 10 x 42 Superior E
Swift Audubon Kestrel 10 x 50
Helios 15 x 70 Observation
Strathspey 20 x 90
Televue 76 APO
Zeiss 85 Diascope
Helios 102 f5 refractor
Various eyepieces barlows tripods mounts etc.
Panasonic Lumix DMC - TZ5 digital camera
|
ngc6475
Fearless Spectator
Reged: 03/02/02
Posts: 4790
Loc: Northern Sierra Foothills
|
|
Hi Mike,
Having suffered from the affliction of eyeglasses my entire life, I sympathise with you. Your new contacts/glasses may help considerably and I hope you can return to your binoculars without the grief you described. Astigmatism can be corrected and new spectacles usually don't arrive covered with scratches! If the new eyeglasses do the trick, you may consider a second pair dedicated solely to astronomy in order to keep your primary optical system in perfect working condition!
--------------------
Walter
"Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest."
-Mark Twain
|
Glassthrower
Vendor - Galactic Stone & Ironworks
Reged: 04/07/05
Posts: 14686
Loc: Hurricane Alley
|
|
Regardless of what happens, I am reasonably sure my issue has nothing to do with the quality of the GO binocular. The binocular is obviously superior, both optically and mechanically, to any giant binocular I have used previously. But, I think my expectations were too high for such a binocular. I was expecting a tack-sharp sweet spot in the center of the FOV with NO flaring....none. Nada. Zip. And what I have instead is a noticeably-reduced amount of flaring compared to my previous binos, but not the total lack of it I was seeking. I have suffered through it over the past two years with my Celestron binoculars because I thought a higher quality (and higher priced) binocular would deliver a radically-better view. So I looked at it like "paying my dues" until I could manage to purchase a higher quality binocular and get closer to my dream stargazing aesthetic - which is nice, round, tight, ball-like, bead-like, crisp, tack-sharp stars. What I am now discovering, I am afraid, is that such performance may not be possible in a fast f/ratio giant binocular that is within my price range. I more than doubled my $200 Skymaster expenditure, and while I have noticed a marked improvement in view performance, I still find the results well short of my desired aesthetic. This was tolerable in a $200 Skymaster, I find it less tolerable in a $500 binocular. If for no other reason, because I could not buy a quality scope (with equivelant light grasp to a 4" bino) with $200, so why not get the binocular? But now, I can spend ~$500 on the used market and get a pretty nice, pretty large scope. Slap a premium eyepiece in it, and live with a narrower but tack-sharp FOV.
I also find, someone please correct me if I am mistaken, that my eyes seem to tolerate scope optics much better than binocular optics. When I look through others' telescopes, I often get the type of view aesthetic I am seeking in a binocular - tight, round, bead-like sharp stars with no flaring. I have yet to look through ANY binocular and get that view aesthetic. So now, here I am, undergoing a sudden and radical shift in my stargazing philosophy. In effect, I am undergoing a binocular mid-life crisis. It is quite disheartening and I have been obsessing *again* over what to do. My poor wife is tiring of my endless chain of optical demands that never end in satisfaction and a happy husband.
If I move back to contact lenses from glasses, will this have any effect on my view aesthetic? I am desperate for a solution that does not involve selling all of my binocular gear and converting to SCOPISM ....
I cannot and will not live with flaring. Period. Am I being unrealistic here? Someone slap me in the face with a dose of reality if I need it. Really. Someone please direct me to a binocular that can give TACK-SHARP FLARE-FREE stars without spending $10,000 US. If such a creature does not exist, then I may convert to telescope.
Clear dark skies...
MikeG
--------------------
Michael Gilmer - Member of the Meteoritical Society & Collector of Falling Stars.
Galactic Stone & Ironworks - Buy/Sell/Trade Meteorites, Moon Rocks, Mars Rocks, & 35 different falls and types!
|
Joad
Wordsmith
Reged: 03/22/05
Posts: 11919
|
|
GT, ol' buddy. First things first: get new eyeglasses.
Now, as to star appearances. We binocular fans know that a good part (please note everyone that I am not saying the whole part nor even the most part) of the pleasure in binocular viewing is aesthetic. At lower powers, scanning rich star fields is a marvelous experience, much closer to the experience of fine art rather than science. Now, to get to my point. When I look at a good photographic image of a star I realize that stars are, indeed, spheres, balls of light and energy. When I look through my big Obies (as I was doing last night with pleasure), I was paying attention to the star appearances. Most of the stars appeared as sharp bright point sources of light (unextended, as EdZ might say). The larger stars, especially at first magnitude, have always, for me, shown a bit of diffraction, though. So long as the star is in sharp focus and not spiking all over the place, though, I find this rather a pleasing affect. I have looked through high quality refractors (an Astrophysics 155mm and a TAK 150), as well as that 6 inch homemade giant bt scope we were discussing recently, but while I'm sure a more expert viewer than I might well note a significant difference in the star views, I really haven't. I mean this. Every time I've looked through a premium scope, I've expected to be so blown away that I'd want to throw out my optics, but while I can tell when something is better, I've always felt fine about my optics. (The difference I've always noted, incidentally, is what aperture can do for DSOs: now that's a different story).
In short, perhaps if our expectations are set too high, we may be disappointed. This may be why so many folks are constantly buying and selling optical equipment, even premium equipment. Now, if you can't focus your new bino, that is a problem. But if you expect perfectly spherical stars, even the high magnitude ones, your expectations may be too high.
But I know you have a dilemma. You only have a brief window of opportunity to return your GOs. Rest your eyes today and try again tonight, with your glasses (looks like you need them for viewing), and good luck!
|
pcad
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 01/17/05
Posts: 1501
Loc: Connecticut
|
|
Mike,
If your glasses are as bad as you say they are, how can you expect good views through them. It's too soon for you to start looking for another bino.
You may have a point about telescope optics being clearer for you. I can think of two reasons that might be involved. The slower focal ratio and the generaly higher quality lenses used in scopes may be responsible for the differences you see between binos and scopes.
Rereading your initial post in this thread, I have to wonder if you didn't have a little case of dry eyes that night. It could explain why things got worse as time passed. Try a little observing before dawn, after you've gotten an adequet amount of sleep. The eyes will be less likely to suffer from dryness when you first wake up.
Good luck and don't panic!
Peter
--------------------
Peter
Telescopes 25 - 318 mm
Binoculars 15 - 88 mm
Microscope 50x - 1000x
|
KennyJ
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10146
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Mike ,
In addition to the various fine and pertinent points already made , there is the indisputable fact that looking through a SCOPE using just one eye DOES eliminate all possibilities of even very minor collimation problem interference , and also removes from the equation whichever is the " weaker " of your two eyes , and the optical differences between them , which even with the best will in the world , is not ALWAYS compensated for by weraing glasses , particularly if those glasses are slightly " out of prescription " and badly scratched .
If our friend Brock was writing this , I'm sure he would end the post with the words from a memorable song , and although I won't do that at this , what must be a most difficult and concerning period for you , please remember that more often than not , when all seems lost in this life , things DO have a happy habit of turning out far better than feared or anticipated .
I'm sure that EVERY member here shares my sincere wish of a HAPPY outcome for you in this matter .
P.S -- try to get hold of some NON - PRESCRIPTION eye drops , commonly referred to as " artifical tears " and use them four times a day for a week BEFORE your eye test .
Regards , Kenny
--------------------
If everyone is thinking the same thing , no-one is thinking - General George S.Patton
Zeiss 7 x 42 BGAT
Captain's Helmsman 7 x 50
Nikon 10 x 42 Superior E
Swift Audubon Kestrel 10 x 50
Helios 15 x 70 Observation
Strathspey 20 x 90
Televue 76 APO
Zeiss 85 Diascope
Helios 102 f5 refractor
Various eyepieces barlows tripods mounts etc.
Panasonic Lumix DMC - TZ5 digital camera
|
starramus
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 09/01/04
Posts: 1124
|
|
Since your problem appears to be alleviated when using your 60mm scope I do not believe the problem lies with your glasses. You should probably replace them anyway though because looking through scratched glasses even for everyday use is not satisfactory. I too had a pair of the Celestron 25X100s which i returned just about immediately. I could not subject myself to the high degree of CA and almost glob like star shapes. My 15X70 Skymasters however are amazingly good for a $68.00 binocular. I had out a lawn chaise the other night to better steady the view and compared the Skymasters to my 7X50 Fujinon FMTSXs. I have a Slik 700 DX Pro tripod, but have never liked binocular astronomy with tripod mounted observing. The lawn chaise seems to give me better flexibility. Certainly the stars were pin points in the Fujinon 7X50s, but the Skymasters delivered a commendable view considering the price. I got out my 11 year old Celestron 11X80 Japanese made binos and compared them to the Skymasters and found them to be slightly better, but not that much. I have found that optical quality is much of the time a *Gosh, dang dibbity dag nabbit* shoot. You might give the new binos another chance, but i would call the dealer and inquire about the return policy. You should alert them to the fact of your dissatisfaction as quickly as possible. There may be a restocking fee, but if you opt for a replacement that would eliminate that. You might give the dealer another chance to supply something of your liking. I recently returned a pair of 16X70 Fujinons so even a premium brand does not guarantee optical perfection.
Regards and clear skies,
|
mplkn1
sage
Reged: 08/28/05
Posts: 393
Loc: Centrally Inaccessible, PA
|
|
Hey Mike -
So sorry to hear what you're going through but wanted to share some ideas in the hope they might help...
I agree with new glasses. Light hitting scratches will splatter.
Eye position is crucial. I've found that failing to get both eyes centered simultaneously can make one or the other see worse flare on bright objects.
Flare: I don't get flare on stars in my GO 20x80 triplets. I do see a bit of flare on Jupiter, and frankly, slightly more in one eye than the other. Flare is worse if I move either eye off-axis. At first I thought I must have gotten a bad set, but searches and re-reads of numerous postings here have convinced me that a little flare on non-stellar bright objects is common, that is, not unexpected. I believe it doesn't mean rejecting the instrument unless it's a problem on stellar points. (somebody else with deeper optical knowledge or wider experience, please weigh in here...)
Elongation: My 20x80s do show some elongation at the very edges, but to see it I have to watch a particular star as I move it to the very edge of the field - the effect is not distracting when my attention is on the center of the field.
IPD: Do you need a center post extender to achieve the IPD you require?
To sum up - If you replace your glasses, make certain your IPD is set properly, and make certain your eye positions are lined up I think you'll come to be well satisfied. My 20x80s seemed to take a little getting used to at first. I had to twiddle and shift around to get comfortable. Once used to them, I've continued to appreciate them more with each use.
Hang in there, and please let us know how it goes!
Best wishes,
--------------------
Michael -
"I am obliged to confess that I should sooner live in a society governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than in a society governed by the two thousand faculty members of Harvard University."
William F. Buckley, 1963.
Orion (Celestron) 8" SCT on SkyView Pro, Telrad.
Garrett Optical Gemini 25x100 WP IF,
Bogen 3051 tripod w/ 3063 head.
Oberwerk 10x60 Mariner.
Palm Planetarium.
Stellarium on a Motion Computing tablet PC.
|
Glassthrower
Vendor - Galactic Stone & Ironworks
Reged: 04/07/05
Posts: 14686
Loc: Hurricane Alley
|
|
I'm not worried about returning these binoculars to the vendor. If need be, I will sell them on AstroMart and recoup 99% of my money - since these are now backordered, I'm sure I won't have any problems selling this pair at a small discount.
I don't think the problem is my glasses. Sure, the scratches contribute to the problem, but I DO get good views through some telescope/eyepiece combinations. I know this is going to sound terrible, but aesthetically-speaking, I get better views from my 60mm Meade department store scope and MA25mm eyepiece at 27x. The stars are nice tight, uniform balls with virtually no flaring in the FOV sweetspot and only a small amount towards the edges. And this is with my glasses on. I get some flaring, depending on how I move my head (this is the glasses), but once I find a scratch-free window on the eyeglass lenses, I can carefully hold that position and get a flare-free view. I cannot do the same with any binocular, no matter how I try.
Oddly enough.....now that I sit and think about it, my Celestron Skymaster 15x70 exhibits roughly the same amount of flaring as the new GO 22x85 SS. Of course, this is probably due to the fact that at 15x, some abberrations are below the threshhold of notice-ability (is that a word?).
I don't know, but right now I am leaning towards getting a scope.
Unless I have another major change of heart in the coming days, I likely see the following in my near future :
1) getting an eye exam and new glasses.
2) putting these binos on Astromart.
3) putting my surveyor tripod on Astromart.
4) swapping my p-mount back to Roy Hess for a nice observing chair.
5) buying a telescope with motorized mount.
6) getting a camera adapter for my new Sony 6MP digital camera.
7) start fooling around with rudimentary astrophotography
I think my binocular days may be nearing an end...
Clear dark skies...
MikeG
--------------------
Michael Gilmer - Member of the Meteoritical Society & Collector of Falling Stars.
Galactic Stone & Ironworks - Buy/Sell/Trade Meteorites, Moon Rocks, Mars Rocks, & 35 different falls and types!
|
Rich V.
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 01/02/05
Posts: 985
Loc: Carson Valley, Nevada USA
|
|
Mike, why don't you try an experiment and make some simple aperture masks, say 60 or 70mm and see if your stars clean up or not. This will increase the f ratio and may be all it takes to get more pinpoint star images.
I think some flaring of bright objects has to be tolerated with short focal ratio optics. Comparing binoculars to an f8 scope will probably ALWAYS be a bit disappointing!
It has already been pointed out that eye moisturizing drops could help as well; I get variances night to night depending on the condition of my eyes
Also, even at 22x local seeing conditions will have some effect on the clarity of star images. See if a night with a great Clear Sky Clock forecast gives better results. On some nights, particularly when still low in the sky, even the brighter stars in the Pleiades will flare some in my Fujinons, but I don't consider the image to be intolerable!
Rich V
--------------------
Binoculars:
33-150x100 Saturn III, 16x70FMT-SX, 10x50 PCF-V, 10x43 DCF-SP, 10x35 E2, 7x35 E, 8x30 E2, 7x26 Custom, 8x23AS Diplomat, 8x23 Travelite
Scopes:
C9.25, 6" f8 reflector, SV80S
|
Mark9473
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/21/05
Posts: 2699
Loc: 51°N 4°E
|
|
Mike, what you need to do is breathe, and then snap out of it. You just don't make any such radical decision as a reaction to a single event, at least not without letting some time (and thought) go over it. I'm sure you could sell your 22x85 without much loss, if any, even several months from now.
Your 60 mm refractor at 27x, is operating at an exit pupil of 2.2 mm. It's a lot easier for your eyes to display pinpoint stars in such condition. My 80 mm apo at 37x and up is also pinpoint; at 17x stars flare just like in a binocular.
Perhaps my strongest argument: you need to be using binoculars to participate in this forum! 
--------------------
Mark
Leica 8x20; Vixen 8x42; Swift 8.5x44, 10x50 and 20x80; TS 7x50; Orion 15x63
WO Megrez II 80 FD + Baader 90° T2 Amici
|
tbourg
super member
Reged: 06/25/06
Posts: 191
|
|
Hello Mike,
I wish I had some wise words to give you about the problem, but I've had to adapt as best I can to my failing eyesight. I just hope it is a problem you can solve quickly to your complete satisfaction.
I am far sighted with astigmatism and I try to observe without glasses because of the flaring I get with mine. I find it noticeable even if I clean them very well. I use gradual lenses rather than trifocals, btw.
I don't notice flaring in the telescope without glasses, at least I don't think I do. Last night I was using a 25mm Epic in my 6" f4 newt. The Epic is hard to use without glasses because of kidneybeaning but with glasses the large eye relief makes it great for the low-power scope. I noticed some flare on Vega so without really thinking much about it I took off my glasses. I never really thought about it much, but I do that a lot. I even wear those little ultra-nurdy, rope thingys so I can hang my glasses around my neck.
If the sky ever gets clear again, I'm going to try my 1970 Canon 7X50s and my newer 10X42 Chinese Pentaxes and see how much flaring I get.
Anyway, one bad thing about good optics is that you start noticing things that you considered minor before. I guess it's like dropping a lot of money on audio equipment--eventually you start noticing the limitations of the recording medium and your ears.
See you and clear skies.
Tom B.
Edited by tbourg (10/21/06 06:50 PM)
|
Glassthrower
Vendor - Galactic Stone & Ironworks
Reged: 04/07/05
Posts: 14686
Loc: Hurricane Alley
|
|
I agree that f-ratio is playing a major role here. My 60mm Meade scope is vignetted down to about 42mm, at a 900mm focal length, that yields a glacial f-ratio of 20+. It's no wonder the stars exhibit less flaring. My only and major complaint about the tiny scope is the lack of overall light grasp. So I am thinking that perhaps a compromise refractor, say 4-5" achromat operating at about f/7 with a minus-violet filter. Or heck, maybe a "long" reflector like a 6" f/8. I am not as opposed to reflectors anymore like I used to be.
I'm just hitting my astronomical mid-hobby crisis perhaps.
Or maybe my tastes are evolving.
This would have been heresy for me to say only days ago, but right now my gut instinct is telescope.
Clear dark skies....
MikeG
--------------------
Michael Gilmer - Member of the Meteoritical Society & Collector of Falling Stars.
Galactic Stone & Ironworks - Buy/Sell/Trade Meteorites, Moon Rocks, Mars Rocks, & 35 different falls and types!
|
Joad
Wordsmith
Reged: 03/22/05
Posts: 11919
|
|
[snip]"5) buying a telescope with motorized mount"[snip] GT
If option 5 does turn out to be in your future, GT (though I agree with the folks who suggest some breathing time here), you will find that $500 will not get you a lot. Best bang for the buck, aperture-wise, is, of course, an unmotorized Dobsonian. But while $500 may get you a tracking Meade 90mm ETX, you will find that the small field of view and small aperture will be quite a surprise after years of binocular sweeping. Celestron has a nice looking 6 inch tracking SCT on the market (C6--S XLT) for $699.00, but of course you'll need eyepieces and would want some sort of finder. A 1500mm focal length f/10 six inch SCT is also going to have a narrow field of view compared to a binocular, and with its central obstruction may disappoint in the image "crispness" department.
Point is: there are always trade-offs. Even the big ticket items have tradeoffs.
But the important thing is that you do whatever feels best to you. This is a hobby. Hobbies are intended for enjoyment. Be sure that you are enjoying yourself. And remember that while we are trying to help out, we are not judging you whatever you decide.
|
tbourg
super member
Reged: 06/25/06
Posts: 191
|
|
Mike,
Scopes are great, but so are binoculars. I use my 7X50s a lot more than my 16" truss dob or my 10" Meade cat.
Wait a while and think long and hard about buying scope. On our skies I believe an rft-type scope would not provide much improvement over the binoculars unless it is at least 8". My 8" f5 newt is pretty good and I use it a lot. At its best it is a lot more fuss and bother to use than binoculars, though.
I have a focal reducer for my Meade f10 cat that works well, btw. If you decide to go the cat route a focal reducer allows you to overcome some of the drawbacks of a high f number on deep sky stuff.
A good scope certainly adds a lot of enjoyment to the hobby and opens up the world of lunar and planetary observing, two things that we can do very well in our area.
See you and clear skies.
Tom B.
|
Glassthrower
Vendor - Galactic Stone & Ironworks
Reged: 04/07/05
Posts: 14686
Loc: Hurricane Alley
|
|
I do appreciate all of the heartfelt feedback and good wishes. And here is something else that might sound a wee-bit nutty : I am tempted to keep the binocular just so I have an excuse to remain in this forum and post! 
I can be quite impulsive once I make up my mind to do something, and I have already done it. I emailed Zach Garrett and put the ball in motion for a resolution, possibly a refund. Just for record, I am not doing this because I am disappointed with the product per-se. This is a great binocular, IF this is the kind of instrument one really WANTS. I am just now discovering what I really want from stargazing, and binoculars are not it apparently. I am happy I got my start with binoculars, but I think it is time to move on to something else, something more versatile.
I'm not sure what kind of scope I want. I have done a lot of thinking in the past few weeks leading up to the binocular purchase and now I am going back over all of that in my mind. I am going to purchase on the used market to maximize my dollar. In recent weeks I have been wheeling and dealing and I have acquired some pretty good eyepieces. I think it is now time to get a good scope to match.
Ahh....so close to binocular nirvana....yet so far.
Clear dark skies...
MikeG
--------------------
Michael Gilmer - Member of the Meteoritical Society & Collector of Falling Stars.
Galactic Stone & Ironworks - Buy/Sell/Trade Meteorites, Moon Rocks, Mars Rocks, & 35 different falls and types!
|
camvan
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 05/02/05
Posts: 2086
Loc: British Columbia
|
|
heheheh, this is kinda funny Mike. I bought an EQ3-4 back in August at the Mt. Kobau Star Party on a whim when I thought I wanted to have a telescope. now I realize I want binoculars! 
--------------------
Cameron
"Aperture can only be replaced by even more aperture. Dark transparent skies cannot be replaced by anything else." - Stathis Kafalis
|
holger_merlitz
sage
Reged: 02/08/04
Posts: 282
|
|
Quote:
... I get better views from my 60mm Meade department store scope and MA25mm eyepiece at 27x. The stars are nice tight, uniform balls with virtually no flaring in the FOV sweetspot and only a small amount towards the edges. And this is with my glasses on. I get some flaring, depending on how I move my head (this is the glasses), but once I find a scratch-free window on the eyeglass lenses, I can carefully hold that position and get a flare-free view. I cannot do the same with any binocular, no matter how I try.
Mike,
the small exit pupil which you get at 27x60, namely about 2mm, comes along with several benefits: First, it is much easier to find a 'scratch-free window' which would let pass a 2mm exit pupil than almost 4mm of the 22x85. I don't know about your other binoculars, but I guess the same holds true for any of them since 2mm exit pupil-binoculars are rarely found. Then, what you describe appears to be a classical case of insufficiently corrected astigmatism: Those people with residual astigmatism tend to dislike binoculars with large exit pupils and prefer the ones with narrow exit pupils. Why? Because the amount of astigmatism of the eye-lens is increasing towards the edge, and a narrow exit pupil is completely passed through the central ('paraxial') region of the eye-lens which is almost free of astigmatism.
In other words: With properly correcting eye-glasses, your problem might disappear.
Good luck,
Holger
|
refractory
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 02/05/05
Posts: 1016
|
|
One could always buy big prints of Hubble pics, scrape off the backings, punch pinpricks where the stars are (proportional to the size of the star images), and then put a light show behind the pics. Much better views than you'll get otherwise.
My eyesight is also iffy; even so I usually use my equipment without glasses. So my unsymmetrical astigmatism and nearsightedness (plus interesting major floaters in my right eye) provide me with endless fun observing possibilities. And age is creeping up fast too. Just great.....
I've trained myself to fuse images that don't really wanna go and ignore the parts that straggle. Lot worse on planets than stars. I live with it. I ain't gonna be 13 again, not in this life anyway. That's when my eyesight was darned near perfect, the night skies were nearly light-pollution free where I lived, life was all full of possibilities and women hadn't yet become a distraction from astronomy. Of course Nixon was President but you can't have everything.....
Jess Tauber
|
|
5 registered and 22 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: EdZ
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 1014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 